Community in conservation



Download 77.19 Kb.
Date30.04.2018
Size77.19 Kb.
COMMUNITY IN CONSERVATION

AFRICA

WILDLIFE
Abel, N and P Blaikie (1986). “Elephants, people, parks and development: the case of the Luangwa Valley, Zambia.” Environmental Management 10(6): 735-751.

Akama, J (1996). “Western environmental values and nature-based tourism in Kenya.” Tourism Management 17(8): 567-574.

Kenya is one of the leading tourist destinations in Africa. Most of the country's tourism is based on nature attractions. About 10% of the country has been set aside for wildlife conservation and the promotion of nature-based tourism. This study gives a historical evaluation of western environmental values and how these values influence wildlife conservation and the development of nature-based tourism in Kenya. Also, a comparative analysis is conducted between western environmental values and rural peasants' environmental perceptions. (Source)
Akama, J, C Lant, et al. (1995). “Conflicting attitudes toward state wildlife conservation programs in Kenya.” Society & Natural Resources 8(2): 133-144.

We present a case study of the social issues of wildlife conservation in Kenya based on field work in and near Nairobi and Tsavo National Parks. Surveys of small-scale cultivators and pastoralists (157) and local park officials (44) reveal that there are widespread negative feelings and perceptions of local people toward state policies and programs of wildlife conservation. For instance, 84% of the local people reported that there is a bad relationship between the national park management and the local community; only 10% stated that the park is an asset to them; and 57% asserted that the park should be abolished. Moreover, perceptions and attitudes of local people and park officials are greatly disparate with regard to the benefits the parks provide for local people, the level of conflict between local people and wildlife, and the future of the parks. (Authors)


Akama, J, C Lant, et al. (1996). “A political-ecology approach to wildlife conservation in Kenya.” Environmental Values 5(4): 335-347.

Kenya has one of the highest remaining concentrations of tropical savanna wildlife in the world. It has been recognised by the state and international community as a 'unique world heritage' which should be preserved for posterity. However, the wildlife conservation efforts of the Kenya government confront complex and often persistent social and ecological problems, including land-use conflicts between the local people and wildlife, local people's suspicions and hostilities toward state policies of wildlife conservation, and accelerated destruction of wildlife habitats. This essay uses a political-ecological framework in the analysis of the social factors of wildlife conservation in Kenya. It postulates that the overriding socioeconomic issue impacting wildlife conservation in Kenya is underdevelopment. The problem of underdevelopment is manifested in forms of increasing levels of poverty, famine and malnutrition. The long term survival of Kenya's wildlife depends on social and ecological solutions to the problems of underdevelopment. (Author)


Arhem, K (1984). “Two sides of development: Maasai pastoralism and wildlife conservation in Ngorongoro, Tanzania.” Ethnos 49(3-4): 186-210.

Balakrishnan, M and DE Ndhlovu (1992). “Wildlife utilization and local people: a case-study in upper Lupande game management area, Zambia.” Environmental Conservation 19(2): 135-144.



Wildlife culling is the most preferred form of wildlife utilization in ULGMA. Nevertheless, die frequency of game-meat consumption by local people is low, partly due to the problem of irregular meat sales from the culling scheme and partly due to the low purchasing capability of villagers. LIRDP needs to improve the distribution routine of meat sale at lower prices if the culling scheme is to fulfil its objective of providing game-meat to local people. It is also essential to spread comprehension of the use of benefits from wildlife utilization among the local residents. Any increase in the allocation of the wildlife harvest quota should be considered with caution in order that species are not harvested at a rate beyond their reproductive capacity. There is resentment against safari hunting, based on the opinion that it gives to foreigners the opportunities to utilize wildlife resources while the local people are forbidden access to them. Appreciation of benefits from safari hunting is minimal, and option for reduction of the off-take allocation quota is strong. Although safari hunting is the most prominent revenue-generating form of utilization, benefits from it are not visible to local communities. Exchange of information between LIRDP and the local communities concerned with the use of revenue from wildlife utilization programmes needs to be reinforced. This would be instrumental not only in minimizing misconceptions about safari hunting, but also in establishing cooperation between LIRDP and local communities. An increase in the number that may be taken of the more numerous species during DGL hunting could well be considered, so as to enable more local people to utilize wildlife resources legally. Control shooting has a marginal effect in reducing crop damage. Even though electric fencing could be an effective barrier against large animals such as Elephants, it would be better to encourage traditional methods of self-defence. Control shooting is advocated only if and when the problem gets out of hand. Subsistence poaching is widely successful, due to the skills of the practitioners, the use of appropriate traditional technology, and the low operating costs. These features may be considered favourably in wildlife culling operations. Through allocation of a sustainable off-take quota to local hunter cooperatives, their services could be used to provide game-meat to local communities. Continued confrontation with commercial poachers through regular and more intensive patrols is essential, particularly in vulnerable areas. LIRDP should maximize the services of Village Scouts stationed at Miliyoti and Kauluzi wildlife camps by providing adequate firearms and ammunition for more effective anti-poaching patrols in the game management areas than currently exist. To gain local support, LIRDP may consider an increased wildlife off-take quota for the Malaila Kunda traditional ceremony. This would serve to sustain local culture and would help to develop enthusiasm among local people for due conservation of animal wildlife and other natural resources. (Author)
Barnes, JI (1995). “Economic analysis of community-based wildlife utilisation initiatives in Botswana.” Development in Southern Africa 12(6): 783-803.

