Living with elephants
A case study from Kavango‐Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area in Zimbabwe
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 19583160 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Muhammad Faizan Usman (0000-0002-7167-2854, Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, corresponding author), Martin Reinhardt Nielsen (0000-0002-8941-6031, University of Copenhagen), Sébastien Le Bel (Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement), Maxwell Phiri (0000-0001-5765-6340), Patrice Grimaud (International Centre for Reproductive Health Kenya) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 7 |
| Issue | 7 |
| Pages | 1605-1618 |
| Publication date | 2025-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | People and Nature (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2575-8314 • E-ISSN: 2575-8314 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/pan3.70060 |
| OpenAlex | W4411354237 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 63 |
The Kavango‐Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (KaZa TFCA) is home to one of the largest populations of African savanna elephants (approximately 227,000), a species iconic for ecological balance but also a major driver of human–elephant conflict (HEC). This study investigates how spatial and socio‐economic factors shape household perceptions and tolerance towards elephants in the Zimbabwean part of KaZa TFCA. Using a survey sample of 668 households experiencing HEC, we analysed the impact of proximity to forests, protected areas and water points on conflict intensity and community responses. Our findings reveal that households closer to these conflict‐prone features experience higher exposure to elephants, resulting in significant tangible costs, such as crop loss and property damage, and increased emotional stress. Among these features, proximity to forests emerged as the strongest predictor of HEC, followed by protected areas, with water points having a lesser influence. Distance to these features was found to mediate tolerance through its effects on tangible costs, intangible benefits and mitigation efforts. Intangible benefits, including an appreciation of elephants' ecological roles and aesthetic value, emerged as the strongest determinants of tolerance, highlighting the importance of nurturing positive perceptions. However, the absence of tangible benefits, such as tourism revenue or financial incentives, coupled with the tangible costs of living alongside elephants, such as crop damage, significantly undermine household tolerance. The study stresses the need for spatially informed mitigation strategies, including participatory spatial planning, early‐warning systems and livelihood diversification through community‐based conservation initiatives. Establishing community conservancies in high‐conflict wards could provide tangible benefits while empowering communities to engage in wildlife management. These findings highlight the importance of integrating conservation objectives with the socio‐economic realities of local communities, offering pathways for coexistence in biodiversity hotspots like KaZa TFCA. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog
Geography · African studies and sociopolitical issues · Archaeology and Rock Art Studies · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Landscape Approaches
A wildlife tolerance model and case study for understanding human wildlife conflicts
Partial Least Squares (PLS) Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) for Building and Testing Behavioral Causal Theory
Ecotourism as a vehicle for local economic development
The Elephant Queen
Determining Sample Size
The Village, the Elephant, and the State
Human–Elephant Conflict Around Bénoué National Park, Cameroon
Well-Being Impacts of Human-Elephant Conflict in Khumaga, Botswana
Human–Wildlife Conflicts and the Need to Include Tolerance and Coexistence
Fencing elephants
Where elephants roam
| Highly cited | No |
|---|