Nature & Extent of Human-Wildlife Conflict in Baringo North Sub-County, Kenya.

Abstract

Kenya Wildlife Service has invested heavily in implementation of strategies as a concerted effort by the government to curb Human Wildlife Conflict in Kenya. Despite this effort, cases of Human Wildlife Conflicts are still being reported. Various existing policies seem not to offer solutions to the prevailing Human Wildlife Conflict. It’s on this foundation that the study sort to examine the nature and extent of human wildlife conflicts in Baringo North Sub-County, Kenya. This
study was guided by Stern Theory of Value Belief Norm; Kenneth’s and Kilmann’s Conflict Styles theory and Dollard’s Frustration Aggression Displacement theory. A descriptive survey research design was used. The study population was; Government field officers, Civil society leaders, KWS official, Opinion leaders, Teachers, Community based organizations, Leaders of Farmers Corporations, Village elders and victims of human wildlife conflicts, totaling to 329 respondents. Both
probability and non-probability sampling techniques were used.
Data was collected using questionnaires, interview schedules, observation checklist and Focus Group Discussions. Descriptive
analysis using quantitative and qualitative techniques were used
in the study. While quantitative data was presented in form of frequencies and percentage, in tables, charts and graphs, qualitative data was presented thematically through narratives reports and verbatim quotations. Findings indicated that there was risk of the children meeting wild animals as they cross paths with wild animals as they go to school or attend their daily chores, hence they face imminent injuries and death. Most wildlife attack people during the day as they work in their farms. Snakes and elephants were the most reported as wild animals that attack the people. Shared water and food resources were indicated as the main cause of the HWC. Poverty and overpopulation were identified as the main drivers of HWC and
that wildlife habitats are disappearing at an alarming rate. The
study recommends that government should resolve HWC by generating, lasting solutions. Such solutions include fencing off
the reserve to keep off roaming wildlife and those injured together with the crops destroyed should be adequately compensated.

Key Words: Game reserve; Human Wildlife Conflict; Livelihood

Full text

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 220
The Nature and Extent of Human-Wildlife Conflict
Effect on Socio- Economic Development and
Educational Development in Baringo North Sub-
County, Kenya
Cheptarus, G.1, Rev. Sgt. Rtd. Dr. Odhiambo, E. O. S.2 & Dr. Nabiswa, J.3
1Department of Peace and Conflict Studies, Masinde Muliro University of Science and Technology, Kenya
2 Department of Arts, Governance and Communication Studies, Bomet University College, Kenya
3 Department of Psychology, Kibabii University, Kenya
Abstract: Kenya Wildlife Service has invested heavily in
implementation of strategies as a concerted effort by the
government to curb Human Wildlife Conflict in Kenya. Despite
this effort, cases of Human Wildlife Conflicts are still being
reported. Various existing policies seem not to offer solutions to
the prevailing Human Wildlife Conflict. It’s on this foundation
that the study sort to examine the nature and extent of human
wildlife conflicts in Baringo North Sub-County, Kenya. This
study was guided by Stern Theory of Value Belief Norm;
Kenneth’s and Kilmann’s Conflict Styles theory and Dollard’s
Frustration Aggression Displacement theory. A descriptive
survey research design was used. The study population was;
Government field officers, Civil society leaders, KWS official,
Opinion leaders, Teachers, Community based organizations,
Leaders of Farmers Corporations, Village elders and victims of
human wildlife conflicts, totaling to 329 respondents. Both
probability and non-probability sampling techniques were used.
Data was collected using questionnaires, interview schedules,
observation checklist and Focus Group Discussions. Descriptive
analysis using quantitative and qualitative techniques were used
in the study. While quantitative data was presented in form of
frequencies and percentage, in tables, charts and graphs,
qualitative data was presented thematically through narratives
reports and verbatim quotations. Findings indicated that there
was risk of the children meeting wild animals as they cross paths
with wild animals as they go to school or attend their daily
chores, hence they face imminent injuries and death. Most
wildlife attack people during the day as they work in their farms.
Snakes and elephants were the most reported as wild animals
that attack the people. Shared water and food resources were
indicated as the main cause of the HWC. Poverty and
overpopulation were identified as the main drivers of HWC and
that wildlife habitats are disappearing at an alarming rate. The
study recommends that government should resolve HWC by
generating, lasting solutions. Such solutions include fencing off
the reserve to keep off roaming wildlife and those injured
together with the crops destroyed should be adequately
compensated.
Key Words: Game reserve; Human Wildlife Conflict; Livelihood
I. INTRODUCTION
umerous incidents of human-wildlife conflict (HWC) are
still being reported in most countries of the world. The
Human wildlife conflict occurs when the needs of wildlife and
human populations collide, as stated by the World
Conservation Union (WCU) (2002). This is especially true in
areas with a high concentration of both human and wildlife,
such as cities, rural areas, and protected areas, from which
animals frequently wander into neighboring farmland or
grazing pastures. According to HWC there are three ways in
which humans and wildlife can be harmed during an armed
conflict: first, humans can injure or kill wildlife; second,
wildlife can injure or kill humans, crops, cattle, and property;
and third, both humans and wildlife can be harmed or killed
during an armed conflict (World Conservation Union (WCU),
2002)..
The long-term effects of human activity on wildlife are the
root cause of the rising risk of extinction for many animal
species. Musiani, et al. (2003) cites human-caused injuries
and deaths as a major factor decline of animal species. These
might be the result of carelessness, such as when animals are
hit by cars or trains or fall into snares meant for other species
or farm wells, or they can be the result of malice, such as
when people shoot back or poison those who have shot at
them.
Okello et al. (2001) note that human-wildlife conflicts have
intensified in recent years due to human population growth
and the encroachment on wildlife habitats. People and wildlife
are increasingly at odds with one another as a result of shifts
in land use that are typically associated with activities that are
counterproductive to conservation efforts. Due to the expenses
associated with wildlife conflicts, such as property damage,
livestock depredation, and disease transmission, many people
view wildlife as a liability. These costs can include damage to
crops, human deaths and injuries, the loss of legitimate and
traditional rights, and the destruction or theft of personal
property and livestock (Okello et al., 2001).
Pastoralists have co-existed with wildlife in the African Range
land for many hundreds of years. There is an increased
human/wildlife conflict resulting from; competition for scarce
grazing and water resource due to demographic pressure and
N