Barrett, C and P Arcese (1998). “Wildlife harvest in integrated conservation and development projects: linking harvest to household demand, agricultural production, and environmental shocks in the Serengeti.” Land Economics 74(4): 449-465.

This paper develops a model coupling wildlife population dynamics to endogenous human consumption and poaching behavior in an environment of imperfect labor and product markets and static agricultural production technology subject to environmental shocks. Using a model of the Serengeti wildebeest herd, we simulate how long an integrated conservation and development project based on managed wildlife harvest might effectively delay biodiversity loss by preempting poaching. Alternative interventions that more directly tackle the problem of rime-varying returns to peasant agricultural labor appear to offer more durable solutions to the challenge of wildlife conservation in the midst of endemic rural poverty. (SSCI)
Barrett, CB and P Arcese (1995). “Are integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) sustainable? On the conservation of large mammals in sub-Saharan Africa.” World Development 23(7): 1073-1084.

Initiatives to link rural development and species conservation, known as integrated conservation-development projects (ICDPs), have been launched with considerable fanfare and funding around the world. Although ICDPs hold appeal as broader ecological efforts than the conservation and development strategies that preceded them, they also suffer conceptual flaws that may limit their appropriateness and potential sustainability, at least when applied to the protection of large African mammals. (SSCI)


Barrow, E, P Bergin, et al. (1995). Community conservation lessons from benefit sharing in east Africa. in Integrating People and Wildlife for a Sustainable Future. JA Bissonette and PR Krausman, Ed. Bethesda, MD, The Wildlife Society.

Beinart, W (1990). “Empire, hunting and ecological change in southern and central Africa.” Past and Present 128: 162-186.

Berger, D (1993). Wildlife Extension: Participatory Conservation by the Maasai of Kenya. Nairobi, African Centre for Technology Studies.

Butler, V (1995). “Is this the way to save Africa's wildlife?: communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE).” International Wildlife 25: 38-43.

The Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) has added a new dimension to wildlife conservation in Zimbabwe. Under CAMPFIRE, Zimbabwean communities sell hunting or photographic concessions to safari companies, thus making wildlife more valuable to local people and minimizing the inclination toward poaching. While the idea of promoting hunting to help save wildlife may seem ironic, the program seems to be working. Careful monitoring under CAMPFIRE has helped ensure that hunted populations remain stable or increase, and in many villages, the money acquired through the program goes toward beneficial community projects. The program has sparked interest throughout the continent, and conservationists from many African nations have come to Zimbabwe to examine the program. (Wilsonweb)
Child, B (1988). The role of wildlife utilization in the sustainable economic development of semi-arid rangelands in Zimbabwe, Oxford University.

Child, B and JH Peterson (1991). CAMPFIRE in rural development: the Beitbridge Experience. Joint Working Paper. Harare, Centre for Applied Social Studies, Department of National Parks and Wildlife.

Chonde, B (n.d.). Community Development from Below : The Case of ADMADE Programme in Zambia, USAID.

De Boer, W and D Baquete (1998). “Natural resource use, crop damage and attitudes of rural people in the vicinity of the Maputo Elephant Reserve, Mozambique.” Environmental Conservation 25(3): 208-218.

Participation by local communities in management is widely considered a means of sustaining protected areas. In parts of the world with a history of armed conflict, the chances of such an approach being successfully adopted might seem remote. One such area is the Maputo Elephant Reserve in southern Mozambique. The aim was to improve understanding of the local people's use of natural resources and perceptions of the Reserve's impact. Interviews and questionnaires distributed in four different villages were used to estimate the relative value of these resources in relation to the attitude of the local people towards the Reserve. The people gave a relative value rank for each specific use of each plant, animal and fish resource. On average 60% of the households exploited more than two different resource categories. The plant resources of the Reserve were used by 71% of the households and were valued more highly than animal and fish resources. Plants were used for many purposes; construction material, fuelwood and fruits had the highest relative values. Antelopes, hippopotamus and elephants were valued highest amongst a range of animal species which were hunted by 21% of households. Amongst uses of animals, consumption, use of the skins and commercial sale of the meat were especially important. When asked if they liked the Reserve, 88% of respondents answered positively. The attitude towards the Reserve was correlated with crop damage experiences; people with crop damage caused by elephants, hippos or bushpigs, were more negative. Attitude of respondents was inversely related to the number of species invading their agricultural fields. Resource use intensity, use purpose, resource value and attitude were different amongst sites and dependent on site-specific circumstances, different management strategies could be necessary for the four sites. A resource management plan should be drawn up, local people should be included in the management team and steps should be taken to improve the relationship between the Reserve's authorities and the local population generally. (Journal)
Dourojeanni, MJ (1978). The integrated management of forest wildlife as a source of protein for rural populations. Paper presented at the Eighth World Forestry Congress, Jakarta.

