Wild encounters: Media's role in shaping co-existence

Human-wildlife interaction in India has increasingly become a significant issue, affecting both human populations and wildlife. The growing human population and urban expansion have led to the fragmentation of wildlife habitats, making it difficult for animals to find food and shelter within their natural environments. This challenge is particularly pronounced in regions with high forest cover but also high population densities. Addressing human-wildlife interaction in India requires a multifaceted approach.

A recent roundtable, featuring subject experts and esteemed media representatives, aimed to facilitate a better understanding of the current state of human-wildlife interaction in India, identify existing gaps, and explore potential solutions. The roundtable meeting, titled ‘From conflict to coexistence: Media’s role in shaping public perception on human-wildlife interaction’, was hosted by the ClimateRISE Alliance, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, and Mongabay India.

This discussion illuminated the multifaceted impacts of human-wildlife interactions on various stakeholders, shared through stories and case studies from the ground. The roundtable conversation also delved into the reasons behind the increasing incidence of human-wildlife interactions and highlighted the vital role that grassroots civil society organisations (CSOs) play in addressing them.

“The laws and guidelines around handling human-wildlife interactions are clear. Animals such as leopards do not wish to create conflict intentionally, animals are not aware of boundaries, they merely seek safety. There is a need to raise awareness of such issues and the laws surrounding them. The focus must shift towards awareness and capacity building,” said Deboditya Sinha, Lead (Climate & Ecosystems) at the VIDHI Centre for Legal Policy.

The goal of the event was to encourage an enlightening exchange of ideas and experiences on the media's crucial role in shaping key narratives and enhancing public awareness around human-wildlife coexistence. “Reporting on human-wildlife interaction requires very careful handling of hearsay and social media influence to protect all affected parties,” said Ipsita Pati, Times of India.

Key insights from the roundtable

Perception is shaped by interaction: Sunil Harsana, a Coexistence Consortium Fellow, highlighted that direct interaction with wildlife significantly shapes people's perceptions. Rural populations, who often live in closer proximity to wildlife, tend to have a more positive attitude towards animals. These communities frequently interact with wildlife, understanding their behaviours and recognising them as part of their ecosystem.

In contrast, urban populations, who rarely encounter wildlife, often perceive animals as threats. The limited interaction of urban populations with wildlife diminishes their understanding of coexistence, undermining the importance of potential harmonious relationships with wildlife.

Acknowledge the diverse spectrum of human-wildlife interactions: Dr. Samir Sinha from the Wildlife Trust of India provided a nuanced understanding of human-wildlife encounters, emphasising that these encounters exist on a spectrum and not all interactions should be classified as conflicts. True conflict involves recurring incidents that lead to human or property loss, fear, intolerance, and persecution. While urban areas may experience fear without actual losses, rural areas face direct, often unavoidable interactions.

Understanding root causes, such as improper waste disposal attracting wildlife, is crucial to addressing these encounters effectively. By distinguishing between benign interactions and true conflicts, we can develop more targeted and effective strategies for coexistence.

Language matters: The language used in media reports plays a crucial role in shaping public perceptions of human-wildlife interaction. Terms like 'terror' and 'havoc' convey negative implications without considering all perspectives. Kundan Pandey from Mongabay India emphasised the importance of sensitive storytelling and responsible reporting. Dr. Sumit Dookia noted that media reports in different languages often depict the same incident differently, with more sensational language used in reports aimed at rural audiences. This highlights the need for media professionals to use language carefully, avoid terms that can exacerbate fear in local communities, and instead focus on fostering coexistence among diverse stakeholders.

Revisit traditional practices of coexistence: Learning from traditional practices of coexistence offers valuable insights for modern conservation efforts. Samira Agnihotri from the Coexistence Consortium pointed out that many Adivasi communities in India have successfully coexisted with large animals for generations. These communities' practices of 'co-adaptation' demonstrate a deep understanding and respect for wildlife. By integrating these traditional practices into modern conservation strategies, we can promote coexistence and reduce conflicts.

Jayashree Nandi from the Hindustan Times also highlighted stories of traditional coexistence efforts practiced by tribal communities in India that have proven successful in managing instances of human-wildlife interaction. Such practices can shift emotional connections between humans and wildlife, facilitating a narrative shift from conflict to interaction and fostering a more harmonious relationship between people and nature.

Need for balanced reporting on human-wildlife interaction: Ensuring accurate, responsible, and unbiased reporting is essential for shaping informed public opinions. Nikhil Ghanekar from The Indian Express and Akshay Deshmane, an independent journalist, highlighted the biases and challenges in current media reporting on human-wildlife interactions. Event-centric reporting and class biases often lead to distorted public perceptions.

For instance, labelling indigenous communities as 'encroachers' while not scrutinising urban expansion equally affects policy frameworks and public attitudes. To counteract this, media outlets need to engage in thorough investigation, present balanced viewpoints, and avoid sensationalism. This approach will help build a more informed and empathetic public, better equipped to support effective conservation efforts and coexistence with wildlife.

Strengthening response systems: In many instances of human-wildlife interaction, affected individuals and bystanders struggle to identify the right stakeholders to manage the situation. Pawan Kumar Sharma from Dainik Bhaskar shared that, based on their experiences, there is a need for proactive efforts by local authorities to address knowledge gaps. Sunil Saurav from Hindustan echoed this sentiment, reflecting on the need for interventions to address the concerns of the most vulnerable people who live in sheds and lack the protection of concrete structures.

Recommendations

• The Wildlife Protection Act (§11, §62, §64) and the Ministry of Environment and Forests' Leopard Guidelines underscore the need for collaboration between the forestry and media sectors. Beyond legal measures, efforts should focus on raising awareness and building capacity.
• In India, forests have historically been inhabited, with displacement resulting from legal and other factors. The current wildlife narrative often highlights charismatic species like lions, elephants, and tigers, while neglecting the human dimension. Unlike Africa, where wildlife and people have coexisted for centuries, our perception often overlooks the continuous human presence. Addressing these misconceptions is vital for developing effective solutions.
• Indigenous communities, particularly Adivasis, hold valuable knowledge about coexisting with large animals. Urban areas can greatly benefit from their experiences and practices.

The language used in these discussions is powerful in shaping narratives. It is crucial to emphasise interaction over conflict and to present diverse narratives with nuance, incorporating India's traditional ideas into mainstream discourse for a more inclusive and constructive dialogue.

• Integrating traditional wisdom alongside modern methods is essential. The general public must understand the consequences of using herbicides and pesticides.
• Conflicts can arise not only between humans and wildlife but also among humans themselves. Reporting and scientific inquiry should focus on thorough fact-finding and proactive solution-seeking.
• Animal management must be prioritised nationwide, requiring comprehensive training for veterinarians across the country.

At the policy level within the ministry, given the significant issue of human-wildlife interaction, establishing a rapid response team is crucial. Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) should be developed and implemented at all levels, including schools, panchayats, and particularly in areas prone to leopard encounters.

• Engaging key stakeholders, including the government, the forest department, and the media, is essential for fostering peaceful coexistence.