the book (pdf).

Transcription

the book (pdf).

New Alliances for Tourism, Conservation and Development in Eastern and
Southern Africa
Zellmer.indd 1
8-12-2011 16:55:22
This book (publication) is made possible with the help of the ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education (EDULINK), a programme of the
ACP Group of States, with the financial support of the European Union.
EDULINK financed the project “African-European Academic Alliance for
Sustainable Tourism Development, Environmental Sustainability and Poverty
Reduction” (3A-STEP), which can be contacted via Wageningen University,
Droevendaalsesteeg 3, 6708 PB Wageningen, the Netherlands or via email
[email protected] or telephone +31 317 486 192.
The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and
can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the ACP
Secretariat.
Zellmer.indd 2
8-12-2011 16:55:22
New Alliances for Tourism,
Conservation and Development in
Eastern and Southern Africa
Edited by René van der Duim, Dorothea Meyer,
Jarkko Saarinen and Katharina Zellmer
Eburon, Delft 2011
Zellmer.indd 3
8-12-2011 16:55:22
ISBN 978-90-5972-542-3
Cover design: Katharina Zellmer
Cover picture: René van der Duim
Editorial assistance: Jennifer Parry
Graphic design: Textcetera, The Hague
Published with the support of ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education (EDULINK),
a programme of the ACP Group of States, with the financial support of the European Union.
© 2011 The authors. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing from the proprietor(s).
Zellmer.indd 4
8-12-2011 16:55:22
Contents
Preface7
Contributors9
1
Introduction: New Alliances
René van der Duim, Dorothea Meyer and Jarkko Saarinen
2
Pro-Poor Employment and Procurement: A Tourism Value Chain
Analysis of Inhambane Peninsula, Mozambique
Manuel Mutimucuio and Dorothea Meyer
27
Factors Constraining the Linkages between the Tourism Industry and
Local Suppliers of Meats in Zanzibar
Wineaster Anderson and Saleh Juma
49
3
4
Governance of Community-Based Tourism in Uganda: An analysis
of the Kibale Association for Rural and Environmental Development
(KAFRED)63
Jockey Baker Nyakaana and Wilber Manyisa Ahebwa
5
New Institutional Arrangements for Tourism, Conservation and
Development in Sub-Saharan Africa
René van der Duim
83
6
Conservation through Tourism: The Conservation Enterprise Model of
the African Wildlife Foundation
107
Rita Nthiga, Ben Mwongela and Katharina Zellmer
7
Modern and Traditional Arrangements in Community-Based Tourism:
Exploring an Election Conflict in the Anabeb Conservancy, Namibia
Arjaan Pellis
8
Zellmer.indd 5
13
127
Community-Based Natural Resource Management, Tourism and Local
Participation: Institutions, Stakeholders and Management Issues in
Northern Botswana
147
Tsitsi Chipfuva and Jarkko Saarinen
8-12-2011 16:55:22
6
9
Institutionalisation of Community Involvement in Nature Conservation:
The Case of the Masebe Nature Reserve, South Africa
165
Chris Boonzaaier and Deon Wilson
10
Managing Conservation and Development on Private Land: An
Assessment of the Sport Hunting Approach around Lake Mburo
National Park, Uganda
Jim Ayorekire, Wilber Manyisa Ahebwa and Amos Ochieng
Zellmer.indd 6
185
8-12-2011 16:55:22
Preface
This book is dedicated to Professor Deon Wilson. In the last decade Deon has
been an active member of various tourism research networks like ATLAS Africa, the North-South-South Higher Education programme and the 3A-STEP
project. The first time I met him was in 2001, during a conference organised
by the Centre for Afrikatourism of Pretoria University. In following years we
got together on a regular basis during Atlas Africa conferences and meetings
of the 3A-STEP project. He co-organised the 2004 Atlas Africa conference
in Pretoria and a joint field trip to Masebe Nature Reserve in South Africa
in December 2009. I was looking forward meeting him again in Kampala
in June 2011 during the 7th Atlas Africa conference, but he did not manage to
participate as by that time his health was already failing him. Soon after the
conference I received the message that he had passed away.
As member of the 3A-STEP project Deon worked together with around
30 other senior and junior staff members from universities in ten different
countries. Making use of our respective networks and contacts in Africa, in
2008 Dorothea Meyer, Jarkko Saarinen and I decided to apply for funding
at the ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education (EDULINK),
a programme of the ACP Group of States with the financial support of the
European Union. The project proposal “African-European Academic Alliance
for Sustainable Tourism Development, Environmental Sustainability and
Poverty reduction” (3A-STEP) was granted in December 2008 and started in
January 2009. It brought together 10 universities: the University of Botswana
in Gaborone, Moi University in Eldoret (Kenya), the University of Namibia
in Windhoek, the School of Finance and Banking in Kigali (Rwanda), the
University of Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Makerere University in Kampala
(Uganda), the University of Pretoria (South Africa), Sheffield Hallam University (United Kingdom), the University of Oulu (Finland) and Wageningen
University (the Netherlands). These universities also managed to establish a
close cooperation with three NGOs: the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF),
SNV Netherlands Development Organisation and the Association for Tourism
and Leisure Education (ATLAS).
Zellmer.indd 7
8-12-2011 16:55:22
8
Preface
The 3A-STEP project had three fundamental goals: to improve the academic
relevance and excellence within the African partner universities, to establish a
Southern and Eastern African Young Leaders team, and to establish an active
(inter) regional and international institutionalised research network. Academic relevance was predominantly improved by joint development of educational
modules (in community-based tourism, corporate social responsibility and
pro-poor tourism) and by organising scientific workshops and conferences
(together with ATLAS Africa).
The Young Leaders team consisted of 12 promising African scholars (MA/
MSc graduates and PhD candidates) planning a future academic career in
sustainable tourism development. The 3A-STEP project supported them by
offering participation in three seminars and educational tours in South Africa, Kenya and Namibia and offering a small grant for the realisation of field
research and internships. By July 2011 all 12 members were in the process of
designing or executing their post-graduate research projects. Six Young Leaders were enrolled in PhD programs at European Universities, which ensures
a close cooperation between the European and African universities involved.
One Young Leaders started his PhD in the USA and four have started their
PhD research at African universities. In these projects researchers from the
three European universities are involved as co-supervisors.
Overall, this book is the result of the third component of the project. In three
workshops (in Gaborone, Dar es Salaam and Kampala) we discussed topical
issues related to sustainable tourism in Africa and decided on the joint publication of a book on sustainable tourism development in Africa. This book
consists of some of the research outputs of the staff members involved in the
3A-STEP project and is one of the tangible results of the cooperation between
the universities involved.
My deepest gratitude goes towards the contributors to this book – without
them the book would not exist. I would also like to thank my co-editors for
their efforts in working on this edited book and for the continual and fruitful
cooperation within the framework of the 3A-STEP project. Further I would
like to express my gratitude to all team members of the 3A-STEP project
and especially the project coordinators of the participating African universities: Haratsebe Manwa, Lucy Mboma, Fritz Becker, Jockey Nyakaana, Chris
Boonzaaier and Bob Wishitemi. It has been a great pleasure working together
and I hope and trust we will find new avenues for cooperation in the future.
A final and special word of thanks goes towards Katharina Zellmer, assistant
project manager at Wageningen University; without her the 3A-STEP project
and this book would never have materialised.
René van der Duim
Wageningen, November 2011
Zellmer.indd 8
8-12-2011 16:55:22
Contributors
Wilber Manyisa Ahebwa is Lecturer at the Department of Forestry, Biodiversity and Tourism, Makerere University, Uganda. His research interests focus
on tourism, conservation and development, with special focus on Bwindi National Park, Uganda.
Wineaster Anderson is Senior Lecturer of Tourism Economics and Marketing
at the Department of Marketing, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. She
is also an Associate Dean in Research and Publication of the University of Dar
es Salaam Business School. Her research interests include entrepreneurship
in the tourism and hospitality industry, networks and linkages in tourism
destinations, tourist behaviour, stakeholder perspectives and economics of
tourism in developing countries.
Jim Ayorekire is Lecturer in and Coordinator of the Tourism Programme at
the Department of Forestry, Biodiversity and Tourism, School of Forestry, Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Makerere University, Uganda. His
research interests include sustainable tourism development and planning,
environmental management, land use planning and regional development
geography.
Chris Boonzaaier is an Associate Professor of Anthropology at the University of Pretoria. He is also a director of Southern Cross Foundation, a NGO
whose main aim is to promote community-based tourism through empowerment programmes. His research interests include traditional leadership and
governance, community-based tourism development and cultural landscapes
from a community-based perspective.
Tsitsi Chipfuva is a Programme Leader and Lecturer in Travel and Tourism
at Botswana Accountancy College/University of Derby (UK) partnership. Her
research interests are in tourism and poverty alleviation, community-based
tourism, sustainable tourism and tourism education.
Dorothea Meyer is Director of the Tourism and Poverty Reduction Research
Unit and Senior Lecturer at Sheffield Business School, Sheffield Hallam
Zellmer.indd 9
8-12-2011 16:55:22
10
Contributors
niversity, UK. Her research interests include tourism as a tool for poverty
U
reduction, the political economy of tourism development, power relations at
global-local level and the role of the tourism private sector in development.
Saleh Mohamed is Senior Agriculture Economist and research officer at the
Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Zanzibar, Tanzania. He is
also a coordinator of the Agro-processing Development Project. His research
interests include agriculture-tourism linkages, food and agriculture policies
and their socioeconomic impacts and poverty analysis.
Manuel Mutimucuio is a Tourism Adviser at SNV – Netherlands Development Organisation. He is also a Lecturer of Ethic and Corporate Social Responsibility in Tourism at Eduardo Mondlane University of Mozambique. His
research interests include tourism value chain analysis, pro-poor tourism and
responsible tourism.
Ben Mwongela is Regional Enterprise Manager (Eastern Africa) for the African Wildlife Foundation and has in the last 12 years developed conservation
enterprises in Eastern and Southern Africa. His research interests include the
linkages between conservation and human development and the understanding of how global discourses in nature conservation have shaped the evolution
of conservation strategies in practice.
Rita Nthiga is Lecturer at the Department of Hospitality Management, School
of Business and Economics, Moi University, Kenya. Her research interests
include tourism as a tool for poverty reduction, tourism partnerships in biodiversity governance, biodiversity conservation and local livelihoods.
Jockey Baker Nyakaana is Professor of Tourism in the Department of Forestry, Biodiversity and Tourism and Coordinator at the Jinja Campus, Makerere
University. His areas of research interest are sustainable tourism, pro-poor
tourism development and conservation for tourism.
Amos Ochieng is Assistant Lecturer at the Department of Forestry, Biodiver
sity and Tourism, Makerere University, Uganda. His research interests include
sustainability issues in tourism development, conservation and livelihoods of
communities, consumptive and non-conservative forms of tourism activities,
intercultural interactions at tourist destinations, dialogical processes in the
planning and development of tourist regions and policy issues governing leisure and tourism operation.
Arjaan Pellis is Researcher at the Cultural Geography Group of Wageningen
University, the Netherlands. He holds a double MSc title in Global Business
and Stakeholder Management and in Leisure, Tourism and Environment. His
Zellmer.indd 10
8-12-2011 16:55:22
Contributors
11
current research interest focuses on institutional dynamics in sustainable
tourism development.
Jarkko Saarinen is Professor of Human Geography at the University of Oulu,
Finland, and Research Affiliate at the School of Tourism and Hospitality, Faculty of Management, University of Johannesburg. He is also External Program Leader in the International Tourism Research Centre (ITRC), University of Botswana. His research interests include tourism development and
sustainability, tourism and climate change and the construction of the ideas
of nature, local culture and indigeneity in tourism.
René van der Duim is Special Professor Tourism and Sustainable Development at Wageningen University, the Netherlands, where he teaches on the relation between tourism, globalisation and sustainable development. He holds
a PhD in Social Sciences for his dissertation on the relation between tourism,
sustainable development and actor-network theory. His current research interest focuses on the relation between tourism, conservation and development
in sub-Saharan Africa.
Katharina Zellmer is Researcher at the Cultural Geography Group of Wageningen University, the Netherlands. She holds a MSc title in Leisure, Tourism
and Environment and her current research interests include biodiversity conservation and governance, sustainable financing mechanisms through tourism and the omnipresent nexus between conservation and development.
