Stand structure and tree species diversity patterns were examined plot-wide and among four topographically defined habitats (plateau, cliff, low plain and depressions) in a 120-ha permanent plot in an Acacia-dominated savanna in Mpala Ranch, central Kenya. The four habitats were defined by clustering the 3000 quadrats of 20 × 20 m in the plot based on their altitude, slope and convexity. Structural and floristic differences among the four habitats were examined and species-habitat associations were tested for the 30 most abundant species using torus translation randomization tests. The plot included 113 337 trees in 62 species with diameter at knee height ≥ 2 cm (18.4 species ha−1), 41 genera and 23 families. Fabaceae with the genus Acacia were the dominant family, followed by Euphorbiaceae and Ebenaceae. Tree density and basal area were twice as high on low plain and depressions than on the plateau. Species richness was highest in the cliff and was seven times higher than in the adjacent plateau. Half of the species assessed showed significant positive associations with one habitat and 21 showed significant negative associations with at least one habitat. The variation in stand structure and tree species diversity within the Mpala plot shows that topography is among the important drivers of local species distribution and hence the maintenance of tree diversity in savannas.

This article situates the shooting of white Kenyan landowner Kuki Gallmann within recent critiques of community-based conservation and the politics of whiteness in Kenya. I discuss how conservation has enabled white landowners to consolidate their influence over Laikipia County, as well as neighboring regions of Kenya via an organization called the Northern Rangelands Trust. The NRT is feared to be undermining regional livestock economies, while contributing to land shortages that have precipitated violence in Laikipia. I argue that the pastoralists implicated in these conflicts are subject to a maelstrom of livelihood stressors, some of which are aggravated by the efforts of white Kenyans to expand conservation throughout northern Kenya.

Human–wildlife conflict (HWC) is often considered in terms of how the impact on humans can be mitigated, but in the context of the larger goal of meeting conservation goals. This article explores the hidden costs of HWC on human well-being in northern Kenya through a qualitative case study of Laikipia County. Drawing on narratives of wildlife as destructive, wildlife as inherently more important or valuable than humans, and wildlife preservation as a pathway for capturing resources, it explores the impacts of HWC on human well-being, situating the study within the HWC, political ecology, and human security literature.

Biodiversity conservation outside protected areas requires cooperation from affected communities, hence the extensive discussions of trade-offs in conservation, and of a so-called new conservation that addresses human relations with nature more fully. Human–wildlife conflict is one aspect of those relations, and as land use intensifies around protected areas the need to understand and manage its effects will only increase. Research on human–wildlife conflict often focuses on individual species but given that protecting wildlife requires protecting habitat, assessments of human–wildlife conflict should include subsidiary impacts that are associated with ecosystem conditions. Using a case study from Laikipia, Kenya, where conservation outside protected areas is critical, we analysed human–wildlife conflict from a household perspective, exploring the full range of impacts experienced by community members on Makurian Group Ranch. We addressed questions about four themes: (1) the relationship between experienced and reported human–wildlife conflict; (2) the results of a high-resolution assessment of experienced human–wildlife conflict; (3) the relative impact of high-frequency, low-severity conflict vs high-severity, low-frequency conflict; and (4) the effect of experienced conflict on receptivity to the conservation narrative. Our results show that high-frequency, low-severity conflict, which is often absent from reports and discussion in the literature, is a significant factor in shaping a community's perception of the cost–benefit ratio of conservation. Local, ongoing, high-resolution monitoring of human–wildlife conflict may facilitate more realistic and effective incorporation of the experienced impacts of human–wildlife conflict in conservation planning and management. Such monitoring could help to define locally appropriate trade-offs in conservation and thereby improve conservation outcomes.

Human–elephant conflict is a significant problem in Africa, undermining biodiversity conservation and development efforts. Early warning of crop raiding and a coordinated response from landholders and wildlife authorities are important for effective management of this conflict. Mobile phones have spread rapidly in rural Africa and could potentially be used to improve communication and increase the effectiveness of responses to crop raids by elephants. We analyse changes in patterns of communication around human–elephant conflict incidents before and after the arrival of mobile phone technology in Laikipia County in north-central Kenya, and the performance of mobile phone communication in a trial at three sites. We show that mobile phones can improve communication and reduce human–elephant conflict where there is good mobile coverage and widespread adoption. Conservation projects have much to gain from engaging with mobile phone technology.

Human-elephant conflict, in particular the damage caused by elephants to smallholder crops, is a major challenge to the conservation of African elephant Loxodonta africana. Conventional tools used to address this problem are capital intensive and require high levels of expertise. In recent years simple, affordable farm-based elephant deterrents, using locally available materials, have been encouraged by a number of human-elephant conflict researchers. There are very few published studies demonstrating the performance of these deterrents, however, and little is known about levels of uptake among smallholder farmers. We trialled a number of such farm-based elephant deterrents with local farmers in three sites within Laikipia District, Kenya. Levels of crop raiding declined after the introduction of treatments but not significantly when compared with control farms. Variable levels of uptake among the participating farmers made it difficult to draw clear conclusions from the trials. However, participating farmers were positive about the deterrent effect of the tools introduced, corroborated by their willingness to make financial commitments towards sustaining future trials. Availability of household labour, local politics, and insecurity were identified as important barriers to uptake of some of the deterrents introduced. Household labour availability should be a key consideration in future endeavours to trial farm-based elephant deterrents.