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 221
the expansion of cultivation to supplement any revenue got
from wildlife (Maito et al, 2013).
A number of studies in Africa have revealed that there are
conflicts between humans and wildlife in all ecosystems,
including those in west and central Africa as well as eastern
and southern Africa (Treves & Karanth, 2003). The issue is
particularly pressing in arid agricultural regions and in water-
scarce pastoralist territories. There has been an increase in
human-wildlife conflicts in these regions mostly because
humans have expanded their activities onto territory that were
once populated by wild animals. Although conflicts are most
severe and widespread around protected areas, they are
growing in other places as well, threatening conservation
efforts due to factors like land clearance for agriculture and
poaching. Therefore, various management approaches are
needed in various locations and at various times (Treves &
Karanth, 2003).
Onyango, (2015) observed that in Kenya, human-animal
conflicts can be traced back to the development of parks,
reserves, and other wildlife protected areas in close proximity
to human settlements. Whether by force or treaty, local
communities were displaced to make way for the creation of
parks and other protected places. Communities subsequently
had their land rights taken away from them. For instance, the
Maasai people who traditionally grazed in the Amboseli
habitat were never paid for the land and water they no longer
had access to after the park was established. Tsavo and
Nairobi national parks, as well as Maasai Mara national
reserve, all had the same problems when they were first
established (Onyango, 2015). Since losing so much land, the
people in those areas have become increasingly unsupportive
of conservation efforts.
Human-animal conflicts have become more problematic due
to the rise of human activities, such as agriculture, in areas
bordering parks and other protected areas that are mistakenly
thought to be wildlife areas (Patterson et al., 1999). Some
residents have given up their usual routines because of
frequent wildlife incursions, and people's tolerance for
wildlife is decreasing as shown by the prevalence of poisoning
and poaching of wild animals for bush meat, hide, and even
trophies (Woodroffe et al., 2005; Patterson et al., 1999).
Jones (2012) asserts that the local populations that live close
to and around national parks, including Nairobi National Park
and game reserves, are those who bear the brunt of the costs
associated with wildlife. Property damage and human
fatalities or injuries caused by wildlife are the root causes of
human-wildlife conflicts in Kenya's protected areas. In the
large game reserves and national parks of Kenya, this is
especially true. Little-known Lake Kamnarok National
Reserve may be found in the breathtakingly gorgeous Kerio
Valley, which furrows the North Rift. The African Jacana,
grebe, hamerkop, heron, egret, ibis, tree duck, and Egyptian
geese are just few of the avian species that may be found in
the Reserve. Elephants can be spotted throughout the day
under the dense cover of the bush in great numbers; at one
point, the elephant population in this reserve totaled over 500.
(Andrew, 2021). Very little prior study has considered
community participation in resource usage when examining
resource conflicts in Kamnarok National Reserve and the
surrounding villages (Dickman, 2010).
Togoch et al. (2018) found that expanding human populations
and economic constraints are increasing local communities'
dependence on wildlife protected areas in marginal
rangelands. HWC in areas near to Kamnarok National
Reserve was a consequence of unsustainable resource
extraction by neighboring family activities, diminishing food
resources for wildlife, and ineffective conservation
governance by those in charge. The Kamnarok National
Reserve has had both positive and negative effects on the lives
and livelihoods of neighboring villages, including agricultural
damage, cattle predation, property destruction, and even
death. The nearby communities' portfolios are diversified for a
variety of reasons, including risk reversion linked with
wildlife conflicts, higher income, food security, and
supporting the needs of people.
Despite the existence of the human-wildlife idea for a number
of years, disputes in the wildlife sector have endured.
Communities that formerly coexisted with nature are now
armed against the same creatures they once admired. There is
a need to study how the intensifying conflict might be
minimized so that humans and wildlife can once again
coexist, particularly in light of the emerging reality that both
human and wildlife populations are growing, while the
environmental ecosystem can no longer support both ends of
existence due to climate change.
Successful conflict management necessitates cordial
relationships amongst the many agencies that may be engaged
in order to negotiate the maze of rules and regulations and
overlapping responsibilities. In addition to regulatory
authority issues, several elements influence conflict
resolution. State and federal authorities are hampered in their
ability to respond by significant budgetary and human
resource constraints. These constraints have led some state
authorities to work with local governments on conflict
resolution and policymaking. There are various partnership
models, such as citizen action, citizen-agency partnership, and
community vote (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005).
Orina (2009) conducted research on the Nairobi National Park
and its surrounding Kitengela and Athi Kapiti plains, covering
the resolution of human-wildlife conflict and various
strategies the local community had implemented to do so.
However, he did not examine the larger ecology of Nairobi in
relation to other regions of Kenya, such as Baringo North
Sub-County (Slotow, 2008). Togoch (2018) conducted
research at Kamnarok National Reserve, but his focus was on
how the HWC has influenced the diversification of the
residents' means of subsistence in the park's vicinity.
According to Wang and Macdonald (2006), there have only
been a few models that have been effectively implemented in
managing human wildlife conflict, while others have began

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 222
with a very limited grasp of the fundamental reasons of the
risks to the protected areas that require conservation.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Wildlife related conflicts continue to increase each day
despite the enormous effort and resources used to mitigate and
resolve these conflicts. The nature of conflicts and how they
are resolved becomes complex each day (Woodroffe et al.,
2005). In some instances, conflicts about wildlife have
degenerated into security issues. The human population
increase in Kenya that is estimated to reach 60 million people
by 2030 and would complicate the dynamics of wildlife
related conflicts thus the survival of the tourism sector would
be highly threatened (Wang et al., 2006). Kenya continues to
lose citizens and animals through these conflicts. The
goodwill of the communities that cherished their coexistence
with wild animals would be lost. The survival of the wildlife
heritage would then be highly threatened. Each year elaborate
planning efforts in the sector continue (Wanjau, 2002). These
efforts are supplemented by private individuals and by the
nongovernmental organizations.
Despite all the multi-sectorial approach, we continue to lose
human beings and animals. The psychological impacts and the
image of the nation is great. The retaliations towards wildlife
killings affect our tourism, which is a main contributor to
GDP and consequently the national human development
index. This impacts then to our national security and
jeopardizes our national interests. It would consequently
affect the national vision 2030 delivery unless the situation is
addressed now. There is therefore need to have a permanent
solution to human wildlife conflicts. There is need to look at
conflict management strategies visa-versa the concept of
human wildlife conflict. If the wrong concept is in use the
most likely is that the wrong strategies are employed. Then a
paradigm shift needs to be executed soonest to avoid a
national tragedy in a few years to come.
1.3 Objective of the study
Examine the nature and extent of human wildlife conflicts
effect on socio- economic development and educational
development in Baringo North Sub-County, Kenya.
1.4 Research question
How does the nature and extent of Human Wildlife Conflicts
affect the socio-economic and educational development in
Baringo North Sub-County, Kenya?
1.5 Justification of the study
1.5.1 Academic and Policy Justification
There’s is dearth of information about the HWC and its
effects on socio-economic aspects on communities living near
Lake Kamnarok National game reserve. Orina (2009) studied
conflict resolution on wildlife and various communities
around Nairobi national park. His study didn’t look at the
larger ecosystem in Kenya. Mukeka (2018) did a study on
human wildlife conflict and how its correlates in Narok
county and observed that the conflicts were mainly seasonal
with annual fluctuations. Most studies on HWC have been
done in most game reserves in Kenya (Ogutu et al, 2008.,
Ogutu et al 2018., Koech, 2018., Mukeka, 2019).
The findings of this study will form part of reference materials
in library and other research works thus providing adequate
information to other researchers in the related field of the
study. The findings would also act as a source of reference
material in the University libraries and other research websites
where this work would be published.
While Baringo North Sub-County is located close to
Kamnarok National Reserve, it is currently experiencing a
growth in human settlement, making it a victim of human
wildlife conflict. In the absence of preventative steps, this
conflict is likely to escalate to a dangerous level very soon.
Therefore, the study's findings might be utilized to assess the
efficacy of existing animal conservation measures and to
develop new regulations. The Sustainable Development Goal
- SDG agenda and its implementation strategy must
incorporate the HWC. While it is impossible to totally
eliminate HWC, there are methods that, with the full
cooperation of local communities, can help diminish it and
lead to cohabitation between humans and wildlife. Similarly,
the study's recommendations could improve conditions at our
nation's national parks. The findings are particularly
significant because they give decision and policy makers a
deeper understanding of the issues typically connected with
wildlife protection.
II. THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF HUMAN WILDLIFE
CONFLICT
The term "human-wildlife conflict" has been in common
usage all throughout the world for quite some time. Human-
wildlife conflict arises when wildlife needs collide with those
of human populations, resulting in negative outcomes for
humans and non-humans alike, as stated by the International
Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and World
Parks Congress in 2003. (IUCN). As long as there have been
humans and wildlife, there will be conflicts between the two
groups over territory and resources. Not only in Africa do
people and animals come into confrontation with one another.
Human-animal conflicts occur nowadays in various forms all
across the globe. For example, human-crocodile conflict has
been documented in 33 tropical and subtropical nations, while
it is likely present in many more. Human-wildlife conflict
affects every region of the world, both developed and
developing. While wealthy people in industrialized countries
may be more vulnerable than those living in poverty, agro
pastoralists in undeveloped countries are in a different
position (Mwagiru, 2000).
Human-wildlife conflict is a major problem across Africa,
especially in countries with greater per capita incomes. People
are still killed by crocodiles in the Lake Nasser region of
Egypt and in cities in Mozambique; leopards kill sheep within
100 kilometers of Cape Town, South Africa; and lions