Ellis, S (1994). “Of elephants and men: politics and nature conservation in South Africa.” Journal of Southern African Studies 20(1): 53-69.

South Africa's policy of destabilisation of neighbouring countries was closely associated with the rise of South Africa as a leading middleman in the international ivory trade. South African-based traders, acting in partnership or with protection from officers of the South African Military Intelligence Directorate, imported raw ivory from Angola, Mozambique and points further north and re-exported it to markets in the Far East. This was a source of income both for the South African secret services and for individuals associated with them. The same trade routes were also used for trade in other goods, including rhino horn, drugs, gems, currency and weapons. This was not only as a means of earning money but also a technique of destabilisation in itself. The extent of South Africa's involvement in this trade, although suspected by some conservationists, was difficult to prove and did not form the target of any concerted campaign by the leading conservation groups world-wide. In this respect, the strength of the South Africa lobby in the World-Wide Fund for Nature seems to have played a significant role. Since the ending of South Africa's military presence in Namibia and Angola in 1989, the Military Intelligence officers, Special Forces officers and others who conducted the wars for the defence of white South Africa have been intent on the struggle inside South Africa itself. There is evidence that such counter-insurgency specialists are now using Mozambique in particular as a base for operations inside South Africa. Moreover, they continue to have an interest in the ivory and rhino horn trades. Former officers of specialist counter-insurgency units have also found employment as game wardens in national parks. The bold proposals currently being implemented to create large new game parks along the South African-Mozambican border, using modern management techniques and involving local communities in their management, have important implications for politics and national security. (Source)
Gibson, C and S Marks (1995). “Transforming rural hunters in conservationists: an assessment of community-based wildlife management programs in Africa.” World Development 23(6): 941-957.

The failure of conventional wildlife management in Eastern and Southern Africa has led several countries to implement community-based wildlife programs. We examine the assumptions these initiatives make about rural hunters, and describe how the programs attempt to induce individuals away from illegal hunting. Using game theory and a case study from Zambia, we find that these programs misunderstand some of the economic, political and social benefits of local hunting. As a results, community-based wildlife management schemes succeed in protecting some of the larger mammals only by virtue of their increased enforcement levels, not their ability to distribute socioeconomic benefits. Rather than support conservation, local hunters continue to kill game at a rate comparable to the days before the programs, although they have shifted their tactics and prey selection. (Source)


Hasler, R (1993). Political Ecologies of Scale and the Multi-Tiered Co-management of Zimbabwean Wildlife Resources under CAMPFIRE. Harare, University of Zimbabwe, Center for Applied Social Sciences.

Hasler, R (1994). Cultural perceptions and conflicting rights to wildlife in the Zambezi Valley. in Elephants and Whales: Resources for Whom?Ed. Basel, Gordon and Breach Publishers S. A: 85-97.

Hess, K (1997). “Wild success: saving elephants, crocodiles, and other endangered wildlife once meant trampled crops and violent death to the villagers of southern Africa.” Reason 29: 32-41.

Examines community-based efforts to market wildlife products in a sustainable manner; focus on the CAMPFIRE program of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife, Zimbabwe.


Hill, CM (1998). “Conflicting attitudes towards elephants around the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda.” Environmental Conservation 25(3): 244-250.

Attitudes of local people to wildlife, and particularly to large animals, are an increasingly important element of conservation work, but attitudes may vary within a community according to gender, and prior experience of wildlife. Data mere collected by questionnaire and informal interviews with 59 men and 57 women living on the southern edge of the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda, to assess the influence of these factors in attitudes towards elephants, in an area from which they are now absent, and to conservation in general. It was hypothesized that prior experience of elephants might influence people's perceptions of them, and that this in turn might influence their attitudes towards the issue of elephant conservation. The results of this study did not generally support this. There was no evidence that people with prior experience of elephants were any more likely to support their conservation than were people who did not have prior experience of them. Within this community men and women expressed very different views as to the behaviour of elephants. Women were more likely than men to report that elephants were dangerous, irrespective of whether they had seen an elephant or not. Locally, conservation was considered to be particularly important and beneficial as a strategy because it 'should help ensure protection of people and their crops from marauding elephants and other animals'. Attitudes to, and expectations of, conservation as a strategy also varied between members of this community with respect to gender, but age and ethnic group were not good predictors of whether people were likely to be supportive of conservation issues or not. (Author)
Hill, KA (1991). “Zimbabwe wildlife conservation regime - rural farmers and the state.” Human Ecology 19(1): 19-34.

