Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Biological and Environmental Sciences Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: The role of incentive-based instruments and social equity in conservation conflict interventions
Author(s): Rakotonarivo, Sarobidy O
Bell, Andrew Reid
Abernethy, Katharine
Minderman, Jeroen
Duthie, A Bradley
Redpath, Steve
Keane, Aidan
Travers, Henry
Bourgeois, Stephanie
Moukagni, Lea-Larissa
Cusack, Jeremy J
Jones, Isabel L
Pozo, Rocío A
Bunnefeld, Nils
Contact Email:
Keywords: conservation conflict
human behavior
human–elephant conflict
human–wildlife conflict
interactive game
monetary incentives
stakeholder engagement
Issue Date: 2021
Date Deposited: 4-May-2021
Citation: Rakotonarivo SO, Bell AR, Abernethy K, Minderman J, Duthie AB, Redpath S, Keane A, Travers H, Bourgeois S, Moukagni L, Cusack JJ, Jones IL, Pozo RA & Bunnefeld N (2021) The role of incentive-based instruments and social equity in conservation conflict interventions. Ecology and Society, 26 (2), Art. No.: 8.
Abstract: Conflicts between biodiversity conservation and other human activities are multifaceted. Understanding farmer preferences for various conflict mitigation strategies is therefore critical. We developed a novel interactive game around farmer land management decisions across 18 villages in Gabon to examine responses to three elephant conflict mitigation options: use of elephant deterrent methods, flat-rate subsidy, and agglomeration payments rewarding coordinated action for setting land aside for elephants. We found that all three policies significantly reduced participants’ inclinations to engage in lethal control. Use of deterrents and agglomeration payments were also more likely to reduce decisions to kill elephants in situations where levels of social equity were higher. Only the two monetary incentives increased farmers’ predisposition to provide habitats for elephants, suggesting that incentive-based instruments were conducive to pro-conservation behavior; different subsidy levels did not affect responses. Likewise, neither participants’ socioeconomic characteristics nor their real-life experiences of crop damage by elephants affected game decisions. Killing behavior in the games was 64% lower in villages influenced by protected areas than in villages surrounded by logging concessions, highlighting the need to address conservation conflicts beyond protected areas. Our study shows the importance of addressing underlying social conflicts, specifically equity attitudes, prior to, or alongside addressing material losses.
DOI Link: 10.5751/ES-12306-260208
Rights: Copyright © 2021 by the author(s). Published here under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article is under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( You may share and adapt the work for noncommercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license. Go to the pdf version of this article
Licence URL(s):

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
ES-2021-12306.pdfFulltext - Published Version3.47 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.