The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 37 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Predicting spatial aspects of human–elephant conflict
Open accessAbstract
Summary: Human–elephant conflict (HEC) in Africa occurs wherever these two species coincide, and poses serious challenges to wildlife managers, local communities and elephants alike. Mitigation requires a detailed understanding of underlying patterns and processes. Although temporal patterns of HEC are relatively predictable, spatial variation has shown few universal trends, making it difficult to predict where conflict will take place. While this may be due to unpredictability in male elephant foraging behaviour (the male behaviour hypothesis) it may also be due to variations in the data resolution of earlier studies. This study tested the male behaviour and data resolution hypotheses using HEC data from a 1000‐km 2 unprotected elephant range adjacent to the Masai Mara National Reserve in Kenya. HEC incidents were divided into crop raiding and human deaths or injuries. Crop raiding was further subdivided into incidents involving only male elephants or family groups. A relatively fine‐resolution, systematic, grid‐based method was used to assign the locations of conflict incidents, and spatial relations with underlying variables were explored using correlation analysis and logistic regression. Crop raiding was clustered into distinct conflict zones. Both occurrence and intensity could be predicted on the basis of the area under cultivation and, for male elephant groups, proximity to major settlements. Conversely, incidents of elephant‐induced human injury and death were less predictable but were correlated with proximity to roads. A grid‐based geographical information system (GIS) with a 25‐km 2 resolution utilizing cost‐effective data sources, combined with simple statistical tools, was capable of identifying spatial predictors of HEC. At finer resolutions spatial autocorrelation compromised the analyses. Synthesis and applications. These results suggest that spatial correlates of HEC can be identified, regardless of the sex of the elephants involved. Moreover, the method described here is fully transferable to other sites for comparative analysis of HEC. Using these results to map vulnerability will enable the development and deployment of appropriate conflict mitigation strategies, such as guarding, early warning systems, barriers and deterrents. The utility of such methods and their strategic deployment should be assessed alongside alternative land‐use and livelihood strategies that limit cultivation within the elephant range.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring the Accuracy of Diagnostic Systems
Swets, J. A. (1988) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3287615 · Cited by 10,058
A review of methods for the assessment of prediction errors in conservation presence/absence models
FIELDING, A. H., & BELL, J. F. (1997) · Environmental Conservation · doi:10.1017/s0376892997000088 · Cited by 6,956
Two-sided confidence intervals for the single proportion: comparison of seven methods
Newcombe, R. G. (1998) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0258(19980430)17:8<857::aid-sim777>3.0.co;2-e · Cited by 5,107
Spatial Processes, Models and Applications
Anselin, L., Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1983) · Economic Geography · doi:10.2307/143420 · Cited by 2,628
Pimm, S. L., Russell, G. J., Gittleman, J. L., & Brooks, T. M. (1995) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.269.5222.347 · Cited by 2,230
Evaluating the predictive performance of habitat models developed using logistic regression
Pearce, J., & Ferrier, S. (2000) · Ecological Modelling · doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(00)00322-7 · Cited by 2,002
Evaluating presence–absence models in ecology: the need to account for prevalence
Manel, S., Williams, H. C., & Ormerod, S. J. (2001) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2664.2001.00647.x · Cited by 1,759
Edge Effects and the Extinction of Populations Inside Protected Areas
Woodroffe, R., & Ginsberg, J. R. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.280.5372.2126 · Cited by 1,757
Spatial Processes: Models and Applications
Wrigley, N., Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1982) · The Geographical Journal · doi:10.2307/633177 · Cited by 1,247
Spatial autocorrelation of ecological phenomena
Koenig, W. D. (1999) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(98)01533-x · Cited by 655
Cited by
Human-Elephant Conflict: A Review of Current Management Strategies and Future Directions
Shaffer, L. J., Khadka, K. K., Van Den Hoek, J., & Naithani, K. J. (2019) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2018.00235 · Cited by 367
Problematic animals in the zoo: the issue of charismatic megafauna
Hosey, G., Melfi, V., & Ward, S. J. (2020) · Problematic Wildlife II · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-42335-3_15 · Cited by 31
Responses to alternative rainfall regimes and antipoaching in a migratory system
Holdo, R. M., Galvin, K. A., Knapp, E., Polasky, S., Hilborn, R., & Holt, R. D. (2010) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/08-0780.1 · Cited by 30
Metadata
- Authors
- Sitati, N. W., Walpole, M. J., Smith, R. J., & Leader‐Williams, N.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-07-11
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 667-677
- ISSN
- 0021-8901 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2664
- OpenAlex
- W2038843982
- Cited by
- 317
- References
- 37
- FWCI
- 8.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Predicting spatial aspects of human–elephant conflict. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2003.00828.x
- The paper
- Sitati, N. W., Walpole, M. J., Smith, R. J., & Leader‐Williams, N. (2003). Predicting spatial aspects of human–elephant conflict. Journal of Applied Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2003.00828.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.