*Corresponding Author: Koffi Kouamé Christophe, Department of Agronomy and Forestry
University of Man, Côte d'Ivoire Email: christophe.koffi@univ-man.edu.ci. 26
International Journal of Zoology and Applied Biosciences ISSN: 2455-9571
Volume 10, Issue 5, pp: 26-33, 2025 http://www.ijzab.comhttps://doi.org/10.55126/ijzab.2025.v10.i05.004
Research Article
PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES: FARMER RESPONSES TO WILDLIFE
CROP RAIDING NEAR MONT SANGBÉ NATIONAL PARK,
WESTERN CÔTE D'IVOIRE
1*Koffi Kouamé Christophe, 1Bohousou Kouakou Hilaire, 1,2Bogui Elie Bandama, 1Ouffoue
Naomie, 1Brou Kouakou Anselme, 3Beda Alex, 3Tondossama Adama
1 Department of Agronomy and Forestry University of Man, Côte d'Ivoire.
2 Centre suisse de recherche scientifique (CSRS), Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire
3 The National Office for Parks and Reserves of Côte d'Ivoire, Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire
Article History: Received 29th July 2025; Accepted 23rd August 2025; Published 30th September 2025
ABSTRACT
In tropical regions, human-wildlife conflicts are escalating, particularly in the vicinity of protected areas, where animal
incursions cause considerable damage to crops. The Mont Sangbé National Park (MSNP) in Côte d'Ivoire exemplifies this
issue. Farmers' protection strategies under these pressures remain inadequately documented, both in terms of their diversity
and the influencing factors governing their adoption. A survey was conducted between February and April 2022 involving
120 households across three villages near the MSNP. The data collected comprised crop species, identified crop raiders,
protection methods employed, and perceptions of damage. The analysis integrated descriptive statistics, χ² tests to evaluate
associations between variables, and logistic regression to model the impact of damage perception on the adoption of
control measures. Of the 1,085 devastation cases recorded, 61.8% of households had not implemented any protective
measures. The prevalent active strategies were guarding (16.7%) and trapping (11.8%). The analysis revealed a strong
correlation between protection methods and the types of crops or crop raiders, as well as a significant influence on damage
perception. Specifically, only households that perceived losses as "catastrophic" significantly adopted control measures
(OR = 5.3; p = 0.029). This study highlights a pronounced strategic inertia in response to wildlife crop raiders. However, it
also reveals a refined adaptability among producers, based on the economic value of crops and the ecology of the crop
raiders. It emphasizes the necessity of incorporating local knowledge and farmers' perceptions in devising integrated
management strategies that are better aligned with the realities of tropical agriculture.
Keywords: Crop protection strategies, Crop Raiding, Human-wildlife conflict, Perception of damage.
INTRODUCTION
In various tropical regions, the interactions between
agricultural systems and wildlife are leading to increasing
conflicts, specifically manifesting as wildlife-induced crop
damage (Digun-Aweto et al., 2004). These phenomena,
widely recognized as human-wildlife conflicts, are
particularly prevalent in areas adjacent to protected zones,
where agricultural endeavors coexist with diverse and
occasionally invasive biodiversity forms (Larson et al.,
2016; Woodroffe et al., 2005). This situation is further
intensified by habitat fragmentation, the expansion of
agricultural boundaries, and the depletion of natural
resources, compelling wildlife to venture beyond protected
areas in search of sustenance. Mont Sangbé National Park
(MSNP), situated within the forest-savannah transition
zone of western Côte d'Ivoire, serves as a case study of the
ongoing tension between conservation initiatives and the
interests of local communities. Designated as a protected
area since 1976, the park spans 95,000 hectares and
supports a diverse array of wildlife, including several
protected species such as duikers, arboreal primates, and
burrowing rodents (Lauginie, 2007). However, this
biodiversity also engenders disputes with local populations,
predominantly due to wildlife incursions into agricultural
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 27
territories, resulting in considerable economic losses for
rural households (Koffi et al., 2024).
In this context, the defensive strategies employed by
agricultural producers are essential for bolstering the
resilience of agricultural systems. However, there is a
paucity of comprehensive documentation pertaining to
these strategies, especially in relation to their diversity,
ecological appropriateness, and the factors that determine
their adoption. Gaining an in-depth understanding of
farmers’ responses to wildlife crop raiders is crucial for
devising more effective integrated management systems
tailored to specific local conditions.
This research aims to address the existing gap by
evaluating wildlife crop raider control practices in three
villages located on the periphery of the MSNP. Utilizing a
household survey, the researcher examines the
interrelations among crop types, crop raider species,
protection strategies implemented, and damage perceptions.
By applying statistical tools and explanatory models, this
study provides a comprehensive understanding of farmers'
responses to wildlife pressures, analyzed through an
agroecological perspective.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study site
The collection of data occurred from February to April
2022 across three villages situated in proximity to the
Mount Sangbé National Park (MSNP) (Figure 1). The
MSNP has maintained its status as a classified forest since
1945 and was formally recognized as a national park on
February 19, 1976. It experienced a phase of development
between 1995 and 2001, facilitated by financial support
from the European Commission and the Republic of Côte
d'Ivoire, amounting to three million euros. Located in the
Man region, the park sits in a forest-savannah transition
zone in the western part of the country. The MSNP is
confined to the Biankouma-Touba-Sifie triangle and is
traversed from west to east by the Bafing River, a tributary
of the Sassandra River. This contributes to a hydrographic
network that sustains the extensive Ivorian plateau. As part
of Côte d'Ivoire's natural and forest heritage, the MSNP
covers an area of 95,000 hectares, making it the fourth
largest park in the country, following Comoé, Tai, and
Marahoué parks. Notably, 40% of its area is situated in
mountainous regions: the Sangbé Mountain massif, which
represents the last eastern bend of the Guinean Ridge,
reaches a height of 1,052 meters. A wildlife census
conducted in 2000 identified 69 species of mammals, 12
species of reptiles, and 60 species of birds (MEEF, 2000).
