Introduction
Methods
Ethical Approval
Study Areas
Questionnaire Preparation and Administration
Variable type | Data type | Variable |
---|---|---|
Dependent | Continuous | Self-reported number of household livestock killed by snow leopards in the last 12 months (computed as log10 scale) |
Self-reported number of household conflicts with snow leopard conservation in the last 12 months, as a total of number of household conflicts with: Park management; Local committee; Ban on the killing of snow leopards; Livestock compensation scheme; Corral construction; Environmental education activities; Limits on the collection of Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs); Limits on the collection of wood; Other | ||
Independent | Continuous | Self-reported total household livestock owned in the last 12 months (computed as log10 scale) |
Self-reported number of livestock lost by household to all mortality sources in the last 12 months (computed as log10 scale) | ||
Self-reported number of household livestock killed by snow leopards in the last 12 months (computed as log10 scale) | ||
Self-reported number of household conflicts with snow leopard conservation in the last 12 months | ||
Household adult literacy rate | ||
Total household members | ||
Household Sustainable Livelihoods Index score (see Supplementary Information for more detail on this index and its computation) | ||
Binary | Study site/Protected Area/Household location | |
Livestock as primary source of household financial income | ||
Tourism as primary source of household financial income | ||
Other source as primary source of household financial income | ||
Livestock as primary source of household financial income |
Questionnaire Data Analysis
Key Informant Interviews
Results and Discussion
Household Conflicts with Snow Leopard Conservation
Question | Response | Combined N = 70 | SNP N = 26 | ACA N = 44 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N | % | N | % | N | % | ||
Conflict with actors | 20 | 28.6 | 3 | 11.5 | 17 | 38.6 | |
Reason(s) for conflict with actors | [Sample size] | 19 | 3 | 16 | |||
Lack of local benefits | 1 | 5.3 | 1 | 33.3 | 0 | 0.00 | |
Livelihood damage | 9 | 47.4 | 2 | 66.7 | 7 | 43.8 | |
Other | 1 | 5.3 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 6.3 | |
Bureaucracy and livelihood damage | 8 | 42.1 | 0 | 0.0 | 8 | 50.0 | |
Conflict with interventions | 26 | 37.1 | 11 | 42.3 | 15 | 34.1 | |
Reason(s) for conflict with interventions | [Sample size] | 26 | 11 | 15 | |||
Lack of local benefits | 2 | 7.7 | 2 | 18.2 | 0 | 0.0 | |
Livelihood damage | 18 | 69.2 | 7 | 63.6 | 11 | 73.3 | |
Other | 1 | 3.8 | 3.8 | 9.1 | 0 | 0.0 | |
Bureaucracy and livelihood damage | 5 | 19.2 | 3.8 | 9.1 | 4 | 26.7 | |
Received compensation | No | 33 | 68.8 | 19 | 100.0 | 14 | 48.3 |
Yes | 10 | 20.8 | 0 | 0.0 | 10 | 34.5 | |
Sometimes | 5 | 10.4 | 0 | 0.0 | 5 | 17.2 | |
Total | 48 | 100.0 | 19 | 100.0 | 29 | 100.0 | |
Reason(s) for not receiving compensation | Bureaucracy | 16 | 41.0 | 5 | 29.4 | 11 | 50.0 |
Limited amount | 3 | 7.7 | 0 | 0.0 | 3 | 13.6 | |
Not insured | 2 | 5.1 | 0 | 0.00 | 2 | 9.1 | |
Scheme collapsed/irrelevant | 3 | 7.7 | 1 | 5.9 | 2 | 9.1 | |
Haven’t reported/not aware of scheme | 7 | 17.9 | 6 | 31.3 | 1 | 4.5 | |
