Life Satisfaction And Human-Wild Animal Conflicts
One of the biggest barriers to wild animal conservation in Africa is human-wild animal conflict. Often, conservationists face a tension between protecting endangered animals while balancing the needs of people who rely on the land where these animals live. Such conflicts are especially common in communities adjacent to protected areas, such as the Greater Virunga Landscape where endangered mountain gorillas live.
To better navigate these issues, conservationists need to understand how local community members feel about conflicts with wild animals. In this study, researchers explored whether people’s perceived satisfaction in life impacts their thoughts about human-wild animal conflicts.
The study is based on the bottom-up spillover theory of life satisfaction. This theory depicts life satisfaction as a hierarchy — that is, a pyramid. The pyramid is divided into different factors that “spillover” and affect each other, ultimately influencing perceived life satisfaction. In the study, the bottom of the life satisfaction pyramid was objective (material) well-being measures including food security, financial security, and health security. The middle of the pyramid was subjective (thoughts/feelings) measures including emotional and psychological wellbeing. Finally, the top of the pyramid was overall life satisfaction.
Researchers surveyed 570 heads of households in the Greater Virunga Landscape in summer 2016. Survey participants lived in communities adjacent to Volcanoes National Park in Rwanda (293) and Mgahinga National Park in Uganda (278). The surveys included questions about financial security, food security, and health security (bottom of the pyramid), psychological well-being and emotional well-being (middle of the pyramid), life satisfaction, and beliefs about human-wild animal conflicts (e.g., their thoughts about bamboo harvesting, human-caused forest fires, medicinal herbs harvesting, and poaching).
There are two key results of this study. First, the authors found that different factors of life satisfaction did affect each other. In both Rwanda and Uganda, life satisfaction was influenced by psychological well-being, financial security, food security, and health security. However, life satisfaction was not influenced by emotional well-being.
Some “spillover” effects were different in Rwanda vs. Uganda. For example, food security had a greater impact on life satisfaction in Rwanda than in Uganda. Likewise, health security had a greater impact on psychological well-being in Rwanda than in Uganda. In summary, the authors argue that life satisfaction is affected by a pyramid of factors that vary by country.
Secondly, the authors were surprised to find that higher life satisfaction was linked with worse perceptions of human-wild animal conflicts. In other words, as life satisfaction went up, people reported more negative thoughts about these conflicts. This result contradicts findings in other studies.
The researchers suggest that power dynamics may explain this finding. For example, perhaps reporting worse feelings about human-wild animal conflicts enables marginalized communities to ensure that they continue to benefit from conservation programs and policies funded by governments and nonprofit organizations. In other words, conservation efforts aimed at reducing poverty may unintentionally “incentivize” reporting worse human-animal conflicts. Community members may think that they will lose funding and resources if they do not show a need for development projects.
It’s important to note that this study captured the way people think and feel about human-wild animal conflicts. Research that compares community members’ thoughts with actual conflict data could help animal advocates develop conservation programs that balance the needs of humans and nonhuman animals. When launching these programs, it’s also important to bear in mind that what benefits people in one community may not be as beneficial to people elsewhere. For example, conservation programs focused on food security may be more successful in Rwanda than in Uganda. Similarly, as this study only focused on one protected area of Africa, the results may not apply in other areas of Africa or the world.
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2248