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 223
slaughter cattle on the outskirts of Nairobi, Kenya, as was
recently seen in Kitengera (Okello & Washitemi, 2006).
Human wildlife conflicts take many forms including crop
damage, damage to property, livestock predation and even
attack to man. Studies have shown that local population and
especially those living near Protected Areas (PAs) takes the
greater burden to shoulder the costs incurred. This is more so
because they are in dispersal areas of the protected areas. The
increase in human population has continued to increase
demand for natural resources including land. The wildlife
corridors have been converted into either settlement or in
areas of swamps like Kimana and Namelok in Amboseli
converted into agriculture. This has witnessed increase in
wildlife related conflicts. It’s clear that lack of land policies
for a long time in Kenya has contributed to the current
dilemma. This seriously undermines support for conservation.
The cost of this is both direct and indirect through opportunity
costs incurred through the conflict mitigation process (Orina,
2009).
Animals and people come into conflict when people's interests
and behaviors interfere with the needs of wildlife, or when
animals' needs collide with people's interests. The Kenya
wildlife contributes enormously to the national Gross
Domestic Product - GDP through tourism. The connection of
this contribution to the life of the local residents has not been
well articulated at the rural areas and more-so pastoral parts of
the country. This is one reason why the perception on animals
is changing in these communities in Kamnarok area, the
communities don’t have direct benefits as in most parts of the
country. Stakeholders who are informed and engaged are
more likely to make sound decisions and plans, which in turn
reduces the likelihood of conflicts (Messer, 2009).
Policy formulation in Kenya has had no much involvement of
the local populations and stakeholders. The land policy has for
a long time been limited in solving the clash between humans
and wildlife. The pastoral areas like Kamnarok have had
farmer’s migration changing the land use in pastoral areas.
The in-compactable land use in these areas has witnessed
increase in wildlife related conflicts. Lack of national land
policy that should have made sure the wildlife corridors are
left intact for the national good and world heritage has greatly
contributed to this scenario (Wang et al., 2006).
Wildlife conservation initiatives in Kenya address
complicated and frequently chronic social and ecological
concerns, such as land usage, conflicts between local people
and wildlife, local people's suspicion and antagonism toward
state wildlife conservation policy, and the rapid degradation of
wildlife habitats (Sindiga, 2005).
Kenyans on the savanna and along wildlife corridors face a
number of social and economic challenges due to their
proximity to protected areas. Due to the severity of the
accumulating issues, they cannot afford to give top attention
to wildlife preservation efforts. The social and economic
challenges have altered the scenario even in places where
conservation aims were stated. Recent research has indicated
that the majority of locals living near conservation areas have
a negative attitude toward governmental policies and
conservation initiatives (Musiani, et al., 2003). Kenya's
enormous wildlife reservoir is under increasing pressure, and
as a result, the country risks losing the economic, social, and
employment benefits it provides. Consequently, the
management of this country's government affects the
incidence of disputes with animals. The fact that the sector's
problems stem from a wide variety of shortcomings across so
many areas makes wildlife management that much more
difficult.
The adage that nothing operates in a vacuum applies
particularly well to the management of human-wildlife
conflicts. The places we call home and the places we go to
work have been shaped by political, cultural, and social
influences. Therefore, the ability of decision makers and
wildlife managers to understand, embrace, and include
different stakeholder's values, attitudes, and beliefs in crafting
policies will be crucial to the success of programs aimed to
settle human-wildlife conflicts in this ever-changing context.
Values, perspectives, attitudes, and beliefs held by
stakeholders have evolved over time. So, there must be long-
term shifts in conflict policy and administration. When it
comes to resolving conflicts in the wildlife industry, a number
of moving parts just add further complexity. Human-wildlife
conflict (HWC) has significantly impacted the tourism
business in the Kamnarok National Reserve area, hence this
study set out to identify the approaches taken by stakeholders
to reduce HWC incidents (Vijayan & Pati, 2002).
III. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
Wasike and Odhiambo (2016) discuss the role of theories in
guiding the thrust of academic studies. They emphasise the
importance of theories in offering compelling and incisive
causal explanations with calculated precision. They buttress
their argument by quoting Smith (1986) who asserts that
theories play the role of predicting, prescribing and evaluating
socio-political phenomena hence they cannot be ignored.
This study is guided by three theories: the Value – Belief –
Norm theory, the Frustration Aggression Theory and the
Conflict style theory.
3.1.1 Value - Belief - Norm (VBN) Theory
The theory's comprehension is divided into three sections:
moral norm activation, personal values, and the new
ecological paradigm.
Schwartz (1977) norm-activation theory of altruism has been
applied to pro-environmental behavior with some success.
This theory holds that pro-environmental actions occur in
response to personal moral norms about such actions and that
these are activated in individuals who believe that
environmental conditions pose threats to other people, other
species, or the biosphere (awareness of consequences, or AC)
and that actions they initiate could avert those consequences
(ascription of responsibility to self, or ARS). Supportive