The local populations living around the park are situated in
what is known as the "MSNP peripheral zone." This area
extends over 200,000 hectares within a radius of 20 to 40
kilometers around the park and is home to four ethnic
groups: the Yacouba, the Toura, the Mahou, and the
Worodougou. The economy in this region is characterized
by cash crops such as cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.), coffee
(Coffea canephora Pierre ex A. Froehner), and cashew nuts
(Anacardium occidentale L.), alongside a traditional
subsistence economy that includes the cultivation of rice
(Oryza sativa L.), cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz), yam
(Dioscorea sp.), okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.), potatoes
(Ipomoea batatas L.), chili peppers (Capsicum sp.), and
eggplant (Solanum melongena L.). The MSNP operates in
an integrative manner (Gueneau and Jacobee 2005), serving
as a nature reserve open to both visitors and researchers.
However, resource exploitation is prohibited for local
populations. As compensation, these communities benefit
from special subsidies aimed at developing the park's
peripheral zone, as well as job opportunities created
through its tourism development.
Figure 1. Location of the study area.
www.ijzab.com 27
territories, resulting in considerable economic losses for
rural households (Koffi et al., 2024).
In this context, the defensive strategies employed by
agricultural producers are essential for bolstering the
resilience of agricultural systems. However, there is a
paucity of comprehensive documentation pertaining to
these strategies, especially in relation to their diversity,
ecological appropriateness, and the factors that determine
their adoption. Gaining an in-depth understanding of
farmers’ responses to wildlife crop raiders is crucial for
devising more effective integrated management systems
tailored to specific local conditions.
This research aims to address the existing gap by
evaluating wildlife crop raider control practices in three
villages located on the periphery of the MSNP. Utilizing a
household survey, the researcher examines the
interrelations among crop types, crop raider species,
protection strategies implemented, and damage perceptions.
By applying statistical tools and explanatory models, this
study provides a comprehensive understanding of farmers'
responses to wildlife pressures, analyzed through an
agroecological perspective.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study site
The collection of data occurred from February to April
2022 across three villages situated in proximity to the
Mount Sangbé National Park (MSNP) (Figure 1). The
MSNP has maintained its status as a classified forest since
1945 and was formally recognized as a national park on
February 19, 1976. It experienced a phase of development
between 1995 and 2001, facilitated by financial support
from the European Commission and the Republic of Côte
d'Ivoire, amounting to three million euros. Located in the
Man region, the park sits in a forest-savannah transition
zone in the western part of the country. The MSNP is
confined to the Biankouma-Touba-Sifie triangle and is
traversed from west to east by the Bafing River, a tributary
of the Sassandra River. This contributes to a hydrographic
network that sustains the extensive Ivorian plateau. As part
of Côte d'Ivoire's natural and forest heritage, the MSNP
covers an area of 95,000 hectares, making it the fourth
largest park in the country, following Comoé, Tai, and
Marahoué parks. Notably, 40% of its area is situated in
mountainous regions: the Sangbé Mountain massif, which
represents the last eastern bend of the Guinean Ridge,
reaches a height of 1,052 meters. A wildlife census
conducted in 2000 identified 69 species of mammals, 12
species of reptiles, and 60 species of birds (MEEF, 2000).
The local populations living around the park are situated in
what is known as the "MSNP peripheral zone." This area
extends over 200,000 hectares within a radius of 20 to 40
kilometers around the park and is home to four ethnic
groups: the Yacouba, the Toura, the Mahou, and the
Worodougou. The economy in this region is characterized
by cash crops such as cocoa (Theobroma cacao L.), coffee
(Coffea canephora Pierre ex A. Froehner), and cashew nuts
(Anacardium occidentale L.), alongside a traditional
subsistence economy that includes the cultivation of rice
(Oryza sativa L.), cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz), yam
(Dioscorea sp.), okra (Abelmoschus esculentus L.), potatoes
(Ipomoea batatas L.), chili peppers (Capsicum sp.), and
eggplant (Solanum melongena L.). The MSNP operates in
an integrative manner (Gueneau and Jacobee 2005), serving
as a nature reserve open to both visitors and researchers.
However, resource exploitation is prohibited for local
populations. As compensation, these communities benefit
from special subsidies aimed at developing the park's
peripheral zone, as well as job opportunities created
through its tourism development.
Figure 1. Location of the study area.
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 28
Data collection
A random selection of 40 households was made from each
village, resulting in a total of 120 households. Three
interviewers were assigned to each village, accompanied by
three local translators fluent in both the local languages and
French. During the interviews, participants had the option
to communicate in either French or their native language. If
both the household head and their spouse were present, the
interview was conducted with both individuals; otherwise,
it proceeded with a single participant. Throughout the
survey process, interviewers documented the animals
causing damage to the crops, the methods employed for
controlling these wild animals, and the participants'
perceptions regarding the extent of the damage. OIPR
ecologists assisted with the surveys by helping to identify
the wild animal species that were crop raiders of crops.
Interviewees also provided the names of crop-raiding
animal species in either French or their native language.
The identification of these crop-damaging species was
verified using morphological description guides authored
by Hilary Fry and Keith (2020), Kingdon et al., (2024;
2013) Kingdon and Happold (2024) and Urban et al.,
(2020). These resources enabled a scientific verification of
the species responsible for the damage.
Data analysis
To examine crop raiders protection strategies, a
comprehensive methodological framework was applied,
integrating descriptive analyses, statistical cross-
referencing, and modeling techniques. Initially, a horizontal
bar graph was employed to depict the frequency of various
crop protection methods, facilitating the identification of
the strategies most commonly employed by producers.
Subsequently, the associations between protection methods
and three explanatory variables—crop species, crop raider
species, and damage perception—were analyzed through
cross-analyses. In each case, the data were filtered to
eliminate instances where the farmer took no action against
crop-raiding animals, thereby focusing the analysis on
active methods. Cross-tabulations were generated and
subjected to a χ² independence test to assess the
significance of the observed associations (Momeni et al.,
2018). The results were visualized using stacked bar charts,
which aided in interpreting method preferences within the
agricultural, ecological, and perceptual contexts. Finally, to
further understand how damage perception affects the
adoption of control measures, a logistic regression
(binomial model) was implemented, with the variable
"adopt" (1 = active method, 0 = no action) as the response.
