Improved conservation efforts in China have contributed to the recovery and range expansion of the Asian elephant, increasing spatial overlap between humans and elephants and intensifying the pressure of human–elephant coexistence. Understanding human tolerance toward Asian elephants has therefore become an important pathway for promoting conservation and coexistence. Using survey data from 873 farm households collected in Xishuangbanna Prefecture and Pu’er City in Yunnan Province, this study measures tolerance toward Asian elephants across five dimensions: types of elephant-related damage, economic loss, population size, spatial distance, and activity frequency. Independent-sample t-tests, one-way ANOVA and ANCOVA were used to examine differences in tolerance among different groups of farm households. The results show that: (1) the overall tolerance toward Asian elephants among farm households is relatively low (mean = 2.40); (2) within types of elephant-related damage, tolerance is lowest for crop loss and cash crop loss, followed by loss of working time and risk of human injury, while tolerance is relatively higher for damage to houses and property, loss of stored food, and damage to vehicles; (3) farm households showed low levels of tolerance across the dimensions of economic loss, population size, spatial distance, and activity frequency; (4) higher tolerance is observed among male respondents, Dai farm households, those engaged in wildlife protection-related occupations, and households located in Pu’er City, and tolerance increased as cultivated land area decreased, household income increased, and agricultural dependence declined. These findings provide empirical evidence for understanding farm households’ tolerance toward Asian elephants and offer policy insights for improving tolerance, optimizing human–elephant conflict (HEC) management, and promoting the social sustainability of human–elephant coexistence. The study also contributes China-based evidence to discussions on flagship species conservation and community coexistence under the SDG 15 and CBD frameworks.
Chen et al. (Tue,) studied this question.