Zellmer.indd 11
8-12-2011 16:55:22
Zellmer.indd 12
8-12-2011 16:55:22
1 Introduction: New Alliances
René van der Duim*, Dorothea Meyer** and Jarkko Saarinen***
Tourism is increasingly seen as an important economic sector for many African nations. In 2010, the African continent saw a 6% increase of international arrivals compared to 2009, leading to 49 million visitors (UNWTO,
2011). There are a number of reasons why tourism is widely regarded as a
crucial business sector in Africa (see also Ashley and Mitchell, 2005). First,
while tourism to Africa contributes little in terms of overall global flows – it
represents only 5% of the global inbound international arrivals – it is nevertheless highly significant to many African economies in particular in terms
of foreign exchange earnings (see Rogerson, 2007; Roe et al., 2004). Second,
in 1980 tourism represented 2% of African exports of goods and services,
now it is at nearly six times this level (cf. Ashley and Mitchell, 2005). Third,
tourism matters all across Africa. International arrivals are concentrated in
South Africa, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia and Mauritius, together receiving nearly three quarters of continental receipts, but tourism constitutes over 10% of
total exports in more than half of the African countries for which there is
data (Ashley and Mitchell, 2005). Fourth, there are those success stories of
African countries escaping the status of ‘least developed country’, mainly or
partly due to a strong tourism sector. In addition South-South tourism is increasing in Africa, as it does elsewhere in the developing world. Fifth, Africa’s
comparative advantage in wilderness and wildlife is only likely to increase in
value as such resources become scarcer globally. Sixth, very different to other
industries tourism can provide the opportunity of inter-sectoral linkages in
particular with local agriculture which is traditionally the mainstay of many
African economies. Finally, the barriers to enter the tourism industry are generally very limited and initial investment costs are lower when compared to
other sectors, such as manufacturing.
*
**
Cultural Geography Group, Wageningen University, the Netherlands
Centre for Tourism, Hospitality and Events Research, Sheffield Business School, Sheffield
Hallam University, UK
*** Department of Geography, University of Oulu, Finland
Zellmer.indd 13
8-12-2011 16:55:22
14
Currently, not only South Africa and the ‘old man of nature tourism’ Kenya
(see Olindo, 1991), but also Tanzania, Namibia, Botswana and increasingly
Uganda and Rwanda attract a growing number of tourists looking for exotic
wildlife and extraordinary landscapes. Similarly the coastal areas of Kenya,
Tanzania, Mozambique, The Gambia and Senegal, for example, have long
been established as attractive for sun-hungry tourists during the European
winter. Many communities around important tourism hubs – such as Amboseli National Park and Maasai Mara Game Reserve in Kenya, the Arusha
region in northern Tanzania, Etosha National Park in Namibia and the Okavango Delta in Botswana – have linked up with the global tourism industry. These communities are now increasingly networked via transport and
communication infrastructures to the tourism markets visiting these iconic
wildlife parks, and have taken advantage of the powerful, albeit stereotypical
images of indigenous people – like for example the Maasai, the San (Basarwa)
or the OvaHimba – to develop new cultural products and enhance the communities’ involvement in tourism.
New Alliances
The growth of tourism in Africa feeds the development of new alliances and is
in turn supported by them. This book introduces and discusses some of these
alliances in the context of Sub-Saharan Africa. Firstly, this book is the result of
new alliances in education and research. As already pointed at in the preface,
tourism education and research in (Eastern and Southern) Africa are increasingly executed in and strengthened by a number of collaborative efforts, such
as Atlas Africa and the 3A-STEP project. This chapter aims at giving some
background of these initiatives.
Second, to capitalise from the growing tourism industry, but also to contribute to wider economic development in the destinations, the private sector is
increasingly involved in two types of alliances: intra- and inter-sectoral alliances. Especially the first three chapters of this book discuss some of the
inter-sectoral alliances in Mozambique, Zanzibar and Uganda.
Third, we present a strong evidence of growth in partnerships between public,
private and third sector organisations in tourism, conservation and development in Sub-Saharan Africa. By taking examples from Eastern and Southern
Africa, this book illustrates the variety of emerging partnerships and some of
their consequences. However, before introducing these case studies in more
detail, we first like to draw attention to new education and research alliances
which have facilitated the writing of this book.
Zellmer.indd 14
8-12-2011 16:55:22
15
New Alliances in Education and Research
Despite the growth of tourism in Africa, the African tourism research and
education system has not yet fully been to the level “where the dividends
really begin to accumulate” (Hottola, 2009: 190; see also Rogerson and Visser,
2011; Rogerson, 2007). Despite enormous progress in the last decades, Hottola
(2009: 190) concludes that there could still be more “higher-quality education
with firm standards, continuity, accountability, and competitive edge to meet
the challenges that the future may bring”. To sustain progress and stimulate
new developments in the last decade a number of projects aimed at strengthening tourism education and research programmes, some of which are panAfrican in nature.
Firstly, to promote education and research in tourism on the African continent, the Association for Tourism and Leisure Education (ATLAS) founded
an African chapter. ATLAS, established in 1991 to develop transnational educational initiatives in tourism and leisure, provides a forum to promote staff
and student exchange, transnational research, and facilitates curriculum and
professional development. ATLAS currently has members in more than 70
countries while members of ATLAS Africa predominantly reside in Eastern
and Southern Africa. Since its establishment in 2000, ATLAS Africa organised seven conferences in Africa (see also Van der Duim, 2011a) leading to
several conference proceedings (see Saarinen et al., 2010; Zellmer et al., 2010;
Kloek and van der Duim, 2008a, 2008b, 2007a, 2007b, and 2007c). These
seven volumes, together with a book edited by Wishitemi, Spenceley and Wels
(2007), three new publications on tourism development in Southern Africa
(Hottola, 2009; Saarinen et al., 2009; Spenceley, 2008), and special issues of
scientific journals like Development Southern Africa in 2010 (see issue 5) and
Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie in 2011 (see issue 3; see also
Rogerson and Visser, 2011) provide an overview of the current state of the art
of (applied) research in tourism in Africa.
Furthermore, in September 2008 the UK Department for International Development funded a 3-year DELPHE project managed by the British Council
which brought together the University of Dar es Salaam (Tanzania), Makerere
University (Uganda), the School of Finance and Banking (Rwanda), Moi University (Kenya), Sheffield Hallam University (UK) and Wageningen University
(the Netherlands). The purpose of this project was to develop a research capacity-building and information-sharing network that executed joint research in
order to inform Pro-Poor Tourism policy debates in East Africa. This project
was further supported by funding from the UK Department for Business,
Innovation and Skills for an 18-month Education Partnership in Africa (EPA)
project which integrated the key tourism stakeholders in East Africa (public,
private and third sector) into ongoing debates on how the tourism industry
Zellmer.indd 15
8-12-2011 16:55:22
16
can effectively contribute to poverty reduction in the East African partner
countries.
While DELPHE and EPA focused on Eastern Africa, the North-South-South
(N-S-S) Programme’s projects aim to create new and deepen existing linkages
between Southern African and Finnish Universities. The N-S-S Programme
is funded by the Finnish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and coordinated by the
Centre for International Mobility (CIMO) and it aims to activate and institutionalise the mutual collaboration between Finnish universities and universities in the Global South. The projects ‘Sustainable Tourism in Southern
Africa’ (2005–2009) and ‘Tourism for Development?’ (2009–2011) involved
the Universities of Botswana, Cape Town (RSA), Namibia, Oulu (Finland) and
Pretoria (South Africa). These projects supported two-way student and lecturer exchange and joint field courses in tourism and community studies. In addition, related to these projects, the financial support of the Finnish Ministry
of Foreign Affairs through the Institutional Collaboration Instrument (ICI)
made it possible to develop educational materials focused on higher education
institutions (HEIs). The cooperation materialised in form of the edited book
Sustainable Tourism in Southern Africa (Saarinen et al., 2009), and joint academic projects, including a special issue of Current Issues in Tourism focusing
on Tourism and Millennium Development Goals (Saarinen et al., 2011).
As already explained in the Preface, this book is a result of a fifth project: the
African-European Academic Alliance for Sustainable Tourism Development,
Environmental Sustainability and Poverty Reduction (3A-STEP). In December
2008 the ACP-EU Cooperation Programme in Higher Education (EDULINK)
of the European Union approved a 30-month project (which started 1 January
2009) of seven African and three European universities. It brought together
the same universities participating in the Delphe project and the universities
participating in the North-South-South project.
It aimed at increasing competitiveness and excellence of Southern and Eastern African Higher Education Institutions in research and education in the
fields of sustainable tourism development, environmental sustainability and
poverty reduction. The specific objectives of the 3A-STEP project were twofold, namely: institutionalised (inter)regional and international cooperation
of Southern and Eastern African HEIs, and relevant and up-to-date academic
education concerning sustainable tourism development that aims to contribute to environmental sustainability and poverty alleviation.
In 2009, the 3A-STEP project resulted in the establishment of a research network consisting of 20 researchers from ten universities, a team of 12 postgraduate students and associate partners including SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, the African Wildlife Foundation, and ATLAS. The
Zellmer.indd 16
8-12-2011 16:55:22
17
12 postgraduate students, mainly members of University staff, formed the
Southern and Eastern African Young Leaders Team and they focus their PhD
projects on sustainable tourism development, environmental sustainability and poverty alleviation. Their publications in peer-reviewed journals (see
Ahebwa et al., 2012a, 2012b; Stone and Stone, 2010); and their contributions to
this book (see Chapter 4, 6 and 10) illustrate the great potential of this group
of young African scholars.
New Economic Alliances
To capitalise upon the growing tourism industry, but also to contribute to
wider economic development in the destinations, the tourism private sector
is increasingly involved in two types of alliances: intra- and inter-sectoral alliances. Intra-sectoral alliances are not a new phenomenon in the tourism
industry and have often grown out of the need for cost reduction and economies of scale. Many of the more established tourism destinations such as for
example Kenya and The Gambia, are often characterised by the presence of
fully integrated tour-operators (both foreign and locally owned or joint operations) who bring together the whole range of tourism products required
to create the holiday experience. This can include equity and non-equity investment in providers of transportation (air-transport, cruise-liners, and land
transport), accommodation and experiences. In this case businesses decide to
work together in sales, marketing, and investment, to jointly develop and sell
a specific product. In recent years these alliances have also seen the growth of
business outsourcing where, for example, accommodation providers work in
partnership with local businesses to develop non-core business enterprises.
McNab (2005) and Meyer (2007) report about initiatives where the tourism
private sector helps with the setting-up of locally owned businesses that work
in close alliances with accommodation providers to take over aspects such as
housekeeping, laundry and even catering.
However, a probably more important, and frequently neglected, set of allian
ces are those between the tourism industry and other economic sectors in the
destination. Many destinations are keen to get involved in developing tourism
as it promises the potential to increase production and sale in sectors already
significantly important to many African countries such as the agricultural
sector or handicraft production. Meyer (2011: 174) argues: “whereas the poorest
in society often do not have the skills and experience to obtain direct employment in the tourism industry, many are already engaged in agriculture and
artisanal fisheries for their livelihoods. Tourism in fact is seen as providing
good potential for livelihood diversification into the non-farm economy”. The
first part of this book focuses particularly on these all-important inter-sectoral
Zellmer.indd 17
8-12-2011 16:55:23
18
linkages and alliances by presenting examples of Value Chain Analysis (VCA)
from Inhambane (Mozambique), Zanzibar (Tanzania) and Uganda.
It is frequently argued that two areas of pro-poor intervention related to tourism in Less Economically Developed Countries (LEDC’s), namely employment and procurement, have the potential to provide considerable benefits to
poor communities (Telfer and Sharpley, 2008; Meyer, 2007; Torres, 2003). To
test this, Mutimucuio and Meyer (Chapter 2) therefore apply a VCA approach
to analyse in-depth the situation in Inhambane, Mozambique. Their chapter
shows that while employment opportunities can (and do) provide pro-poor
impacts locally; this could be considerably enhanced with adequate training
given to local people allowing them to assume management positions. Similarly, it was found that procurement opportunities are currently very limited
for two main reasons. Firstly, many inputs required by the tourism industry
can currently not be sourced locally; and secondly, the very specific existing
tourism market, namely self-drive, second home owning South Africans, reduces the need for local inputs very considerably. The chapter concludes by
critically questioning the usefulness of value chain analyses carried out by
development organisations such as SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, and alerts to the shortcomings.
The chapter by Anderson and Juma (Chapter 3) focuses specifically on the
factors constraining the linkages between the tourism industry and local sup
pliers of meats in Zanzibar, Tanzania. Here it is discovered that the key obstacles in utilising procurement opportunities are the lack of education of
local suppliers, the fact that local suppliers frequently stem from the informal
sector, the apparent lack of information and possibly miss-communication
between buyers and sellers, and the lack of quality guidance and distribution
infrastructure. One suggestion Anderson and Juma make is that the formation of stronger associations or networks of local suppliers could possibly enable them to pool resources and benefit from economies of scale instead of
competing among themselves. They further suggest that future studies may
expand the scope of this research by analysing in detail the legal and institutional factors constraining the linkages between the tourism industry and
local sectors in Zanzibar.
This focus on institutional factors and governance is taken on in the chapter
by Nyakaana and Ahebwa (Chapter 4). This chapter investigates governance
issues of a community based tourism initiative in Uganda, the Kibale Association for Rural and Environmental Development (KAFRED). The aim of
the chapter is to investigate KAFRED’s management arrangements from a
value chain governance perspective. It shows that all the three governance
aspects (legislative, executive and judicial) are dominated by a hand-full of
Zellmer.indd 18
8-12-2011 16:55:23
19
individuals, and as such provides a very valuable case study of elite capturing
frequently occurring among community based tourism initiatives.
