Community perspectives on the prospect of lion (Panthera leo) reintroduction to Comoé National Park, Côte d'Ivoire (West Africa)

IF 1.7 3区 生物学 Q3 ECOLOGY Wildlife Biology Pub Date : 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1002/wlb3.01116
Aglissi Janvier, Sogbohossou Etotépé Aïkpémi, Bauer Hans
{"title":"Community perspectives on the prospect of lion (<i>Panthera leo</i>) reintroduction to Comoé National Park, Côte d'Ivoire (West Africa)","authors":"Aglissi Janvier, Sogbohossou Etotépé Aïkpémi, Bauer Hans","doi":"10.1002/wlb3.01116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The civil war in Côte d'Ivoire led to a hike in human disturbances and the extirpation of African lion Panthera leo from the Comoé National Park (CNP). After the war, many efforts have been made to restore this ecosystem and management is considering the reintroduction of lions. In a participatory management with people at the center of conservation, there is a need to discuss with communities the initiatives affecting their livelihoods. We assessed the acceptance of lion reintroduction by the local communities; through semi‐structured questionnaires to 307 volunteer participants in surrounding 23 villages. Most respondents had knowledge of lions from CNP (93%, n = 286). A generalized linear model (GLM) revealed that sex, profession, perceived benefits and risks, and an appreciation of the current management system are the main significant determinants for the acceptance of lion reintroduction in CNP. A large majority (73%, n = 223) were in favor of the lion reintroduction with significant variance among socio‐professional categories. The majority of respondents (81%, n = 250) acknowledged having coexisted with lions, with previous lion conflicts reported by 20% (n = 61), and a willingness to coexist in future by 74% (n = 227). More than 84% (n = 260) believed that there would be benefits associated with lion reintroduction to CNP and 53% (n = 162) believed that the potential benefits would be greater than the possible risks associated with lions. Most respondents (88%; n = 270) confirmed the possibility of taking precautions to prevent future lion attacks. While only 42% (n = 129) of respondents felt that current management was participatory, most of them felt that it was acceptable (83%; n = 254). Our data shows a large degree of lion support, positive perceptions and willingness to coexist with lion in future. These results form part of a fundamental step in the direction for ethical reintroduction, as described by the IUCN reintroduction specialist group. We recommend the improvement of the involvement of indigenous communities in potential reintroduction of lions, especially the pastoralists, and the sharing of any associated benefits.","PeriodicalId":54405,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Biology","volume":"45 16","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wildlife Biology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The civil war in Côte d'Ivoire led to a hike in human disturbances and the extirpation of African lion Panthera leo from the Comoé National Park (CNP). After the war, many efforts have been made to restore this ecosystem and management is considering the reintroduction of lions. In a participatory management with people at the center of conservation, there is a need to discuss with communities the initiatives affecting their livelihoods. We assessed the acceptance of lion reintroduction by the local communities; through semi‐structured questionnaires to 307 volunteer participants in surrounding 23 villages. Most respondents had knowledge of lions from CNP (93%, n = 286). A generalized linear model (GLM) revealed that sex, profession, perceived benefits and risks, and an appreciation of the current management system are the main significant determinants for the acceptance of lion reintroduction in CNP. A large majority (73%, n = 223) were in favor of the lion reintroduction with significant variance among socio‐professional categories. The majority of respondents (81%, n = 250) acknowledged having coexisted with lions, with previous lion conflicts reported by 20% (n = 61), and a willingness to coexist in future by 74% (n = 227). More than 84% (n = 260) believed that there would be benefits associated with lion reintroduction to CNP and 53% (n = 162) believed that the potential benefits would be greater than the possible risks associated with lions. Most respondents (88%; n = 270) confirmed the possibility of taking precautions to prevent future lion attacks. While only 42% (n = 129) of respondents felt that current management was participatory, most of them felt that it was acceptable (83%; n = 254). Our data shows a large degree of lion support, positive perceptions and willingness to coexist with lion in future. These results form part of a fundamental step in the direction for ethical reintroduction, as described by the IUCN reintroduction specialist group. We recommend the improvement of the involvement of indigenous communities in potential reintroduction of lions, especially the pastoralists, and the sharing of any associated benefits.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
社区对科特迪瓦(西非)como国家公园重新引入狮子(Panthera leo)前景的看法
Côte科特迪瓦的内战导致了人类骚乱的增加和非洲狮子Panthera leo从como国家公园(CNP)灭绝。战争结束后,人们做出了许多努力来恢复这一生态系统,管理部门正在考虑重新引入狮子。在以人为中心的参与式管理中,有必要与社区讨论影响其生计的举措。我们评估了当地社区对狮子重新引入的接受程度;通过半结构化问卷对周边23个村庄的307名志愿者进行调查。大多数受访者从CNP了解狮子(93%,n = 286)。广义线性模型(GLM)显示,性别、职业、感知的利益和风险以及对当前管理系统的欣赏是CNP接受狮子重新引入的主要决定因素。大多数人(73%,n = 223)支持狮子的重新引入,在社会专业类别中存在显著差异。大多数受访者(81%,n = 250)承认曾与狮子共存,20% (n = 61)表示曾与狮子发生冲突,74% (n = 227)表示愿意在未来与狮子共存。超过84% (n = 260)的人认为将狮子重新引入CNP会带来好处,53% (n = 162)的人认为潜在的好处将大于与狮子相关的可能风险。大多数受访者(88%;N = 270)证实了采取预防措施防止未来狮子袭击的可能性。虽然只有42% (n = 129)的受访者认为目前的管理是参与式的,但大多数人认为这是可以接受的(83%;N = 254)。我们的数据显示了很大程度的狮子支持,积极的看法和未来与狮子共存的意愿。正如世界自然保护联盟放归专家组所描述的那样,这些结果构成了伦理放归方向的基本步骤的一部分。我们建议加强土著社区,特别是牧民对狮子可能重新引入的参与,并分享任何相关利益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Wildlife Biology
Wildlife Biology 生物-动物学
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
33
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: WILDLIFE BIOLOGY is a high-quality scientific forum directing concise and up-to-date information to scientists, administrators, wildlife managers and conservationists. The journal encourages and welcomes original papers, short communications and reviews written in English from throughout the world. The journal accepts theoretical, empirical, and practical articles of high standard from all areas of wildlife science with the primary task of creating the scientific basis for the enhancement of wildlife management practices. Our concept of ''wildlife'' mainly includes mammal and bird species, but studies on other species or phenomena relevant to wildlife management are also of great interest. We adopt a broad concept of wildlife management, including all structures and actions with the purpose of conservation, sustainable use, and/or control of wildlife and its habitats, in order to safeguard sustainable relationships between wildlife and other human interests.
期刊最新文献
Wind energy development can lead to guild‐specific habitat loss in boreal forest bats Lying deadwood retention affects microhabitat use of martens (Martes spp.) in European mountain forests Evaluating population persistence of ornate box turtles (Terrapene ornata) at the northeast edge of their distribution Epidemiological landscape of Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis and its impact on amphibian diversity at global scale Diet analysis of Père David's deer (Elaphurus davidianus) based on stable isotope analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1