By Basant Sharma, 6th May 2025
In the foothills of the Himalayas lies the Terai region of Nepal, a vast landscape of dense forests, grasslands and river systems that serves as a vital habitat for numerous wildlife species, including the Endangered Bengal tiger Panthera tigris tigris. Here, finding ways to mitigate poaching and human–tiger conflict are not the only difficulties when it comes to protecting tigers—conducting new research is also an uphill struggle, especially for early-career scientists like myself.
Left: Geruwa River near Pattharbhuji settlement, an example of tiger habitat in lowland Nepal. Right: Our study species, the Bengal Tiger, in the Central Zoo in Kathmandu, Nepal. Photos: Basant Sharma.
When thinking about wildlife research, we often envision highly sophisticated studies: camera traps methodically set in the wild, satellite collars tracking species movements in real-time or advanced genetics and behavioural monitoring. But for many early-career researchers, especially in developing countries like Nepal, the reality is quite different.
Funding opportunities are incredibly scarce, and international grants tend to prioritize established researchers or well-known institutions, leaving those of us just starting out to rely on small, often insufficient, funding sources. To adapt to these financial constraints, many of us turn to low-cost research methods, doing the best we can with minimal resources. For tiger conservation, this often means conducting observational studies, such as searching for pugmarks, or carrying out community surveys to analyse human–tiger interactions. Whether research employs expensive, cutting-edge techniques or low-cost alternatives, both can yield valuable insights. While camera-trapping and satellite-tracking can provide precise data on tiger presence and movements near human settlements, track and sign techniques and gathering local knowledge can be equally informative; each approach sheds light on tiger activity—the difference lies in the level of detail.
Established human settlements in the edge of the buffer zone of Bardiya National Park near Neulapur Settlement. Photo: Basant Sharma
Despite the obstacles, low-cost research methods have opened the door to creative and effective approaches in tiger conservation in Nepal. Community-based research, for instance, is an affordable method that harnesses local knowledge to understand tiger movements. Involving local communities not only reduces costs but also fosters a sense of ownership and responsibility for conservation among those living closest to this iconic species. This approach was central to our study, and we are proud of the results it has yielded.
Livestock in an open area at the edge of the Khata Corridor Forest in Pattharbhuji, where tigers have killed livestock on two separate occasions. Photo: Basant Sharma
We carried out in-person surveys with members of four settlements in Bardiya National Park, Nepal, gathering anecdotes on their experiences with tigers, as well as demographic and socio-economic information to help us analyse our findings. We found that both the economic benefits and the conflict risks resulting from living in close proximity with tigers were unevenly distributed among communities. Communities living closer to the National Park faced a greater risk of conflict with tigers but received fewer economic benefits from tiger tourism, while those living further from the Park experienced lower conflict risk and had more economic benefits, indicating environmental injustice in the region. In the long term, coexistence between people and tigers will depend on establishing an equitable distribution of conservation benefits.
Household survey with a local resident in the Thakurdwara settlement area. The responses were collected digitally using a handheld mobile device after formatting the questionnaires for a digital survey. Photo: Gokarna Dhakal.
Our local study, conducted with limited financial resources, demonstrates the value of such research in providing valuable insights into human–tiger interactions. Fortunately, the simple research methods we used meant obtaining research permits was relatively straightforward. However, even with financial support, the complex process of obtaining permits can be a huge challenge for researchers to navigate. As interest in using advanced techniques for wildlife research grows, the process of securing permits has become increasingly complex and time-consuming. Nepal has strict laws regarding wildlife studies, especially those involving technology or genetic research. While these rules are necessary to ensure ethical and responsible research, securing a permit can sometimes feel like a bureaucratic maze. The process often involves multiple rounds of reviews, clearances from various governmental agencies, and recommendations from officials. These steps, while essential, can lead to significant delays that result in researchers waiting months (or even years) before they can begin fieldwork.
Basant Sharma in the field with field mate Mr. Gokarna Dhakal after an extensive household survey and interaction with people near Pattharbhuji settlement. Photo: Basant Sharma
We will continue to work with what we have—small grants, community support and simple tools—because, even with limited resources, our dedication to conservation remains strong. So, if you are an early-career scientist facing similar challenges, do not be discouraged by a lack of funding; your commitment and creativity are your most valuable assets.
Finally, we would like to extend our thanks to Oryx for fully supporting the research publication and providing me with the opportunity to share this blog.
The article ‘Dimensions of human–tiger conflict and solutions for coexistence in the forests of the Khata Corridor, Bardiya, Nepal’ is available open access in Oryx—The International Journal of Conservation.
