缺乏关键信息加剧了肯尼亚农村地区缓解人象冲突的障碍

IF 2.2 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Oryx Pub Date : 2024-09-09 DOI:10.1017/s0030605323001795
Lynn Von Hagen, Bruce A. Schulte, Todd D. Steury, Kelly Dunning, Mwangi Githiru, Sarah Zohdy, Christopher A. Lepczyk
{"title":"缺乏关键信息加剧了肯尼亚农村地区缓解人象冲突的障碍","authors":"Lynn Von Hagen, Bruce A. Schulte, Todd D. Steury, Kelly Dunning, Mwangi Githiru, Sarah Zohdy, Christopher A. Lepczyk","doi":"10.1017/s0030605323001795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Crop foraging by African savannah elephants <jats:italic>Loxodonta africana</jats:italic> negatively affects farmer livelihoods and support for conservation, yet affordable, sustainable and practical solutions remain elusive. To inform conservation priorities, our goal was to assess the hitherto little explored relationships between farmers’ views on agricultural damage and the socio-economic factors limiting their use of elephant deterrents. We tested our hypotheses associated with the demographic categories of age, education level, years spent farming, gender, exposure to information on deterrent methods, farm size, village and relevant combinations of these factors by surveying 206 respondents across six villages in rural Kenya and analysing the resulting data using an information theoretic approach. Respondents were almost four times more likely to use deterrents if exposed to the relevant information, and almost five times more likely to do so if they had secondary education as opposed to none. Farmers with a higher level of education were five times more likely to have received information on deterrents compared to those with no formal education. Participants who had not received information on deterrents were almost three times more likely to believe that they could implement deterrent methods. Respondents who stated that they could not implement deterrents overwhelmingly cited a lack of financial resources as the reason. Overall, we found that crucial information on reducing elephant crop foraging is not reaching the relevant stakeholders, and socio-economic factors such as education and exposure to information appear to limit uptake of protective measures. These insights are important for developing mitigation strategies and supporting the livelihoods of people affected by negative human–elephant interactions, and thus for effective elephant conservation. Our findings also have broader applications for practitioners seeking to understand barriers stakeholders face in their efforts to mitigate negative interactions with wildlife.","PeriodicalId":19694,"journal":{"name":"Oryx","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Lack of crucial information exacerbates barriers to mitigating human–elephant conflicts in rural Kenya\",\"authors\":\"Lynn Von Hagen, Bruce A. Schulte, Todd D. Steury, Kelly Dunning, Mwangi Githiru, Sarah Zohdy, Christopher A. Lepczyk\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0030605323001795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Crop foraging by African savannah elephants <jats:italic>Loxodonta africana</jats:italic> negatively affects farmer livelihoods and support for conservation, yet affordable, sustainable and practical solutions remain elusive. To inform conservation priorities, our goal was to assess the hitherto little explored relationships between farmers’ views on agricultural damage and the socio-economic factors limiting their use of elephant deterrents. We tested our hypotheses associated with the demographic categories of age, education level, years spent farming, gender, exposure to information on deterrent methods, farm size, village and relevant combinations of these factors by surveying 206 respondents across six villages in rural Kenya and analysing the resulting data using an information theoretic approach. Respondents were almost four times more likely to use deterrents if exposed to the relevant information, and almost five times more likely to do so if they had secondary education as opposed to none. Farmers with a higher level of education were five times more likely to have received information on deterrents compared to those with no formal education. Participants who had not received information on deterrents were almost three times more likely to believe that they could implement deterrent methods. Respondents who stated that they could not implement deterrents overwhelmingly cited a lack of financial resources as the reason. Overall, we found that crucial information on reducing elephant crop foraging is not reaching the relevant stakeholders, and socio-economic factors such as education and exposure to information appear to limit uptake of protective measures. These insights are important for developing mitigation strategies and supporting the livelihoods of people affected by negative human–elephant interactions, and thus for effective elephant conservation. Our findings also have broader applications for practitioners seeking to understand barriers stakeholders face in their efforts to mitigate negative interactions with wildlife.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19694,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oryx\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oryx\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0030605323001795\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oryx","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0030605323001795","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

非洲稀树草原大象(Loxodonta africana)对农作物的觅食对农民的生计和保护工作的支持产生了负面影响,但负担得起的、可持续的和切实可行的解决方案仍然遥遥无期。为了为保护优先事项提供信息,我们的目标是评估农民对农业损害的看法与限制他们使用大象威慑手段的社会经济因素之间的关系,迄今为止,我们对这两者之间的关系探索甚少。我们对肯尼亚农村地区 6 个村庄的 206 名受访者进行了调查,并采用信息理论方法对所得数据进行了分析。如果受访者接触过相关信息,其使用威慑方法的可能性几乎要高出四倍;如果受访者受过中等教育,其使用威慑方法的可能性几乎要高出五倍。与未受过正规教育的农民相比,受过高等教育的农民获得威慑信息的可能性要高出五倍。没有接受过威慑信息的受访者认为他们可以实施威慑方法的可能性几乎是没有接受过威慑信息的受访者的三倍。表示无法实施威慑方法的受访者绝大多数都认为原因是缺乏资金。总之,我们发现有关减少大象觅食的重要信息并没有传达到相关利益方,而教育和信息接触等社会经济因素似乎限制了对保护措施的吸收。这些见解对于制定缓解战略和支持受人象负面互动影响的人们的生计,从而有效保护大象非常重要。我们的研究结果对于那些希望了解利益相关者在努力减轻与野生动物的负面互动时所面临的障碍的实践者来说,也具有更广泛的应用价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Lack of crucial information exacerbates barriers to mitigating human–elephant conflicts in rural Kenya
Crop foraging by African savannah elephants Loxodonta africana negatively affects farmer livelihoods and support for conservation, yet affordable, sustainable and practical solutions remain elusive. To inform conservation priorities, our goal was to assess the hitherto little explored relationships between farmers’ views on agricultural damage and the socio-economic factors limiting their use of elephant deterrents. We tested our hypotheses associated with the demographic categories of age, education level, years spent farming, gender, exposure to information on deterrent methods, farm size, village and relevant combinations of these factors by surveying 206 respondents across six villages in rural Kenya and analysing the resulting data using an information theoretic approach. Respondents were almost four times more likely to use deterrents if exposed to the relevant information, and almost five times more likely to do so if they had secondary education as opposed to none. Farmers with a higher level of education were five times more likely to have received information on deterrents compared to those with no formal education. Participants who had not received information on deterrents were almost three times more likely to believe that they could implement deterrent methods. Respondents who stated that they could not implement deterrents overwhelmingly cited a lack of financial resources as the reason. Overall, we found that crucial information on reducing elephant crop foraging is not reaching the relevant stakeholders, and socio-economic factors such as education and exposure to information appear to limit uptake of protective measures. These insights are important for developing mitigation strategies and supporting the livelihoods of people affected by negative human–elephant interactions, and thus for effective elephant conservation. Our findings also have broader applications for practitioners seeking to understand barriers stakeholders face in their efforts to mitigate negative interactions with wildlife.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Oryx
Oryx 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
7.40%
发文量
150
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: ORYX—THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSERVATION, a quarterly journal from Fauna & Flora International, publishes research on biodiversity conservation, conservation policy and sustainable use, and the interactions of these matters with social, economic and political issues. The journal has a particular interest in material with the potential to improve conservation management and practice. Explore the map for details of published articles.
期刊最新文献
Georeferencing Sunda pangolin Manis javanica records in Singapore The Pangolin Universal Notching System: a scale-marking methodology for pangolins The lion's share: implications of carnivore diet for threatened herbivores in Tsavo, Kenya Exploring links between socio-ecological systems and psychological distress: a case study in rural Uganda First Red List of Ecosystems assessment of a tropical glacier ecosystem to diagnose the pathways towards imminent collapse
×
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