Managing human-wildlife conflict along hard boundaries of African protected areas through fencing

High-intensity human activities along protected-area boundaries in the western Greater Serengeti Ecosystem have intensified human–wildlife conflict and prompted the use of fencing as a mitigation measure. This study evaluated a 30-km electric fence designed to protect reintroduced black rhinos and reduce human–elephant conflict (HEC), assessing its ecological and socio-economic impacts. Results showed the fence significantly reduced HEC, improved community relations, and gained strong local support, though it also enabled some illegal hunting, highlighting the need for effective monitoring. Land-use analysis revealed that fencing overall increased cropland in fenced villages at the expense of grazing land, causing spillover grazing pressure and conflicts among a few pastoralists with large herds. The fence did not disrupt wildebeest migration, suggesting that proper installation without blocking adjacent protected areas can address HEC while protecting migratory species. Similarly, large mammal abundance remained stable, but subtle changes in species interactions and activity patterns were observed. Vegetation studies indicated that fencing enhanced grass biomass and limited woody encroachment by preventing illegal grazing. However, this was accompanied by reduced grass species diversity in fenced areas, illustrating ecological trade-offs. Overall, fencing proved beneficial for conflict mitigation, habitat restoration, and conservation relationships, but also introduced social and ecological challenges. The study concludes that fencing should be applied selectively in high-conflict areas, without blocking adjacent protected areas or migratory routes, and should be supported by community involvement, continuous monitoring, and integration with broader conservation strategies, such as land-use planning, rangeland restoration, and livelihood diversification to ensure sustainable human–wildlife coexistence.