Using the theory of planned behaviour to predict farmer's intention to report livestock depredation and kill hyena
Data files
Nov 18, 2025 version files 242.02 KB
-
README.md
11.84 KB
-
Tavolaro_et_al_TPB_data.csv
230.18 KB
Abstract
Understanding and managing conservation conflicts is important for stakeholders (e.g., policymakers and practitioners) trying to minimise negative impacts on people and biodiversity. A key component of Namibia’s community-based natural resource management system, besides enabling communities to derive benefits from wildlife, is the monitoring of wildlife and reporting of negative wildlife impacts on human lives and livelihoods. Farmers across Namibia may legally kill carnivores found attacking their livestock and may receive financial compensation if reported within twenty-four hours. Both interventions are intended to offset costs and build tolerance towards wildlife. Expanding the Theory of Planned Behaviour by incorporating Descriptive Norm, we investigated farmers’ Behavioural Intention to (1) legally kill brown Hyaena brunnea and spotted Crocuta crocuta hyena when found killing their livestock, and (2) report livestock depredation incidents to the relevant authorities in two governance contexts – inside versus outside communal conservancies. We hypothesised famers inside communal conservancies would have lower behavioural intentions to kill hyaena and stronger intentions to report livestock depredation compared to farmers outside conservancies. Questionnaire data were collected from 1,139 farmers from inside (n=945) and outside (n=188) communal conservancies. Most respondents reported no intention to kill hyena that killed their cattle, with no significant difference between farmers living inside (89%) and outside (90%) conservancies. Intention to report depredation incidents differed significantly between groups, with 90% of respondents inside conservancies intending to report compared to 78% outside conservancies. Inside conservancies, Attitude was the strongest predictors of farmers’ Behavioural Intention to kill hyena and report incidents of livestock depredation. Outside conservancies, intention to kill hyaena was most strongly associated with Perceived Behavioural Control, while Attitude was the strongest predictor of intention to report. Including Descriptive Norm improved model fit. Our findings highlight how socio-psychological factors differ between governance contexts and how they subsequently influence farmer’s behavioural intentions. Our improved understanding of perceptions underpinning farmers’ decision-making can inform the design of interventions to reduce retaliatory killing and improve reporting of wildlife impacts. Results from this study could also improve the interpretation of national depredation databases and guide more effective mitigation strategies.
Dataset DOI: 10.5061/dryad.ns1rn8q5z
Description of the data and file structure
This dataset was collected as part of an experimental study investigating farmers’ behavioural intentions toward hyena-related livestock depredation in Namibia. Using an expanded Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) framework incorporating Descriptive Norm, questionnaire data were gathered from 1,139 farmers living inside and outside communal conservancies to assess their intentions to (1) legally kill hyenas when found attacking livestock and (2) report depredation incidents to authorities. The data capture socio-psychological constructs (Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioural Control, and Descriptive Norm) and demographic and contextual variables. These efforts aimed to understand how governance context influences conservation behaviour and to inform strategies for mitigating human–wildlife conflict and improving incident reporting in Namibia’s community-based natural resource management system.
Files and variables
File: Tavolaro_et_al_TPB_data.csv
Description:
Variables
-
Missing variables (no response or NA) = #NULL!
-
Descriptive variables:
Variable Question 1.Region Name of region 2.Areyouaconservancymember Are you a conservancy member? 3.Inthepastyeardidyourhouseholdproducefood In the past year did your household produce food? 4.Howmuchmoneyonaveragefromwagessalesandgovernmentgrantscomes How much money on average from wages, sales and government grants comes into your household each month? (N$) 5.wildlifekillinglivestock Do you think that near your village/homestead, the prevalence of wildlife killing livestock has increased, stayed the same or decreased (since the start of the conservancy or in the past decade): 6.Hasyourhouseholdeverexperiencedanydamageassociatedwithwildli Has your household ever experienced any damage associated with wildlife (i.e. livestock loss, crop or infrastructure damage)? 7.Theimpactonmyhouseholdofwildlifedamagingmypropertylivestock The impact on my household of wildlife damaging my property (livestock, crop or infrastructure) is: 8.Riskofdamageassociatedwithwildlifehappeningtomypropertyinth Risk of damage associated with wildlife happening to my property in the next 12 months is: 9.doyouownlivestock In the past year, did you or your household own cattle? 10.NumberofLivestock What was the largest number of cattle you had in the past year? 11.Doyouprotectyourcattlefromwildlife Do you protect your cattle from wildlife? 12.Didyoureceiveoffsetpaymentsfortheselosses Did you receive any offsets/compensation for these losses? 13.Doyoubenefitfromhavinghyenainthearea Do you benefit from having hyena in the area? 14a-j In your community, who is likely to influence your decision whether or not to take matters into your own hands to kill wildlife which is predating your livestock? -
TPB Kill Variables:
