Suchergebnisse

This article applies sensemaking theory to instances of human-elephant interaction to understand how farmers make sense of elephants in their crops and how this fits into a broader discussion of human-wildlife coexistence. The concept of sensemaking is extended to discuss the institutional context of wildlife management and the role this has on the individual farmers' enacting and selection when confronted with an elephant in their crop. Analysis showed that respondents who had come into direct physical contact with an elephant reported to be more likely to refrain from attempting to scare elephants in the future and viewed them as dangerous. In comparison, farmers who had not experienced direct physical contact and subsequent injury from an elephant reported that they would continue to engage in interactions with elephants to remove them from their crops, viewing the elephants primarily as a pest. The discussion posited that institutional failures such as the lack of an efficient compensation policy, politics, and the top-down approach to wildlife policy indirectly impact on farmers' perceptions and subsequent sensemaking processes regarding their interactions with elephants in their crops. This article is intended as a snapshot of the potential for the application of sensemaking theory to human-wildlife interactions rather than a case for generalisation. ; This article applies sensemaking theory to instances of human-elephant interaction to understand how farmers make sense of elephants in their crops and how this fits into a broader discussion of human-wildlife coexistence. The concept of sensemaking is extended to discuss the institutional context of wildlife management and the role this has on the individual farmers' enacting and selection when confronted with an elephant in their crop. Analysis showed that respondents who had come into direct physical contact with an elephant reported to be more likely to refrain from attempting to scare elephants in the future and viewed them as dangerous. In comparison, farmers who had not experienced direct physical contact and subsequent injury from an elephant reported that they would continue to engage in interactions with elephants to remove them from their crops, viewing the elephants primarily as a pest. The discussion posited that institutional failures such as the lack of an efficient compensation policy, politics, and the top-down approach to wildlife policy indirectly impact on farmers' perceptions and subsequent sensemaking processes regarding their interactions with elephants in their crops. This article is intended as a snapshot of the potential for the application of sensemaking theory to human-wildlife interactions rather than a case for generalisation.