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 224
evidence comes from studies focused on a variety of pro-
environmental actions.
Researchers have used the value measures created in cross-
national research, or modified versions of them, for
environmental research because they follow the reasoning
already described that ties pro-environmental behavior to
certain basic types of values (Stern et al., 1999). At its core,
this strategy takes into account three distinct "value
orientations" or types of values: self-interest, altruism towards
other humans, and altruism towards other species and the
biosphere. Environmental philosophy and the literature of the
environmental movement recognize these three unique
motivations for caring about the environment, but actual
research has yet to show a difference between human altruism
and altruism towards other species and the biosphere.
However, in more environmentally conscious populations,
such college students in the United States or the general
public in some other nations, the contrast may be more salient.
This research delves at the selfless and selfish motivations
behind environmental protection, or the Self-Transcendent
(ST) and Self-Enhancement Value (SEV) value clusters,
respectively. Schwartz identifies two key value categories,
conservation (traditional) values and openness to change, and
this study investigates both in search of evidence of their
effects on environmentalism.
The rise of the environmental movement is linked to growing
acceptance of a new ecological paradigm (NEP) or
worldview, a view that human actions have substantial
adverse effects on a fragile biosphere. The NEP scale
primarily measures broad beliefs about the biosphere and the
effects of human action on it a sort of “folk” ecological theory
from which beliefs about the adverse consequences (AC) of
ecological change can easily be deduced (Stern, et al., 1999).
In a sense, NEP measures awareness of very general adverse
consequences of environmental conditions, whereas most
studies using the Schwartz norm-activation model use
measures of problem specific consequences. The NEP is a
worldview that predisposes an individual to accept more
narrowly focused AC beliefs.
Stem, et al. (1999) link individuals with community and
observe the pro- environmental behavior, which comes from
moral obligations or personal norms embedded with a certain
value orientation. They believe that valued objects are
threatened, and believe that their actions can help restore
those values, thus experience an obligation as a matter of
norm.
The theory reveals a chain of influence on behavior from
people’s value sets and beliefs that the danger posed by the
threats is greater than they feel obliged to address the
environmental problems. The VBN - model builds on
Schwartz and Howard (1981), topology of value theory that
presumes that altruism value lead to awareness of adverse
consequences on other people and thus instigates
responsibility to help eliminate the problem.
3.1.2 Frustration Aggression Displacement Theory
Dollard et al. (1939) introduced the Frustration Aggression
Displacement Theory, which was later refined by Miller
(1941) and Berkowitz (1969). Aggressiveness, according to
the notion, is caused when someone or something prevents a
person or group from achieving their goal(s); hence,
frustration is the cause of aggression. Aggression is an
inevitable consequence of dissatisfaction since it motivates
violent actions.
According to this view, aggression is defined as an act whose
goal-response is injury to an organism, creature, or human,
while frustration occurs when a goal-response experiences
interference. According to this view, aggressiveness stems
from frustration but is directed elsewhere when the source of
that frustration cannot be addressed directly. Riots and
revolutions are often attributed to the underprivileged, who
feel they have nowhere else to vent their frustrations and rage,
and so resort to violence (Berkowitz, 1969).
Dissatisfaction with the study stems from unfulfilled
anticipation. The feeling of being ignored contributes to this
discontent. The frustration-aggression theory explains how
this leads to angry reactions. Anger and hostility can quickly
escalate from here. Some disagreements don't become obvious
until a certain event has place. High levels of competition for
land usage are a major cause of human-wildlife conflicts. The
concentration of human activity in places with abundant
animals has had a negative impact on the region's ability to
provide enough food to sustain its inhabitants. There is still a
long way to go until we meet the bare necessities of human
existence. Since animals are naturally aggressive, the lack of
intelligence when it comes to interacting with humans makes
them increasingly frustrated, especially at the first instance of
experiencing threat, which compounds the already delicate
interaction between wildlife and humans and complicates
social-economic activities within areas which are rich in
wildlife. However, when human objectives like grain
production, animal raring, and security are threatened by wild
animals, people get dissatisfied and hostile, which in turn
leads to human-wildlife conflict (Berkowitz, 1969).
According to the frustration-aggression-displacement theory,
communities that previously coexisted with wildlife resort to
their heritage killing of the animals when their basic needs are
not supplied. For example, in semiarid places all over the
world, residents experience frustration due to a shortage of
food in wildlife reserves, a lack of water in both the
population and the reserves, and a climate that produces
draught. Because of this, conflicts between humans and other
forms of wildlife have only increased (Orina, 2009).
3.1.3 Conflict Styles Theory
The Conflict Styles Theory was developed by Kenneth
Thomas and Ralph Kilmann in the 1970s. Different levels of
cooperation and assertiveness characterize the five primary
conflict resolution strategies defined by the theory. In their
theory, Thomas and Kilmann claimed that everyone has a

