Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPekor, A
dc.contributor.authorMiller, JRB
dc.contributor.authorFlyman, MV
dc.contributor.authorKasiki, S
dc.contributor.authorKesch, MK
dc.contributor.authorMiller, SM
dc.contributor.authorUiseb, K
dc.contributor.authorvan der Merve, V
dc.contributor.authorLindsey, PA
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-23T05:11:32Z
dc.date.available2021-02-23T05:11:32Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn0006-3207en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.biocon.2018.10.030en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/402525
dc.description.abstractThe fencing of protected areas (PAs) is highly controversial, and much remains unknown about the associated financial, ecological, and social impacts. We surveyed experts on 63 fenced and 121 unfenced PAs across 23 African countries to assess the advantages and drawbacks of fencing. Where fences exist, they are largely supported and widely viewed as effective at demarcating PA boundaries and mitigating human-wildlife conflicts. However, most fences were insufficiently funded, which limited their ability to contain conflict-prone species like elephants and lions. Fences were also frequently vandalised and caused numerous conflicts with local communities. We documented for the first time the distribution of and support for fencing in PAs across Africa. While fencing is largely limited to Southern Africa and East Africa, support for fencing is greatest in West Africa and is associated with high human and livestock densities, and high threats from bushmeat harvesting, livestock encroachment, and logging.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.languageenen_US
dc.publisherElsevier BVen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom67en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto75en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalBiological Conservationen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume229en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchEnvironmental Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchBiological Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchAgricultural and Veterinary Sciencesen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode05en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode06en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode07en_US
dc.titleFencing Africa's protected areas: Costs, benefits, and management issuesen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articlesen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationPekor, A; Miller, JRB; Flyman, MV; Kasiki, S; Kesch, MK; Miller, SM; Uiseb, K; van der Merve, V; Lindsey, PA, Fencing Africa's protected areas: Costs, benefits, and management issues, Biological Conservation, 2019, 229, pp. 67-75en_US
dcterms.licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en_US
dc.date.updated2021-02-23T05:07:45Z
dc.description.versionVersion of Record (VoR)en_US
gro.rights.copyright© 2018 Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits unrestricted, non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, providing that the work is properly cited.en_US
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorLindsey, Peter


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record