No abstract

This research aims to foster discourse about the extent to which gender is important to consider within the context of participatory approaches for biological conservation. Our objectives are to: (1) gender-disaggregate data about stakeholders' risk perceptions associated with human-wildlife conflict (HWC) in a participatory conservation context, and (2) highlight insights from characterizing gendered similarities and differences in the way people think about HWC-related risks. Two communal conservancies in Caprivi, Namibia served as case study sites. We analyzed data from focus groups (n = 2) to create gendered concept maps about risks to wildlife and livelihoods and any associations of those risks with HWC, and semi-structured interviews (n = 76; men = 38, women = 38) to measure explicit risk attitudes associated with HWC. Concept maps indicated some divergent perceptions in how groups characterized risks to wildlife and livelihoods; however, not only were identified risks to wildlife (e.g., pollution, hunting) dissimilar in some instances, descriptions of risks varied as well. Study groups reported similar risk perceptions associated with HWC with the exception of worry associated with HWC effects on local livelihoods. Gendered differences in risk perceptions may signal different priorities or incentives to participate in efforts to resolve HWC-related risks. Thus, although shared goals and interests may seem to be an obvious reason for cooperative wildlife management, it is not always obvious that management goals are shared. Opportunity exists to move beyond thinking about gender as an explanatory variable for understanding how different groups think about participating in conservation activities.

No abstract

Poaching can disrupt wildlife-management efforts in community-based natural resource management systems. Monitoring, estimating, and acquiring data on poaching is difficult. We used local-stakeholder knowledge and poaching records to rank and map the risk of poaching incidents in 2 areas where natural resources are managed by community members in Caprivi, Namibia. We mapped local stakeholder perceptions of the risk of poaching, risk of wildlife damage to livelihoods, and wildlife distribution and compared these maps with spatially explicit records of poaching events. Recorded poaching events and stakeholder perceptions of where poaching occurred were not spatially correlated. However, the locations of documented poaching events were spatially correlated with areas that stakeholders perceived wildlife as a threat to their livelihoods. This result suggests poaching occurred in response to wildlife damage occurred. Local stakeholders thought that wildlife populations were at high risk of being poached and that poaching occurred where there was abundant wildlife. These findings suggest stakeholders were concerned about wildlife resources in their community and indicate a need for integrated and continued monitoring of poaching activities and further interventions at the wildlife-agricultural interface. Involving stakeholders in the assessment of poaching risks promotes their participation in local conservation efforts, a central tenet of community-based management. We considered stakeholders poaching informants, rather than suspects, and our technique was spatially explicit. Different strategies to reduce poaching are likely needed in different areas. For example, interventions that reduce human-wildlife conflict may be required in residential areas, and increased and targeted patrolling may be required in more remote areas. Stakeholder-generated maps of human-wildlife interactions may be a valuable enforcement and intervention support tool.

No abstract

Cross-cultural research in the human dimensions of wildlife brings methodological, epistemological, and logistical challenges. This article reviews two measurement tools that begin to address cross-cultural measurement issues in global human dimensions of wildlife research: the visual scale and visual aid. We discuss (a) our experience field-testing these two tools in two different human dimensions of wildlife management contexts and (b) strengths and limitations associated with cross-cultural tools for human dimension research. One area for capacity building in human dimensionsis cross-cultural measurement. Tools herein may be adapted or serve as a baseline on which to evaluate other cross-cultural tools.

No abstract

Gender is an explanatory factor in multiple dimensions of conservation, including women's access to and participation in conservation programmes, with gender bias in wildlife research persisting globally. There is reason to believe the current global wildlife crime crisis is no exception, with a lack of critical examination of gendered roles in security for biodiversity conservation. Despite the emergence of high-profile all-women ranger units (e.g. Akashinga in Zimbabwe) there has been a lack of systematic integration of gender within biodiversity protection. Theoretical and methodological applications from criminology have become progressively more common in response to an increase in a wide range of environmental crimes with consequences for women and their communities. Here we consider the implications of the lack of knowledge of women's direct and indirect roles in wildlife security. We used the criminology and conservation literature to identify key gaps in research, and relevant and robust typologies and frameworks informed by criminology to structure future research on women as offenders, protectors (handlers, managers, guardians) and victims of wildlife crime. We argue that more intentional research into the direct and indirect roles of women in wildlife crime is needed to address wildlife crime, protect biodiversity and support social justice in response to wildlife crimes.