{"title":"Conservation Practitioners’ Perspectives on Management Responses to Poaching in South African Protected Areas","authors":"Ndivhuwo Shivambu, Tinyiko Cavin Shivambu, Takalani Nelufule, Tsireledzo Goodwill Makwarela, Tshifhiwa Constance Nangammbi, Nimmi Seoraj-Pillai","doi":"10.1007/s00267-026-02634-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Biodiversity across Africa faces escalating threats from agricultural expansion, urbanisation, resource overexploitation, and pollution, particularly at the margins of protected areas (PAs). These land‑use changes intensify interactions between people and wildlife by compressing habitats, increasing competition for space and resources, and disrupting ecological processes, thereby exacerbating human–wildlife conflict and threatening conservation outcomes. In this context, conservation practitioners play an important role in managing these conflicts by implementing conservation management interventions. A total of 49 conservation practitioners across KwaZulu‑Natal, Limpopo, and Mpumalanga in South Africa were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire to document the implementation of key conservation measures and to examine their association with practitioner-reported poaching occurrence. Most reserves implemented perimeter fencing and shared boundaries with adjacent local communities. Community engagement and environmental education programmes were also widely reported. The proportion of practitioners reporting poaching was highest in KwaZulu‑Natal (84.2%), followed by Limpopo (71%) and Mpumalanga (61.5%). Binary logistic regression revealed that community engagement was significantly associated with lower odds of poaching. Sustaining PAs requires integrated strategies that combine enforcement, community engagement, and adaptive management.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":543,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Management","volume":"76 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13653863/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00267-026-02634-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Biodiversity across Africa faces escalating threats from agricultural expansion, urbanisation, resource overexploitation, and pollution, particularly at the margins of protected areas (PAs). These land‑use changes intensify interactions between people and wildlife by compressing habitats, increasing competition for space and resources, and disrupting ecological processes, thereby exacerbating human–wildlife conflict and threatening conservation outcomes. In this context, conservation practitioners play an important role in managing these conflicts by implementing conservation management interventions. A total of 49 conservation practitioners across KwaZulu‑Natal, Limpopo, and Mpumalanga in South Africa were interviewed using a semi-structured questionnaire to document the implementation of key conservation measures and to examine their association with practitioner-reported poaching occurrence. Most reserves implemented perimeter fencing and shared boundaries with adjacent local communities. Community engagement and environmental education programmes were also widely reported. The proportion of practitioners reporting poaching was highest in KwaZulu‑Natal (84.2%), followed by Limpopo (71%) and Mpumalanga (61.5%). Binary logistic regression revealed that community engagement was significantly associated with lower odds of poaching. Sustaining PAs requires integrated strategies that combine enforcement, community engagement, and adaptive management.
期刊介绍:
Environmental Management offers research and opinions on use and conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats and control of hazards, spanning the field of environmental management without regard to traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal aims to improve communication, making ideas and results from any field available to practitioners from other backgrounds. Contributions are drawn from biology, botany, chemistry, climatology, ecology, ecological economics, environmental engineering, fisheries, environmental law, forest sciences, geosciences, information science, public affairs, public health, toxicology, zoology and more.
As the principal user of nature, humanity is responsible for ensuring that its environmental impacts are benign rather than catastrophic. Environmental Management presents the work of academic researchers and professionals outside universities, including those in business, government, research establishments, and public interest groups, presenting a wide spectrum of viewpoints and approaches.