内容:文本/纯文本;charset="UTF-8" TY - JOUR A1 - Kamdar, Arjun A1 - Baishya, Hiten Kumar A1 - Nagendra, Harini A1 - Ratnam, Jayashree A1 - Smith, David A1 - Sekar, Nitin TI -作为公共利益的人象冲突缓解:是什么决定了围栏维护?N2 -人类和大象之间的负面互动已知会产生严重的后果，导致两个物种的生命损失和生活质量恶化。减少人象冲突(HEC)对大象保护和社会正义至关重要。在村庄或社区周围设置非致命的电网是一种广泛用于缓解HEC的干预措施。这些障碍就像不可排除和不可减去的资源一样。公共产品——必须由受益人或国家共同维护。尽管在维护良好的情况下，这种围栏相当有效，但印度东北部的大多数栅栏维护得很差。这就引出了我们的中心问题:为什么有些围栏维护得很好，而有些围栏维护得很差?我们使用定性比较分析、奥斯特罗姆的社会生态系统框架和扎根理论方法，结合定性社会科学工具，研究了19个这样的围栏。 We found that, contrary to our hypothesis, the functionality of fences cannot be predicted based on the design of the fence, whether or not the community made cash payments, or ethnic homogeneity or leadership in the village. Instead, we found there are three potential pathways of maintenance: (1) a community maintainer, (2) the community self-organizes, and (3) the Forest Department. Maintenance occurs when there is a congruence between perceived costs and benefits for the entity responsible for fence maintenance. These costs and benefits are diverse, including not just material benefits but intangibles like goodwill, sense of safety, social standing, and a feeling of fairness. We highlight these factors and provide recommendations for practitioners and policy. JO - Ecology and Society PB - The Resilience Alliance Y1 - 2022 P1 - 2022 VL - 27 IS - 3 C7 - 24 UR - //www.dpl-cld.com/vol27/iss3/art24/ DO - 10.5751/ES-13271-270324 KW - collective action problem KW - fence maintenance KW - grounded theory KW - human–elephant conflict KW - India KW - non-lethal fences KW - public good KW - qualitative comparative analysis KW - social-ecological systems ER -