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 225
natural tendency toward one particular method of settling
disputes. Thomas' conflict theory identifies five strategies for
dealing with disagreements: competition, cooperation,
accommodation, compromise, and avoidance.
Those who are competitive are those who have strong
opinions and goals. In most cases, they are able to exert
influence because of their status, level of education, field of
expertise, or the ability to persuade others. Collaborative
approaches are employed when multiple perspectives must be
considered in order to arrive at the optimal answer, when
tensions already exist within the group, or when the stakes are
too high for a simple compromise. To compromise is to favor
seeking out solutions that will, at the very least, leave some
people happy.
When both sides have roughly the same amount of power,
when progress is at a standstill, and when time is running out,
compromise is the best option. By definition, an
accommodating personality will sacrifice their own wants and
needs in order to make everyone else happy. The
accommodating person typically has a good sense of when to
give in, but can be convinced to back down from a stance
even when it isn't merited. When the other party's interests
outweigh your own, when keeping the peace is more
important than winning, or if you want to be in a position to
collect on this "courtesy" you've given, accommodation is the
acceptable response. However, favors may not be returned,
and this strategy is not likely to produce optimal results.
Finally, avoidant members are those that want to stay out of
the conflict altogether. Characteristics of this approach
include passing off responsibility for difficult choices, being
content with the status quo, and avoiding confrontation out of
concern for others' feelings. There are times when it's the right
move, such as when you know you can't win, the stakes are
too low, or someone else is in a better position to handle the
situation. This is a poor strategy to employ in many cases,
however (Hamissou & DeSilvestre, 2008).
The Conflict Styles Theory is applicable to this study because
it proposes strategies for resolving human-wildlife conflicts in
the Baringo North Sub-County. For instance, policies that
allow for a range of perspectives to be expressed, some of the
policies may not please the community leaders or the national
and county government leaders but a neutral groud of
understanding must be reached if conflicts have to be avoided
or solved. The study concludes that so long as people and
wildlife in the Baringo North Sub-county coexist, conflict will
inevitably arise, and that there are both immediate and long-
term options for resolving the many forms of conflict that
have been documented. When fighting breaks out, it forces
people to rethink their relationships with one another and
whether or not they can live together in a way that is both
peaceful and productive for the economy and society of the
Baringo North sub-county. Therefore, since conflicts are
driven by unmet demands, managing them well should
eliminate the negative and damaging impacts, turning them
into a net positive. The existing degree of human-wildlife
conflicts can be reduced if the Baringo North Sub- county
implements one or more parts of Conflict system theory,
including competitiveness, collaboration, compromising,
accommodation, and avoidance.
IV. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Figure 1 Showing Conceptual Model Framework Model
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Model
Source: Researcher, 2021)
V. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
5.1 Research Design
Creswell and Miller (2000) define a study design as "a
description of techniques that researchers employ to gather,
analyze, interpret, and present their research results."
Researchers follow the rationale established by their study
design when conducting their investigations and analyzing
their data (Flick, 2002). This study used a descriptive survey
method to identify factors that either increase or decrease the
likelihood of human-wildlife conflict in the Baringo North
Sub-County. The study's methodology was judged adequate
since it uncovered factors like population growth, shifts in
land use, and the biased application of policies that contribute
to human-wildlife conflict. As an added bonus, this method
allows the researcher to survey a sample of the population to
gain insight into how its members think, feel, and act, as well
as what they know. Since the conflicts in the area span the
entirety of Baringo North Sub-County, it was necessary to

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 226
adopt a cross-sectional study design to provide an accurate
picture of the community at large.
5.2 Study Area
The research was conducted in the Baringo North Sub-County
of Kenya, which lies roughly 270 kilometers north-west of
Nairobi and is part of the country's former Rift Valley
Province. It has a total area of 1,703.50 square kilometers. To
the east are Samburu and Laikipia, to the north and north-east
are Turkana, to the south is Nakuru, to the west is Elgeyo
Marakwet, to the north-west are West Pokot and Uasin Gishu,
and to the south-west are Kericho and Uasin Gishu (IEBC,
2017).
The southern half of the Sub- County experiences milder
weather, with temperatures averaging 25°C in June and July
and 30°C in the hottest months of January and February, while
the northern parts have warmer weather, with temperatures
averaging 30°C to 35°C throughout the year. Every year, the
county's hills get between 1,000 and 1,500 millimeters (mm)
of precipitation, while the lowlands only get 300 millimeters
(mm) of rain. March through June (long rains) and November
(short rains) are the two rainy seasons that Baringo North
Sub-County experiences (Kenya Metrological Department,
2018).
The county's topography mostly consists of river valleys and
plains, the Tugen Hills, the floor of the Rift Valley, and a
northern plateau. The Kerio valley is notable as one of the
major river valleys in the area. Located in the western part of
the county, this plain is quite level. The height above sea level
varies from 1000m to 2600m (Kenya Metrological
Department, 2018).
The research focussed on the reserves in the Baringo North
Sub-County, one of which being the Rimoi National Reserve,
a sanctuary for endangered animals. The Kenya Wildlife
Service guards the 66-square-kilometer reserve. It is a
component of a conservation area that is five times greater
than its size and is located next to the dried-up Lake
Kamnarock. In addition to the world's rare white crocodiles,
which may be seen at the campsite along the Kerio River, the
reserve is home to a variety of reptiles such as Agama, lizards,
tortoises, and snakes. Based on the efforts of the Kenya
Wildlife Service (KWS) to include local communities in the
management of wildlife resources in these locations, this
study uses Rimoi National Reserve as a proxy for the other
reserves. Which has helped local communities maintain its
natural resources, but has had unintended negative
consequences and has not improved their standard of living,
hence the study's urgency (Woodroffe et al., 2005). Therefore,
KWS is eager to support and cooperate with people in
Baringo North Sub-County, Rimoi being one of the reserves,
to identify and implement optimal land uses that have high
conservation and livelihood values (WWF, 2006).
Figure 2. Baringo North Sub County
Source: Researcher’s (2021)
5.3 Sampling Procedure and Sampling Size
The researcher employed purposive sampling in selecting the
respondents to constitute the sample for the study. The sample
population of the respondents was calculated based on Krejcie
and Morgan Table 1970, Conroy (2018) who suggested that a
sample of 30% of the subjects can be sufficient and Creswell
(2018) who said 10% of the sample is sufficient especially for
phenomenological research.The total sample size was
therefore 286 respondents. The sample included 6 government
field officers which were purposively sampled, 3 civil society
leaders, 3 KWS officials, 3 opinion leaders, 6 teachers, 20
community based organization leaders and farmers, 3 village
elders and 242 victims of human wildlife conflicts.
Sample technique used in this study included purposive and
simple random sampling. Purposive sampling was used to
select government field officers and identified key informants
while simple random sampling was used in selecting the
victims of human wildlife conflicts.
5.4 Data Collection Method
The study used the questionnaire, interview guides and
observation guides in data collection. The questionnaire
contained open ended questions which allowed the
respondents to give their own views. These were; Government
field officers, head teachers, KWS officials, and HWC
survivors while interviews method was used to collect
information from officials from the Ministry of Forestry and
Wildlife with use of structured and semi-structured interview
questions. The reason for use of interviews was that they are
easy to administer since the questions are prepared in
advance. They also allow a great deal of information to be
gathered in a short period of time. Interviews also eliminate

