Ground-level perspectives to assess a compensation scheme's efficiency

The use of compensation schemes as conservation tools that counteract losses of crops or livestock by wildlife of conservation concern has been widely implemented to settle disputes between conservationists and farmers, with... [ view full abstract ]

The use of compensation schemes as conservation tools that counteract losses of crops or livestock by wildlife of conservation concern has been widely implemented to settle disputes between conservationists and farmers, with varying success. Assessment of compensation schemes are therefore essential, but can be performed using different approaches. Here, we assess a compensation scheme implemented to support jaguar conservation in Mexico, focusing on ground-level perceptions of local actors as the main determinant of their acceptance and attitudes towards it. We carried out 165 semi-structured interviews to obtain livestock breeders’ perceptions of both depredation and the scheme. We developed criteria to cover every aspect of the scheme (accessibility, relationships, efficiency, transparency), which we measured through 5-point Likert items. Among those individuals who had yet to claim compensation, responses regarding the evaluation of the scheme were mixed, where the number of livestock lost was negatively associated with their evaluation. More individuals who had used the scheme rated it positively, with trust and the accessibility of information being the criteria most closely associated with positive perceptions. Last, ranchers’ satisfaction levels with the scheme operation was related to the transparency of the decision-making process, while satisfaction with the results was related to their trust in the operating organization. A deeper understanding of local actors’ perceptions allowed us to uncover criteria that they used to shape their evaluations that cannot be found in biological or economic assessments. Our assessment, based on social data, was developed to be easily accessible to managers, practitioners, and scientists, with a capability of delivering answers on how to improve such compensation tools.