Attitude AttK1 1. For me to kill a hyena that is killing my livestock is the right thing to do Attitude AttK2 2. For me to kill a hyena that is killing my livestock is a good thing Attitude AttK3 3. For me to kill a hyena that is killing my livestock would benefit my household Subjective Norm SNK1 1. I feel social pressure to take matters into my own hands and to kill a hyena that is killing my livestock Subjective Norm SNK2 2. Most people in my community think I should kill a hyena if it kills my livestock Subjective Norm SNK3 3. Doing what people in my community think I should do is important to me Perceived Behavioural Control PBCK1 1. Whether I kill the hyena for killing my cattle, is my decision Perceived Behavioural Control PBCK2 2. I can kill a hyena who is killing my cattle if I want to Perceived Behavioural Control PBCK3 3. It is easy for me to kill a hyena who is killing my cattle if I want to Descriptive Norm DNK1 1. Most people in my community kill wildlife that are killing their livestock Descriptive Norm DNK2 2. Most people in my community think that killing wildlife that are killing their livestock would benefit their household Descriptive Norm DNK3 3. Most people in my community think that killing wildlife that are killing their livestock is the right thing to do Intention IntK1 1. I intend to kill the next hyena that kills my livestock Intention IntK2 2. I will try to kill the next hyena that kills my livestock -
TPB Report Variables:
Attitude AttR1 1. For me to report the incident of a hyena killing my livestock and wait for MEFT or a PH to kill it is the right thing to do Attitude AttR2 2. For me to report the incident of a hyena killing my livestock and wait for MEFT or a PH to kill it is a good thing Attitude AttR3 3. For me to report the incident of a hyena killing my livestock and wait for MEFT or a PH to kill it would benefit my household Subjective Norm SNR1 1. I feel social pressure to report the incident of a hyena killing my livestock and wait for MEFT or a PH to kill it Subjective Norm SNR2 2. Most people in my community think I should report to the authorities an incident of a hyena killing my livestock Subjective Norm SNR3 3. Doing what people in my community think I should do is important to me Perceived Behavioural Control PBCR1 1. Whether I report the incident of the hyena killing my cattle, is my decision Perceived Behavioural Control PBCR2 2. I can report the incident of the hyena killing my cattle if I want to Perceived Behavioural Control PBCR3 3. It is easy for me to report the incident of the hyena killing my cattle if I want to Descriptive Norm DNR1 1. Most people in my village report to the authorities incidents of wildlife killing their livestock Descriptive Norm DNR2 2. Most people in my community think that reporting to the authorities incidents of wildlife killing their livestock is the right thing to do Descriptive Norm DNR3 3. Most people in my community think that reporting to the authorities incidents of wildlife killing their livestock would benefit their household Intention IntR1 1. I intend to report the next incident of a hyena killing my livestock Intention IntR2 2. I will try to report the next incident of a hyena killing my livestock
Code/software
Statistical analyses were carried out in R version 4.2.3 (R Core Team 2024), using ltm package (Rizopoulos, 2007) for descriptive and t-test analysis, and SPSS AMOS for SEMs (Arbuckle, 2019).
Human subjects data
All human subjects provided explicit consent for public data sharing, identifying information was removed through pseudonymization and exclusion of personal details.
The survey was piloted in early 2019 in five conservancies to identify ambiguities, assess question flow, and improve clarity before full implementation. Between 2019 and 2020, we carried out 1,139 surveys using a questionnaire composed of three sections. The first gathered data on perceived risks and impacts of wildlife on households and characterised farms found within and outside of communal conservancies (Table S2). The first section also gathered information on farmer demographics (e.g., age, education level and household size) and number of livestock owned (Table S3). The final two sections measured Descriptive Norm and four components of the TPB (Attitude, Subjective Norm, Perceived Behavioural Control and Behavioural Intention) enumerating respondents’ perspectives with respect to two distinct behaviours, killing hyena and reporting a livestock depredation incident by hyena. Answers were reported using a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree (Table 1). Respondents answered TPB questions from their own personal view but answered other questions (e.g., number of cattle owned) at the household level. Respondents were categorised as owning livestock or not, and as members of a communal conservancy or not. Respondents’ livestock ownership and conservancy membership were recorded using binary (Yes/No) categories. Table 1 shows constructs and items used to model farmer’s intention to kill hyena that were killing their livestock, and report incidents of livestock depredation, as well as reliability and descriptive statistics of items.
Given the rural setting, most homesteads or villages had low population densities, were often difficult to access, scattered and, in some cases, communities inside communal conservancies were semi-nomadic. For these reasons, we used a combination of snowball and convenience sampling (Newing, 2010), with the household defined as the sampling unit (FAO, 2010). We surveyed either the household owner or another adult member (≥18 years) who knew about the households’ farming practices and wildlife interactions. We aimed to sample a minimum of 40 households per communal conservancy and 40 households per selected area adjacent to communal conservancies (from here on collectively referred to as areas “outside conservancies”), although the final number varied per site depending on respondent willingness and accessibility. Surveys were conducted in English, with the support of local interpreters. In communal conservancies, office staff and community game guards acted as guides and interpreters, while outside conservancies, community members assisted in this role. Interpreters helped translate questions and participants’ responses into the relevant local languages, ensuring clarity and comprehension. Each survey took approximately one hour to administer. Permission to undertake research at each site was obtained from the relevant traditional authorities and conservancy office staff. Data from the questionnaire were collected and were data recorded using ‘Device Magic’ (Device Magic, 2021).