Odds ratios (OR) and their confidence intervals were
calculated, and predictions were derived from simulated
data to estimate the likelihood of adopting control methods
based on perceived severity levels. This integrated
approach provides a clearer comprehension of the factors
influencing grower behavior regarding crop raiders (Ghosh,
2020; Statology, 2022). The statistical method was
implemented with the R Software Version 4.4.2.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study documented 1,085 occurrences of field raiding
among the 120 households included in our survey sample.
The most prevalent response to damage caused by crop
raiders was inaction, with 60.5% of households indicating
that no remedial measures were implemented to address the
issue (Figure 2). The second most commonly utilized
strategy was field surveillance, which was adopted by
24.2% of farmers and primarily involved human
monitoring to avert animal intrusions onto their lands.
Trapping and capturing techniques were implemented by
6.9% of farmers as a focused approach to controlling crop
raider activity; however, this method requires a certain
level of expertise. Additional strategies included the use of
scarecrows (2.9%), traditional hunting practices (2.6%),
fencing (1.2%), as well as the employment of weeding
(1.1%) and noise deterrents (0.7%).
Figure 2. Response Against Crop Raiding.
www.ijzab.com 28
Data collection
A random selection of 40 households was made from each
village, resulting in a total of 120 households. Three
interviewers were assigned to each village, accompanied by
three local translators fluent in both the local languages and
French. During the interviews, participants had the option
to communicate in either French or their native language. If
both the household head and their spouse were present, the
interview was conducted with both individuals; otherwise,
it proceeded with a single participant. Throughout the
survey process, interviewers documented the animals
causing damage to the crops, the methods employed for
controlling these wild animals, and the participants'
perceptions regarding the extent of the damage. OIPR
ecologists assisted with the surveys by helping to identify
the wild animal species that were crop raiders of crops.
Interviewees also provided the names of crop-raiding
animal species in either French or their native language.
The identification of these crop-damaging species was
verified using morphological description guides authored
by Hilary Fry and Keith (2020), Kingdon et al., (2024;
2013) Kingdon and Happold (2024) and Urban et al.,
(2020). These resources enabled a scientific verification of
the species responsible for the damage.
Data analysis
To examine crop raiders protection strategies, a
comprehensive methodological framework was applied,
integrating descriptive analyses, statistical cross-
referencing, and modeling techniques. Initially, a horizontal
bar graph was employed to depict the frequency of various
crop protection methods, facilitating the identification of
the strategies most commonly employed by producers.
Subsequently, the associations between protection methods
and three explanatory variables—crop species, crop raider
species, and damage perception—were analyzed through
cross-analyses. In each case, the data were filtered to
eliminate instances where the farmer took no action against
crop-raiding animals, thereby focusing the analysis on
active methods. Cross-tabulations were generated and
subjected to a χ² independence test to assess the
significance of the observed associations (Momeni et al.,
2018). The results were visualized using stacked bar charts,
which aided in interpreting method preferences within the
agricultural, ecological, and perceptual contexts. Finally, to
further understand how damage perception affects the
adoption of control measures, a logistic regression
(binomial model) was implemented, with the variable
"adopt" (1 = active method, 0 = no action) as the response.
Odds ratios (OR) and their confidence intervals were
calculated, and predictions were derived from simulated
data to estimate the likelihood of adopting control methods
based on perceived severity levels. This integrated
approach provides a clearer comprehension of the factors
influencing grower behavior regarding crop raiders (Ghosh,
2020; Statology, 2022). The statistical method was
implemented with the R Software Version 4.4.2.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The study documented 1,085 occurrences of field raiding
among the 120 households included in our survey sample.
The most prevalent response to damage caused by crop
raiders was inaction, with 60.5% of households indicating
that no remedial measures were implemented to address the
issue (Figure 2). The second most commonly utilized
strategy was field surveillance, which was adopted by
24.2% of farmers and primarily involved human
monitoring to avert animal intrusions onto their lands.
Trapping and capturing techniques were implemented by
6.9% of farmers as a focused approach to controlling crop
raider activity; however, this method requires a certain
level of expertise. Additional strategies included the use of
scarecrows (2.9%), traditional hunting practices (2.6%),
fencing (1.2%), as well as the employment of weeding
(1.1%) and noise deterrents (0.7%).
Figure 2. Response Against Crop Raiding.
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 29
The agronomic study reveals a significant diversity of
species within the evaluated agricultural systems,
comprising a total of 15 cultivated species distributed
across 10 distinct botanical families. The findings highlight
a varied distribution of protection methods specifically
adapted to the species under cultivation (Figure 3). The
cashew emerges as a crop of strategic importance, utilizing
a substantial combination of guarding (21 instances) and
trapping (29 instances), emphasizing its considerable
economic value and vulnerability to numerous crop raiders.
In contrast, rice is predominantly safeguarded through
guarding (155 instances), while also benefiting from
additional methods, including trapping, hunting, and the
deployment of scarecrows and auditory deterrents,
indicating pressure from a diversity of species, especially
avian and primate crop raiders. Certain food crops, such as
potatoes, sesame (Sesamum indicum L.), and okra, often
demonstrate simpler or less diverse protection strategies,
which may sometimes be largely confined to guarding
alone. Cassava displays a balanced protection profile,
employing guarding and trapping techniques equally (14
instances each), reflecting the subterranean nature of its
crop raiders, which are often targeted with specific
countermeasures. Statistical analysis employing the χ² test
(χ² = 114.53; ddl = 54; p = 3.038 × 10⁻⁶) corroborates that
the selection of protection methods is distinctly correlated
with crop type rather than occurring by chance. This
statistical relationship supports the premise that producers
tailor their control strategies based on the specific
vulnerabilities and behaviors of crop raiders, while also
considering the crops' economic importance. Nevertheless,
caution regarding the approximation of the test suggests
that adjustments for limited sample sizes in certain cases
should be considered.
