Research Article
An Assessment of Local People’s Support to Private Wildlife Conservation: A Case of Save Valley Conservancy and Fringe Communities, Zimbabwe
Table 1
Proximate and underlying drivers of local resistance to SVC across the villages.
| Ward(s) | Village(s) | Proximate | Underlying | Lack of wildlife-related benefits | Poor control of damage-causing wildlife | Escalating wildlife-induced costs/conflicts | Distrust for SVC owners and workers | Limited and irregular communication | No compensation for losses from wildlife | Lack of participation in wildlife conservation |
| 3 | Matsai | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 26 | 24 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | | 26 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | | 27 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | 31 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Total () | 11 (22%) | 7 (14%) | 13 (27%) | 5 (10%) | 6 (12%) | 5 (10%) | 2 (4%) |
|
|
Note: contained in this table are numbers of respondents (not bracketed) who provided a response.
|