All of these three chapters illustrate the complexity of generating pro-poor
impacts from tourism in LEDC’s and the potential benefits as well as shortcomings of value chain analysis.
New Alliances in Conservation and Development
A third type of new alliances consists of partnerships for conservation. The recent history of the tourism–conservation–development nexus in Sub-Saharan
Africa shows that the emphasis in conservation and development has shifted
from government to first communities and later all kind of partnerships which
also include the private sector. This book presents evidence of the growth in
partnerships between public, private and third sector organisations in tourism, conservation and development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Especially in the
1990s the largest conservation organisations like Conservation International,
World Wildlife Fund and African Wildlife Foundation became more cooperate
in their structure, and raised substantial sums from businesses (cf. Adams,
2004). This in turn had important consequences for building partnerships
at the local level, moving from community based tourism organisations to
community-private partnerships, as for example illustrated by the development of conservation enterprises (see Chapter 6).
These new alliances can be classified in different ways (e.g. Ahebwa et al.,
2012a; Van der Duim, 2011b) including for example Public-Private Partnerships (PPP), Public-Private-Community Partnerships (PPCP) and of late Private-Community Partnerships (PCP). Important variables for classification
include the type of actors involved, the degree of centralisation or decentralisation, the type of management, the main sources of income, and the land
tenure arrangements
Related to the new alliances of partnerships for conservation, René van der
Duim (Chapter 5) presents a short history of the tourism–conservation–development nexus. He subsequently shows that tourism’s role in the conservation–development nexus has become more important over the last 20 years,
leading to a lot of relatively new institutional arrangements (conservancies in
Namibia, conservation enterprises, the enormous increase of private game
reserves in South Africa, etc.), some of which are also discussed in other chapters in this book. His discussion of seven categories of institutional arrangements in Sub-Saharan Africa demonstrates that institutional arrangements
are multiple and varied (ranging from public-private partnerships, community based tourism ventures, private sector networks to even more complex
Zellmer.indd 19
8-12-2011 16:55:23
20
and messy institutional arrangements). They are increasingly multi-actor of
nature combining state, market and civil society and may range from formal
to informal arrangements. Institutional arrangements are also increasingly
multi-scalar (linking the local and global) and as the history of conservation
and development has also clearly shown, they may lead to compliance as well
as to – sometimes fierce – resistance. As many of hem are rather new, ‘successes’ and ‘failures’ still have to be fully established.
To make a start with that, Rita Nthiga, Ben Mwongela and Katharina Zellmer,
discuss in Chapter 6 the origins, development and implementation of conservation enterprises, as part of the Heartland approach of the African Wildlife Foundation. Illustrated by an account of the Samburu Heartland and one
tourism-related AWF conservation enterprise, the Koija Starbeds Ecolodge,
they discuss actors involved, benefits accrued and challenges faced. Although
continuously evaluated and improved, the Conservation Enterprises Strategy
is not without shortcomings. The challenges include issues of financing, governance, benefit sharing as well as skills and management transfer modalities
to communities by the private investors. Additional challenges to the success
of Conservation Enterprises such as Koija Starbeds Ecolodge emerge from the
relationships created within the communities resulting from the enterprise.
These relationships have been found to lead to dependency of communities
on donors and outside assistance (e.g. private investors); thereby increasing
the power struggles within the communities.
These power struggles are also prominent in the next chapter (Chapter 7),
where Arjaan Pellis presents an ethnographic case study performed in one of
Namibia’s 64 conservancies. By focusing on the committee elections of 2010
in one particular conservancy, the Anabeb Conservancy in Kunene, he shows
that the introduction of conservancy policy has had drastic effects on the role
of traditional leadership in former homelands. By making use of the Policy
Arrangement Approach, Pellis shows that current arrangements in Anabeb
hold poor juridical, economic and political capacities. Due to contestable and
ambiguous use of the ‘right’ constitution people cannot count on how simple matters in the conservancy ought to be dealt with. Where traditionally
Herero’s and Damara used to vie over past homeland territories, Pellis shows
how new alliances reflect a shift into the direction of the modern (where innovative policy propagates democracy and business logic) or the traditional
(as a form of resistance against the progress of the modern conservancy). In
this new division, the role of traditional leaders remains a stronghold against
the ‘apolitical’ character of the conservancy management structure. That the
conservancy is in fact strongly political is clear from the divide in ideas, rules
and resources between different actor coalitions.
Zellmer.indd 20
8-12-2011 16:55:23
21
Just as Namibia, Botswana also has a strong Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) programme. In Chapter 8 Tsitsi Chipfuva and
Jarkko Saarinen give an overview of the CBNRM programme in Botswana
and discuss its connections to tourism development and management and
the challenges of local participation and benefit creation. The chapter further
aims to identify institutional structures pertinent to CBNRM programmes.
Based on this general approach the paper focuses on the Chobe Enclave, located in Northern Botswana where the country’s main tourist attractions are
located in. Chipfuva and Saarinen conclude that the CBNRM programme has
indeed worked for and with local communities in the past but in the future
there needs to be stronger governmental committed towards a real devolution of authority and responsibility to local communities. In this respect the
government’s recent decisions to transfer the revenues of CBNRM projects
from local scale to regional and national levels are regarded problematic and
conflicting with the needed devolution. The authors further conclude that
this shift in policy most likely will have a negative effect on the relationship
between nature conservation and local communities and, thus, the overall
sustainability of CBNRM programme in Botswana.
Chris Boonzaaier and Deon Wilson (Chapter 9) continue the discussion on
CBNRM by examining the institutionalisation of community involvement in
nature conservation. The specific case is the Masebe Nature Reserve, South
Africa, where conflicts over local, tourism and conservation related land uses
and needs have occurred. In addition to the examination of the local (the
Langa Ndebele’s) institutional capacity in nature conservation and management, Boonzaaier and Wilson aim to identify principles that are important for
CBNRM arrangements at a local scale. They also aim to evaluate how these
principles could be applicable to other communities than the ones located next
to the Masebe Nature Reserve. Based on their findings the CBNRM approach
needs to involve, for example, local people’s perceptions regarding nature and
nature conservation. In addition, in order to be functional the institutional
arrangements should be based on existing authority structures and local community actors should integrate themselves and their actions more deeply into
wider regional and national scale institutions. Thus, Boonzaaier and Wilson
state that as the CBNRM process is a negotiated model, any attempts without
the participation of the community should be avoided as such actions will
be highly contested at a local scale, resulting in conflicts over land uses and
failures in nature conservation. Thus, the connections between their case and
Chipfuva and Saarinen’s are very clear.
In the final Chapter, Jim Ayorekire, Wilber Manyisa Ahebwa and Amos
Ochieng focus on the increasingly popular but also debated issue of sport
hunting tourism in nature conservation and community-based tourism contexts. Their specific case is based on the assessment of hunting tourism around
Zellmer.indd 21
8-12-2011 16:55:23
22
Lake Mburo National Park (LMNP), Uganda, where sport hunting became
popular in the 1960s. However, due to political instability and the reducing
number of wildlife in the following decades, touristic hunting was suspended
by the government until it was restarted in the early 2000s. The chapter overviews the main arguments that have been introduced when aiming to use
hunting tourism as an intervention to nature conservation and community
development challenges around the LMNP. According to A
yorekire, Manyisa
and Ochieng, sport hunting in tourism has a real potential as an intervention mechanisms in supporting the nature conservation efforts outside established protected areas. Based on the empirical material they state that tourism driven hunting can act as a tool for socio-economic development for local
communities living near conservation areas. However, they further note that
the success of hunting tourism depends on having a consultative, transparent
and collaborative management and monitoring system in place. In addition,
the development and practices of hunting tourism should be planned and
managed in a way that they do not jeopardise the possibilities of other less
consumptive forms of tourism such as ecotourism. Therefore, the authors
conclude that hunting tourism should focus on places and wildlife resources
outside nature conservation areas such as national parks.
Research Directions
This volume addresses some of the topical issues related to tourism for development and sustainability in African contexts. Together with an increasing
number of other research publications focussing on tourism in Africa (cf.
Rogerson and Visser, 2011; Hottola, 2009; Saarinen et al., 2009; S
penceley,
2008), the chapters in this book illustrate the current state of the art of tourism
studies in Africa, but also the need to move to a next stage in which universities across the continent work closely together in developing and executing
research programs. In this respect Rogerson and Visser (2011) recently argued
that the imperative exists for strengthening the tempo of critical research.
Geopolitical developments, changing conservation and development debates,
shifts from government to governance, global economic crises, but also the
neo-liberalisation of nature conservation (Büscher, 2008) and even processes of ‘land grabbing’ (cf. Cotula et al., 2009) have transformed the political
economy of tourism, conservation and development in Sub-Saharan Africa.
This has – for better or worse – created all kind of new alliances with should
be scrutinised.
In terms of socio-economic pro-poor benefits it is important to recognise that it
is possibly too narrow-sighted to simply focus on economic benefits via direct
employment and wage-earnings. The indirect benefits from tourism development such as access to improved infrastructure can have considerable pro-poor
Zellmer.indd 22
8-12-2011 16:55:23
23
impacts often outweighing the direct employment impacts which generally
do only incur to those already out of poverty. Furthermore, the tourism industry offers considerable opportunities for inter-sectoral linkages, but possibly most importantly the integration of the informal sector which is often
the main livelihood activity of the poorer segments of society. One of the key
challenges is how to forge alliances with the mainstream industry rather than
an over-reliance on well meaning but often utterly unsuccessful communitybased tourism projects. Following Scheyvens’ (2011), recent analysis of the
relation between tourism and poverty, research should (amongst others) focus
on finding credible answers to pertinent issues such as bringing equity to the
forefront of tourism developments, specifically targeting the poorer sectors
of society, building good partnerships with the private sector, incorporating
communal benefits into tourism planning and creating benefits beyond economic benefits. As poverty is also about vulnerability, exclusion, loss of dignity
and lack of choice (cf. Scheyvens, 2011) a pro-poor tourism research agenda in
Africa should move beyond narrowly defined financial and economic benefits.
Moreover, as Rogerson and Visser (2011: 258) argue, “it remains that significantly more attention needs to be devoted to understanding the domestic and
regional tourism flows on the continent and their developmental potential,
not least as it impacts upon enterprise establishment and local development.
Too much of the current body of knowledge is concerned with international
tourist inflows from other continents and their potential to stimulate development objectives”.
In terms of conservation, Sub-Sahara Africa is now confronted with a raging
conservation-development debate and a wide variety of conservation practices.
Sub-Sahara Africa is plastered with conservation areas, reserves, conservancies and parks in which a range of governmental organisations, communities,
(I)NGOs and increasingly private companies, whether they are local or global,
are confronted with costs and benefits in terms of tourism, conservation and
development. These developments raise important questions about the implementation of tourism as a strategy for conservation and development. Increasingly these questions have been voiced by political economists and political
ecologists (cf. Brockington et al., 2008). In their view, changing conservation
and development discourses and practices and the ‘neoliberalisation’ of nature conservation (see Büscher, 2008) have transformed the political economy of conservation from a predominate state-led conservation model to one
in which corporate interests increasingly play a dominant role. These developments clearly show – just as the chapters in this book – that the challenge of
bringing together tourism, nature conservation and local development has
not lost any of its urgency and calls for continued research about the costs and
benefits of different interventions. Still a lot of research has to be done before
we will be able to provide encompassing answers. It is the objective of this
book to contribute to this process and the ambition of the editors of this book
to continue their support in creating the required conditions to do so.
Zellmer.indd 23
8-12-2011 16:55:23
24
References
Adams, W.M. (2004) Against Extinction: the Story of Conservation. London: Earthscan.
Ahebwa, M.W., Van der Duim, V.R. and C.G. Sandbrook (2012a) Tourism, Power and
Partnerships: Investigating a new approach to Conservation and Development in Uganda.
Conservation and Society, forthcoming.
Ahebwa, M.W., Van der Duim, V.R. and C.G. Sandbrook (2012b) Tourism Revenue Sharing
Policy at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (BINP), Uganda: A Policy Arrangements
Approach (PAA). Journal of Sustainable Tourism, forthcoming.
Ashley, C. and J. Mitchell (2005) Can tourism accelerate pro-poor growth in Africa? Opions 60.
London: Overseas Development Institute.
Brockington, D., Duffy, R. and J. Igoe (2008) Nature Unbound. Conservation, Capitalism and
the Future of Protected Areas. London: Earthscan.
Büscher, B. (2008) Conservation, neoliberalism and social science. Conservation Biology 22
(2) pp. 229–231.
Cotula, L., Vermeulen, S., Leonard, J. and J. Keeley (2009), Land grab or development
opportunity? Agricultural investment and international land deals in Africa. London/Rome:
FAO, IIED and IFAD.
Hottola, P. (2009) Tourism strategies and local responses in Southern Africa. Wallingford: CABI.
Kloek, M. and R. van der Duim, eds. (2007a) Tourism and nature in Africa. Thematic
Proceedings of ATLAS Conferences ,Volume 1. Arnhem: ATLAS.