Figure 3. Relationship between crop species and the selection of control methods.
The ecological assessment identifies a substantial diversity
of crop-raider taxa, documenting 25 distinct animal species
distributed across 16 taxonomic families (Figure 4). This
diversity indicates a cultivated ecosystem experiencing
considerable biotic pressure. The findings underscore a
pronounced specificity between crop-raider species and the
management strategies implemented by cultivators,
corroborated by a highly significant chi-squared test result
(χ² = 672.59; ddl = 120; p < 2.2 × 10⁻¹⁶). Primates such as
the patas monkey (Erythrocebus patas; Schreber 1774), (61
observations) and the green monkey (Chlorocebus sabaeus;
Linnaeus 1766), (10 observations) are predominantly
controlled by human guards, likely due to their arboreal
movement capabilities. Seed-eating avian species,
including the red-headed quelea (Quelea erythrops;
Hartlaub 1848), (124 observations), the double-spurred
francolin (Francolinus bicalcaratus; Linnaeus 1766), (35
observations), and the helmeted guineafowl (Numida
meleagris; Linnaeus 1758), (8 observations), are primarily
deterred via guarding, supplemented occasionally by
scarecrows and acoustic deterrents. Conversely, burrowing
rodents such as the grass cutter (Thryonomys swinderianus;
Temminck 1827) and the northern giant pouched rat
(Cricetomys gambianus; Waterhouse 1840) exhibit distinct
control profiles; trapping (28 and 15 observations,
respectively) is the predominant method, supplemented by
hunting, weeding, and even fencing for the grass cutter.
These observations suggest a well-adapted management
strategy, tailored to the ecological behaviors of crop-
raiders: subterranean or elusive species require more
focused and often challenging control strategies. Less
frequently encountered species such as the crested
porcupine (Hystrix cristata; Linnaeus 1758), the African
savanna hare (Lepus victoriae; Thomas, 1893), or the green
bush squirrel (Paraxerus poensis; A. Smith 1830) exhibit
varied responses aligned with their specific ecological
niches, whether subterranean, arboreal, or otherwise.
www.ijzab.com 29
The agronomic study reveals a significant diversity of
species within the evaluated agricultural systems,
comprising a total of 15 cultivated species distributed
across 10 distinct botanical families. The findings highlight
a varied distribution of protection methods specifically
adapted to the species under cultivation (Figure 3). The
cashew emerges as a crop of strategic importance, utilizing
a substantial combination of guarding (21 instances) and
trapping (29 instances), emphasizing its considerable
economic value and vulnerability to numerous crop raiders.
In contrast, rice is predominantly safeguarded through
guarding (155 instances), while also benefiting from
additional methods, including trapping, hunting, and the
deployment of scarecrows and auditory deterrents,
indicating pressure from a diversity of species, especially
avian and primate crop raiders. Certain food crops, such as
potatoes, sesame (Sesamum indicum L.), and okra, often
demonstrate simpler or less diverse protection strategies,
which may sometimes be largely confined to guarding
alone. Cassava displays a balanced protection profile,
employing guarding and trapping techniques equally (14
instances each), reflecting the subterranean nature of its
crop raiders, which are often targeted with specific
countermeasures. Statistical analysis employing the χ² test
(χ² = 114.53; ddl = 54; p = 3.038 × 10⁻⁶) corroborates that
the selection of protection methods is distinctly correlated
with crop type rather than occurring by chance. This
statistical relationship supports the premise that producers
tailor their control strategies based on the specific
vulnerabilities and behaviors of crop raiders, while also
considering the crops' economic importance. Nevertheless,
caution regarding the approximation of the test suggests
that adjustments for limited sample sizes in certain cases
should be considered.
Figure 3. Relationship between crop species and the selection of control methods.
The ecological assessment identifies a substantial diversity
of crop-raider taxa, documenting 25 distinct animal species
distributed across 16 taxonomic families (Figure 4). This
diversity indicates a cultivated ecosystem experiencing
considerable biotic pressure. The findings underscore a
pronounced specificity between crop-raider species and the
management strategies implemented by cultivators,
corroborated by a highly significant chi-squared test result
(χ² = 672.59; ddl = 120; p < 2.2 × 10⁻¹⁶). Primates such as
the patas monkey (Erythrocebus patas; Schreber 1774), (61
observations) and the green monkey (Chlorocebus sabaeus;
Linnaeus 1766), (10 observations) are predominantly
controlled by human guards, likely due to their arboreal
movement capabilities. Seed-eating avian species,
including the red-headed quelea (Quelea erythrops;
Hartlaub 1848), (124 observations), the double-spurred
francolin (Francolinus bicalcaratus; Linnaeus 1766), (35
observations), and the helmeted guineafowl (Numida
meleagris; Linnaeus 1758), (8 observations), are primarily
deterred via guarding, supplemented occasionally by
scarecrows and acoustic deterrents. Conversely, burrowing
rodents such as the grass cutter (Thryonomys swinderianus;
Temminck 1827) and the northern giant pouched rat
(Cricetomys gambianus; Waterhouse 1840) exhibit distinct
control profiles; trapping (28 and 15 observations,
respectively) is the predominant method, supplemented by
hunting, weeding, and even fencing for the grass cutter.
These observations suggest a well-adapted management
strategy, tailored to the ecological behaviors of crop-
raiders: subterranean or elusive species require more
focused and often challenging control strategies. Less
frequently encountered species such as the crested
porcupine (Hystrix cristata; Linnaeus 1758), the African
savanna hare (Lepus victoriae; Thomas, 1893), or the green
bush squirrel (Paraxerus poensis; A. Smith 1830) exhibit
varied responses aligned with their specific ecological
niches, whether subterranean, arboreal, or otherwise.
