DOES CONFLICT ACCURATELY REPRESENT HUMAN AND WILDLIFE INTERACTIONS? AN EXAMINATION OF HUMAN AND TIGER INTERACTIONS IN SUMATRA

Abstract

The term human-wildlife conflict is often used to describe negative interactions between humans and wildlife. However, the term is subjected to greater scrutiny today because its use can entrench negative encounters due to animals as the only way of conceptualising interactions between humans and wildlife. This thesis builds upon existing human-wildlife conflict scholarship involving large carnivores through its focus on human interactions with the Sumatran tiger. Based on empirical findings the thesis aims to determine whether current interactions between humans and tigers in Sumatra can be fairly labelled as examples of human-wildlife conflict. Through a mixed-method approach comprising content analysis of newspaper articles, spatial mapping of tiger-related incidents, and a questionnaire-based survey involving selected residents of Giam Siak Kecil-Bukit Batu Biosphere Reserve, the study found that most of the negative human and tiger interactions were driven, directly and indirectly, by human activities. Hence, human-tiger conflict seems an inaccurate way to describe encounters between humans and tigers in Sumatra. Overall, this thesis finds that use of the human-wildlife conflict trope can be misleading and urges a more cautious and nuanced use of terms in relation to human and wildlife interactions.