Household socio-agricultural profiles and the adoption of crop protection strategies in human-wildlife conflict contexts: Insights from western Côte d’Ivoire around mount Sangbé National Park

In rural sub-Saharan Africa, proximity to protected areas and habitat fragmentation intensify human-wildlife conflicts, particularly through crop-raiding. This study examines how household socio-agricultural profiles influence the adoption of protection strategies against wildlife incursions. The study took place near mount Sangbé national park in Côte d’Ivoire and involved surveying 121 farming households from three villages through structured interviews, complemented by field observations and expert consultations. Nineteen wildlife species were identified as crop raiders, with granivores and rodents, especially the grass cutter, red-headed quelea, and patas monkey, causing significant damage to rice, cassava, and cocoa. A hierarchical classification revealed four distinct household clusters, differentiated by landholding size, education level, age structure, and proximity to the park. Binary indicators were constructed for each method to evaluate protection practices and visualized by cluster. Strategies were grouped into physical deterrents, agroecological measures, and community-based interventions. A bias-reduced multinomial logistic regression was conducted using adjusted score equations to obtain stable estimates. Results show that field guarding is the most widely used strategy, especially among educated households with smaller landholdings, while traditional hunting and trapping are more common among older, less educated households with larger farms. Passive tolerance was positively associated across all clusters, suggesting widespread reliance on non-confrontational coping mechanisms. Scarecrows and trapping methods showed low or negative adoption rates, indicating limited perceived effectiveness. These findings underscore the need to tailor mitigation strategies to household-specific capacities and spatial contexts. The study advocates for agroecological and community-based approaches to enhance resilience and sustainability in buffer zones near protected areas.