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 227
many sources of bias common to other instruments like
observations.
Observation checklist was used to provide researchers with
ways to check for nonverbal expression of feelings, determine
who interacts with whom, grasp how participants
communicate with each other, and check for how much time
is spent on various activities (Schmuck, 1997). Participant
observation allows researchers to check definitions of terms
that participants use in interviews, observe events that
informants may be unable or unwilling to share when doing so
would be impolite, or insensitive, and observe situations
informants have described in interviews, thereby making them
aware of distortions or inaccuracies in description provided by
those informants.
5.5 Data Analysis and Presentation
Analyzing data entails establishing some kind of hierarchy or
framework for the gathered data in order to draw conclusions
from it. The data analysis and visualizations employed a wide
range of approaches. Mixtures of quantitative and qualitative
methods were used. Statistical software for social sciences
(SPSS, version 27.0), together with proportions, percentages,
and averages, were used in the studies, all of which are
indicative of the quantitative method and were used to paint a
broad picture from which conclusions could be drawn. The
qualitative information gathered through surveys and in-depth
interviews was subjected to a theme analysis. But statistical
tables, bar graphs, charts, and even maps were all derived
using quatitative methods (Espinosa & Yamashita, 2015).
VI. RESULTS
6.1 Risk of Wild Animals attacking Children
The study sought to establish the risk of wild life attacks that
was faced children in Baringo County. This was based on
three considerations namely; whether the children cross paths
with animals; whether the schools that children attend are
close to wildlife reserve and the history of wild animals
attacks among the survivor’s children. Based on these units of
analysis, the study revealed that there is a risk of the children
meeting wild animals as indicated by 178 (61.2%) of the
survivors who stated that children cross paths with wild
animals, another 178 (61.2%) of the survivors stated that the
schools are located close to wildlife reserves and 172 (60.2%)
of the survivors reported knowing either their or other
people’s children who had been attacked by wild animals.
Table 1: Risk of Children getting attacked by Wild Animals
Risk of Children getting
Attacked by Wild Animals
YES
NO
N
%
n
%
n
Children crossing path with
animals
62.1
178
37.9
108
286
Is the school close to wildlife
reserve
62.1
178
37.9
108
286
Has your child been attacked by
wild animals
60.2
172
39.8
114
286
Source: Field Data, 2021
Greater percentage of respondents was in agreement they were
exposed to the risk of wild animal’s attacks as they use paths
network in and around the protected area. This is because
some of the schools are located inside the national reserve.
Some respondents also confirmed children’s injuries or deaths
from wild life attacks.
6.2 Incidences of attack by Wild Animals
The study sought to establish the incidences of wild life
attacks in Baringo North Sub-County. The respondents were
asked whether they had been attacked by wild animals in the
past, out of the 286 respondents, 274 (95.70%) stated that they
had been attacked by wild Animals while 12 (4.3%) indicated
that they had not faced any wild life attacks. The results were
as indicated in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Whether Respondents had been attacked by Wild Animals
Source: Field Data, 2021
The findings indicate that most respondents had directly or
indirectly experienced wild animal’s attacks. This could have
been destruction of wild life habitats inside the reserve in
which the wild animals are forced to roam/move outside the
protected area. Human encroachment into the reserve could be
also be another pre-disposing factor. Competition for limited
resources such as water especially during the dry sessions
could also be another case in point.
6.3 Frequency of Wild Animal Attacks based on time of the
Day when the animals attack.
The study sought to establish the time of the day when most
wildlife attacks occurred in Baringo North Sub-County. The
results from the 286 respondents revealed that most of the
attacks occurred during the day with 22.4% stating that the
wild animal attacks occur in the afternoon, 21.1% revealing
that the attacks occurred before noon, 12.4% stating that the
attacks were common early morning and 11.8% of the opinion
that the attacks were common in the evening. The results were
as show in Figure 4

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 228
Figure 4: Time of Wild Animal Attacks
Source: Field Data, 2021
Most wild animals’ attacks occur during the day, mostly in the
afternoon. This is because of movements of people and
livestock. This is the time life stock and people move around
in search of pasture and water. Such movements are more
pronounced before noon and are at its highest level in the
afternoon. Early morning attacks could be attributed to
farming activities which are carried out early before the
scorching heat of the sun, common phenomena in ASAL
area.
6.4 Types of Wild animals that Attack People in Baringo
North Sub-County
The study sought to establish the types of wild animals that
attacked residents of Baringo County. The results of the study
revealed that among the animals, the snake had the highest
reports of attacks to humans at (37.3%), followed by elephants
(25.5%), Crocodiles (13.5%), buffalo (12.4%) while hyena
and rhino having the least incidences of 1.20%. The findings
were as shown in Figure 5
Figure 5: Wild animals that Attacked people in Baringo Sub-County
Source: Field Data, 2021
During the Interviews and FGD it emerged that the types of
wild animals involved in HWC included: inside the reserve;
Elephants, warthogs, snakes, zebras introduced from Rimoi /
Zoi but crossed to Baringo North Sub-County; crocodiles;
hyena; baboon; monkeys; outside the reserve, foxes, honey-
burgers, snakes, baboons, wild-dogs.
In reference to these findings, Snakes were found to generate
most attacks on people. Baringo North Sub-County has an
ecological niche that harbors several types of deadly snakes.
This cuts across the entire Baringo North Sub-County.
Residents are therefore highly exposed to the risk of snake
bites. Elephants attack people in the area because of destroyed
vegetation cover inside and outside the protected area. This
has forced the Elephant’s to move out of the reserve in search
of forage. In the process they invade people’s farms/ crops
hence a trigger of conflict as farmers attempt to repulse them
back. Pouching which is influenced by commercial ornaments
of wild life products such as ivory is systematically carried
out. This at times leaves some elephants wounded. Such
injured elephants become very wild and aggressively attack
people and livestock as well. Whenever they come their way
(Musyoki, 2007). Lack of electric fence around the national
reserve elephants allows move from Karmnarok national
reserve to people’s farms and places of residents. Based on
their instincts they have permanent migratory routes and can
move from one conservancy to another.
Additionally, overstocking of elephants in the protected area
is also a contributing factor. Initially, the elephant population
in the reserve was about 206 in total. Presently, they number
over 1000; a population size the carrying capacity of the
reserve cannot sustain (Obunde et al., 2005). Crocodiles are
the least attackers in HWC because they attack mostly during
dry season when people look for water for both domestic and
livestock consumptions. They prey on them especially at Lake
Kamnarok and water berms. Crocodiles are prime killers of
livestock at water points. This escalates in the area since the
main livelihood / source for people in Baringo North Sub-
County ward rests in livestock keeping. Hyena population in
Baringo North Sub-County ward is too small to trigger major
attacks. A few live inside the reserve while others migrate
from outside the area. Hyenas predate on small live stocks
such as sheep and goats. This finding is in contrast to what
Mutunga et el (2022) found out in terms of response to
disasters in Kakamega County. In their article “Psychological
First Aid Practices Applied by Humanitarian Responders
during Disasters in Kakamega County, Kenya” they found out
that: There are many volunteers across Kakamega County and
during such traumatic events, they are activated using the
volunteer management system so as to assist where necessary
during times of traumatic events. Together with community
members, volunteers offer physical and psychological first aid
before ambulances and other responders arrive to the scene.
They normally use locally available materials to save lives.
These results are consistent with a study done by Mukeka et
al. (2019) that found 80.8% of HWC in Narok county were
caused by elephants, 10.6% by buffallo, 7.6% by Burchell's