Kloek, M. and R. van der Duim, eds. (2007b) Local communities and participation in African
tourism. Thematic Proceedings of ATLAS Conferences, Volume 2. Arnhem: ATLAS.
Kloek, M. and R. van der Duim, eds. (2007c) Aspects of tourism in Kenya. Thematic
Proceedings of ATLAS Conferences, Volume 3. Arnhem: ATLAS.
Kloek, M. and R. van der Duim, eds. (2008a) Tourism, nature conservation and wealth creation
in Africa. Thematic Proceedings of ATLAS Conferences, Volume 4. Arnhem: ATLAS.
Kloek, M. and R. van der Duim, eds. (2008b) New avenues for tourism and wealth creation in
Africa. Thematic Proceedings of ATLAS Conferences, Volume 5. Arnhem: ATLAS.
McNab, D. (2005) Impacts of Pro-poor Tourism Facilitation with South African Corporates.
Meyer, D. (2007) Pro-poor tourism: From leakages to linkages. A conceptual framework
for creating linkages between the accommodation sector and ‘poor’ neighbouring
communities. Current Issues in Tourism 10 (6) pp. 558-583.
Meyer, D. (2011) Pro-Poor Tourism – Can Tourism Contribute to Poverty Reduction in Less
Economically Developed Countries? In: Cole, S. and N. Morgan, eds., Tourism and
Inequality: Problems and Prospects. Wallingford: CAB International, pp. 164-182.
Olindo, P. (1991) The Old man of Nature. In: Whelan, T., ed., Nature Tourism. Managing the
Environment. Washington: Island Press, pp. 23-38.
Roe, D., Ashley, C., Page, S. and D. Meyer (2004) Tourism and the Poor: Analysing and
Interpreting Tourism Statistics from a Poverty Perspective, PPT Working Paper No. 16,
London: ODI, IIED and ICRT.
Zellmer.indd 24
8-12-2011 16:55:23
25
Rogerson, C. (2007) Reviewing Africa in the global tourism economy. Development Southern
Africa 24 (3) pp. 361-379.
Rogerson, C. and G. Visser (2011) African tourism geographies: existing paths and new
directions. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie 102 (2) pp. 251-259.
Saarinen, J., Becker, F., Manwa, H. and D. Wilson, eds. (2009) Sustainable tourism in
Southern Africa. Local communities and natural resources in transition. Bristol: Channel
View Publications.
Saarinen, J., van der Duim, V.R. and K. Zellmer, eds. (2010) Tourism, tourists and sustainable
development in Africa. Thematic Proceedings of ATLAS Conferences, Volume 7. Arnhem:
ATLAS.
Saarinen, J., Rogerson, C. and H. Manwa (2011) Tourism and Millennium Development
Goals: tourism for global development? Current Issues in Tourism 14 (3) pp. 201-203.
Scheyvens, R. (2011) Tourism and Poverty. London: Routledge.
Spenceley, A. (2008) Responsible tourism. Critical issues for conservation and development.
London: Earthscan.
Stone, S. and T.M. Stone (2010) Community-based tourism enterprises: challenges and
prospects for community participation; Khama Rhino Sanctuary Trust, Botswana.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism 9 (1) pp. 97-114.
Telfer, D. and R. Sharpley (2008) Tourism and Development in the Developing World. London:
Routledge.
Torres, R. (2003) Linkages between Tourism and Agriculture in Mexico. Annals of Tourism
Research 30 (3) pp. 546-566.
UNWTO – United Nations World Tourism Organisation (2011) 2010 - A multi-speed Recovery.
World Tourism Barometer 9 (1) February 2011. Madrid: UN World Tourism Organisation.
Van der Duim, V.R. (2011a) Strengthening Tourism Research and Educational capacities in
Africa: An overview of projects. Tourism Analysis 16 (2) pp. 211-214.
Van der Duim, V.R. (2011b) Safari. A Journey through Tourism, Conservation and Development.
Inaugural Address. Wageningen: Wageningen University
Wishitemi, B., Spenceley, A. and H. Wels, eds. (2007) Culture and community. Tourism studies
in Eastern and Southern Africa. Amsterdam: Rozenberg.
Zellmer, K., van der Duim, V.R. and J. Saarinen, eds. (2010) Environmental sustainability,
poverty reduction and empowering communities. Thematic Proceedings of ATLAS
Conferences, Volume 6. Arnhem: ATLAS.
Zellmer.indd 25
8-12-2011 16:55:23
Zellmer.indd 26
8-12-2011 16:55:23
2 Pro-Poor Employment and
Procurement: A Tourism Value
Chain Analysis of Inhambane
Peninsula, Mozambique
Manuel Mutimucuio* and Dorothea Meyer**
Tourism is increasingly viewed as an attractive development option for many
Less Economically Developed Countries (LEDCs). This is due to its potential
to increase income opportunities, improve foreign exchange earnings, create
direct and indirect employment, and facilitate economic diversification into
the non-farm economy (Telfer and Sharpley, 2008). Two of the most frequently cited means of using tourism as a tool for poverty reduction are direct and
indirect employment as well as the creation of inter-sectoral linkages. The
former is critical, because although tourism is generally labour-intensive, it is
also frequently criticised for providing mainly low-paid, menial jobs without
sufficient career development and growth opportunities. Different to that, the
potential to create inter-sectoral linkages with agriculture in particular, the
mainstay of many destinations in LEDCs, is very high (Meyer, 2007; Torres,
2003). Research, however, has shown that these inter-sectoral linkages are
often underdeveloped, thus creating competition between economic sectors
over scarce resources such as land, water, and labour among many others
(Mbaiwa and Darkoh, 2009).
This chapter will focus on both means, employment and procurement (intersectoral linkages), using data collected in Inhambane, Mozambique. Inhambane was chosen as a case study site given the importance of tourism to the
local economy. In 2007, tourism represented 7 per cent of the provincial GDP
*
**
Zellmer.indd 27
SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, Inhambane, Mozambique
Centre for Tourism, Hospitality and Events Research, Sheffield Business School, Sheffield
Hallam University, UK
8-12-2011 16:55:23
28
(Governo da Provincia de Inhambane, 2008); just over three times the national average of 2.3 per cent. At the same time Inhambane is rated among the
poorest provinces in the country with a poverty index of 57.9 per cent in 2009
(Ministry of Planning and Development, 2010). The conceptual framework
and research tool we used is Value Chain Analysis (VCA). The VCA model applied to tourism was developed by the Overseas Development Institute (ODI)
and the International Trade Centre (ITC) and “provides understanding of how
the tourism value chain operates, what share of tourism expenditure reaches
different groups of people in the destination, in particular the poor, and identifies interventions for increasing the participation and income for the poor
from tourism” (SNV, 2009a: 13).
This chapter is divided into five main parts. The following section will illustrate the use and development of VCA related to tourism research. A brief
historical overview of the VCA concept and its application with regard to tourism as a tool for local economic development and poverty reduction will be
provided. The next section will briefly explain the methodology used for this
particular VCA, which will be followed by an in-depth illustration of the context in which tourism development takes place in Inhambane. The fourth section will provide a brief analysis of the key results before discussing in detail
the findings related to employment and procurement. This chapter will be
concluded by discussing the implications of this particular VCA study, potential nodes for intervention, and a critical discussion of the value of the VCA
applied to tourism research.
Tourism Value Chain Analysis – the Theoretical Background
Tourism has emerged as a key area of intervention for LEDC policy makers
and is seen as a route to broader development and shared growth, and consequently, tourism is included in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs)
of more than 80 per cent of low-income countries, including Mozambique.
However, no consensus seems to have emerged about tourism’s poverty reduction impacts and how these could be increased. Since early research on
tourism in LEDCs began in the 1980s, the academic community has retained
a rather pessimistic view of the sector’s value as a tool for poverty reduction
(e.g. Schilcher, 2007; Clancy, 1999; Brohman, 1996; Britton, 1982). Scheyvens
(2007, 2009) argues that tourism might not be effective as a tool for poverty reduction, but might instead increase the dependency of the ‘South’ on
‘Northern’ transnational corporations (TNCs). Several authors claim that
‘leakages’ – money that leaves the destination to pay for imports or is paid to
TNCs in the ‘North’ and thus never reaches the destination – are exceptionally
high in the tourism industry (e.g. Oppermann and Chon, 1997; Britton, 1982).
Zellmer.indd 28
8-12-2011 16:55:23
Pro-Poor Employment and Procurement
29
However, according to Bennett et al. (1999) research also indicates that tourism can act as a tool for poverty reduction as: i) the market comes to the producers; ii) it has the potential to create considerable inter-sectoral linkages; iii)
it is labour intensive; iv) it takes place in marginal areas; v) it employs a high
level of females; vi) it has limited barriers of entry; and vii) the sector is already
growing at a high rate in many LEDCs.
In order to understand if and how tourism can contribute to poverty reduction
more efficiently, research and technical assistance organisations such as the
Overseas Development Institute (ODI), the International Trade Centre (ITC),
and SNV Netherlands Development Organisation developed the ‘pro-poor
tourism value chain’ approach. This VCA focuses on the full range of activities that are required to bring a tourist to a destination and provide all the
necessary services (accommodation, catering, retail, excursions, etc.) during
a visitor’s stay, and identifies key points along the chain where interventions
could expand income opportunities for the poor.
VCA has been widely used in two distinctive, but related, disciplines and
fields of analysis. The first is primarily within management studies and is
concerned with intra-firm competitive analysis (Porter, 1985). Porter (1985: 33)
uses VCA as “a systematic way of examining all the activities a firm performs
and how they interact”. The aim of this type of VCA is to develop strategies
for an individual firm to increase its competitive advantage. The second approach focuses on meso-level investigations into the way in which industries
in LEDCs are integrated into the global economy, and the impacts this has
on development. This commodity-focused approach, titled ‘Filière’, which
maps the value chain and nodes of production, was developed in the 1960s by
French economists. Raikes et al. (2000: 403) state that it “is a loosely knit set
of studies with the common characteristic that they use the filière [or chain]
of activities and exchanges as a tool and to delimit the scope of their analysis.”
While Porter’s aim was to deliver prescriptive management strategies, the
‘Filière’ approach was primarily a descriptive mapping tool.
Gereffi (1994) expanded on the ‘Filière’ approach, using Wallerstein’s World
Systems Theory (Wallerstein, 1984) to focus on the importance of power relations within the value chain. Kaplinski and Morris (2004) brought these two
ideas together by focusing on how the value chain analysis could potentially
influence and optimise policy interventions. They argue that globalisation has
not resulted in a concomitant spread of benefits for all economic participants
and thus suggest that value chain analysis which “focuses on the dynamics of inter-linkages” (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2004: 2) is an appropriate tool
for understanding the causes and to develop intervention strategies that can
lead to more beneficial economic development in LEDCs. Similarly, Mitchell
and Ashley (2009: iv) argue that VCA is “a powerful diagnostic tool that can
Zellmer.indd 29
8-12-2011 16:55:23
30
identify critical issues and blockages for specific target groups – and provides
a framework for interventions to change the circumstances of the resource
poor”. VCA is particularly useful as it enables researchers to go beyond a single sector (such as tourism) by focusing on inter-sectoral linkages, and it allows the integration of both the formal and the informal sectors.
One of the distinctive features of VCA research is its concern with distributional issues, which have both power and income components. The former
concerns the balance of leverage which different parties have in determining
the distribution of roles in the tourism value chain and the returns which
accrue to different parties. The latter is concerned with the distribution of
income from tourism activity, and focuses on issues such as barriers of entry,
the measurement of income and profitability, the locality dimensions of the
tourism value chain distribution, the decomposition of recipients by class,
gender, ethnicity, etc. and the integration of small, medium and micro-enterprises (SMMEs) and the informal sector into the tourism value chains. However, while VCA provides a generic framework to describe both the behaviour
of costs as well as the existing and potential sources of differentiation it remains a descriptive construct providing a heuristic framework for the generation of data. Although it tells us what happens (i.e. how much income from
tourism goes to the ‘poor’), relatively little attention is paid to why it happens.
This chapter will therefore focus in-depth on the context in which tourism
development takes place in Inhambane to explain the VCA results presented.
This VCA was carried out to answer the following key questions:
i) What type of employment opportunities does the tourism sector offer in
Inhambane?
ii) Where do tourism businesses source their inputs?
iii)What are the Inhambane specific factors that reduce pro-poor impacts?
The data was collected using a mixed-method approach consisting of quantitative as well as qualitative data including questionnaires, interviews, focus
groups discussions, informal conversations and observations. This was further supplemented with secondary data. The sample was comprised of tourism 23 businesses (accommodation providers, catering outlets and excursion
centres) and 30 suppliers (handicraft producers, supermarkets, wholesalers,
and informal vendors). The selection was based on convenience sampling
(willingness to co-operate), but a representativeness in terms of geographical
area and size of business was intended (see Table 1).
