Assessment of socio-economic implications of human-wildlife conflicts in communities adjacent to Nyerere National Park, Morogoro, Tanzania

MSc Dissertation

Human-wildlife conflicts (HWC) present a pervasive challenge worldwide, particularly in regions adjacent to protected areas. The IUCN (2023) emphasize the importance of effectively managing HWC to achieve the United Nations for Biodiversity 2050. Despite the introduction of various conservation initiatives to mitigate HWC, the success rate remains low. Conservation management strategies have traditionally focused on addressing dispute level of conflicts focusing primarily on the visible impacts of HWC while neglecting the underlying and identity-based conflicts that drives social conflicts of HWC. Apart from neglecting the underlying and identity-based conflicts, hidden costs associated with HWC remain understudied and poorly documented leading to an exclusion from economic evaluations and mitigation policies. Therefore, there is a critical need for up-to-date studies focusing on addressing the social conflicts and the socio-economic implications associated with HWC. Specifically, the study aimed at (i) assessing the nature and extent of HWC (ii) assessing the current intervention strategies employed across the study area, (iii) identifying hidden costs associated with HWC, (iv) quantifying households’ economic implications of hidden and visible costs associated with HWC, and (v) evaluating the socio- demographic predictors influencing respondents’ attitudes towards wildlife conservation. Cross-sectional data were collected through household interviews, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions. Data analysis involved content analysis, descriptive statistics and binary logistic regression analysis. Results revealed that HWC resulted in both social and economic implications. in terms of livelihood, majority of households (78%) were engaged in agricultural farming. However, the nature of damage experienced by respondents exhibited a significant difference (χ2=4.393, df= 1, P<0.05). Predominantly, crop damage emerged as the most prevalent form of conflict, mainly attributed to elephant intrusions. Despite livestock depredation being comparably lower than crop damages, respondents perceived it as highly significant and distressing. Poultry losses constituted the highest proportion, with monkeys identified as the primary perpetrators. The study further delineated HWC across three levels of conflict: dispute, underlying, and identity-based conflicts. The prevalence of conflicts at the dispute level was observed to be lower in comparison to underlying and identity-based conflicts, underscoring the limited scope of addressing conflicts solely at the dispute level within the context of HWC. In addition, dispute and underlying levels of conflict r=0.414, (p<0.05); and underlying and identity-based levels of conflict r=0.535, (p<0.05) both indicated a positive significant correlation indicating that an increase in dispute level of conflict leads to an increase in underlying conflict. Dispute and identity-based levels of conflict showed a not significant correlation r=0.328, (p=0.072). Lethal and non-lethal intervention strategies were employed to mitigate conflicts under dispute level. However, no lethal methods were reported for mitigating livestock depredation. The intervention strategies employed including the utilization of chili pepper, fencing, farm guarding, scare tactics, solar torches, reporting to village leaders, firecrackers, smoke, throwing stones at wild animals, pesticides, and car oil/grease, were employed to alleviate crop damages. Enclosures for livestock, supplementary feeding, solar torches, and herding/guarding practices were employed to mitigate livestock depredation, with varying degree of effectiveness among respondents. Additionally, results revealed that respondents faced several challenges in soliciting assistance from local authorities, wildlife authorities and government authorities, including protracted HWC incident reporting process, lack of consolation payment for damages, exclusionary practices and lack of transparency. The HWC incident reporting process was perceived as a protracted chain, necessitating contacting the village leaders before relevant authorities are notified, thereby intensifying HWC cases within the study area. Exclusionary practices manifested in marginalizing affected communities from participating in decision-making processes concerning conservation and HWC-related issues. Lack of transparency further compounded the issue with majority of respondents being unaware of NGOs operating within their communities in addressing HWC. Furthermore, the study revealed that HWC includes diverse dimensions of hidden costs, including opportunity costs, transaction costs psychological and health impacts. These hidden costs present significant implications, particularly for households reliant on agricultural farming and livestock keeping within the study area. Additionally, both visible and hidden costs associated with HWC pose economic implications stemming from crop damage, livestock depredation, monetary opportunity costs, and transactional expenses, with a total estimated annual economic loss of USD 1 455.53 per household. Nonetheless, no consolation payments were made to mitigate the economic losses incurred by respondents. The following variables were statistically significant in explaining the respondents’ attitudes towards wildlife and conservation, namely: household head age, level of education, household size and HWC experience (X2=24, df=7, p<0.05). Finally, the study therefore concluded that solely focusing on addressing HWC at the dispute level leads to a partial understanding of the overall situation and overlooks social conflicts, potentially resulting in recurring conflicts over time. Furthermore, respondents within the study area are faced with a range of hidden costs associated with HWC that not only include direct financial expenses but also non-monetary impacts such as psychological and health impacts. Therefore, the study advocates for the adoption and implementation of a holistic approach aligned with the Conservation Conflict Transformation Model (CCT) model to effectively address HWC, acknowledging their complexity and fostering cooperation among stakeholders to safeguard wildlife and enhance local livelihoods.

KfW UNAM (UNAM, BMZ Ref.2015.67.015)