This article examines the rhino and elephant conservation policies of Zimbabwe, focusing on the historical experiences of rural farmers with colonial and post-colonial wildlife policies. It begins by defining the social and political ramifications of the current environmental conservation debate in Africa, and how these are crucially affected by rural people's perceptions of environmental goods. Next, the paper explores the exploitative colonial legacy of wildlife conservation in Zimbabwe, and how that legacy has or has not been transformed since independence. The paper pays close attention to the development of linkages between rural farmers, local conservation NGOs, and local and national governmental bodies. Finally, the paper finds that, while many positive linkages have been made between conservation authorities and rural farmers and ranchers in elephant conservation programs, few such linkages have been made in the various rhino conservation schemes. Such Zimbabwe has been relatively successful in conserving its elephant population, but relatively unsuccessful in stopping rhino poaching, the paper concludes that the development of positive linkages between rural farmers and the state, which include heavy doses of popular participation at the grassroots level, is crucial for any successful natural resource policy. (Journal)


Hill, KA (1994). “Politicians, farmers, and ecologists: commercial wildlife ranching and the politics of land in Zimbabwe.” Journal of Asian and African Studies 29(3).

Kenya Wildlife Service (1990). Community Conservation and Wildlife Management outside Parks and Reserves: Policy Framework and Development Programme 1991-1996. Nairobi, KWS.

Kiss, A, Ed. (1990). Living with Wildlife: Wildlife Resource management with Local Participation in Africa. World Bank Technical Paper, no. 130. Africa Technical Department Series. Washington DC, World Bank.

Examines the experience, the potential, and the constraints of wildlife management programs, which involve and benefit local people. Discusses the objectives of wildlife utilization and management schemes and explores the integration of conservation and economic development based on sustainable exploitation of wildlife resources. Defines the economic, policy, technical, sociological, institutional, and human resource development issues in community-based wildlife management and suggests ways to address them. Presents case studies examining seventeen projects in twelve African countries. Describes two types of projects: projects whose initial objective was preserving particular endangered species or protected areas and projects not centered on protected areas and which aim to develop wildlife resources to improve the living standard of rural communities. Assesses wildlife utilization as a land-use option, focusing on the semi-arid rangelands of southern Africa. (Source)


Latour, B ( 1997). “Local politics and practical ecology: when the Masai enter the elephants in the storehouse of Western science [Politique locale et ecologie pratique: quand les Masai font entrer les elephants dans le magasin de la science occidentale].” Recherche 85.

Discusses community-based conservation, an environmental philosophy that advocates a combination of ecology & economy in maintaining environmental equilibrium by the united management of humans & their environment, rather than concentrating on the preservation of an isolated species. It is argued that this philosophy does not make a clear distinction between the factors of ecology & economy & more alarmingly, fails to adequately assess differences in the societies & environmental factors between developing & technologically advanced countries. It is maintained that intact nature without human intervention or effects is an impossible concept, illustrated by the situation of elephants in Kenya trampling a park & the Masai's shambas while migrating. (Anthrolit)


Leader-Williams, N and EJ Miller-Gulland (1993). “Policies for the enforcement of wildlife laws; the balance between detection and penalties in Luangwa Valley, Zambia.” Conservation Biology 7(3): 611-617.

Lewis, D, G Kaweche, et al. (1990). “Wildlife conservation outside protected areas-lessons from an experiment in Zambia.” Conservation Biology 4(2): 171-180.

Lewis, D and A Phiri (1998). “Wildlife snaring - an indicator of community response to a community-based conservation project.” Oryx 32(2): 111-121.

The use of wire snares for catching wildlife to support household needs was treated as an indicator to evaluate community support and understanding for a community-based resource management project. Data were based on snare counts in areas surrounding the targeted community as well as from interviews with individuals purported to have had a history of snaring. The high use of snares conflicted with expected behaviour for a community benefiting from the project. Snaring levels were high enough to threaten the viability of the safari industry and the derived revenues that were meant to be shared with the community. These contradictions suggested flaws in the project: an overdependence on external donor-supported management and lack of real community involvement and leadership in management of the resource. This study underscores the critical importance for monitoring land-use behaviour as an indicator of the success of community-based management projects. (Source)


Lewis, DM (1995). “Importance of GIS to community-based management of wildlife - lessons from Zambia.” Ecological Applications 5(4): 861-871.

