Human-wildlife conflict in Rwanda: Linking ecoregion, changing conservation status and the local communities’ perception

Sun, P, Bariyanga, JD and Wronski, T ORCID: 0000-0002-0853-6008 (2026) Human-wildlife conflict in Rwanda: Linking ecoregion, changing conservation status and the local communities’ perception. Global Ecology and Conservation, 59. ISSN 2351-9894

Preview

Text Human-wildlife conflict in Rwanda - Linking ecoregion, changing conservation status and the local communities’ perception.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial. Download (5MB) | Preview

Abstract

For densely populated and low-income countries, human-wildlife competition (better known as human wildlife conflict; HWC) is an increasing challenge to both biodiversity conservation and local communities’ wellbeing. This study examines HWC (crop raiding and livestock depredation) in Rwanda — one of the most densely populated countries in the world. Specifically, two socio-ecological contexts were compared: i) two agriculturist communities dwelling around the isolated forest fragments of Gishwati and Mukura Forest, i.e., protected, afro-montane rain forest patches in the west of Rwanda, and ii) a savannah dwelling pastoralist community in the Eastern savannah, a semi-arid rangeland in the east. We related results from camera trapping to those obtained from semi-structured interview surveys of local communities to assess wildlife abundance and the reliability of wildlife damage compensation claims. We investigate the predominant nuisance species at each study site, the type and amount of crop/livestock damage caused, the communities’ tolerance towards such damage, and the different levels of response to the impairment. In the Eastern savannah and around Mukura Forest, relative species abundance obtained from interview surveys corresponded to that found using camera traps, but strongly deviated near Gishwati Forest, where farmers reported significantly higher crop losses than near Mukura Forest or in the Eastern savannah. Main nuisance species around Gishwati and Mukura Forest were primates, mainly targeting maize, while in the Eastern savannah rodents and primates caused most damage, mainly on beans. Livestock (chicken) losses in the Eastern savannah region were caused by mongooses, around Gishwati and Mukura Forest by genets. Communities near Gishwati were significantly less tolerant towards wildlife damage than near Mukura Forest or in the Eastern savannah, suggesting that ecoregion or a changing conservation status had no effect on HWC. Accordingly, people around Gishwati used stronger retaliative responses to repel wildlife than near Mukura or in the Eastern savannah.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Wildlife damage management; Local ecological knowledge; Forest/savannah biome; Human-wildlife competition; Human-wildlife coexistence; Nuisance species; Quantity of damage; Tolerance of damage; Responses to damage; 4102 Ecological Applications; 31 Biological Sciences; 3103 Ecology; 4104 Environmental Management; 41 Environmental Sciences; 15 Life on Land; 0502 Environmental Science and Management; 0602 Ecology; 3103 Ecology; 4104 Environmental management
Subjects:	G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GE Environmental Sciences Q Science > QL Zoology
Divisions:	Biological and Environmental Sciences (from Sep 19)
Publisher:	Elsevier
Date of acceptance:	15 March 2025
Date of first compliant Open Access:	10 June 2026
Date Deposited:	10 Jun 2026 11:10
Last Modified:	10 Jun 2026 11:10
DOI or ID number:	10.1016/j.gecco.2025.e03550
URI:	https://researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk/id/eprint/28796

View Item