Are farmers willing to accept compensation from tourism revenue for elephant crop damage and coexistence support? Evidence from Sri Lanka

Kanesh Suresh, Clevo Wilson, Annette Quayle, Shunsuke Managi and Uttam Khanal

Ecological Economics, 2024, vol. 224, issue C

Abstract: In many regions of the world the incidence of human-wildlife conflict is increasing. This problem is made more complex in countries where wildlife are a key tourist attraction. For example, while subsistence farmers' crops can be destroyed by elephants, they are at the same time an important tourist drawcard. This study of human-wildlife conflict in Sri Lanka explores this issue and proposes as a solution a compensation scheme for farmers funded from revenue raised from tourism revenue and/or a tourism levy such as an embarkation tax. To ascertain the viability of this proposal we investigate affected farmers' willingness to accept compensation for elephant-related crop damage thereby providing an economic means for coexistence. The scheme proposed was tested by undertaking a discrete choice experiment involving 439 affected farm households. The modelling results show that farmers perceive an increased disutility from elephants visiting their farmland. However, they are willing to accept an average compensation of US$295 per acre when the entire crop is destroyed. The modelling exhibits preference heterogeneity: farmers' education, gender, tourism opportunities and membership in environmental clubs significantly influence their preference to coexist with human-elephant conflict (HEC). In particular, the interactions between ‘crop switching and education’ and ‘crop switching and gender’ reveal that better educated and male farmers are more inclined to adapt by changing crops on their farmlands compared to their less educated and female counterparts. Furthermore, farmers who prioritize tourism opportunities and those affiliated with environmental clubs are more open to coexistence, as they are willing to accommodate a greater number of elephants visiting their farmland compared to their counterparts. The key outcome of this study is that tourism has the potential to contribute to and form the basis for resolving HEC.

Keywords: Human-elephant conflict; Farmers; Compensation; Nature-based tourism; Conservation; Human wildlife conflict (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924001976
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:224:y:2024:i:c:s0921800924001976

DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108300

Access Statistics for this article

Ecological Economics is currently edited by C. J. Cleveland

More articles in Ecological Economics from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().