Livelihood vulnerability and human wildlife conflict in Nepal’s lowland protected areas

Human wildlife conflict (HWC) has emerged as a serious challenge, particularly in low-income countries where protected areas and human settlements overlap, affecting both biodiversity and human well-being. Although HWC generally cause economic losses, disrupt food security and exert socio-psychological pressures on local people, it also negatively affects wildlife populations by increasing retaliatory killings and threatening the survival of endangered species. Nevertheless, the ways in which HWC shapes the local livelihoods of already vulnerable communities remain underexplored. To address this gap, we analysed HWC incident data and vulnerability indicators from 92 municipalities surrounding protected areas (PAs) in Nepal’s lowland Tarai region. Using both the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) and an IPCC-based vulnerability framework, we assessed the extent to which HWC contributes to overall livelihood vulnerability. We found that while municipalities adjacent to PAs indeed experience higher livelihood vulnerability, the direct contribution of HWC—though significant at the local level—is relatively modest compared to socio-economic and environmental drivers. These findings highlight HWC as an integral part of broader socio-ecological processes, closely linked with livelihood insecurity, poverty, limited access to services and climate stresses. Addressing HWC, therefore, requires a holistic, multi-sectoral approach that goes beyond reactive, species-specific mitigation to incorporate livelihood diversification, strengthen social safety nets, improved access to basic services, and climate-resilient development pathways. We recommend that future conservation and adaptation programs should adopt integrated socio-ecological frameworks that prioritize community-based conflict mitigation, improve compensation mechanisms, and align wildlife management with national livelihood resilience goals such as Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and global biodiversity conservation targets under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

Publication Details

Journal
Global Ecology and Conservation
Published
2025-12-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2025.e04029
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Livelihood vulnerability and human wildlife conflict in Nepal’s lowland protected areas

Global Ecology and Conservation
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
article

Livelihood vulnerability and human wildlife conflict in Nepal’s lowland protected areas

article en

Abstract

Human wildlife conflict (HWC) has emerged as a serious challenge, particularly in low-income countries where protected areas and human settlements overlap, affecting both biodiversity and human well-being. Although HWC generally cause economic losses, disrupt food security and exert socio-psychological pressures on local people, it also negatively affects wildlife populations by increasing retaliatory killings and threatening the survival of endangered species. Nevertheless, the ways in which HWC shapes the local livelihoods of already vulnerable communities remain underexplored. To address this gap, we analysed HWC incident data and vulnerability indicators from 92 municipalities surrounding protected areas (PAs) in Nepal’s lowland Tarai region. Using both the Livelihood Vulnerability Index (LVI) and an IPCC-based vulnerability framework, we assessed the extent to which HWC contributes to overall livelihood vulnerability. We found that while municipalities adjacent to PAs indeed experience higher livelihood vulnerability, the direct contribution of HWC—though significant at the local level—is relatively modest compared to socio-economic and environmental drivers. These findings highlight HWC as an integral part of broader socio-ecological processes, closely linked with livelihood insecurity, poverty, limited access to services and climate stresses. Addressing HWC, therefore, requires a holistic, multi-sectoral approach that goes beyond reactive, species-specific mitigation to incorporate livelihood diversification, strengthen social safety nets, improved access to basic services, and climate-resilient development pathways. We recommend that future conservation and adaptation programs should adopt integrated socio-ecological frameworks that prioritize community-based conflict mitigation, improve compensation mechanisms, and align wildlife management with national livelihood resilience goals such as Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and global biodiversity conservation targets under the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF).

Global Ecology and ConservationVol. 65
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.