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 30
When the damage is evaluated as "negligible," minimal
interventions are executed, with merely two households
reporting the employment of trapping (Fig.5). At a damage
level deemed "fairly important," there is an initiation of
active management strategies, evidenced by 8 households
engaging in guarding and 9 utilizing trapping, while other
methods remain sparse. As the perception of damage
escalates to "very significant," the implementation of
guarding rises to 39 households, trapping to 18, and the
usage of scarecrows is recorded in 10 instances. At the
"catastrophic" threshold, the adoption of guarding reaches
its peak with 216 households utilizing it, followed by
trapping (46), hunting (25), and a diverse array of
techniques such as fencing, weeding, and sound decoys,
employed by 6 to 21 households respectively. The χ² test
(χ² = 38.13; ddl = 18; p = 0.0037) indicates a substantial
variation in the distribution of control methods contingent
on the perceived severity of damage: as losses intensify,
farmers increasingly employ active strategies.
Figure 4. Relationship between animal species and the selection of control methods.
Figure 5. Relationship between perception of damage and the selection of control methods.
www.ijzab.com 30
When the damage is evaluated as "negligible," minimal
interventions are executed, with merely two households
reporting the employment of trapping (Fig.5). At a damage
level deemed "fairly important," there is an initiation of
active management strategies, evidenced by 8 households
engaging in guarding and 9 utilizing trapping, while other
methods remain sparse. As the perception of damage
escalates to "very significant," the implementation of
guarding rises to 39 households, trapping to 18, and the
usage of scarecrows is recorded in 10 instances. At the
"catastrophic" threshold, the adoption of guarding reaches
its peak with 216 households utilizing it, followed by
trapping (46), hunting (25), and a diverse array of
techniques such as fencing, weeding, and sound decoys,
employed by 6 to 21 households respectively. The χ² test
(χ² = 38.13; ddl = 18; p = 0.0037) indicates a substantial
variation in the distribution of control methods contingent
on the perceived severity of damage: as losses intensify,
farmers increasingly employ active strategies.
Figure 4. Relationship between animal species and the selection of control methods.
Figure 5. Relationship between perception of damage and the selection of control methods.
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 31
The model (Table 1) indicates that when the damage is
perceived as "negligible," the log-odds of adopting a
method are –1.8718, equating to an estimated probability of
approximately 13%. Conversely, evaluating the damage as
"quite large" enhances the likelihood of adoption by
roughly 2.9 times (OR = exp(1.0609)), whereas considering
it "very important" augments the likelihood by
approximately 2.5 times (OR = exp(0.9227)). However,
these effects do not achieve statistical significance (p >
0.05). On the other hand, categorizing the damage as
"catastrophic" yields an odds ratio of about 5.3 (OR = exp
(1.6649), p = 0.029), signifying that such households are
more than five times as likely to adopt a control method
compared to those who view the damage as negligible. The
decrease in deviance from 1456.3 (null model) to 1425.1
(fitted model) across 3 degrees of freedom, along with an
AIC of 1433.1, suggests that the perception of damage
provides a modest yet meaningful explanatory
enhancement. Ultimately, only those households perceiving
the damage as "catastrophic" exhibit a significantly greater
tendency for adoption.
Table 1. Result of the logistic regression analysis assessing the association between perception and the probability of
adoption.
Variables Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) -1.8718 0.7596 -2.464 0.0137 *
Quite important 1.0609 0.8057 1.317 0.1879
Very important 0.9227 0.7721 1.195 0.2321
Catastrophic 1.6649 0.7631 2.182 0.0291 *
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘’ 1
(Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
Null deviance: 1456.3 on 1084 degrees of freedom
Residual deviance: 1425.1 on 1081 degrees of freedom
AIC: 1433.1
Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 4
The observation that 61.8% of households do not adopt
measures for protection against wildlife crop raiders
highlights a concerning strategic inertia, suggesting a
disengagement in the presence of an evident risk. This
mindset can be ascribed to a combination of structural and
cognitive factors, comprising economic constraints, limited
access to efficacious solutions, decision fatigue, and the
normalization of risk within routine agricultural practices
(Banerjee and Duflo 2019). This situation reflects a well-
documented logic of resignation common in low-resource
agricultural systems, where producers, faced with recurrent
losses, ultimately come to regard hazard as an unavoidable
component of their operations (Hill, 1998; Pretty et al.,
2001). The observed agronomic diversity functions as a
critical lever for adaptation, enabling a spectrum of
technical responses. The distinct adoption of protection
methods between crops, particularly between cashew (a
cash crop) and rice (a food crop), underscores the presence
of adaptive strategies that correspond with the economic
value of the crops and the biotic pressures they encounter
(Altieri, 1999; FAO, 2022). The χ² test provides statistical
validation for this differentiation, signifying that producers
undertake informed trade-offs based on their economic
priorities and their practical comprehension of ecological
dynamics (Van den Berg and Jiggins 2007).
The identification of 25 crop raider species distributed
across 16 taxonomic families underscores a considerable
heterogeneity in faunal pressure, both regarding diversity
and ecological behavior. The capability of producers to
adapt their control strategies based on crop raider
characteristics—be they arboreal, burrowing, or seed-
feeding—demonstrates an agroecological intelligence that
is frequently underestimated (Horgan, 2017; Pretty and
Pervez Bharucha 2015; Schroth et al., 2004). The χ² test
further substantiates the significance of this sophisticated
adaptation, akin to a form of integrated crop raider
management informed by local experience and indigenous
knowledge (Berkes et al., 2000). Logistic modeling
provides substantial insights, demonstrating that the
perception of damage characterized as "catastrophic"
significantly influences the implementation of protective
measures (OR = 5.3; p = 0.029). This outcome emphasizes
the essential role of subjective interpretations in the
dynamics of adoption (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). It
suggests the existence of a psychological threshold at
which taking action becomes imperative, thereby
reinforcing the concept that agricultural decisions are
dictated not only by objective determinants but also by
perceptions, emotions, and previous experiences. In this
framework, the decisions made by producers manifest as
economically and cognitively rational compromises,
integrating both present constraints and future expectations.
