Human -wildlife conflict in the forest fringe farms of Kerala and Andhra Pradesh

Abstract

This study entitled “Human-Wildlife Conflict in the forest fringe farms of Kerala and Andhra Pradesh” investigates the dynamics of human-wildlife conflict (HWC) in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh (AP), emphasizing the socio-economic, environmental, and political related factors contributing to conflicts. The research aimed to identify patterns of crop and livestock damage, explore regional variations, and assess farmers' attitudes toward existing mitigation strategies. Primary data was collected through structured questionnaires, and a comparative analysis between the two states revealed critical differences in conflict experiences and management. Advanced tools such as IMINDMAP (AYOA) software were used to create visual representations, identifying key factors contributing to HWC from the farmers’ perspectives. In Kerala, 56.66% of farmers reported medium-level conflicts, with 43.33% experiencing severe impacts, primarily due to elephant and leopard attacks. In contrast, AP recorded no high-level conflicts, with 62.22% of respondents facing medium-level issues and 37.77% reporting low-level conflicts, largely involving wild boars, elephants and monkeys. Livestock depredation was also more severe in Kerala due to nocturnal attacks, while AP reported fewer incidents occurring mostly during the day. It was also observed that crop and property damage levels differed between the two states. In Kerala, 57.77% of respondents reported moderate crop losses, while 25.55% experienced severe damages. In AP, most farmers (85.55%) reported moderate crop damage, with a small fraction experiencing high (11.11%) or low (3.33%) losses. Property damage followed similar patterns, with 93.33% of AP farmers reporting moderate impacts, whereas Kerala saw more polarized outcomes, with both high (25.55%) and low (52.22%) levels of damage. The study, form Kerala, revealed that adoption of innovations to manage HWC had a negative and significant correlation with the extent of impact of HWC on farmers at the 5% significance level. Also, information source utilization had negative and significant relation with the extent of impact of HWC on farmers at 1% level of significance. This indicates 1 that greater access to information sources equips farmers with essential knowledge, enabling them to implement better mitigation strategies, further reducing conflict impacts. Meanwhile in Andhra Pradesh, education, occupation, and family income had a significant negative relationship with the extent of HWC, with education and occupation significant at the 1% level and family income at the 5% level. Farmers with higher education and diversified occupations experienced fewer conflicts, while higher-income households were better equipped to adopt preventive measures, reducing conflict severity. Additionally, they tend to employ sustainable practices, reducing the overall impact of HWC. Attitudes toward existing mitigation strategies were influenced by several socio-economic factors. In Kerala, analysis revealed that farming experience negatively affects farmers' attitudes toward mitigation strategies at the 5% significance level. Experienced farmers, frustrated by past failures, tend to be skeptical of new interventions. Their involvement in crafting solutions tailored to local conditions can improve the effectiveness of mitigation strategies and build trust. In Andhra Pradesh, the analysis revealed that adoption of innovations to manage HWC had a positive correlation with farmers' attitudes toward current mitigation strategies at the 5% significance level. Farmers who embrace new techniques demonstrate greater satisfaction with conflict management efforts. Participation in conservation efforts varied significantly between the two states. In Kerala, 37.77% of respondents reported high involvement, while in AP, 85.55% showed low participation, possibly due to limited awareness and logistical challenges. Encouraging greater engagement through awareness programs, incentives, and improved communication frameworks could enhance cooperation with conservation efforts. The mind map from Kerala farmers’ perspective highlighted key factors of Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC), including competition for natural resources, poor land-use planning, socio-economic challenges, inadequate policies, and weak decision-making. Meanwhile in Andhra Pradesh, mind map from farmers’ perspective highlighted key drivers of Human- Wildlife Conflict (HWC), including competition for natural resources, socio-economic challenges, poor land-use planning, inadequate policies. These interconnected factors 2 intensify conflicts and hinder effective mitigation efforts, underscoring the need for holistic solutions. The study emphasizes the need for context-specific mitigation strategies. For Kerala, advanced technologies such as drones, sensors, and AI can support effective monitoring, while AP should prioritize preventive measures to maintain stability. Promoting livelihood alternatives, such as eco-tourism and cultivating non-palatable crops, could help reduce reliance on vulnerable agricultural practices, minimizing the frequency of wildlife encounters. This research provides valuable insights into the nature and drivers of HWC in Kerala and AP, offering practical recommendations for policymakers and conservation bodies. Enhancing farmer participation, improving education, and adopting innovative technologies will be essential for sustainable conflict management. By engaging local communities and aligning mitigation strategies with socio-economic realities, this study highlights pathways toward achieving long-term coexistence between humans.