Search

Human-wildlife-conflicts (HWCs) threaten wildlife conservation and livelihoods, particularly around biodiversity hotspots, such as Ghana's Bia Biosphere Reserve (BBR). Because wildlife raids farms or preys on livestock, such conflicts cause economic losses to farmers, psychological distress to communities, and social tensions between stakeholders, leading to retaliation—killing or injuring wildlife. Nonetheless, traditional approaches to HWC management, such as physical barriers, buffer zones, scare tactics, and non-lethal wildlife deterrents, are ineffective in addressing the problem. The study investigates HWCs in five communities through case studies involving focus groups, interviews, and on-site observations to understand the effects of wildlife-related incidents on these villages, how stakeholders accept and tolerate wildlife issues, and assess the effectiveness of the community engagement and participation (CEP) approach as a potential solution. The findings show that although CEP has the potential to mitigate HWCs and promote coexistence, the lack of involvement of communities substantially hinders the success of conservation efforts and addressing HWCs, which have substantial ecological, economic, social, and psychological impacts on communities near the BBR. Also, farmers' level of acceptance is substantially affected by the perceived economic benefits derived from the reserve. A crucial lesson learned is that involving communities in wildlife management can be more challenging and demands stakeholder cooperation and trust-building. The study recommends that the Ghana government consider (a) fostering a sense of ownership and responsibility among communities by actively and meaningfully involving them in designing and implementing wildlife management and (b) implementing policies that prioritize creating alternative livelihood opportunities for communities living in the BBR area.

The recent wave of large-scale land acquisitions or land deals, popularly called ‘land grabbing’ in subSaharan Africa, has provoked vigorous debate over the potential benefits and risks to local people, with results structured by complex policy and institu­tional context. Land deals present new develop­ment challenges and aggravate old vulnera­bilities, raising critical questions for investigation. Yet empirical evidence of impacts on local populations is limited, particularly regarding how land deals affect local people’s livelihood assets, strategies, and outcomes. Guided by the sustainable livelihood approach and a quasi-experimental design, I compare livelihoods before and after a land deal project and between an affected and a control community in southwestern Tanzania. I use household surveys, focused group discussions, and key informant interviews to collect data. The ANOVA analyses revealed that the project severely deterio­rated households’ natural, financial, and social capital and had far-reaching impacts on well-being in the affected community compared to the control village. The study recommends that African countries should consider (1) scrutinizing land deals and enforcing contracts, (2) conducting rigorous envi­ron­mental and social impact assess­ment, (3) strengthening customary land rights and reinforc­ing compensation policies, and (4) mean­ingfully involving locals in land deal negotiations. This contribution responds to the deficit in research on land deals’ impacts on livelihoods and well-being and lays the groundwork for future research.