CONCLUSION
This research highlights the complexities inherent in
peasant management strategies when faced with wildlife
crop raiders within tropical agricultural systems. The
analysis identifies a significant prevalence of inaction
www.ijzab.com 31
The model (Table 1) indicates that when the damage is
perceived as "negligible," the log-odds of adopting a
method are –1.8718, equating to an estimated probability of
approximately 13%. Conversely, evaluating the damage as
"quite large" enhances the likelihood of adoption by
roughly 2.9 times (OR = exp(1.0609)), whereas considering
it "very important" augments the likelihood by
approximately 2.5 times (OR = exp(0.9227)). However,
these effects do not achieve statistical significance (p >
0.05). On the other hand, categorizing the damage as
"catastrophic" yields an odds ratio of about 5.3 (OR = exp
(1.6649), p = 0.029), signifying that such households are
more than five times as likely to adopt a control method
compared to those who view the damage as negligible. The
decrease in deviance from 1456.3 (null model) to 1425.1
(fitted model) across 3 degrees of freedom, along with an
AIC of 1433.1, suggests that the perception of damage
provides a modest yet meaningful explanatory
enhancement. Ultimately, only those households perceiving
the damage as "catastrophic" exhibit a significantly greater
tendency for adoption.
Table 1. Result of the logistic regression analysis assessing the association between perception and the probability of
adoption.
Variables Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)
(Intercept) -1.8718 0.7596 -2.464 0.0137 *
Quite important 1.0609 0.8057 1.317 0.1879
Very important 0.9227 0.7721 1.195 0.2321
Catastrophic 1.6649 0.7631 2.182 0.0291 *
Signif. codes: 0 ‘***’ 0.001 ‘**’ 0.01 ‘*’ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘’ 1
(Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
Null deviance: 1456.3 on 1084 degrees of freedom
Residual deviance: 1425.1 on 1081 degrees of freedom
AIC: 1433.1
Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 4
The observation that 61.8% of households do not adopt
measures for protection against wildlife crop raiders
highlights a concerning strategic inertia, suggesting a
disengagement in the presence of an evident risk. This
mindset can be ascribed to a combination of structural and
cognitive factors, comprising economic constraints, limited
access to efficacious solutions, decision fatigue, and the
normalization of risk within routine agricultural practices
(Banerjee and Duflo 2019). This situation reflects a well-
documented logic of resignation common in low-resource
agricultural systems, where producers, faced with recurrent
losses, ultimately come to regard hazard as an unavoidable
component of their operations (Hill, 1998; Pretty et al.,
2001). The observed agronomic diversity functions as a
critical lever for adaptation, enabling a spectrum of
technical responses. The distinct adoption of protection
methods between crops, particularly between cashew (a
cash crop) and rice (a food crop), underscores the presence
of adaptive strategies that correspond with the economic
value of the crops and the biotic pressures they encounter
(Altieri, 1999; FAO, 2022). The χ² test provides statistical
validation for this differentiation, signifying that producers
undertake informed trade-offs based on their economic
priorities and their practical comprehension of ecological
dynamics (Van den Berg and Jiggins 2007).
The identification of 25 crop raider species distributed
across 16 taxonomic families underscores a considerable
heterogeneity in faunal pressure, both regarding diversity
and ecological behavior. The capability of producers to
adapt their control strategies based on crop raider
characteristics—be they arboreal, burrowing, or seed-
feeding—demonstrates an agroecological intelligence that
is frequently underestimated (Horgan, 2017; Pretty and
Pervez Bharucha 2015; Schroth et al., 2004). The χ² test
further substantiates the significance of this sophisticated
adaptation, akin to a form of integrated crop raider
management informed by local experience and indigenous
knowledge (Berkes et al., 2000). Logistic modeling
provides substantial insights, demonstrating that the
perception of damage characterized as "catastrophic"
significantly influences the implementation of protective
measures (OR = 5.3; p = 0.029). This outcome emphasizes
the essential role of subjective interpretations in the
dynamics of adoption (Kollmuss and Agyeman 2002). It
suggests the existence of a psychological threshold at
which taking action becomes imperative, thereby
reinforcing the concept that agricultural decisions are
dictated not only by objective determinants but also by
perceptions, emotions, and previous experiences. In this
framework, the decisions made by producers manifest as
economically and cognitively rational compromises,
integrating both present constraints and future expectations.
CONCLUSION
This research highlights the complexities inherent in
peasant management strategies when faced with wildlife
crop raiders within tropical agricultural systems. The
analysis identifies a significant prevalence of inaction
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 32
among households, suggesting a concerning level of
strategic inertia which may be attributed to structural
constraints, a lessened perception of risk, or resignation due
to the perceived ineffectiveness of control measures.
Nevertheless, the study also demonstrates the substantial
adaptability of farmers, as evidenced by their
implementation of varied strategies dependent on the type
of crops grown, the nature of the crop raider threat, and
their evaluation of the damage severity. The observed
diversity in agronomic and faunal practices, coupled with
specific technical interventions (such as guarding, trapping,
and the application of auditory devices), indicates an
agroecological acumen deeply embedded in local
knowledge systems. Statistical analyses reveal that the
selection of protective measures is not arbitrary; rather, it
bears a significant relationship with the ecological
characteristics of the crop raiders and the economic value
of the crops. In addition, logistic modeling underscores the
pivotal role of farmers' subjective loss perceptions, with
those categorizing damage as "catastrophic" being
substantially more likely to adopt control methods. These
findings underscore the necessity for an enhanced
recognition of farmers' insights in the formation of
integrated crop raider management policies and the
institution of support mechanisms that are attuned to local
perceptions, economic conditions, and particular ecological
dynamics. By strengthening the linkage between scientific
insights and indigenous practices, a cooperative approach
can be fostered, enabling the development of resilience
strategies that are more aptly aligned with the realities of
tropical agriculture.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors sincerely thank the general manager of the
Ivorian Office of Parks and Reserves, Côte d'Ivoire, for
providing essential facilities for this research.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
The authors declare no conflict of interest
ETHICS APPROVAL
Not applicable
FUNDING
This study received no specific funding from public,
commercial, or not-for-profit funding agencies.
AI TOOL DECLARATION
The authors declares that no AI and related tools are used to
write the scientific content of this manuscript.