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 229
zebra, 7.3% by leopards, 5.8% by spotted hyenas, and 3.3%
by lions; 11.7% were caused by non-human primates. Raids
on crops (50%) were the most common cause of conflict,
followed by attacks on humans (27%) and animal depredation
(17.6%). The areas where wheat and maize are cultivated
commercially experienced the highest rates of crop raiding.
Carnivores were more likely to attack animals that were about
the same size as themselves. Consequently, leopards (44.0%)
and spotted hyenas (37.9%) were the primary predators of
sheep and goats, while lions (63.1%) and spotted hyenas
(14.5%).
The findings concur with that of Kitampui and Odhiambo
(2021) in their article “Forms of Human-Wildlife Conflict in
Transmara West Sub-County, Kenya” when they said: The
most manifested human-wildlife conflict in Transmara west
Sub County is destruction of crops. Findings indicate that
elephants were considered to be responsible for more deaths
than any other large animal in Mara triangle. Greatest of the
deaths especially those occurring at night are often not
registered by the relevant authorities for lack of clear
reporting mechanism. Basically large carnivores are
responsible for various lethal attacks on Humans, while large
herbivores, such as elephants, are involved in human deaths
every year which occurs when people are protecting their
crops against raiding animals usually at night.
This study was in agreement with a study by Masago &
Kweingoti (2018), which showed that livestock depredation
was one of the kinds of human-wildlife conflict. Here,
carnivorous and omnivorous fauna (particularly species with a
broad range and high body size) often prey upon livestock,
causing substantial economic damage as supported by Kissui
(2008). Examples from the developed world include wolf
predation on ranched and free-ranging domestic animals
(Boitani et al., 2010; Lance et al., 2010), while examples from
the developing world include wolf predation of pastoral
livestock (Inskip and Zimmermann, 2009). As a result,
subsistence tillage is often the only option for people living in
locations with high human population densities, limited arable
land, and high prices, all of which make pastoral herding of
cattle impossible. This is made worse in places bordering
wildlife preserves, which are home to numerous herbivorous
and omnivorous species. It's possible that a lack of food or the
area's maximum population size for a certain species are
determining factors in animal raiding behavior in protected
habitats (Van Aarde and Jackson, 2007).
VII. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
The study revealed that there was risk of the children meeting
wild animals as indicated by 178 (61.2%) of the respondents
indicating that children cross paths with wild animals.
According to the findings among the animals that attacked
people, the snake had the highest reports of attacks to humans
at (37.3%), followed by elephants (25.5%), Crocodiles
(13.5%), buffalo (12.4%) while hyena and rhino having the
least incidences of 1.20%. The findings also indicated that,
148 (52%) of the participants agreed that shared water sources
was a cause of human wildlife conflict, while 92(32%)
strongly agreed respectively. Study findings further indicated
that 137 (48%) of the participants strongly agreed sources of
food for both humans and wild animals was another major
cause of human-wild life conflicts. On examination of the
place where wild animals attacked survivors on Baringo North
Sub-county, findings indicated that most of the attacks
occurred at work/ in farms as supported by 140 (49.1%) while
53 (18.6%) were of the opinion that the attacks were common
inside/near wild life park. The study further revealed that
poverty and overpopulation are drivers to human wildlife
conflicts as wildlife habitats are disappearing at an alarming
rate, as supported by 194 (68%) response rate. The study
concludes that HWC has caused loss of lives including loss of
body parts of victims due to snake bites and crocodiles. There
has been increased insecurity around schools adjacent to the
national reserve caused by roaming animals and which has
remained a perennial problem but government agencies have
not taken care of proactive stand to get a permanent solution.
VIII. RECOMMENDATION
The study recommends that government should resolve HWC
by generating, lasting solutions. Such solutions include
fencing off the reserve to keep off roaming wildlife and those
injured together with the crops destroyed should be
adequately compensated.
REFERENCES
[1] Berkowitz, L. (1969). Roots of aggression: A re-examination of
the frustration-aggression hypothesis. New York: Atherton Press.
[2] Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining Validity in
Qualitative Inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130
[3] Creswell, JW. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design
Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
[4] Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The
discipline and practice of qualitative research: The Sage handbook
of qualitative research. London: Sage.
[5] Dickman, A. J. (2014). Using landscape and bioclimatic features
to predict the distribution of lions, leopards, and spotted hyenas in
Tanzania's Ruaha landscape. PLoS ONE 9(5): e96261.
[6] Dollard, J., Miller, N. E., Doob, L. W., Mowrer, O. H. & Sears, R.
R. (1939). Frustration and Aggression. New Haven, CT, US: Yale
University Press.
[7] Espinosa, L., L. & Yamashita, M. (2015). Evaluation Toolkit.
Evaluation Guide. Analyze Data. Retrieved
from: http://toolkit.pellinstitute.org/evaluation-
guide/analyze/analyze-qualitative-data/
[8] Flick, U. (2002). An introduction to qualitative research. London:
Sage.
[9] Hamissou, H.M.G. & DE Silvestre, I. (2008). Conflicts between
large carnivores and domestic livestock in the peripheral zone of
the W Transboundary Park in Niger. In B. Croes, R. Buij, H.H. de
Iongh & H. Bauer, eds. Conservation of large carnivores in West
and Central Africa. Proceedings of an international seminar,
Maroua, Cameroon, 15–16 November 2006. Leiden, the
Netherlands, Institute of Environmental Sciences
[10] Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC, 2017).
Constituencies and Electoral Population. Baringo, Kenya.
Government Printers, Nairobi.
[11] Independent Electral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC, 2017).
Constituency boundaries establishment. Government of Kenya
Gazette; Nairobi-Kenya.
[12] Jones, B. (2012). The evolution of Namibia’s communal
conservancies. In: Nelson, F. Community rights, conservation and