Wildlife resources under the protective custodianship of skilled managers can thrive and sustain important revenues. Such custodianship is generally lacking among communal rural societies in Africa becauseof land use policies that overlook the capacity and the practical importance of actively engaging these societies in wildlife management. In Zambia participation by local village communities in this management is recognized as a prerequisite for wildlife development and conservation. This participation is permitted through the administrative management design (called ADMADE) for game management areas. To help improve the capacity of rural communities to become more knowledgeable and effective in managing their wildlife resources, a geographical information system (GIS), based on ARC/INFO software, was applied and tested as an appropriate technology. It was hypothesized that maps composed of easily recognizable information about land use issues affecting the welfare of local residents and their natural resources would facilitate communal societies to make technically improved land use decisions with broad-based support within the community. Results offered a growing set of achievements in land use planning by local community leaders in support of this hypothesis. Custom designed maps produced by this technology were used by these leaders to explain and build consensus at the community level on ways to resolve resource use conflicts. Results also demonstrated the pragmatic and cost-effective value of training local residents to participate in the collection of GIS data as a way of making maps more locally acceptable and better focused on relevant issues and needs. (Source)

Lewis, DM and P Alpert (1997). “Trophy hunting and wildlife conservation in Zambia.” Conservation Biology 11(1): 59-68.

For wildlife conservation to succeed in developing countries, people who live in or near protected areas must receive benefits that offset the costs of their reduced access to natural resources. International trophy hunting is currently generating significant economic benefits for residents of game management areas in Zambia. This has been made possible through a revolving fund and an administrative program that direct revenues from trophy hunting to local wildlife management and community developmental projects. Benefits might be enhanced by better biological information for management greater local participation in the allocation and operation of hunting concessions, and the promotion of ecological and ethical standards for trophy hunting. An international system of certification for trophy hunting operations could foster these improvements. (Journal)


Luisigi, WJ (1984). “New approaches to wildlife conservation in Kenya.” Ambio 10(2/3): 87-92.

Marks, S (1984). The Imperial Lion: Human Dimensions of Wildlife Management in Central Africa. Boulder, Westview Press.

Matawanyika, JZZ (1989). “Cast out of Eden: Peasants vs wildlife policy in savanna Africa.” Alternatives 16.

Matzke, GE and N Nabane (1996). “Outcomes of a community controlled wildlife utilization program in a Zambezi Valley community.” Human Ecology 24: 65-85.

Zimbabwe is devolving substantial wildlife management responsibility to local government, and ultimately to local communities, through its Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) program. This paper's purpose is to explore the notion that CAMPFIRE offers a useful model for sustainable development discussions by examining the program's impacts in one case study location. It presents a legislative history of the CAMPFIRE Program before specifying the spatial criteria that explain ideal CAMPFIRE sites. Thereafter, it reports results from a study of the development impacts of locally controlled wildlife management in Masoka, an isolated CAMPFIRE community in the Zambezi Valley. The village has developed a land use plan, fenced its fields and settlements, reduced wild animal attacks on people and crops, provided access to primary education for both boys and girls, created local employment, and provided money for household food purchases during a severe drought. In Masoka, the implementation of CAMPFIRE seems to successfully provide incentives to protect megafauna and their habitats. For Masoka, CAMPFIRE has provided an alternative model to statist solutions emphasizing centralized control for biodiversity conservation purposes. (Author)
McShane, T (1990). “Wildlands and human-needs - Resource use in an African protected area.” Landscape and Urban Planning 19(2): 145-158.

Mesterton-Gibbons, M and E Milner-Gulland (1998). “On the strategic stability of monitoring: implications for cooperative wildlife management programmes in Africa.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series-B Biological Sciences 265(1402): 1237-1244.

Game-theoretic modelling is used to study the design of an agreement among residents to conserve a wildlife resource, by not hunting animals illegally when the community monitors its own behaviour. The analysis demonstrates that such an agreement may be very much costlier for a government to sustain if its incentive structure avoids the payment of monitoring fees, and instead relies on community benefits for conservation, with bonuses for reporting poachers. Conditions are identified for the agreement to be stable against both the temptation to avoid monitoring and the temptation to poach, either with guns or by snaring. In particular, the size of the community must exceed a critical value. Implications are discussed for community-based wildlife management programmes in Africa. (Author)
Metcalfe, S (1994). The Zimbabwe Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). in Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community-based Conservation. D Western and RM Wright, Ed. Washington DC, Island Press.

Mongi, ALD (1978). The integrated management of forest wildlife as a source of protein for rural populations - with particular reference to East Africa. Paper presented at the Eighth World Forestry Congress, Jakarta.

Murombedzi, JC (1991). Decentralizing common property resources management: a case study of the Nyaminyami district council of Zimbabwe's wildlife management programme. IIED Drylands Networks Programme Paper #30. London, International Institute for Environment and Development.

Murombedzi, JC (1992). Decentralization or recentralization? Implementing CAMPFIRE in the Omay Communal Lands of the Nyaminyami District. Harare, University of Zimbabwe, Center for Applied Social Sciences.

