Abstract:
Using military-type strategies and equipment to conserve wildlife, also known as militarized conservation, is highly contested. In
sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), one acutely controversial aspect of militarized conservation is when armed rangers shoot at suspected
criminals inside protected and conserved areas (PCAs). We quantified perceptions among members of eight international publics
on the acceptability of this particularly contentious aspect of militarized conservation, testing whether acceptability depended on
the specific crime rangers suspect people of committing. Overall, acceptability of rangers shooting at suspected criminals inside
PCAs in SSA was low across all eight publics, but acceptability was generally higher among participants living further away from
PCAs in SSA than those living closer to PCAs in SSA. Shooting in self-defense and to prevent poaching were consistently most
acceptable across all eight publics. Our findings contribute new comparative evidence about international public perceptions of a
very sensitive aspect of PCA management in SSA. This evidence may be useful to decision-makers balancing competing pressures
to protect biodiversity, respect local values, and operate with legitimacy in an international context. Our findings are especially
relevant in light of international aspirations to simultaneously increase PCAs while respecting the rights and interests of people
living in high-biodiversity areas.