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) |Volume VI, Issue X, October 2022|ISSN 2454-6186
www.rsisinternational.org Page 230
contested land: The politics of natural resource governance in
Africa. Routledge, Oxford.
[13] Kitampui, J. N., & Odhiambo, E. O. S. (2021). “Forms of Human-
Wildlife Conflict in Transmara West Sub-County, Kenya”
Published by International Journal of Scientific and Research
Publications, Volume 11, Issue 9, September 2021 ISSN 2250-
3153, pp.108-113 DOI:10.29322/IJSRP.11.09.2021.p11713
http://dx.doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.11.09.2021.p11713
[14] Koech. F.C {2018} An Assessment of Human Wildlife Conflict
within Kitengela wildlife dispersal area. Kajiado County, Kenya.
University of Nairobi.
[15] Maito, Leshan Thomas; Odhiambo, E.O. Standslause; &
Major.Ven.Nakhumwa Habil Otipi (2013). “Ethno-Economy of
Conflicts among Pastoralists of Kenya” published by Asian
Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities (AJSSH), Oyama, Japan.
Vol.2, Number 3, August 2013, ISSN: 2186-8492, Print ISSN:
2186-8484, pp. 72-77. http://ajssh.leena-
luna.co.jp/ajsshvol2n3.php
[16] Messer, T A. (2009). Human wildlife conflicts: emerging
challenges and opportunities, paper university of Nebraska journal.
1 (1): 1-17.
[17] Messer, T.A (2002). The emergence of human–wildlife conflict
management: turning challenges into opportunities. Journal of
International Bio-deterioration & Biodegradation. 1 (1); 17-52.
[18] Messmer, T. A., Brunson, M. W., Reiter, D. & Hewitt, D. G.
(1999). United States public attitudes regarding predators and
their management to enhance avian recruitment. Wildlife Society
Bulletin 27, 75-85.
[19] Messmer, T.A., (2000). The emergence of human–wildlife conflict
management: turning challenges into opportunities. Journal of
International Bio-deterioration & Biodegradation, 45(3-4):97-102
[20] Miller, N. E. (1941). "I. The frustration-aggression hypothesis".
Psychological Review. 48 (4): 337–342. doi:10.1037/h0055861.
[21] Mugenda, A. G. & Mugenda, M. O. (1999). Research methods
Quantitative and Qualitative. Approaches, Acts Press.
[22] Mugenda, O. & Mugenda, A. (2003). Research Methods:
Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches,ACTS Press, Nairobi,
Kenya.
[23] Mukeka. J.M., Ogutu.J.O., Kanga. E., Roskaft. E. {2018}
Characteristics of Human Wildlife Conflict in Kenya. Examples of
Tsavo and Masaai Mara regions. Environmental National
Resources 8{3} 2018.
[24] Musiani, M., Mamo, C., Boitani, L., Callaghan, C., Gates, C.,
Mattei, L., Visalberghi, E., Breck, S. & Volpi, G. (2003). Wolf
Depredation Trends and the Use of Fladry Barriers to Protect
Livestock in Western North America. Conservation Biology.
17(6):1538-1547
[25] Musyoki, F. (2007). Community Rights, Conservation and
Contested Land: The Political Economy of Natural Resource
Governance in Africa. Earth scan, London.
[26] Mutunga, J.N., Rev. Sgt. Rtd. Dr. Odhiambo, E .O. S. & Dr. Iyaya,
M.W. (2022). "Psychological First Aid Practices Applied by
Humanitarian Responders during Disasters in Kakamega County,
Kenya” published by International Journal of Social Sciences and
Humanities Invention, Vol. 9, Issue 09, September, 2022. Pp.
7239- 7254. DOI: 10.18535/ijsshi/v9i09.07 ISSN: 2349-2031
https://valleyinternational.net/index.php/theijsshi
[27] Mwagiru, M. (2000). Conflicts in Africa: Theory, processes and
institutions of management, CCR publication
[28] Obunde, P.O, Omiti, J.M. & Sirengo, A.N. 2005. Policy
dimensions in human wildlife conflicts in Kenya: evidence from
Laikipia and Nyandarua districts. IPAR Policy Brief (11): 3.
[29] Ogutu,J.O., Piepho, H.P., Dublin, H.T., Bhola.N., Ried. R.S
{2008}Rainfall influence on ungulates population abundance in
the Mara Serengeti ecosystem. Journal of Animal Ecology 278 [1]
2009. Pg 1-14
[30] Okello, M. M. & Washitemi B.E.L. (2006). Principles for the
establishment of community wildlife sanctuaries for ecotourism:
Lessons from Maasai Group Ranches, Kenya. African Journal of
Business and Economics, 1 (1), pp. 90–109.
[31] Okello, M. M., Wishitemi, B. E. & Mwinzi, A. M. (2001).
Relative importance of conservation areas in Kenya based on
diverse tourist attractions. The Journal of Tourism Studies. 12(1):
39-49.
[32] Onyango, P. (2015). Kenya crackdown on terrorism threatens
NGOs, wildlife, media.
Mongabayhttps://news.mongabay.com/2015/04/kenya-crackdown-
onterrorism- threatens-ngos-wildlife-media /
[33] Orina, H. (2009), "Contractual National Parks and the Makuleke
Community", Human Ecology, Vol. 29 No.2, pp.135-55.
[34] Patterson, D., Kasiki, M. Selempo, E. & Kays, W. (1999).
Livestock predation by lions (Panthera Leo) and other carnivores
on ranches neighboring Tsavo National Park, Kenya
[35] Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In L.
Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology
(Vol. 10, pp. 221–279). New York: Academic Press.
[36] Schwartz, S. H., & Howard, J. A. (1981). A normative decision-
making model of altruism. In J. P. Rushton & R. M. Sorrentino
(Eds.), Altruism and helping behavior (pp. 89–211). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
[37] Sindiga, I. (2005). Wildlife-based tourism in Kenya: Land use
conflicts and government compensation policies over protected
areas. The Journal of Tourism Studies 6(2): 45-55.
[38] Slotow, R., (2008). Risk and ethical Concerns of hunting male
Elephant: behavioral and physiological assays of the remaining
Elephants. doi: 10.1371/journal
[39] Smith, S. (1986). Theories of Foreign Policy: An Historic
Overview, Review of International Studies(Cambridge University
Press), Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 13-29.
[40] Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L.
(1999). A value-belief-norm theory of support for social
movements: The case of environmentalism. Human Ecology
Review,6, 81–95.
[41] Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (1974). The Thomas-Kilmann
Conflict Mode Instrument. Mountain View, CA: CPP, Inc.
[42] Treves, A. & Karanth, K.U. (2003). Human-carnivore conflict and
perspectives on carnivore management worldwide. Conservation
Biology. 17(6):1491-1499.University, University Park, PA, USA,
pp. 18–22.
[43] Vijayan, S. & Pati, B.P. (2002). Impact of Changing Cropping
Patterns on Man-Animal Conflicts Around Gir Protected Area
with Specific Reference to Talala Sub-District, Gujarat, India.
Population and Environment, 23(6): 541-559
[44] Wang, S.W. & Macdonald, D.W. (2006). Livestock predation by
carnivores in Jigme Singye Wang chuck National Park, Bhutan.
Biological Conservation.129: 558-565
[45] Wang, S.W., Lassoie, J.P. & Curtis, P. (2006). Farmer attitudes
towards conservation in Jigme Singye Wang chuck National Park,
Bhutan. Environmental Conservation. 33: 1-9
[46] Wanjau, M.W. 2002. People/crocodile conflicts in Kenya: policy
changes required to effectively manage the conflicts. Report to
Kenya Wildlife Services
[47] Wasike, S., & Odhiambo, E. O. S. (2016). A Critique of the
Usefulness of Theories in Explaining SocioPolitical Phenomenon.
Asian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3, 29-33.
[48] Woodroffe, R., Lindsay, P., Romanach, S., Stein, A. & Ronali, S.
M. K. (2005). Livestock predation by endangered African wild
dogs (Lycaon pictus) In Northern Kenya. Biological Conservation,
124:225-234
[49] World Conservation Union (IUCN). (2002). The IUCN red list of
threatened species. IUCN, Gland,Switzerland. Available from
http://www.redlist.org. (Accessed January 2003).