Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Performance of Human–wildlife Conflicts Compensation Scheme in Karnataka, India


Affiliations
1 Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110 012, India
2 Agricultural Bioinformatics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
3 Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 110 012, India
4 Division of Environment Science, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 110 012, India

Compensation serves as a post-conflict management tool for human–wildlife conflicts. In the Bannerghatta National Park (BNP) region, Karnataka, India, around 57.4% and 95% of the farmers received compensation for crop loss and cattle kill respectively. Compensation claims incurred transportation and paper costs of 60–70% and 30–40% respectively, and it took 7.6–12.3 months on average to receive compensation. Crop loss applications had the lion’s share of the total applications, while the compensation paid share was relatively less in the total compensation paid. Inadequacy of compensation was a major constraint. Separate advance fund provisions for crop loss, livestock depredation, property damage and human-related losses in proportion to annual cases can prevent the delay and inadequacy of compensation

Keywords

Compensation scheme, constraints, human–wildlife conflicts, national park, performance
User
Notifications
Font Size

Abstract Views: 174




  • Performance of Human–wildlife Conflicts Compensation Scheme in Karnataka, India

Abstract Views: 174  | 

Authors

Naveen Kumar Naik
Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110 012, India
P. Venkatesh
Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110 012, India
D. R. Singh
Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110 012, India
Alka Singh
Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110 012, India
G. K. Jha
Agricultural Bioinformatics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Statistics Research Institute, New Delhi 110 012, India
V. Sangeetha
Division of Agricultural Extension, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 110 012, India
D. K. Sharma
Division of Environment Science, ICAR-IARI, New Delhi 110 012, India
M. Balasubramanian
Division of Agricultural Economics, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi 110 012, India

Abstract


Compensation serves as a post-conflict management tool for human–wildlife conflicts. In the Bannerghatta National Park (BNP) region, Karnataka, India, around 57.4% and 95% of the farmers received compensation for crop loss and cattle kill respectively. Compensation claims incurred transportation and paper costs of 60–70% and 30–40% respectively, and it took 7.6–12.3 months on average to receive compensation. Crop loss applications had the lion’s share of the total applications, while the compensation paid share was relatively less in the total compensation paid. Inadequacy of compensation was a major constraint. Separate advance fund provisions for crop loss, livestock depredation, property damage and human-related losses in proportion to annual cases can prevent the delay and inadequacy of compensation

Keywords


Compensation scheme, constraints, human–wildlife conflicts, national park, performance



DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv126%2Fi4%2F434-441