CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Human-elephant conflict

Open-knowledge reference entry

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 25, 2026
Entity authorityQ139961383 ↗
Source-derived summary

Human-elephant conflict (HEC) refers to the negative interactions that occur between humans and elephants, primarily driven by habitat loss as land is developed for agriculture or settlement and elephants are forced to compete for natural resources. Human-elephant conflict can range from crop raiding, in which elephants consume or damage cultivated plants, to violent encounters when elephants perceive a threat to their land, survival, or offspring.

Human-elephant conflict is prominent in areas where human settlement overlaps with elephant population, such as in Central and East Africa as well as parts of South and Southeast Asia. Hundreds of people are killed annually as a result, and hundreds of Asian elephants in affected countries are killed each year. Kenyan wildlife authorities state that around 120 African elephants are killed every year therein as a result of HEC. The economic impact of human-elephant conflict includes significant crop and income losses across affected regions.

Physical barriers, changes in approach to agriculture, deterrent technology, and warning mechanisms have all been proposed as potential ways to mitigate the problem of human-elephant conflict. Poisoning, electrocution, and other retaliatory methods create threats to Asian elephant populations in South Asia.

Causes

The primary cause of human-elephant conflict is the destruction and fragmentation of natural elephant habitat as a result of the widespread development of land for agricultural, residential or other purposes. This forces elephants into closer proximity with humans, and also creates competition for natural resources, making the chances of a dangerous or costly human-elephant encounter more likely.

By location

Asia

Human-elephant conflict is an issue for many South and East Asian nations.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Human-elephant conflict” is open-knowledge reference entry. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Human-elephant, conflict and Open-knowledge, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current 263-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Human-elephant, conflict and Open-knowledge is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “open-knowledge reference entry” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 25, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q139961383. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Human-elephant conflict”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Human-elephant conflict primary sources, Human-elephant conflict archive and Human-elephant research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Human-elephant conflict”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Human-elephant conflict” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.