Zellmer.indd 30
8-12-2011 16:55:23
Table 1
31
Respondents in this research
Total businesses
Sampled businesses
25
17
Catering outlets
9
4
Excursion centres
5
2
Accommodation providers
Supermarkets and other generic suppliers
18
5
Curio shops and handicraft vendors
49
11
Informal generic product suppliers
137
14
Total
243
53
Most of the primary data was collected in 2007, but this chapter reflects additional data collected until 2010, primarily via participation in meetings, participant observation, semi-structured interviews and conversations with key
stakeholders. The ‘poor’ are defined in this study as those with a low income
(less than US$ 2 per day), disadvantaged background and/or limited access
to basic services. Pro-poor income (PPI), defined as all “type of income that
is earned by poor people, whether from wages, sales earnings, tips, or community earnings” (Ashley et al., 2009: 13), was used as starting point for this
analysis. The PPI was calculated per node of the value chain.
Mozambique and Inhambane
Mozambique is located in South-East Africa bordered by the Indian Ocean and
the countries of South Africa, Tanzania, Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe and Swaziland. In 1975, Mozambique gained independence from Portugal and shortly
afterwards entered into an intense civil war ending only in 1992. At the end of
the civil war, Mozambique ranked among the poorest countries in the world
and currently it is still classified as a least developed country (LDC) with very
low socio-economic indicators. In the last decade, however, Mozambique has
experienced a notable economic recovery, with an average GDP growth rate of
7 per cent per annum. The per capita GDP in 2008 was estimated at US$ 428,
totalling US$ 9.7 billion for the country with roughly 23 million inhabitants
(Governo de Moçambique, 2009). The country’s poverty index was estimated
at 54.7 per cent in 2009 (Ministry of Planning and Development, 2010). The
economically active population in Mozambique is about six million people (26
per cent of the total population), consisting mainly of self-employed (52 per
cent) and unpaid family workers (34 per cent). Only 11 per cent of the economically active population is formally employed, of which 4 per cent is absorbed
by the public and 7 per cent by the private sector (INE, 2007).
Zellmer.indd 31
8-12-2011 16:55:23
32
While the National Action Plan for the Reduction of Extreme Poverty (PARPA)
regards “tourism as a complementary sector, due to the fact that it is linked
to many primary priorities” (MITUR, 2004: 7), Mozambique remains in the
early stages of development as a destination and its product base remains
largely underdeveloped (MITUR, 2003). Although the inherent strength of
the tourism product portfolio is spread over the entire country (2,700 km of
coastline, 11 parks and reserves and an abundance of cultural sites), the industry remains concentrated in the capital city of Maputo, where visitor arrivals
accounted for approximately 60 per cent of the total market share in 2010. In
2009, around 35,000 people were directly employed in the tourism sector,
representing 8.6 per cent of total formal private sector employment (MITUR,
2011). Indirect employment along the very diverse tourism supply chain, including the extensive informal sector, is estimated at 218,750 people (SNV,
2009b), equalling nearly nine times that of direct employment – indicating
the importance of a focus on local economic development and the integration
of the supply chain into discussions of tourism in Mozambique.
In 2010, fewer than two million international arrivals were registered, representing a very high annual average growth rate of 14 per cent since 2006.
Tourism’s share of the GDP was 2.2 per cent in 2008, and international tourism receipts in 2010 accounted for 8 per cent of national exports or just under
US$ 200 million (MITUR, 2011). The main source market is South Africa
representing 52 per cent of all visitors, while Africa as a whole accounts for
79 per cent.
The case study location selected for this study is the province of Inhambane
located on the southern coast of Mozambique and within the province the
Inhambane Peninsula. In 2009, The National Household Survey placed Inhambane among the poorest provinces in the country with a poverty index of
57.9 per cent (Ministry of Planning and Development, 2010). Inhambane was
chosen as the case study site given its high poverty levels and strong tourism
growth rate, with Inhambane currently being the second most visited destination within Mozambique, after the capital Maputo.
In 2007, tourism represented 7 per cent of the provincial GDP after mining,
agriculture and transport (Governo da Provincia de Inhambane, 2008; see
Table 2 for more details). In 2009, 125,000 tourists visited the province leading to just over 5,000 direct tourism jobs, which in turn represents 34 per
cent of the total formal employment in the private sector. On top of that it is
estimated that 23,437 people are indirectly employed in tourism (formally and
informally) (DPTURI, 2010).
Zellmer.indd 32
8-12-2011 16:55:23
Table 2:
33
Tourism sector performance indicators in Inhambane Province
Item
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Revenues of the
sector (mil US$)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
7.5
9.2
10.9
13.4
14.4
Amount of
Investment
(mil US$)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
3.2
18.4
89
150.5
175
Tourist Arrivals
(1000’s)
16.5
23.8
14.3
12.4
21.5
23.5
62.3
75.6
100.6
125.0
Employment
Generated
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2,542
3,351
3,833
4,521
5,165
Capacity of Bed
Nights
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
4,300
4,535
8,786
10,610
12,880
(Source: Governo da Provincia de Inhambane, 2008, 2009. Figures of 2000 – 2004 provided by the
National Statistics Bureau)
The officially recorded occupancy rates in Inhambane are extremely low and
have decreased from 18.5 per cent in 2006 to just under 10 per cent in 2010
(MITUR, 2011). There are two main reasons for this. Firstly, the lack of compliance with business reporting and a desire for tax evasion. A government tax
official stated that:
This occupancy rate is nonsense. Pousada da Maxixe [a local motel] is always
full, but they report only four guests per month in the high season and two in
the lower. Obviously these operators know that more guests mean more taxes
to pay and they just want to evade that.
Secondly, in recent years the key South African tourism market has increasingly invested in second home developments. These second-homes have provided intense competition to local businesses as their owners rent them to the
South African tourist market thus evading Mozambican business tax and bypassing official occupancy statistics. This is also evident in the sharp decline
of guest staying in commercial premises from nearly 26,000 guests in 2006
to fewer than 22,000 in 2010 despite the strong increase in tourism arrivals
(MITUR, 2011). These figures indicate that only 18.5 per cent of approximately
125,000 visitors to Inhambane are officially registered with commercial accommodation providers.
Similarly, the average length of stay in Inhambane has almost halved from
3.5 nights in 2006 to only 1.9 nights in 2010 (MITUR, 2011). It has always
been rather short given the lack of activities available locally, but coupled with
Zellmer.indd 33
8-12-2011 16:55:23
34
the strong development of second homes, Inhambane appears to have moved
from being a commercial holiday location to a weekend retreat for South African sun-seekers and divers, and property owners. This particular South
African financed second home development is also reflected in the tourist
spending in Inhambane. While it is estimated that that an average tourist in
Mozambique spends US$ 278 per day (MITUR, 2011); the estimate for Inhambane is less than a third of this at just US$ 80 per day in 2007 (SNV, 2007).
Employment and Procurement in Inhambane’s Tourism Industry
There is no doubt that tourism is an important engine of growth for the local economy in Inhambane. However, the structure of the industry and the
particular tourist market, i.e. the reliance on South African self-drive tourists,
seems to pose considerable challenges. Figure 1 shows that only around 13 per
cent of tourism income goes to the poor. Two subsectors can be highlighted
because they represent the two opposite extremes of the continuum. Shopping, which includes products such as handicrafts, fruits and vegetables, is
the most pro-poor oriented with a pro-poor income (PPI) of 83 per cent. In
this subsector the majority of businesses is micro scale and owned and operated by poor local people. However, the contribution of the subsector to the
total PPI is modest and only represents 1.4 per cent of total expenditure. At
the other end of the scale is the excursion sector (e.g. diving and fishing). The
overall majority of businesses in this subsector are owned by foreigners and
many occupations are filled by foreigners, diminishing the PPI to only 3.5 per
cent while at the same time this subsector receives 33 per cent of expenditure,
the second highest after the accommodation sector.
Employment
The tourism industry is generally considered highly labour intensive, being
depended on high numbers of low-skilled and unskilled workers, and a particularly important employer of women, who are often the most marginalised
segments of society. However, working conditions are often characterised by
wages being at least 20 per cent less than those paid by other sectors, high
staff turnover, irregular and unsociable working hours, seasonality of employment, and low unionisation (ILO, 2001). In Inhambane, for the local people
direct employment is the most tangible socio-economic impact of tourism
with a total income of US$ 2.1 million per annum. The VCA revealed that the
sampled businesses permanently employ approximately 1,000 Mozambicans
in lodges and restaurants and approximately 500 additional seasonal workers,
with 9,370 indirect employees throughout the supply chain. This represents
approximately 45 per cent of formal private sector employment and is very
considerable.
Zellmer.indd 34
8-12-2011 16:55:23
35
Figure 1: PPI as part of total expenditure along the value-chain
TOTAL TOURISM EXPENDITURE
100%
US$ 21,482,949.60
TOTAL PRO-POOR INCOME (PPI)
13.3%
US$ 2,856,436.30
Accommodation
53.6%
US$ 11,512,695.60
16.5% PPI
US$ 4.42 per day / per person
F&B, Restaurants
9.5%
US$ 2,033,000.00
18.4% PPI
Shopping
1.4%
US$ 293,126.00
83.3% PPI
Local Transport
2.7%
US$ 583,688.00
15.6% PPI
Excursions & Activities
32.9%
US$ 7,057,440.00
3.5% PPI
Employment is generally provided in the form of rather basic, low-skilled
and menial jobs with wages rarely exceeding minimum wage (US$ 100 per
month). However, the advantage of the tourism industry, when compared to
other sectors, is that those employees in direct contact with tourists can earn
additional income through tips (roughly US$ 16 per month extra as an average for all employees). While this amount seems low, it should to be taken
into consideration that not all employees are in direct contact with visitors to
receive tips and that tourism in Inhambane is very seasonal with peak seasons
over the Christmas and Easter holidays. The majority of employees are male
(74 per cent) and women predominately occupied ‘back-stage’ positions such
as housekeeping, supervised by male managers. Interviewees explained that
housekeeping activities carried out early in the morning fit better into women’s livelihood activities, and that women in Inhambane are comparably less
educated than men and are not typically trained in hospitality management.
Furthermore, interviewees referred to local traditions and customs, stating
Zellmer.indd 35
8-12-2011 16:55:24
36
that women working at night in the tourism industry were viewed with suspicion by their communities.
In addition, 225 foreign staff members are working for the surveyed establishments. Although the number may seem modest (15 per cent of total employment in the tourism industry), foreign staff account for 92 per cent of all
managerial positions. As in many comparable LEDC destinations, 98 per cent
of local employees have never received any formal training and are employed
as waiters, barmen, cooks, housekeepers and security guards; while managerial positions are occupied by foreign owners or employees. While owners/managers show concern about the low skills levels, they have no plans
to combine resources to establish joint training programmes. Instead, inhouse training is the common approach. This, however, has limited impact
as owners/managers generally have little knowledge of the tourism industry
and view Inhambane simply as a nice place to retire and start a leisure business. Furthermore, owners/managers are reluctant to enrol staff in external
training programmes due to the fear that well trained personnel might be
poached by other businesses, which is a common practice on the Inhambane
peninsula. At the time of writing, no hospitality training is provided locally
and the closest professional hotel school is located 500km away in the capital
Maputo. Although in 2003 the Eduardo Mondlane University Tourism School
was established in Inhambane, it focuses on management education rather
than training operative staff (e.g. waiters, barmen, cooks, housekeeper, and
receptionists). As a consequence many of the graduates are unwilling to work
for the low class establishments found in Inhambane – 83 per cent are 3 star
or below (MITUR, 2011; Sharma and Christie, 2010). This investment risk
aversion coupled with the belief voiced by one private tourism provider that
“it is not my duty to provide training. Someone else should be doing that”,
means that local employees have limited career opportunities due to the lack
of essential skills. To circumvent the training needs in the short-term, the
government established a mobile training unit, stationed in Inhambane for
nine months in 2009. However, this training unit is not supported by the
local private sector as they feel that the courses offered are not aligned with
industry needs. It is feared by South African owners that the trainers brought
in from Brazil for their language and tourism experience might not have sufficient knowledge of how to cater for the predominately South African market
(ESHTI, 2010). Furthermore, the local industry is unwilling to send off their
staff for five-month courses targeted mainly at business starters as they fear
that upon completion staff would move on to better paying competitors, or
indeed start up their own business and even increase competition.
Apart from direct and indirect employment, in many LEDC tourism destinations outsourcing of services can provide a vital link between the tourism
industry and local businesses. Outsourcing, which has seen a considerable
Zellmer.indd 36
8-12-2011 16:55:24
37
increase since the early 1990s, is according to Robinson et al. (1998), a process
of identifying a company’s core competencies, to ‘trim fat’ and streamline
procedures. The outsourcing of non-core activities such as laundry services,
security, guiding and merchandise offers potential for the tourism sector to
contribute to the development of small and medium size enterprises (SMEs)
through backward supply linkages (e.g. Telfer and Wall, 2000; Alila and
McCormick, 1997). Meyer (2007) argues that these backward supply linkages
can not only increase the technical know-how of SMEs but also ease their access to credits and the market, improving the quality of the products offered
and thus the sustainability of the business venture. This VCA found that outsourced employment in Inhambane was mainly found in bookkeeping and
security services, while other services were mostly done in-house. Therefore,
apart from direct employment, the indirect employment impacts were rather
limited (see Table 3).