Murphree, MW (1990). Decentralizing the proprietorship of wildlife resources in Zimbabwe's communal lands. CASS Occasional Paper, Centre for Applied Social Studies. Harare, University of Zimbabwe.

Murphree, MW (1990). Research on the institutional contexts of wildlife utilization in the communal areas of East and Southern Africa. Harare, Centre for Applied Social Studies, University of Zimbabwe.

Murphree, MW (1991). Communities as Institutions for Resource Management. Harare, University of Zimbabwe.

Murphree, MW (1993). Communities as Resource Management Institutions. IIED Gatekeeper Series #36. London, International Institute for Environment and Development.

Murphree, MW (1994). The role of institutions in community -based conservation. in Natural Connections: Perspectives in Community-based Conservation. D Western and RM Wright, Ed. Washington DC, Island Press: 403-427.

Nabane, N and G Matzke (1997). “A gender-sensitive analysis of a community-based wildlife utilization initiative in Zimbabwe's Zambezi Valley.” Society and Natural Resources 10: 519-535.

Zimbabwe's CAMPFIRE program is a grassroots natural resource management initiative promoting utilization of natural resources, usually wildlife, as an economic and sustainable land use option in Zimbabwe's rural areas. Under CAMPFIRE, the village of Masoka developed a plan to allocate a large portion of the land under its control to leased hunting safari operations. A smaller portion was protected by a wildlife fence and allocated to cultivation and settlement. This study examines the development consequences of this initiative with reference to the differential outcomes for men and women. The program, and associated development activity, has initiated many changes in village life. Some of these have led women into opportunities that were formerly not available, including formal education, cash payments, and paid employment. Although the process of change points to greater inclusion of women,. men still have substantially greater access to money from CAMPFIRE. (Source)
Naughton-Treves, L (1997). “Farming the forest edge: vulnerable places and people around Kibale National Park, Uganda.” Geographical Review 87(1): 27- 46.

Subsistence farmers near Kibale National Park, Uganda, fear and resent many wildlife species. In this article I compare records of crop damage by wildlife and livestock with local complaints about the worst animals and the most vulnerable crops. I discuss the concordance and discrepancies in complaints versus actual damage in light of physical parameters of risk and of social factors that shape perceptions and vulnerabilities. Crop losses were greatest at the edge of the forest, where immigrants are disproportionately represented. State proprietorship of wildlife amplifies local vulnerability and constrains traditional coping strategies, such as hunting. (Author)

Neumann, RP (1992). “The political ecology of wildlife conservation in the Mt. Meru area of northeast Tanzania.” Land Degradation and Rehabilitation 3: 85-98.

The wildlife conservation problems in Tanzania are examined from a political ecology perspective. The analysis is historical, exploring the establishment of national parks under British colonial rule and the tightening of state control over access to resources at the expense of customary rights. Examples are presented from the Mt. Meru area of north-eastern Tanzania. During the colonial period, the formal political debate over land and resource rights was conducted without the participation of African peasants. After independence the state continued to assert control over resource access unilaterally. As Meru peasants have effectively been out of the formal political process, their only resource for defending the loss of access to natural resources is everyday forms of resistance, including de facto alliances with commercial poachers and "foot dragging" in regards to compliance with conservation laws. Consequently there is little local support for current wildlife conservation policies on Mt. Meru and wildlife populations have declined in the 30 years since Arusha National Park was established. (Source)


Neumann, RP (1998). Imposing Wilderness: Struggles Over Livelihood and Nature Preservation in Africa. Berkeley, University of Berkeley Press.

Newmark, W, D Manyanza, et al. (1994). “The conflict between wildlife and local people living adjacent to protected areas in Tanzania: human density as a predictor.” Conservation Biology 8(1): 249-255.

Newmark, WD, NL Leonard, et al. (1993). “Conservation attitudes of local people living adjacent to five protected areas in Tanzania.” Biological Conservation 63: 177-183.

Njiforti, HL (1996). “Preferences and present demand for bushmeat in north Cameroon: some implications for wildlife conservation.” Environmental Conservation 23(2): 149-155.

Norton-Griffiths, M and C Southey (1995). “The opportunity costs of biodiversity conservation in Kenya.” Ecological Economics 12(2): 125-139.

