Landowners who faced wildlife conflicts less likely to feel positive about forests: Study 

A new study conducted within a five-kilometre buffer around two protected areas, Bandipur and Nagarahole national parks, has revealed that landowners who had faced wildlife conflicts were less likely to feel positively about forests.

In the study ‘Contradictions in Conservation: Education, Income, and the Desire to Live Near Forest Ecosystems’, conducted by the Centre for Wildlife Studies (CWS), scientists surveyed 699 landowners bordering the Bandipur and Nagarahole parks.

“The study revealed a strong link between negative experiences with wildlife and attitudes toward forests. Landowners who had encountered wildlife conflicts were significantly less inclined to enjoy living near forests — being 116% less likely to do so — and were 67% less likely to perceive forests as contributing to a pleasant environment, underscoring the lasting impact of such conflicts on how people view their surroundings,” CWS said.

The study was led by Dincy Mariyam from CWS, along with co-authors Sumeet Gulati from University of British Columbia, and Krithi K. Karanth from CWS.

The study estimated the community’s inclination to live close to a forest based on perceived costs such as wildlife-related losses or the lack of access to basic facilities and opportunities. The survey also evaluated perceived benefits — whether they believed that the forest regulates climate and rainfall.

CWS said the study found that increased education and income were positively correlated with perceived benefits and fosters awareness of intangible ecosystem services. However, inadequate local employment options might counteract this effect, making educated people less likely to choose living near forests.

“With the progress in education reaching rural areas, a significant number of individuals now aspire to relocate to metropolitan regions for better opportunities. Dialogue with these communities could promote conservation through creating local employment opportunities, tourism, agroforestry, or implementing incentives for conserving land in close proximity to forests,” Dr. Mariyam said.

CWS added that the study highlights the need for wildlife conflict mitigation and access to livelihood linked to forests in order to strengthen local support for conservation.