>1 negative reason | 8 | 20.5 | 5 | 29.4 | 3 | 13.6 | |
Total | 39 | 100.0 | 17 | 100.0 | 22 | 100.0 |
Household Conflicts Over Livestock Compensation
Explaining Household Conflicts with Snow Leopard Conservation
Household Livestock Losses
Livestock class | Combined N = 705 | SNP N = 260 | ACA N = 445 | Difference *p = ≤ 0.05 | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Median | Max. | Sum | Mean ± SD | Median | Max. | Sum | Mean ± SD | Median | Max. | Sum | Mean ± SD | |||
Total | Cattle | 0 | 7 | 152 | 0.28 ± 0.79 | 0 | 5 | 47 | 0.28 ± 0.077 | 0 | 7 | 105 | 0.28 ± 0.80 | t (703) = 0.093 |
Sheep/goats | 0 | 18 | 435 | 0.80 ± 2.31 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0 | 18 | 435 | 1.14 ± 2.70 | t (579) = −8.27* | |
Equines | 0 | 3 | 38 | 0.07 ± 0.31 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0.02 ± 0.13 | 0 | 3 | 35 | 0.09 ± 0.36 | t (633) = −3.48* | |
Yaks/yak hybrids | 0 | 23 | 328 | 0.60 ± 2.27 | 0 | 20 | 103 | 0.61 ± 1.82 | 0 | 23 | 225 | 0.59 ± 2.44 | t (703) = 0.10 | |
Other | 0 | 10 | 64 | 0.12 ± 0.82 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0 | 10 | 64 | 0.17 ± 0.98 | t (579) = −3.36* | |
Total | 0 | 40 | 1017 | 1.38 ± 3.20 | 0 | 6 | 153 | 0.49 ± 1.00 | 0 | 40 | 864 | 1.90 ± 3.86 | t (540) = −7.31* | |
% of total herd | – | – | 9.3 | – | – | – | 10.8 | – | – | – | 9.0 | – | – | |
Snow leopards | Cattle | 0 | 5 | 44 | 0.28 ± 0.76 | 0 | 3 | 19 | 0.61 ± 0.80 | 0 | 5 | 25 | 0.20 ± 0.73 | t (443) = −2.61* |
Sheep/goats | 0 | 12 | 107 | 0.69 ± 1.92 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0 | 12 | 107 | 0.86 ± 2.11 | t (523) = 4.56* | |
Equines | 0 | 2 | 22 | 0.14 ± 0.42 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0.09 ± 0.30 | 0 | 2 | 19 | 0.15 ± 0.44 | t (703) = 0.72 | |
Yaks/yak hybrids | 0 | 21 | 200 | 1.27 ± 2.97 | 0 | 9 | 30 | 0.97 ± 1.70 | 0 | 21 | 170 | 1.35 ± 3.20 | t (489) = 0.91 | |
Other | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 ± 0.00 | n/a | |
Total | 0 | 21 | 373 | 0.65 ± 2.10 | 0 | 9 | 52 | 0.26 ± 0.60 | 0 | 21 | 321 | 0.82 ± 2.46 | t (475) = 4.16* | |
% of total herd | – | – | 3.4 | – | – | – | 3.7 | – | – | – | 3.36 | – | – |
Livestock class with median value (in US$) per animal in brackets | Combined N = 705 | SNP N = 260 | ACA N = 445 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lost | Total value (US$) | Lost | Total value (US$) | Lost | Total value (US$) | ||
Total | Cattle (125) | 152 | 19,000 | 47 | 5875 | 105 | 13,125 |
Sheep/goats (150) | 435 | 65,250 | 0 | 0 | 435 | 65,250 | |
Horses/mules/donkeys (950) | 38 | 36,100 | 3 | 2850 | 35 | 33,250 | |
Yaks/yak hybrids (450) | 328 | 147,600 | 103 | 46,350 | 225 | 101,250 | |
Total value lost | 953 | 267,950 | 153 | 55,075 | 864 | 212,875 | |
Total value lost per household with livestock | – | 492 | – | 338 | – | 557 | |
Snow leopards | Cattle (125) | 44 | 5500 | 19 | 2375 | 25 | 3125 |
Sheep/ goats (150) | 107 | 16,050 | 0 | 0 | 107 | 16,050 | |
Horses/mules/donkeys (950) | 22 | 20,900 | 3 | 2850 | 19 | 18,050 | |
Yaks/yak hybrids (450) | 200 | 90,000 | 30 | 13,500 | 170 | 76,500 | |
Total value lost | 373 | 132,450 | 52 | 18,725 | 321 | 113,725 | |
Total value lost per household with livestock | – | 243 | – | 115 | – | 298 |