Table 3:
Type of services: outsourced vs. internal
Type of Services
Accountancy
Services Currently
Outsourced (% )
Services Currently
sources in-house (%)
No response (%)
71
29
-
5
95
-
Repair, maintenance
(vehicles, boats)
15
85
-
Repairing & maintenance
(electrical installations,
buildings)
23
77
-
Laundry
Carpentry
29
71
-
Construction
33
67
-
Plumbing
24
76
-
Gardening
4
87
9
Transport
38
62
-
Private security
14
86
-
Marketing
19
81
-
5
57
38
Training
(Source: SNV, 2007: 25)
Outsourcing is severely restricted due to several factors including mistrust between business owners and local companies in terms of quality and reliability
of the services provided, and a high number of informal sector operators are
unable to provide receipts and documents required by the government tax departments. There are very few organised service providers in Inhambane and
people who are qualified preferred to work in Maputo where they earn higher
wages. It was difficult to obtain detailed information from service providers
Zellmer.indd 37
8-12-2011 16:55:24
38
due to many being informal sector operators who maintained very limited
records, and their fear of being taxed. However, income can be estimated at
US$ 200+ per month with their main clients being individual foreign secondhome owners. Mechanics, for example are criticised for lack of equipment
and skills and therefore only 15 per cent of establishments used these services.
Similarly, only just under 30 per cent of carpentry services are outsourced.
Bookkeeping services, on the other hand, are frequently bought in due to the
fact that many foreign operators have been fined by the Labour and Financial Departments for incorrect administrative procedures in the past. To avoid
this, they hire local accountancy firms.
Many authors conclude that the informal sector offers opportunities for indigenous, grassroots participation in the tourism industry (e.g. Long and Wall,
1995; Farver, 1984) as it is characterised by low entry barriers, a reliance on
indigenous resources, family ownership, small scale operation, labour intensiveness, skills acquired outside the formal school system, part-time labour,
locally-based ventures and unregulated and competitive markets (Thomas,
1992; Castells and Portes, 1989; Griffith, 1987; Davies, 1979; Tokman, 1978).
However, in Inhambane most services are sourced internally as 86 per cent
of tourism establishments are not satisfied by the goods and services offered
locally due to lack of consistency in quality, quantity, pricing, and documentation.
Procurement
Meyer (2007) argues that the majority of studies investigating procurement
have focused on the agricultural sector given that it is estimated that approximately 30% of tourist expenditure is on foodstuff (Torres, 2003; Belisle, 1983).
Several studies have also noted the failure of inter-sectoral linkages to develop
(Mbaiwa, 2000; Taylor et al., 1991). In Inhambane it was revealed that the procurement of local goods was relatively weak with few exceptions.
As can be seen in Table 4, apart from seafood, the majority of food and beverages consumed in tourism businesses on the Inhambane peninsula are not
sourced locally (67 per cent).
The VCA in 2007 established that of the US$ 595,128 almost all food and beverage items (except seafood) originate from either South Africa or other parts
of Mozambique. The relative low amount of produce sourced locally (33%) is
a result of the climatic and soil conditions in most parts of the Inhambane
peninsula. Furthermore, restaurant menus are dominated by international
cuisine, primarily South African. Traditional dishes like Mathapa are only
available in two or three restaurants and not regularly served.
Zellmer.indd 38
8-12-2011 16:55:24
Table 4:
39
Summary of local procurement in 2007 (in US$)
Total value
Beverages
Sourced nationally or
internationally
Sourced locally
172,447
Meat/poultry/dairy
153,511
145,836
7,676
0.5%
Seafood
128,871
0
128,871
100%
Fruit & Vegetables
103,538
64,194
39,344
38%
23,781
14,268
9,513
40%
595,128
396,745
198,384
33%
Others
Total
12,980
7%
185,427
(Source: SNV, 2007: 11)
As in most LEDCs, the level of beverages purchased from local producers is
very small (approximately 8 per cent). The annual consumption of beverages
is 31.2 per cent (US$ 185,427) of total food and beverage demand. However,
as expected, all high value produce (e.g. spirits, wines) are imported, and two
businesses (Handling and Translandia) supply more than 90 per cent of the
tourism industry’s demand of beverages. It is discouraging that Inhambane,
a large-scale producer of citrus fruits and coconuts, plays such a minor role in
the provision of beverages to the tourism industry.
The annual consumption value of meat, poultry and dairy products is
US$ 153,511 (25.8 per cent of the total food and beverage demand). In Inhambane there is very limited livestock farming, and meat and dairy processing
units are almost non-existent, resulting in almost all tourism industry demands being met by South African imports. The local abattoir does not process the meat, slaughters fewer than 50 animals (cows and goats) per year, and
uses rudimentary processing and hygiene standards, making it insignificant
in the tourism supply chain. Although the demand for milk and dairy pro
ducts is high in the area, the local supply of one to two tons per month is not
sufficient.
Inhambane is a coastal destination with substantial demand for seafood. The
VCA showed that the consumption of seafood represents 21.7 per cent of total food and beverage value. Currently there are three major fishing zones:
Tofo, Barra and Jangamo with 234 fishermen. The fish is normally sold on the
beach at midday where a small number of middlemen purchase the produce
for the tourism establishments. It is estimated that approximately 30 per cent
of establishments purchase directly from the fishermen. There are currently
137 seafood vendors at the markets of Mafureira, Giló and the central market
in Inhambane City. The VCA estimates that the tourism industry supports
around 200 jobs in fisheries on the Inhambane peninsula. Although most
seafood consumed by the tourism industry is purchased locally, the fishermen
Zellmer.indd 39
8-12-2011 16:55:24
40
and vendors struggle with a series of complex issues. Firstly, adequate systems to process and conserve the fish are not available. Hence, traditional
methods, such as sawfish being cut and sold in the open space on corrugated
iron boards are used which can’t offer adequate hygiene standards for tourists. Secondly, the limited access to power creates problems for the storage
of shellfish. Thirdly, sea-use conflicts are emerging where the construction
of lodges prohibits access to the sea for fishermen, in particularly in Barra.
Similarly, conflicts exist between diving operations and fishermen, where the
latter are concerned that they are being pushed away from the most lucrative
fishing grounds. Fourthly, fishermen raised concerns over the costs of fishing
equipment, as no local supplies were available. Because of these issues, there
has been a gradual decline in the number of fishermen in Barra, as locals opt
for more secure jobs in the tourism industry.
Fruits and vegetables represent 17.4 per cent of the total estimated food and
beverage consumption. Tourism businesses tend to opt for products from
South Africa, due to the fact that these products can be kept for a longer period of time and simply are more aesthetically pleasing. Although there seems
to be good potential for cultivating tropical fruits in Inhambane, both fruits
and vegetables tend to be sourced from South Africa mainly due to production related seasonal fluctuations. Taurus, the main supplier (62 per cent of
all vegetables and fruits consumed), explains that the lack of local sourcing is
related to poor quality and inconsistency in supplies. Approximately 300 vendors trade at four markets frequented by tourists in Inhambane and it is estimated that tourism supports around 65 jobs in selling, and another 80 jobs
in farming these supplies. This extremely low seller/producer ratio is linked
to the fact that the majority of farms are subsistence or low scale farming
operations.
Complimentary products and services is an area with the potential for considerable gains in Inhambane peninsula, not just for the provider in terms of
financial returns, but more so for the tourists in terms of extending the length
of stay and creating a memorable experience. These products and services exist currently at a limited extent (see Table 5), but are expected to increase given
the arrival of more European tourists interested in these experiences.
According to the Head of Culture in the Municipal Council there are around
thirty cultural groups in the area. The main activities of these groups are
dance, music, theatre and the promotion of local attires. However, currently
only two cultural groups which operate in Barra are directly involved in the
tourism industry.
Zellmer.indd 40
8-12-2011 16:55:24
41
Table 5: Complimentary products and services on offer
Complementary Products
Establishments
Establishments
No Response
currently offering (%) interested in offering
(%)
(%)
Exotic food and delicacies
38
33
29
Nature walk
19
43
38
Cultural programme (traditional
dances, music and theatre)
14
76
10
City tours
19
62
19
Handicrafts
19
57
24
Bicycles
0
10
Local guides services
14
48
38
Children entertainment
19
43
38
(Source: SNV, 2007: 28)
Timothy and Wall (1995) argue that souvenir and craft vendors are one of the
most ubiquitous segments of the informal sector in developing countries, and
one that has widespread tourist appeal. The sale of handicraft is either directly
from the producer to the tourists, or from the producer to tourism businesses
who then sell it in their resort shops to tourists or use the items as decorations
(e.g. baskets, weaves, soaps). Several studies found that while selling directly
to tourists is often highly lucrative it is also often characterised by a very complex industry structure that often does not permit direct access of the poorest
craft producers to the consumer. Given that the handicraft sector is often advocated as a key opportunity for local women groups to enter the market, this
provides considerable challenges. In Inhambane this complex situation was
exacerbated by the fact that tourist spending on souvenirs was extremely low.
This VCA estimates that expenditure per day was around US$ 80 of which
approximately 96 per cent was spent on accommodation and catering, leaving
only 4 per cent for out of pocket expenditure on leisure activities, crafts and
souvenirs – or just over US$ 3 per day.
Similarly, the sale to accommodation providers in Inhambane is very limited
due to the fact that the curios sold in hotels are either imported, or produced
by a small number of craft-producers who are directly employed by the hotels, such as for example tailors who make beach clothes out of Capulana
(a colourful local fabric). Furthermore, most of the drive-in tourists from
neighbouring countries are repeat visitors and show decreasing interest in
buying local handcrafts. Fly-in visitors, on the other hand are less likely to
buy larger basketry items, while all other goods are easily available elsewhere
in the country and in airport shopping facilities. The VCA found that even
so-called ‘local’ handicrafts were frequently produced in Maputo and sold
by Maputo residents. Combining the Mozambican curios sold by locals and
Zellmer.indd 41
8-12-2011 16:55:24
42
Maputo r esidents, it is estimated that they generate an annual income of approximately US$ 168,240. According to information from the Inhambane
Municipality, there are 49 artisans involved in handicrafts who rely almost exclusively on tourism, with certain exceptions such as large wooden sculptures
or paintings sold to companies for adornment purposes or the local purchase
of baskets or ceramics for domestic use. One of the biggest challenges faced by
the artisans is the lack of differentiation and innovation. The very same pieces
sold in Maputo (with better finishing) are available in Inhambane. However,
the sale of craft produce remains one of the most ‘pro-poor’ sectors in Mozambique after fisheries.
Conclusion
As has been illustrated by the Inhambane case study, the employment and
pro-poor income opportunities within the tourism industry value chain are
often less than hoped for. Employment has a considerable socio-economic impact in terms of actual numbers of jobs created and is growing with increasing arrivals. However, due to the very low skills base of the local population
and the lack of adequate training facilities, the remuneration is low and many
of the skilled jobs are taken by foreigners, the majority from neighbouring
South Africa. Local employees could see increased economic benefits if they
were provided with professional training and career development opportunities, as well as the opportunity to earn more tips for improved service delivery.
The fact that most tourism establishments are below three stars has a direct
impact on the type of jobs available, and the attitude of managers and owners
towards staff training and development. Some operators believe it is not their
responsibility to provide training; some are too small and prioritise immediate operational problems over planning for the future in terms of human
resources. Perhaps most importantly, most owners have no background in
the tourism industry and are unaware of the standards that can be achieved
through training. Taking into account the characteristic of the local tourism
industry, collaborative training programmes in which operators share the cost
of training would be beneficial for both employees and employers.
The tourism industry intrinsically possesses characteristics that make it appealing to LEDCs such as employment generation and inter-sectoral linkages,
but these positive economic impacts do not occur automatically. In the case
of Inhambane it was found that because of the weaknesses of other economic sectors such as agriculture, the possibilities of inter-sectoral linkages are
at the moment very limited. Restaurants in Inhambane simply cannot buy
many foodstuffs from local smallholder farmers because the production is
extremely low. Destinations such as Inhambane that are reliant on frequent
Zellmer.indd 42
8-12-2011 16:55:24
43
return visitors cannot base economic development on handicraft sales, which
in many other destinations can offer considerable opportunities for poor suppliers to access the market. To overcome this, investment in supply side activities (agriculture, livestock, etc.) is required, not only to diversify the economic
base, but fundamentally to allow locals to produce quality products that can
compete with imported products and reduce leakages.
One of the key characteristics of tourism in Inhambane is its dependency
on tourists from neighbouring countries. Just over 50 per cent of visitors to
Inhambane are South Africans, who are known to be willing tourism spenders. Nevertheless, the characteristics of this segment reveal some issues for
concern. Firstly, the majority of South African visitors stay in private, South
African owned accommodation and will not use local accommodation. Not
only does this strong second-home development create competition with local
providers, it also leads to land use conflicts between fishers and the tourism
industry and price inflation for land. Secondly, second-home developments
circumvent income tax for the local municipalities. Thirdly, these tourists
tend to be self-drive tourists who bring with them the items they plan to consume while on holiday, even petrol. This means that very little is spent on local supplies, which is evident in the very minimal expenditures per day. There
are no easy and obvious measures to control this as private home ownership
by foreigners is permitted by Mozambican laws.
