Examining Drivers of Divergence in Recorded and Perceived Human-Carnivore Conflict Hotspots by Integrating Participatory and Ecological Data

Christine E Wilkinson,Maggi Kelly,Justin S Brashares,Alice C Bett

doi:10.3389/fcosc.2021.681769

Abstract

Human-carnivore conflict is a global challenge with complex and context-specific causes and consequences. While spatial analyses can use ecological principles to predict patterns of conflict, solutions to mitigate conflict must also be locally adaptable, sustainable, and culturally-sensitive. In Nakuru County, Kenya, rapid development and land subdivision have exacerbated conflict by isolating wildlife in protected areas that are increasingly adjacent to human settlements. In an effort to understand local perspectives on carnivore conflict, and to apply this information toward locally-based conservations actions, we conducted gender-stratified interviews and participatory mapping sessions with 378 people in 16 villages near two ecologically isolated protected areas in Kenya: Lake Nakuru National Park and Soysambu Conservancy. Specifically, we developed a method for associating interview responses and demographic information with spatial participatory data to examine how local perceptions of conflict compared to spatially-explicit records of livestock depredation in the region from 2010 to 2018. We mapped kernel densities of recorded and perceived risk of human-carnivore conflict and then tested for potential social and ecological predictors of divergences found between the two datasets. Mismatched hotspots of observed and perceived risk of conflict were correlated with several ecological and socioeconomic factors. Regions with higher NDVI exhibited more perceived conflict, while the opposite held true for verified conflict. Road density was positively correlated with both types of conflict, and both types of conflict increased closer to protected areas. Livestock ownership, visitation to Lake Nakuru National Park, if the participant's child walked to school, and male gender identity were associated with more perceived conflict reports. Education level and national park visitation were associated with more positive attitudes toward carnivores. Our results show that while observed and perceived conflict may ultimately be equally important for understanding and managing human-carnivore conflict, they may be driven by markedly different social and ecological processes. We suggest that integrating the spatially explicit experiences and perspectives of local communities with more traditional ecological methods is critical to identifying lasting and socially just forms of conflict mitigation.

Highlights

Human-carnivore conflict (HCC) is a primary driver of large carnivore declines globally (Ripple et al, 2014) and creates a significant challenge to rural livelihoods in many areas (Muhly and Musiani, 2009)
kernel density estimations (KDE) analyses exhibited 198.88 km2 of high divergence between the two datasets: 87.02 km2 (∼9.8% of the KDE study extent) skewing toward perceived conflict, and 111.856 km2 (∼12.6% of the study area) skewing toward verified conflict (Figure 2A). Within these areas of maximum divergence, mean NDVI for the lower quantile was 0.283 (σ = 0.038), while mean NDVI for areas skewed toward perceived conflict was 0.316 (σ = 0.015)
Mean road density within areas of maximum divergence was 2.46 (σ = 1.113) for areas skewed toward perceived conflict, and 2.23 (σ = 0.341) for areas skewed toward verified conflict

Summary

Introduction

Human-carnivore conflict (HCC) is a primary driver of large carnivore declines globally (Ripple et al, 2014) and creates a significant challenge to rural livelihoods in many areas (Muhly and Musiani, 2009). Livelihood impacts of HCC are most pronounced in regions where carnivore populations remain viable or have recovered, and where marginal incomes place producers near poverty (Dickman et al, 2011). Conflicts between people and carnivores are exacerbated by a combination of sociopolitical factors (e.g., regional livelihoods, poverty, global wildlife policies; Treves and Karanth, 2003) and local histories of people’s relationships with wildlife (e.g., Megaze et al, 2017), as well as increased development that has intensified habitat fragmentation and human-wildlife interactions (Were et al, 2013; Weldemichel and Lein, 2019). Human-carnivore conflicts comprise impacts associated with interactions between carnivores and people, along with the human-human relationships underlying and influencing those interactions (Young et al, 2010; Redpath et al, 2015)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion