Lack of crucial information exacerbates barriers to mitigating human–elephant conflicts in rural Kenya

• Published in: Oryx pp. 1 - 9
• Main Authors: Von Hagen, Lynn, Schulte, Bruce A., Steury, Todd D., Dunning, Kelly, Githiru, Mwangi, Zohdy, Sarah, Lepczyk, Christopher A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cambridge University Press 09.09.2024
• Subjects: African elephant; agricultural damage; deterrent methods; food security; human–elephant conflict; human–wildlife conflict; rural sociology; wildlife interactions
• ISSN: 0030-6053; 1365-3008
• DOI: 10.1017/S0030605323001795

Abstract 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.