The use of VCA facilitated the identification of nodes that promise PPI opportunities. However, there are also several caveats that need to be taken into consideration in order to inform further research in this area. The VCA used by
SNV focuses on the nodes in the local destination only. This is certainly useful but it does not assess the wider supply chain. One of the aims of applying
the VCA method is to highlight opportunities to reduce leakages. Focusing on
just the local area might be far too narrow and is not sufficiently explaining
the leakages (out of the area and the country), and how these could be reduced. Using Gereffi’s (1994) Global Value Chain approach which focuses on
the whole value chain rather than just the destination might explain in more
detail why the South African market tends to bring goods into the country,
and most importantly, how much of the tourism dollars actually flow abroad.
This is particularly important for this case study and should be incorporated
in future research.
Furthermore, the current VCA approach overlooks the potential for qualitative research methods. The core emphasis on spending often does not address why things are happening – although we hope to have provided some
explanation. Qualitative interviews with tourists and foreign home-owners
combined with their spending patterns would have been particularly useful.
Similarly, voices from the tourism industry in South Africa, the generators of
Zellmer.indd 43
8-12-2011 16:55:24
44
international arrivals could have provided considerable additional information. However, one of the largest problems is access to reliable data. The tourism sector in Inhambane acknowledges that it currently lacks the capacity to
objectively collect and systematise accurate statistics. Data that is available
generally refer only to national or provincial data rather than destination data.
Organisations like SNV Netherlands Development Organisation and other
entities that have interest in analysing the tourism phenomena produce their
own statistics tailored to the destinations, creating a scenario in which a research can find substantially different figures for the same reality.
Another critical concept when using VCA is the concept of ‘poor’ and PPI. By
defining ‘poor’ in merely economic terms (e.g. less than US$ 2/day), other
dimensions of poverty such as access to basic services (water, sanitation, education, electricity, etc.) and the all-important aspects of powerlessness, insecurity and vulnerability may be overlooked. However, when all these variables
are considered, the data collection can become rather complex and even impractical. Value Chain Analysis clearly has its shortcomings when studying
the realities of poverty. However, it is able to point to immediate intervention
points and it is hoped that these might be acted upon.
Zellmer.indd 44
8-12-2011 16:55:24
45
References
Alila, P.O. and D. McCormick (1997) Firm linkages in Kenya’s tourism sector. Discussion Paper
No. 297, Institute for Development Studies. Brighton: IDS.
Ashley, C., Mitchell, J. and A. Spenceley (2009) Opportunity study guidelines, tourism led
poverty reduction programme. Report to the International Trade Centre’s Export-Led
Poverty Reduction Program UNCTAD.
Belisle, F. J. (1983) Tourism and food production in the Caribbean. Annals of Tourism Research
10 (4) pp. 497-513.
Bennett, O., Roe, D. and C. Ashley (1999) Sustainable tourism and poverty elimination: a report
for the Department for International Development. London: IIED and ODI.
Britton, S. (1982) The political economy of tourism in the Third World. Annals of Tourism
Research 9 (3) pp. 331–358.
Brohman, J. (1996) New directions for tourism in Third World development. Annals of
Tourism Research 23 (1) pp. 48–70.
Castells, M. and A. Portes (1989) World underneath: the origins, dynamics, and effects of
the informal economy. In: Portes, A., Castells, M. and L.A. Benton, eds., The Informal
Economy: Studies in Advanced and Less Developed Countries. Baltimore: John Hopkins
University Press, pp. 11-37.
Clancy, M. (1999) Tourism and development: Evidence from Mexico. Annals of Tourism
Research 26 (1) pp. 1–20.
Davies, R. (1979) Informal sector or subordinate mode of production? In: Bromley, R. and
C. Gerry, eds., Casual Work and Poverty in Third World Cities. Chichester: Wiley,
pp. 87-104.
DPTURI – Direcção Provincial de Turismo de Inhambane (2010) Relatório do Desempenho
Anual da Direcção Provincial do Turismo de Inhambane para o Ano de 2009. Relatório
Interno.
ESHTI (2010) Relatório de Avaliação dos Resultados do Programa de Capacitação dos
Trabalhadores das Estâncias Turísticas da Cidade de Inhambane, Praia do Tofo e Praia da
Barra. Relatório de Consultoria.
Farver, J.A.M. (1984) Tourism and employment in The Gambia. Annals of Tourism Research 11
(2) pp. 249–265.
Gereffi, G. (1994) The organization of buyer-driven Global commodity chains: how U.S.
retailers shape overseas production networks. In: Gereffi, G. and M.E. Korzeniewicz, eds.,
Commodity Chains and Global Capitalism. Santa Barbara: Praeger, pp. 95-122.
Governo da Provincia de Inhambane (2008) Balanço do Plano Económico e Social do Ano 2007.
Relatório.
Governo da Provincia de Inhambane (2009) Balanço do Plano Económico e Social do Ano
2008. Relatório.
Governo de Moçambique (2009) Plano Económico e Social para 2009. Relatório.
Griffith, H.D. (1987) Beach operations: their contributions to tourism in Barbados. Caribbean
Finance and Management 3: pp. 55–65.
Zellmer.indd 45
8-12-2011 16:55:24
46
ILO – International Labour Office (2001) Human Resources Development, Employment and
Globalization in the Hotel, Catering and Tourism Sector. Geneva: International Labour
Office.
INE – Instituto Nacional de Estatística (2007) Censo Populacional 2007. Maputo: INE.
Kaplinsky, R. and M. Morris (2004) A handbook for value chain research. Institute of
Development Studies, University of Sussex.
Long, V. and G. Wall (1995) Small-scale tourism development in Bali. In: Conlin, M.V. and
T. Baum, eds., Island Tourism: Management Principles and Practice. Chichester: Wiley,
pp. 237-257.
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2000) The impact of tourism in the Okavango Delta in North-Western Botswana.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Climate Change, Biodiversity, MultiSpecies Production Systems and Sustainable Livelihoods in the Kalahari Region, Maun,
Botswana. October, 2000.
Mbaiwa, J. E. and M. Darkoh (2009) The socio-economic impacts of tourism in the Okavango
Delta, Botswana. In: Saarinen, J., Becker, F., Manwa, H. and D. Wilson, eds., Sustainable
Tourism in Southern Africa: Local Communities and Natural Resources In Transition. Bristol:
Channel View Publications, pp. 210-230.
Meyer, D. (2007) Pro-poor tourism: from leakages to linkages: a conceptual framework
for creating linkages between the accommodation sector and ‘poor’ neighbouring
communities. Current Issues in Tourism 10 (6) pp. 558-583.
Ministry of Planning and Development (2010) Poverty and wellbeing in Mozambique: third
national poverty assessment. Maputo: National Directorate for Planning and Development.
Mitchell, J. and C. Ashley (2009) Value chain analysis and poverty reduction at scale. ODI
Working Paper 49, London: Overseas Development Institute.
MITUR – Ministério de Turismo (2003) Mozambique National Tourism Policy. Maputo:
Imprensa Nacional.
MITUR – Ministério de Turismo (2004) Strategic Plan for Tourism Development in
Mozambique (2004-2013). Maputo: Imprensa Nacional.
MITUR – Ministério de Turismo (2011) Indicadores de Referência na Área do Turismo. Maputo:
Direcção de Planificação e Cooperação.
Nhantumbo, E. (2007) Tendência de Desenvolvimento do Turismo e Alteração na Ocupação,
Utilização do Espaço do Município de Inhambane. Inhambane: ESHTI.
Oppermann, M. and K.S. Chon (1997) Tourism in developing countries. London: International
Thompson Business Press.
Page, S. (1999) Tourism and development: the evidence from Mauritius, South Africa and
Zimbabwe. ODI Working Paper, London: Overseas Development Institute.
Porter, M.E. (1985) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance.
New York: The Free Press.
Raikes, P., Friis-Jensen, M. and S. Ponte (2000) Global commodity chain analysis and the
French Filière approach. Economy and Society 29 (3) pp.390-417.
Robinson, S., Seaf, S. and L. Kantor (1998) The case of outsourcing partnerships: branding
and repositioning food and beverages. Arthur Andersen Hospitality and Leisure Executive
Report. New York: Arthur Anderson.
Zellmer.indd 46
8-12-2011 16:55:24
47
Scheyvens, R. (2007) Exploring the poverty-tourism nexus. Current Issues in Tourism 10 (2/3)
pp. 231–254.
Scheyvens, R. (2009) Pro-poor tourism: is there value beyond the rhetoric? Tourism
Recreation Research 34 (2) pp. 191–196.
Schilcher, D. (2007) Growth versus equity: the continuum of pro-poor tourism and neoliberal
governance. Current Issues in Tourism 10 (2/3) pp. 166–193.
Sharma, A. and I.T. Christie (2010) Performance assessment using value-chain analysis in
Mozambique. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 22 (3)
pp. 282-299.
SNV – Netherlands Development Organisation (2007) Tourism and socio-economic
development in Inhambane: the status on the development of linkages between the local
economy and the tourism sector. Unpublished internal SNV report.
SNV – Netherlands Development Organisation (2009a) ESA regional strategic plan 2010-12:
pro-poor tourism. Unpublished internal SNV report.
SNV – Netherlands Development Organisation (2009b) Estudo da Cadeia de Valor do Turismo
da Cidade de Maputo. Relatorio. Maputo: SNV.
Taylor, B.E., Morison, J.B. and E.M. Fleming (1991) The economic impact of food import
substitution in The Bahamas. Social and Economic Studies 40:
pp. 45–62.
Telfer, D. and G. Wall (2000) Strengthening backward economic linkages: local food
purchasing by three Indonesian hotels. Tourism Geographies 2 (4) pp. 421–447.
Telfer, D. and R. Sharpley (2008) Tourism and development in the developing world. London:
Routledge.
Thomas, J.J. (1992) Informal economic activity, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan
Press.
Timothy, D.J. and G. Wall (1995) Tourist accommodation in an Asian historic city. Journal of
Tourism Studies 6 (1) pp. 63-73.
Tokman, V. (1978) An exploration into the nature of the informal-formal sector relationship.
World Development 6 (9-10) pp. 1065–1075.
Torres, R. (2003) Linkages between tourism and agriculture in Mexico. Annals of Tourism
Research 30 (3) pp. 546-566.
Wallerstein, I. (1984) Politics of the world-economy: the states, the movements and the
civilizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Zellmer.indd 47
8-12-2011 16:55:24
Zellmer.indd 48
8-12-2011 16:55:24
3 Factors Constraining the
Linkages between the Tourism
Industry and Local Suppliers
of Meats in Zanzibar
Wineaster Anderson* and Saleh Juma**
Many developing countries strive to embrace the tourism industry and link it
with local agricultural produce as a means of expanding local markets which,
in turn, contributes to economic development. Linking the tourism industry
with local agriculture is crucial for poverty reduction in developing economies
because the majority of their people depend on agriculture-related activities
for survival (IFAD, 2003). The tourism industry has high potential to provide
a worthwhile market for local agricultural produce in destination countries as
it increases the share of the poor from the tourist dollar spent at the destination (Mitchell and Ashley, 2010).
The concept of local linkages has been defined generally as the mechanisms
through which businesses build economic links with residents in their local
economy (Anderson, 2008; Pattullo, 1996). The expansion of local linkages
connotes the increased usage of other sectors at the destination, which stimulates the economy as a whole and creates synergy effects between sectors
(Mitchell and Page, 2005; Goodwin and Bah, 2003). Taking on a sector specific approach, Ashley et al. (2002) refer to the linkage between tourism and the
local agricultural sector as a situation in which each of the two sectors benefits from each other’s activities. Despite these promises, local linkages have
failed in many destinations due to the numerous challenges that confront the
tourism industry. The most recognised of these challenges, particularly in developing economies, include poor infrastructure, poor product development
*
**
Zellmer.indd 49
Department of Marketing, University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Zanzibar, Tanzania
8-12-2011 16:55:25
50
and management, poor marketing, poor linkages within local economy, poor
institutional and technical capabilities, and shortage of appropriate and specialised core and skilled personnel (Mitchell and Faal, 2006).
Counter-acting these challenges, there is need for innovative analyses to identify opportunities for inclusive and sustainable tourism development. In this
respect, the analysis of the value chains to identify local economic linkages
is of paramount importance. To this end, we will explore in this chapter the
factors constraining the linkages between the tourism industry and local suppliers of local beef and chicken meats in Zanzibar. After introducing the case
study area, the current linkages between tourism and local suppliers in Zanzibar are briefly analysed and major challenges are identified. We conclude
the chapter by pointing towards a few ideas that could improve the linkage
between the tourism industry and the local meat suppliers in Zanzibar.