This paper estimates the opportunity costs of biodiversity conservation in Kenya from the potential net returns of agricultural and livestock production, and compares them with the net returns from tourism, forestry and other conservation activities. At the national level, agricultural and livestock production in the parks, reserves and forests of Kenya could support 4.2 million Kenyans and generate gross annual revenues of $565 m and net returns of $203m. These forgone net returns of $203m, some 2.8% of GDP, represent the opportunity cost to Kenya of biodiversity conservation. The current combined net revenues of $42m from wildlife tourism and forestry are quite inadequate to cover these opportunity costs to land. The government of Kenya is clearly subsidising conservation activities whose chief values are all indirect and external to Kenya, and their ability to continue doing so will be a function of growth and modernisation in the Kenyan economy. Dependency on land will increase if the economy stagnates and rural populations continue to grow, and while the government of today may not consider degazetting parks and reserves, the situation could be quite different in 25 years when rural populations have doubled yet again. In contrast, dependency on land will fall only once the economy grows and modernises and rural populations are drawn off the land and into industrial and service sectors. Given the global nature of the benefits from Kenya's conservation efforts, it is quite inappropriate that so much of the cost is born by Kenya. The present scale of subsidies should instead form the basis for international negotiations to transfer funds to meet all or part of them. At present the global environment facility (GEF) is the only operational programme through which such contributions can be channelled to meet the incremental costs of biodiversity conservation, but situations such as the one described here for Kenya were never envisaged when the GEF was designed. If the developed world expects a country like Kenya to maintain conservation estate on its behalf, then it must be prepared to contribute substantially towards these costs until such time as Kenya can afford to carry the burden itself. (Journal)

Noss, A (1997). “The economic importance of communal net hunting among the BaAka of the Central African Republic.” Human Ecology 25(1): 71-89.

This article examines current net hunting practice by BaAka Pygmies of central Africa. In terms of time allocation, net hunting remains the single most important activity for the BaAka. But net hunting is only one in a range of subsistence and economic activities among which individuals switch on a daily basis. Returns from net hunting are roughly equivalent to those from competing activities. Several factors encourage the decline of net hunting and its replacement with snare hunting: enforcement of park regulations, higher individual returns to snare hunting, and greater involvement in formal employment and agriculture. However; net hunting has not been abandoned completely for several reasons: the local market demand for bushmeat is growing, numerous forest products besides meat are collected on net hunts, and economic alternatives remain irregular and unreliable. (Journal)

Nsanjama, H (1997). “People and animals vie for Africa's ecosystems.” Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 12: 136-138.

Competition for habitat between humans and animals has frayed the traditional fabric of African life. Nowhere is the unraveling more obvious than on the borders of the national parks. "In many cases, local inhabitants are forbidden from even setting foot inside national parks without a permit," says Henri Nsanjama, vice president for the African and Madagascar Program of the World Wildlife Fund in Washington, D.C. Animals, on the other hand, occasionally stray beyond the borders in search of food. A herd of elephants can wipe out an entire village's yearly supply of food and seed in one night. The greatest threat to endangered species is not the wanton slaughter of animals, but "the impending conflict between people and animals for a finite amount of living space," Nsanjama notes. To ensure harmony between humans and their environment, rural communities must be able to realize tangible economic benefits from conservation and ecotourism. (Source)


Osemeobo, GJ (1988). “Animal wildlife conservation under multiple use land systems in Nigeria.” Environmental Conservation 15(3): 239-249.

Osemeobo, GJ (1991). “Effects of common property resources utilization on wildlife conservation in Nigeria.” Geojournal 23: 241-248.

Peterson, JH (1991). CAMPFIRE: A Zimbabwean approach to sustainable development and community empowerment through wildlife utilization. Harare, Centre for Applied Social Studies, University of Zimbabwe.

Peterson, JHJ and UP Kreuter (1994). Sustainable wildlife use for community development in Zimbabwe. in Elephants and Whales: Resources for Whom?Ed. Basel, Gordon and Breach Publishers S. A: 99-111.

Pinchin, A (1992). Conservation and wildlife management in Zimbabwe. London, Private press.

Ricciuti, ER (1993). “The elephant wars.” Wildlife Conservation 96: 14-34.

The conflicts arising from human interaction with the African elephant are discussed, and possible solutions are examined. The situation in Kenya and Zimbabwe is taken as a model. The success of anti poaching programs and the collapse of the international ivory trade has caused a steady increase in elephant populations in these countries. Local concentrations of the animals in and around protected areas now threaten the lives and livelihoods of indigenous people farming nearby. Conservation interests recognize that the elephants have become a problem but regard confinement, culling, and birth control as unsatisfactory solutions. A pilot program that gives affected farmers responsibility for wildlife and a share in the tourist revenue it generates is currently under way in Zimbabwe. The initiative is hampered by disagreements between administrators and the community. (Wilson web)

Schulz, C and A Skonhoft (1996). “Wildlife management, land-use and conflicts.” South African Journal of Wildlife Research 26(4): 151-159.

The paper analyses the conflict between wildlife conservation and its accompanying land use in an East African context. In the model there are two agents. First, there is an agency managing the wildlife and the habitat of the wildlife, which is referred to as parkland. On the other hand, there is the group of agro-pastoralists living in the vicinity of the wildlife habitat, whose land use is referred to as rangelands. The parkland is used for tourism production and hunting, while the rangelands are used for agropastoral production. Both agents will find it beneficial to expand their land-use, so there is a land-use conflict. This is analysed in two steps. First, social optimality is studied; then the utilization of the wildlife and its accompanying land-use when there is no unified resource policy and the park agency follows its self-interest. The effects of the two different management schemes of changing economic conditions, such as the recommendations of the CITES convention and a programme subsidizing agro-pastoral production, are discussed. (Journal)
Skonhoft, A (1995). “On the conflicts of wildlife management in Africa.” International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology 2(4): 267-277.