DATA AVAILABILITY
Data will be available on request
REFERENCES
Altieri, M. A. (1999). The ecological role of biodiversity in
agroecosystems. In D. Pimentel, R. Storch, & M. Hunter
(Eds.), Invertebrate biodiversity as bioindicators of
sustainable landscapes (pp. 19-31). Elsevier.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B97804
44500199500054
Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2019). Good economics for
hard times. PublicAffairs.
Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2000). Rediscovery of
traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive
management. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1251-1262.
https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-
0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2
Digun-Aweto, O., Van Der Merwe, P., & Saayman, M.
(2022). Tolerance factors in human-wildlife conflicts in
protected areas: The case of Cross River National Park,
Cross River State Nigeria. GeoJournal, 87(1), 349-361.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10254-9
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
(2022). The state of the world’s biodiversity for food and
agriculture. FAO.
Ghosh, A. (2020). Chapter 7: Logistic regression. In
Responsible applied statistics in R.
https://bookdown.org/anshul302/HE902-MGHIHP-
Spring2020/LogReg1.html
Gueneau, S., & Jacobee, F. (2005). Conservation de la
biodiversité forestière tropicale en Afrique centrale:
Dépassionner les débats (Idées pour le débat, n˚14).
Institut du Développement Durable et des Relations
Internationales.
Fry, C. H., & Keith, S. (2020). The birds of Africa: Volume
VII (Vol. 7). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Hill, P. (1998). The grassroots in Africa. Cambridge
University Press.
Horgan, F. (2017). Integrated pest management for
sustainable rice cultivation: A holistic approach. In M. J.
Jeger (Ed.), Integrated pest management for sustainable
rice cultivation (pp. 321-345). Burleigh Dodds Science
Publishing.https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/1
0.4324/9781351114196-18/integrated-pest-management-
sustainable-rice-cultivation-holistic-approach-horgan-
university-technology-sydney-australia
Kingdon, J., Butynski, T., & Kalina, J. (2024). Mammals of
Africa: Volume II (Vol. 2). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kingdon, J., & Happold, D. (2024). Mammals of Africa:
Volume III (Vol. 3). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kingdon, J., Happold, D., Butynski, T., Hoffmann, M.,
Happold, M., & Kalina, J. (2013). Mammals of Africa:
Volume VI (Vol. 3). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Koffi, K. C., Bohoussou, K. H., Kouadio, K. N., Brou, K.
A., & Beda, A. (2024). Phenological stage of the
destruction of crops by wild animals around Mont Sangbé
www.ijzab.com 32
among households, suggesting a concerning level of
strategic inertia which may be attributed to structural
constraints, a lessened perception of risk, or resignation due
to the perceived ineffectiveness of control measures.
Nevertheless, the study also demonstrates the substantial
adaptability of farmers, as evidenced by their
implementation of varied strategies dependent on the type
of crops grown, the nature of the crop raider threat, and
their evaluation of the damage severity. The observed
diversity in agronomic and faunal practices, coupled with
specific technical interventions (such as guarding, trapping,
and the application of auditory devices), indicates an
agroecological acumen deeply embedded in local
knowledge systems. Statistical analyses reveal that the
selection of protective measures is not arbitrary; rather, it
bears a significant relationship with the ecological
characteristics of the crop raiders and the economic value
of the crops. In addition, logistic modeling underscores the
pivotal role of farmers' subjective loss perceptions, with
those categorizing damage as "catastrophic" being
substantially more likely to adopt control methods. These
findings underscore the necessity for an enhanced
recognition of farmers' insights in the formation of
integrated crop raider management policies and the
institution of support mechanisms that are attuned to local
perceptions, economic conditions, and particular ecological
dynamics. By strengthening the linkage between scientific
insights and indigenous practices, a cooperative approach
can be fostered, enabling the development of resilience
strategies that are more aptly aligned with the realities of
tropical agriculture.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors sincerely thank the general manager of the
Ivorian Office of Parks and Reserves, Côte d'Ivoire, for
providing essential facilities for this research.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
The authors declare no conflict of interest
ETHICS APPROVAL
Not applicable
FUNDING
This study received no specific funding from public,
commercial, or not-for-profit funding agencies.
AI TOOL DECLARATION
The authors declares that no AI and related tools are used to
write the scientific content of this manuscript.
DATA AVAILABILITY
Data will be available on request
REFERENCES
Altieri, M. A. (1999). The ecological role of biodiversity in
agroecosystems. In D. Pimentel, R. Storch, & M. Hunter
(Eds.), Invertebrate biodiversity as bioindicators of
sustainable landscapes (pp. 19-31). Elsevier.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B97804
44500199500054
Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2019). Good economics for
hard times. PublicAffairs.
Berkes, F., Colding, J., & Folke, C. (2000). Rediscovery of
traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive
management. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1251-1262.
https://doi.org/10.1890/1051-
0761(2000)010[1251:ROTEKA]2.0.CO;2
Digun-Aweto, O., Van Der Merwe, P., & Saayman, M.
(2022). Tolerance factors in human-wildlife conflicts in
protected areas: The case of Cross River National Park,
Cross River State Nigeria. GeoJournal, 87(1), 349-361.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10254-9
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
(2022). The state of the world’s biodiversity for food and
agriculture. FAO.
Ghosh, A. (2020). Chapter 7: Logistic regression. In
Responsible applied statistics in R.
https://bookdown.org/anshul302/HE902-MGHIHP-
Spring2020/LogReg1.html
Gueneau, S., & Jacobee, F. (2005). Conservation de la
biodiversité forestière tropicale en Afrique centrale:
Dépassionner les débats (Idées pour le débat, n˚14).
Institut du Développement Durable et des Relations
Internationales.
Fry, C. H., & Keith, S. (2020). The birds of Africa: Volume
VII (Vol. 7). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Hill, P. (1998). The grassroots in Africa. Cambridge
University Press.
Horgan, F. (2017). Integrated pest management for
sustainable rice cultivation: A holistic approach. In M. J.
