Where elephants roam: perceived risk, vulnerability, and adaptation in the Okavango Delta

Abstract

Where people and elephants share space, the chance of human-elephant interactions (HEI) shape how people make livelihood decisions, including where and when to harvest resources. In the Eastern Panhandle of the Okavango Delta in Botswana, elephant populations have doubled in the past 10 years. Currently 16,000 men and women from different ethnic backgrounds share woodlands with 18,000 elephants. People carry out livelihoods in ways that are shaped by multiple facets of their identities, including gender, age, ability, and ethnicity. Residents depend on firewood for energy, but collecting firewood where elephants may be is risky because elephants can kill people. Using an intersectional approach, we asked how do facets of people's identities influence perceived risk, ability to adapt, and vulnerability to HEI? We conducted one year of mixed method, ethnographic research in the village of Mokgacha in the Eastern Panhandle. We found that both men and women collected elephant-felled firewood but had different perceptions of risk to HEI and adapted in different ways. Women often harvested in groups and the middle of the day, whereas men harvested alone in the morning and evenings while tending to cattle, leaving them vulnerable to elephants. Because of physical limitations, the elderly and people with disabilities were vulnerable to HEI and relied on resource sharing from family to reduce their vulnerability to HEI. Settlement history also influenced how people of different ethnicities are vulnerable because of access to environments with low visibility and higher chance of HEI. This work provides insights on who, how, and when people adapt to minimize the potential danger of HEI when collecting firewood. To reduce unwanted HEI and ensure continued support for elephants by rural residents, conservation interests should focus efforts on building solutions that recognize social diversity, recognize local perceptions of risk, and reinforce culturally relevant adaptations.

Resolving Conservation Conflicts through Shared Vision, Collective Benefits and Relevant Values

“…On the other hand, the Dinokeng Game Reserve respondents, despite experiencing more frequent damage or risk from elephants, felt that the benefits of elephants outweighed the costs and expressed more positive attitudes towards elephants. Real and perceived benefits, therefore, can shape and influence responses to risks associated with elephants [91]. To enhance positive attitudes and support for the reserve among Kekana Gardens residents, it is crucial to provide them with access to the benefits associated with elephants and the reserve (even though they live near an elephant reserve, most Kekana Gardens respondents stated that they only see elephants a few times per year (51.5%), or they only have seen elephants a few times in their lives (30.3%)).…”

Gender and Equity Considerations for Building Climate Resilience: Lessons from Rural and Periurban Botswana

“…Xhumaga has a total population of about 1500. It is located at a border of Makgadikgadi National Park, which has an estimated elephant population of about 1800, often considered above the carrying capacity of the area, but in keeping with the government's policy decisions around hunting and conservation [39][40][41]. While significant effort has gone into reducing human-wildlife conflict in the area, at the time the fieldwork was undertaken a number of things contributed to an increase in tensions.…”

The Village, the Elephant, and the State: Land Access and Vulnerability in Rural Botswana

“…Households with strong social support networks are better able to reduce their vulnerability to environmental challenges through access to labor, resources, and information (Cassidy & Barnes, 2012;Pretty, 2003;Pretty & Smith, 2004). Vulnerabilities resulting from HEI, specifically, are not experienced uniformly across the population but rather differ across social groups, negatively impacting some individuals, often women and the elderly, more than others (Ogra, 2008;Redmore et al, 2020).…”

“…Several studies document how conservation efforts for elephants pose real threats to peoples' lives and livelihoods to a degree that they shift resources, change their spatial/ temporal movements across land, or resettle to new locations (e.g., Redmore et al, 2020;Witter, 2013). In conjunction with resettlement regulations, HEI may restrict where and when people move through the landscape due to risk of unwanted direct interactions with elephants (Lee & Graham, 2006), or whether and how they can access land.…”

“…People living near protected areas with elephants may decide to relocate to government-sanctioned settlements, at once pushed away from the protected area by potential HEI and attracted to new settlements by promises of housing, potable water, health clinics, and other infrastructure or opportunities (Hitchcock, 1998;Milgroom & Spierenburg, 2008;Saugestad, 2005;Witter, 2013). Yet the concentration of people in villages means they have longer travel distances to access their agricultural fields and other natural resources, thereby continuing to risk HEI during their daily livelihood activities (Redmore et al, 2020).…”