ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024
Persistent Illegal Hunting of Wildlife in an African Landscape: Insights from a Study in the Luangwa Valley, Zambia.
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decades of illegal hunting (poaching) have adversely affected wildlife populations and thereby limited sustainable wildlife conservation in the Luangwa Valley, Zambia. Despite intervention efforts to address the problem, the illegal hunting of wildlife has persisted. Therefore, this study was conducted to understand the persistence of illegal hunting by investigating the drivers of poaching and intervention measures using a mixed methods approach. Stratified random sampling was used to collect data from 346 respondents through structured questionnaires. Purposive sampling was used to collect data through nine focus group discussions and three in-depth interviews with experts. The study revealed that persistent illegal hunting was mainly driven by people's critical need for survival and sustaining their livelihoods and not by inadequate law enforcement as presumed by resource managers. Although law enforcement was the most prevalent intervention measure, it did not deter local illegal hunters because their main motivations for poaching were not effectively addressed. The key implication of these findings is that where the illegal harvesting of natural resources in protected areas by local resource users is driven by people's critical need for survival and a livelihood, which is ineffectively addressed, illegal harvesting may persist even with increased law enforcement. This study provides empirical evidence, novel conceptual knowledge and an understanding of how prevalent drivers of poaching and other factors may have influenced persistent illegal hunting in the Luangwa Valley.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.