Spatial Assessment of Attitudes Toward Tigers in Nepal

Abstract

In many regions around the world, wildlife impacts on people (e.g., crop raiding, attacks on people) engender negative attitudes toward wildlife. Negative attitudes predict behaviors that undermine wildlife management and conservation efforts (e.g., by exacerbating retaliatory killing of wildlife). Our study (1) evaluated attitudes of local people toward the globally endangered tiger (Panthera tigris) in Nepal's Chitwan National Park; and (2) modeled and mapped spatial clusters of attitudes toward tigers. Factors characterizing a person's position in society (i.e., socioeconomic and cultural factors) influenced attitudes toward tigers more than past experiences with tigers (e.g., livestock attacks). A spatial cluster of negative attitudes toward tigers was associated with concentrations of people with less formal education, people from marginalized ethnic groups, and tiger attacks on people. Our study provides insights and descriptions of techniques to improve attitudes toward wildlife in Chitwan and many regions around the world with similar conservation challenges.

Perception and attitude of pastoralists on livestock-wildlife interactions around Awash National Park, Ethiopia: implication for biodiversity conservation

“…Similar to previous studies in Tanzania (Kideghesho et al 2007), southern African countries (Snyman 2014), Romania (Szell and Hallett 2013), Nepal (Carter et al 2014), and around Abijata-Shalla Lakes National Park, Ethiopia (Kumessa and Bekele 2014), formal education did play a significant role in predicting attitude towards wildlife and its conservation around ANP in our study. According to Anthony (2007) and Shibia (2010), those households with low formal education were observed to have negative attitude to wildlife conservation, while those with better educational status showed positive attitudes (Vodouhê et al 2010).…”

“…Our result is in agreement with previous findings (Kideghesho et al 2007;Groom and Harris 2008;Shibia 2010;Chaminuka et al 2012;Kumessa and Bekele 2013;Yosef 2015) in different protected areas of Africa, in three protected areas in Burma (Allendorf et al 2006), and in Retezat National Park Romania (Szell and Hallett 2013). According to Holmes (2003) and Carter et al (2014), behavioral resource exploitation patterns and socioeconomic and cultural variations were observed to influence local people's attitude towards wildlife. Therefore, such behavioral, socioeconomic, and cultural diversity might contribute to the observed attitude differences towards wildlife among Afar, Kereyu, and Ittu ethnic groups around ANP in our study.…”

Resident perceptions of natural resources between cities and across scales in the Pacific Northwest

“…Relationships exist among socioeconomic characteristics, environmental values and orientations, and attitudes toward and behaviors related to natural resource management (e.g., Koval and Mertig 2004, Morzillo et al 2007, Sidique et al 2010, Morzillo and Mertig 2011a, Carter et al 2014. Therefore, we included seven socioeconomic variables to describe respondents from our sample from both cities (Table 4).…”

Attitudes and perceptions of the local people towards benefits and conflicts they get from conservation of the Bale Mountains National Park and Mountain Nyala (Tragelaphus buxtoni), Ethiopia

“…Moreover, understanding of the attitudes of local communities, particularly where their rural livelihoods are dependent on agriculture is vital for resolving wildlife-human conflicts, which otherwise can threaten the success of any conservation activity (De Boer and Baquete 1998;Webber et al, 2007). Based on the fact that the attitudes are a strong predictor of a person or group's intentions to behave in a particular manner such as complying with wildlife protection regulations (Fulton et al, 1996), therefore, assessing attitudes and perceptions of humans toward wildlife provides insights on the degree to which people are willing to cohabit with wildlife (Carter et al, 2013).…”