Scholarlink

<p>Urban-wildlife conflicts present critical challenges for biodiversity conservation and community well-being, particularly in rapidly urbanizing landscapes. This study examines human-rhesus macaque (<i>Macaca mulatta</i>) conflicts around Asola-Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary, New Delhi, by applying a structured conflict classification framework, Dispute, Underlying Conflict, and Deep-rooted Conflict, to quantify conflict depth and guide targeted interventions. Between April and June 2024, we surveyed 200 households at the sanctuary margin, assessing perceptions across five domains (Perception, Situation, History, Willingness, Authority Views) using Likert scales. Statistical analyses comprised Pearson’s chi-square tests to identify significant associations and conditional inference trees to reveal primary predictors of attitudes and conflict severity. Composite indices were derived from domain-level additive scores that were standardised and classified into three conflict levels, with thresholds of 1–1.8 (Dispute), 1.81–2.6 (Underlying Conflict), and 2.61–3 (Deep-rooted Conflict). Findings reveal that macaque encounters are widespread (88%), resulting in property damage (44.5%), increased workload (93%), and physical injuries (39%). Religious and cultural beliefs foster positive attitudes and drive provisioning behaviors, while aggressive macaque actions and dissatisfaction with wildlife authorities (67.5%) exacerbate tensions. Composite indices indicate that most conflicts align with the Underlying Conflict level (OCI = 1.632), with Perception (OCI = 2.445) and Situation (OCI = 2.09) dimensions also falling within this range. History, Willingness, and Authority Views correspond to Dispute levels. These findings emphasise variation across conflict dimensions. While the study does not assess mitigation interventions, identifying these levels provides a foundation for future work aimed at developing context-specific strategies.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Coexistence or conflict? Understanding human-macaque encounters in Delhi’s urban sanctuary

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月5日

查看全文
  • Mukesh Chand,
  • Feba K S,
  • Parvaiz Yousuf,
  • Shubham Kumar Maletha,
  • Rashi Nautiyal,
  • Bhupendra Singh Adhikari

摘要

Urban-wildlife conflicts present critical challenges for biodiversity conservation and community well-being, particularly in rapidly urbanizing landscapes. This study examines human-rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta) conflicts around Asola-Bhatti Wildlife Sanctuary, New Delhi, by applying a structured conflict classification framework, Dispute, Underlying Conflict, and Deep-rooted Conflict, to quantify conflict depth and guide targeted interventions. Between April and June 2024, we surveyed 200 households at the sanctuary margin, assessing perceptions across five domains (Perception, Situation, History, Willingness, Authority Views) using Likert scales. Statistical analyses comprised Pearson’s chi-square tests to identify significant associations and conditional inference trees to reveal primary predictors of attitudes and conflict severity. Composite indices were derived from domain-level additive scores that were standardised and classified into three conflict levels, with thresholds of 1–1.8 (Dispute), 1.81–2.6 (Underlying Conflict), and 2.61–3 (Deep-rooted Conflict). Findings reveal that macaque encounters are widespread (88%), resulting in property damage (44.5%), increased workload (93%), and physical injuries (39%). Religious and cultural beliefs foster positive attitudes and drive provisioning behaviors, while aggressive macaque actions and dissatisfaction with wildlife authorities (67.5%) exacerbate tensions. Composite indices indicate that most conflicts align with the Underlying Conflict level (OCI = 1.632), with Perception (OCI = 2.445) and Situation (OCI = 2.09) dimensions also falling within this range. History, Willingness, and Authority Views correspond to Dispute levels. These findings emphasise variation across conflict dimensions. While the study does not assess mitigation interventions, identifying these levels provides a foundation for future work aimed at developing context-specific strategies.