The paper analyses the conflict between wildlife conservation and the costs and benefits obtained from it in an East African context. A well defined agency is managing a national park of fixed area. Wildlife is also assumed to be 'owned' by the park authority. The park owner has therefore economic incentives to conserve the wildlife. The management policy, however, does not take into account the damage caused to the production of the agropastoralists living in the proximity of the park by the wildlife roaming freely in and out of the park. The conflict is first analysed in a one-species framework. Next, the model is extended to a two-species framework where the species compete for grazing lands. (Journal)


Skonhoft, A (1998). “Resource utilization, property rights and welfare - Wildlife and the local people.” Ecological Economics 26(1): 67-80.

The paper analyses the conflict between wildlife conservation and the costs and benefits obtained from it in an East African context. In the model there are two agents: a park agency managing a national park of fixed size and a group of agropastoralists living in the vicinity of the park. The park authority produces tourism services and sells hunting licences, whereas the agropastoralists produce livestock products. Wildlife and livestock interact with each other and wildlife is a nuisance for livestock production. The conflict is analysed under different market solutions as the agropastoralists, to various degrees, are given profit shares from the park activities. It is demonstrated that a market solution where they are given property rights in the form of a fixed share of the harvesting profit, will increase the nuisance on their production and therefore generally give no clear welfare gain for the local people. On the other hand, if they also receive a profit share from the tourist activity above that of the hunting benefit, the nuisance from the roaming wildlife will decrease as this scheme gives incentives for the park manager to increase the offtake and thereby decrease the wildlife stock in the- long term. There will therefore be more livestock and a clear welfare gain for the agropastoralists compared to the situation where they have no property rights. Under certain conditions, the stock sizes will also be closer to what is optimal from an overall point of view. (Journal)


Spinage, C (1998). “Social change and conservation misrepresentation in Africa.” Oryx 32(4): 265-276.

Concomitant with the increasing denouncement of African game legislation as inappropriate law imposed by a former colonial authority, is the attack upon traditional, i.e. total protection, practice of conservation. It is increasingly argued by a school of neo-populist thinkers, that local people should be allowed to exploit protected areas in accordance with their own traditions and beliefs. Examples of alleged injustice or practice are consistently misrepresented with a view to replacing traditional conservation practice with left-wing political dogma, proponents claiming a mandate from the Caracas 1992 IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas. (Journal)


Thomas, SJ (1992). The legacy of dualism and decision making: the prospects for local institutional development in CAMPFIRE. Joint Working Paper, Department of National Parks and Wildlife, Zimbabwe, and Centre for Applied Social Studies, University of Zimbabwe, Harare.

Wainwright, C and W Wehrmeyer (1998). “Success in integrating conservation and development? A study from Zambia.” World Development 26(6): 933-944.

Over the past decade, Zambia, like several other Southern African countries, has introduced community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) projects in several rural areas. These initiatives attempt to combine both conservation and development initiatives into an integrated approach, aimed at promoting rural development-based on natural resources as well as encouraging conservation awareness. This critical review examines the impact of the Luangwa Integrated Resource Development Project (LIRDP) at the community level. The research suggests that LIRDP has generally failed to achieve its conservation and development objectives and that the program has achieved few community benefits. The underlying causes of the project's shortcomings are discussed and corrective policy is suggested. By placing the survey findings into the wider debate about community-based conservation, the research has implications for rural development as well as community-based natural resource management. (Source)
Waithaka, J (1993). “The elephant menace.” Wildlife Conservation 96: 62-63.

Governments in Africa must address the increasing number of conflicts that arise where elephants and humans live in close association. In Kenya, as elsewhere in Africa, government wildlife policies have concentrated elephants in protected national parks where they compete with humans and domestic animals for water and food resources. The elephants damage crops, trees, and buildings. In addition, they have attacked, injured, and killed humans. In Kenya, there is no direct compensation for such injury or damage. The Community Wildlife Program aims to protect people and property and to increase the economic benefits accruing to those living in areas of the country that support wildlife. (Wilsonweb)


Western, D (1982). “Amboseli National Park: Enlisting landowners to conserve migratory wildlife.” Ambio 11(5): 302-308.

Wilkie, DS, B Curran, et al. (In press). “Modeling the sustainability of subsistence farming and hunting in the Ituri Forest of Zaire.” Conservation Biology.

Download 77.19 Kb.

Share with your friends:




The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2020
send message

    Main page