Eliciting farmer households' preferences for attributes of insurance schemes addressing wildlife conflict: A choice experiment study

Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is a global challenge that jeopardizes both farmers' livelihoods and wildlife conservation. Providing economic incentives, such as compensation programs, has been a common strategy to address this challenge. However, the effectiveness of these programs is debated, as mishandling and inadequate payments can escalate animosity and financial liabilities for governments. To alleviate future financial burdens and enhance compensation, adopting subsidized insurance schemes for subsistence farmers is proposed as a long-term solution. Such initiatives have shown promise in mitigating HWC in various regions but challenges remain in aligning insurance offerings with the needs of farmers. This paper addresses the scarcity of research on public demand for HWC insurance, with a focus on individual insurance attributes related to HWC. It employs the Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) methodology to analyze essential insurance elements, such as waiting times for indemnity, minimum coverage, and premiums, that influence farmers' decisions. Additionally, it explores integrating preventative measures into insurance, encouraging risk-reduction strategies. The findings contribute to understanding the challenges and opportunities in implementing insurance-based solutions to mitigate HWC. This promotes coexistence between communities and wildlife, safeguarding endangered species while addressing the conflict's economic and social dimensions.