Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania

Abstract Communities in Africa bordering national parks or protected areas commonly overlap with wildlife. However, it is unclear to what degree such overlaps result in interactions with wildlife. The Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) was designated a multiple land-use conservation area in 1959. Ma...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Oswin F. Linuma, Anesi S. Mahenge, Rubhera R. A. M. Mato, Alex D. Greenwood
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Springer 2022-12-01
Series:Discover Sustainability
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-022-00113-7
_version_ 1797985586429034496
author Oswin F. Linuma
Anesi S. Mahenge
Rubhera R. A. M. Mato
Alex D. Greenwood
author_facet Oswin F. Linuma
Anesi S. Mahenge
Rubhera R. A. M. Mato
Alex D. Greenwood
author_sort Oswin F. Linuma
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Communities in Africa bordering national parks or protected areas commonly overlap with wildlife. However, it is unclear to what degree such overlaps result in interactions with wildlife. The Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) was designated a multiple land-use conservation area in 1959. Maasai and Datoga pastoralists and Hadzabe hunter-gatherers reside with protected wildlife in NCA. The study was carried out in four Maasai villages within the NCA, including Kayapus, Endulen, Meshili, and Nainokanoka. A cross-sectional study was used to assess drivers of human‒wildlife interactions using questionnaire surveys, focus group discussions, and field visits. A total of 396 households participated in the survey. The collected data were analysed using qualitative data analysis techniques and descriptive statistics such as frequencies and means. The habitat, which comprises water, pasture, shelter, and space, accounted for 100% of interactions, indicating that it is the primary driver of human‒wildlife conflict. Other driving factors for human‒wildlife interactions are the increase in wildlife, collections of firewood, domestic animals kept, and influence of community sleeping arrangements, searching for traditional medicines, and killing of lions for ritual purposes or defense. Large household sizes (36 family members) coupled with climate change have also driven and fuelled human‒wildlife interactions. Challenges identified as threatening human‒wildlife co-existence are injuries, deaths, disease transmission, and destruction of property. To mitigate human‒wildlife conflicts, the following are recommended: the increase in boarding schools coupled with the increase in enrolment of students in boarding schools or providing reliable transport, distribution of tap water, increasing food assistance to the community living in poverty, controlling population increase through reallocation the population in other areas, introducing zero-grazing, using biogas, discouraging community sleeping arrangements, i.e., humans with calves in the same house, improving record-keeping of the wildlife attacks, provisional dissemination of research findings to the community.
first_indexed 2024-04-11T07:20:30Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f1d7b6af16354619b6a24eb3d1bada1c
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2662-9984
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-11T07:20:30Z
publishDate 2022-12-01
publisher Springer
record_format Article
series Discover Sustainability
spelling doaj.art-f1d7b6af16354619b6a24eb3d1bada1c2022-12-22T04:37:48ZengSpringerDiscover Sustainability2662-99842022-12-013111510.1007/s43621-022-00113-7Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, TanzaniaOswin F. Linuma0Anesi S. Mahenge1Rubhera R. A. M. Mato2Alex D. Greenwood3Department of Environmental Science and Management, Ardhi UniversityDepartment of Environmental Science and Management, Ardhi UniversityDepartment of Environmental Science and Management, Ardhi UniversityDepartment of Wildlife Diseases, Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife ResearchAbstract Communities in Africa bordering national parks or protected areas commonly overlap with wildlife. However, it is unclear to what degree such overlaps result in interactions with wildlife. The Ngorongoro Conservation Area (NCA) was designated a multiple land-use conservation area in 1959. Maasai and Datoga pastoralists and Hadzabe hunter-gatherers reside with protected wildlife in NCA. The study was carried out in four Maasai villages within the NCA, including Kayapus, Endulen, Meshili, and Nainokanoka. A cross-sectional study was used to assess drivers of human‒wildlife interactions using questionnaire surveys, focus group discussions, and field visits. A total of 396 households participated in the survey. The collected data were analysed using qualitative data analysis techniques and descriptive statistics such as frequencies and means. The habitat, which comprises water, pasture, shelter, and space, accounted for 100% of interactions, indicating that it is the primary driver of human‒wildlife conflict. Other driving factors for human‒wildlife interactions are the increase in wildlife, collections of firewood, domestic animals kept, and influence of community sleeping arrangements, searching for traditional medicines, and killing of lions for ritual purposes or defense. Large household sizes (36 family members) coupled with climate change have also driven and fuelled human‒wildlife interactions. Challenges identified as threatening human‒wildlife co-existence are injuries, deaths, disease transmission, and destruction of property. To mitigate human‒wildlife conflicts, the following are recommended: the increase in boarding schools coupled with the increase in enrolment of students in boarding schools or providing reliable transport, distribution of tap water, increasing food assistance to the community living in poverty, controlling population increase through reallocation the population in other areas, introducing zero-grazing, using biogas, discouraging community sleeping arrangements, i.e., humans with calves in the same house, improving record-keeping of the wildlife attacks, provisional dissemination of research findings to the community.https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-022-00113-7DriversHuman-wildlife co-existenceInteractionConflictsConservation Area
spellingShingle Oswin F. Linuma
Anesi S. Mahenge
Rubhera R. A. M. Mato
Alex D. Greenwood
Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania
Discover Sustainability
Drivers
Human-wildlife co-existence
Interaction
Conflicts
Conservation Area
title Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania
title_full Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania
title_fullStr Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania
title_full_unstemmed Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania
title_short Drivers of Human‒wildlife interactions in a co-existence area: a case study of the Ngorongoro conservation area, Tanzania
title_sort drivers of human wildlife interactions in a co existence area a case study of the ngorongoro conservation area tanzania
topic Drivers
Human-wildlife co-existence
Interaction
Conflicts
Conservation Area
url https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-022-00113-7
work_keys_str_mv AT oswinflinuma driversofhumanwildlifeinteractionsinacoexistenceareaacasestudyofthengorongoroconservationareatanzania
AT anesismahenge driversofhumanwildlifeinteractionsinacoexistenceareaacasestudyofthengorongoroconservationareatanzania
AT rubherarammato driversofhumanwildlifeinteractionsinacoexistenceareaacasestudyofthengorongoroconservationareatanzania
AT alexdgreenwood driversofhumanwildlifeinteractionsinacoexistenceareaacasestudyofthengorongoroconservationareatanzania