Jeger (Ed.), Integrated pest management for sustainable
rice cultivation (pp. 321-345). Burleigh Dodds Science
Publishing.https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/1
0.4324/9781351114196-18/integrated-pest-management-
sustainable-rice-cultivation-holistic-approach-horgan-
university-technology-sydney-australia
Kingdon, J., Butynski, T., & Kalina, J. (2024). Mammals of
Africa: Volume II (Vol. 2). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kingdon, J., & Happold, D. (2024). Mammals of Africa:
Volume III (Vol. 3). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Kingdon, J., Happold, D., Butynski, T., Hoffmann, M.,
Happold, M., & Kalina, J. (2013). Mammals of Africa:
Volume VI (Vol. 3). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Koffi, K. C., Bohoussou, K. H., Kouadio, K. N., Brou, K.
A., & Beda, A. (2024). Phenological stage of the
destruction of crops by wild animals around Mont Sangbé
Koffi Kouamé Christophe et al. Int. J. Zool. Appl. Biosci., 10(5), 26-33, 2025
www.ijzab.com 33
National Park, Western Côte d’Ivoire. International
Journal of Agriculture & Biology, 33(3), 6.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why
do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to
pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education
Research, 8(3), 239-260.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Larson, L. R., Conway, A. L., Hernandez, S. M., & Carroll,
J. P. (2016). Human-wildlife conflict, conservation
attitudes, and a potential role for citizen science in Sierra
Leone, Africa. Conservation and Society, 14(3), 205-217.
Lauginie, F. (2007). Conservation de la nature et aires
protégées en Côte d’Ivoire. NEI/Hachette et Afrique
Nature.
Madden, F. (2004). Creating coexistence between humans
and wildlife: Global perspectives on local efforts to
address human–wildlife conflict. Human Dimensions of
Wildlife, 9(4), 247-257.
Ministère de l’Environnement, de l’Eau et de la Forêt.
(2000). Aménagement du Parc national du Mont Sangbé
et développement de sa périphérie (Tome 1-2). MEEF.
Momeni, A., Pincus, M., & Libien, J. (2018). Cross
tabulation and categorical data analysis. In Introduction
to statistical methods in pathology (pp. 93-120). Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-60543-2_5
Pretty, J., Brett, C., Gee, D., Hine, R., Mason, C., Morison,
J., Rayment, M., Van Der Bijl, G., & Dobbs, T. (2001).
Policy challenges and priorities for internalizing the
externalities of modern agriculture. Journal of
Environmental Planning and Management, 44(2), 263-
283. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560123782
Pretty, J., & Pervez Bharucha, Z. (2015). Integrated pest
management for sustainable intensification of agriculture
in Asia and Africa. Insects, 6(1), 152-182.
Schroth, G., Harvey, C. A., & Vincent, G. (2004). Complex
agroforests: Their structure, diversity, and potential role
in landscape conservation. In G. Schroth, C. A. Harvey,
& G. Vincent (Eds.), Agroforestry and biodiversity
conservation in tropical landscapes (pp. 227-260). Island
Press.
Statology. (2022). How to interpret odds ratios in logistic
regression (with examples). https://www.statology.org/r-
logistic-regression-odds-ratio/
Urban, E. K., Fry, C. H., & Keith, S. (2020). The birds of
Africa: Volume II (Vol. 2). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Van den Berg, H., & Jiggins, J. (2007). Investing in
farmers—The impacts of farmer field schools in relation
to integrated pest management. World Development,
35(4), 663-686.
Woodroffe, R., Thirgood, S., & Rabinowitz, A. (2005).
People and wildlife: Conflict or co-existence? (Vol. 9).
Cambridge University Press.
www.ijzab.com 33
National Park, Western Côte d’Ivoire. International
Journal of Agriculture & Biology, 33(3), 6.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why
do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to
pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education
Research, 8(3), 239-260.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Larson, L. R., Conway, A. L., Hernandez, S. M., & Carroll,
J. P. (2016). Human-wildlife conflict, conservation
attitudes, and a potential role for citizen science in Sierra
Leone, Africa. Conservation and Society, 14(3), 205-217.
Lauginie, F. (2007). Conservation de la nature et aires
protégées en Côte d’Ivoire. NEI/Hachette et Afrique
Nature.
Madden, F. (2004). Creating coexistence between humans
and wildlife: Global perspectives on local efforts to
address human–wildlife conflict. Human Dimensions of
Wildlife, 9(4), 247-257.
Ministère de l’Environnement, de l’Eau et de la Forêt.
(2000). Aménagement du Parc national du Mont Sangbé
et développement de sa périphérie (Tome 1-2). MEEF.
Momeni, A., Pincus, M., & Libien, J. (2018). Cross
tabulation and categorical data analysis. In Introduction
to statistical methods in pathology (pp. 93-120). Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-60543-2_5
Pretty, J., Brett, C., Gee, D., Hine, R., Mason, C., Morison,
J., Rayment, M., Van Der Bijl, G., & Dobbs, T. (2001).
Policy challenges and priorities for internalizing the
externalities of modern agriculture. Journal of
Environmental Planning and Management, 44(2), 263-
283. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560123782
Pretty, J., & Pervez Bharucha, Z. (2015). Integrated pest
management for sustainable intensification of agriculture
in Asia and Africa. Insects, 6(1), 152-182.
Schroth, G., Harvey, C. A., & Vincent, G. (2004). Complex
agroforests: Their structure, diversity, and potential role
in landscape conservation. In G. Schroth, C. A. Harvey,
& G. Vincent (Eds.), Agroforestry and biodiversity
conservation in tropical landscapes (pp. 227-260). Island
Press.
Statology. (2022). How to interpret odds ratios in logistic
regression (with examples). https://www.statology.org/r-
logistic-regression-odds-ratio/
Urban, E. K., Fry, C. H., & Keith, S. (2020). The birds of
Africa: Volume II (Vol. 2). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Van den Berg, H., & Jiggins, J. (2007). Investing in
farmers—The impacts of farmer field schools in relation
to integrated pest management. World Development,
35(4), 663-686.
Woodroffe, R., Thirgood, S., & Rabinowitz, A. (2005).
People and wildlife: Conflict or co-existence? (Vol. 9).
Cambridge University Press.