The Zanzibar Archipelago
Zanzibar is a semi-autonomous state within Tanzania, made up of the islands
of Unguja and Pemba. Like many developing economies, this archipelago relies heavily on agriculture, with the majority of its citizens making their living
from subsistence farming and fishing. Poverty rates are more than 50 per cent
(GoZ, 2007). In recognition of this challenge, Zanzibar has launched several
measures intended to tackle poverty, including the adoption of the Zanzibar
Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty commonly known as MKUZA,
which advocates inter-sectoral linkages (RGoZ, 2010). Following the decline
of clove production and the fall of its price in the international markets in the
early 1990s, Zanzibar adopted tourism as a priority sector for its economic
growth. Tourism accounts for over 51 per cent of Zanzibar’s GDP with an annual growth rate of between nine and 10 per cent over the past five years (Steck
et al., 2010). Consequently, annual tourist arrivals have increased drastically
over the last years, from 86,918 in 1999 to 134,919 in 2009. This gain due to
increased tourist arrivals may be offset by losses, both in terms of revenue
leakage, and failure to involve the local people in meaningful activities to improve their welfare. Current tourism activities in Zanzibar are guided by the
Promotion of Tourism Act (1996), the Zanzibar Tourism Master Plan (URT,
2003), Zanzibar Tourism Policy Statement (RGoZ, 2003), and the Strategy for
Half a Million Tourists in Zanzibar 2005-2014 (RGoZ, 2005). These documents declare explicitly the desire and the need to link tourism with agriculture and other economic sectors.
With regard to important tourist markets Europe is by far the most important,
accounting for around 75 per cent of tourist arrivals. Italy alone accounts for
over one third of all direct arrivals in Zanzibar, mainly due to increased direct
Zellmer.indd 50
8-12-2011 16:55:25
Linkages between the Tourism Industry and Local Meat Suppliers
51
flights together with the creation of all-inclusive resort hotels. The UK market
makes up 10 per cent of international arrivals, whereas South Africa, USA
and Scandinavia are gradually becoming important markets. As Table 1 summarises, currently there are about 349 registered hotels with 7,009 rooms and
13,198 beds (ZCf T, 2010).
Table 1:
Distribution of accommodation capacity in Zanzibar in 2009
Place
Registered
Establishments
Rooms
Beds
Unguja:
North & East Coast
91
3,167
6,219
South & East Coast
106
1,732
3,159
Stone Town & Ng’ambo
85
1,134
2,057
Suburb Town Vicinity
48
764
1,351
Pemba:
Total
19
212
412
349
7,009
13,198
(Source: Zanzibar Commission for Tourism, 2010)
The potential benefits of tourism to the development of local economic sectors have been widely acknowledged (e.g. McBain, 2007; Ashley et al., 2006;
Telfer, 2000). In Zanzibar, most of the government policies related to tourism development, for example the Zanzibar Tourism Master Plan 2003 (URT,
2003), Zanzibar Tourism Policy Statement 2003 (RGoZ, 2003), the Strategy
for Half a Million Tourists in Zanzibar 2005-2014 (RGoZ, 2005) and MKUZA
II (RGoZ, 2010) have been formulated based on the assumption that the economic benefits of tourism would stimulate the development of other economic
sectors through increased demand for local agricultural commodities. However, despite these positive intentions by the government and other key stakeholders, the linkages between tourism and local suppliers in Zanzibar are not
encouraging. There has been a particular concern that many hotels and restaurants import a substantial amount of their food requirements (Anderson,
2011a; Steck et al., 2010; ZATI, 2009; ZBC, 2009).
In order to realise the positive impact of tourism on poverty reduction, it is
necessary to create strong linkages with other economic sectors, particularly
the agricultural sector. However, the linkage between tourism and local suppliers of agricultural commodities is constrained by many barriers ranging
from demand and supply to legal and constitutional factors (see Meyer, 2006;
O’Driscoll, 2005; Torres and Skillicorn, 2004; Torres, 2003; Torres, 2002;
Telfer, 2000; Belisle, 1983). This chapter focuses on the sector specific approach and reveals the demand and supply related factors constraining the
Zellmer.indd 51
8-12-2011 16:55:25
52
linkages between the tourism industry and local suppliers of local beef and
chicken meats in Zanzibar.
The decision to focus on beef and chicken meats in this chapter is based on
the evidence reported by the ZATI (2009) that only 10 per cent of beef and
chicken meat consumed in local tourist hotels and restaurants is sourced from
local suppliers. Until now, and to our knowledge, there has been no study conducted to identify factors constraining the linkages between tourism and local
suppliers of specific agriculture commodities in Zanzibar. Existing studies
on value chain analysis such as Steck et al. (2010) and Anderson (2011a) focused on the entire tourism value chain in Zanzibar, instead of a commodity
approach that focuses on the constraints of linking tourism with particular
agricultural commodities. The use of this sectoral approach, however, entails
ignoring the diversity of the sector and the varying nature of commodities
within the sector that cannot be treated equally. That is, different agricultural
commodities require different techniques for handling data; hence the linkage constraints for one commodity might be different to others. Realising
this, we decided to look at one commodity (beef and chicken meats) to study
factors constraining the linkages between tourism and local suppliers, gaining valuable practical and theoretical) insights so far ignored by the sectoral
approach.
The Zanzibar Livestock Policy draft (RGoZ, 2009) acknowledges the fact that
the livestock sector currently lacks appropriate marketing avenues, quality
standards and assurance and control systems, and thus it advocates investment in value addition for livestock products, and the formation of a strong
livestock producers, traders and processors associations. Recently, the focus
has been directed towards linking the livestock sector with the booming tourism industry under the assumption that more benefits will be generated for
individual Zanzibaris as well as the Zanzibar economy in general. This assumption has been supported by the chairperson of the Zanzibar Association
of Tourism Investors (ZATI) who expressed the interest and willingness of
ZATI members to use locally produced foodstuffs. In particular, when giving his welcoming note in the ZATI progress report 2009-2010, the ZATI
chairperson said:
We certainly need better food security – not just to be able to be less reliant on
imports to feed ourselves, but to satisfy the requirements of a growing hotel
industry. In addition, a common unit of mutual benefit will be of assistance to
help villagers to participate in small scale farming, building a strong network
with investors around their respective areas by being able to sell their products
and setting up advisory council which can guide them toward the demands of
the tourism industry (ZATI, 2009: 4).
Zellmer.indd 52
8-12-2011 16:55:25
53
The livestock sector is an important economic activity in rural Zanzibar. The
sector includes the keeping of dairy and beef cattle, goats and poultry among
others. It is estimated that about 37.8 per cent of agricultural households are
engaged in livestock production activities. In most cases livestock are kept
to provide a safety net during times of financial hardship. The isles have
significant potential for market-led commercialisation of the livestock sub-
sector, driven by domestic urban demand and increasing tourist investments.
In 2009 the livestock sub-sector contributed about 4.5 per cent to Zanzibar’s
GDP which is about 14.6 per cent of the total agricultural share in Zanzibar
GDP (RGoZ, 2009). Despite its importance, the sector’s potential is underutilised and the country has a large deficit in livestock products which is addressed by imports. Available data shows that about 91 per cent of livestock
products consumed in the tourism sector are imported, with 70 per cent of
beef meat consumed in Zanzibar coming from Tanzania mainland. The remaining requirements in chicken and beef meats are mainly imported from
South Africa, Kenya and Brazil (Department of Livestock Development, 2010;
ZBC, 2009). The low adoption of improved production technologies, unorganised market outlets and lack of value addition have been mentioned by the
Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (RGoZ, 2009) as among the main
constraints facing livestock development in Zanzibar.
In line with the efforts invested in creating local linkages between tourism
and the local livestock sector, this chapter responds to the following questions:
What are the major constraints associated with sourcing beef and chicken
meats locally? What are the main supply-related problems encountered by local
suppliers to tourist hotels and restaurants? What are the difficulties feared by
those who are hesitant to supply to tourist hotels and restaurants? To respond
to the research questions, interviews involving 78 hoteliers and restaurant
workers and 94 local suppliers of beef and chicken meats were conducted
between January and June 2010. The target respondents in the hotels and
restaurants were procurement officers and managers. The study covers three
out of four existing tourism zones in Zanzibar, specifically on Unguja Island:
Stone Town, its suburbs, the North-East coast, and the South-East coast. The
list of beef butcheries and suppliers of chicken meat was obtained from the
meat inspection unit of the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development
Zanzibar. The majority of local suppliers were interviewed at Darajani and
Mwanakwerekwe central markets, and the remainder at their localities.
Major Constraints Associated with Sourcing Beef and Chicken
Meats Locally
The study results reveal that the hotels involved in the survey receive an average of 5,000 visitors annually with the average length of stay per tourist
Zellmer.indd 53
8-12-2011 16:55:25
54
being between seven and 13 days. Being asked about the years of operations,
the majority (60 per cent) reported to have been in operation for between five
and 15 years. Following Lundgren’s (1973:15) findings that, “as hotels become
more established, over time they tend to increase use of local products”, it
suggests that many hoteliers have knowledge of an experience with the local
environment. On the other hand, Torres (2003) argues that the more a tourism industry matures, the more likely it is to use imported foods. We assume
that Torres’s viewpoint is more applicable in small island destinations such
as Zanzibar that lack adequate land resources and capacity to feed both locals
and visitors (Anderson, 2011b; 2008).
The nationality of hotel owners and managers is said to be another factor
that influences the hotel’s acceptance of local products as suggested by Torres
(2003), Momsen (1998) and Pattulo (1996). The first two authors found that a
hotel managed by a local and with a local chef is more likely to demand locally
produced food items than the hotel with expatriate or internationally trained
chefs. According to Pattulo (1996) expatriate chefs prefer foods that they are
familiar with. Our findings show that 44 per cent of hotels were owned by
Zanzibaris, 6 per cent by people from Tanzania mainland, and 50 per cent by
foreigners. Similarly, 41 per cent of the interviewed hotels were managed by
Zanzibaris, 15 per cent by Tanzania mainlanders, and 43 per cent by foreigners.
With regard to the use of beef and chicken meats from local suppliers, about
60 per cent of the interviewed hotels indicated that they used beef and chicken meats from local suppliers. The findings reveal further that the average
daily requirements per hotel during high seasons are 15 kilograms of beef, 28
kilograms of seafood and 18 kilograms of chicken. The findings reveal that
the majority of the hotels consumed at least 1,000 kilos of meat from local
markets per annum.
Enquiries were made into what prevents the hotels from sourcing most of
their beef meats locally. The results indicate that the majority of the hotels
listed the poor quality of local products, high transaction costs, high level
of mistrust between hoteliers and local suppliers (i.e. local suppliers violate
agreements and do not offer formal receipts in addition to inconsistent supplies), the shorter payment period demanded by local suppliers, and the insufficient supply at local markets as the main constraints (see Table 2).
A typical response from respondents working in hotel or restaurant was:
I have experienced a problem of getting what the hotel needs from the local
suppliers ... if you can show me where to get enough meat to satisfy our kitchen
needs, we will buy everything from Zanzibar.
Zellmer.indd 54
8-12-2011 16:55:25
55
Moreover, the selling price of the product is among the important factors in
making the decision to buy locally or from outside the destinations. For example, Abdool and Carey (2004) found that hoteliers in Tobago preferred to
deal directly with local suppliers and would support initiatives if the prices
of local supplies were reduced. However, small-scale producers do not benefit from economies of scale in production and marketing and they generally
incur high production and marketing costs (Meyer, 2010; 2006). Therefore,
their selling price is normally always higher than that of non-local products.
Additionally, it is also possible for local beef and chicken meats to be devalued
by cheap imports. This was a major concern in Zanzibar where hoteliers complained about the high prices demanded by local suppliers. For example, one
of the respondents stated that:
Locally sourced meats are more expensive than bulk purchased equivalents
imported from other place outside Zanzibar.
Table 2:
Major constraints of sourcing meats locally for hoteliers/ restaurants
Major constraints
Hoteliers/ restaurant
currently sourcing
meat locally
Beef
(n=47) %
Chicken
(n=46) %
Hoteliers/restaurants
currently NOT sourcing
meat locally
Beef
(n=26) %
Chicken
(n=30) %
Poor quality meats
51
28
100
100
High transaction costs
32
20
38
31
Local suppliers mistrust hoteliers
2
2
-
-
Local suppliers violate agreements
9
7
-
-
Local suppliers do not offer formal receipts
6
0
26
23
Very small chickens
0
43
-
-
Shorter payment period
-
-
59
65
Inconsistent supply
-
-
100
100
Many developing countries have limited capacity to process agricultural pro
ducts (including beef and chicken meats) to make them available for tourist
consumption and there is a general lack of technical know-how in production methods (Meyer, 2006; Abdool and Carey, 2004). The local suppliers in
Zanzibar lack the necessary technical know-how particularly in relation to
post-slaughter handlings. Most respondent hoteliers complained about this.
Examples of statements include:
The men bring meat in the bucket without proper covering ... we do not
know if the cow was slaughtered today or yesterday … they simply do not have
refrigerated trucks. Our visitors cannot eat such kinds of meats.
Zellmer.indd 55
8-12-2011 16:55:25
56
When the local suppliers were asked about a complaint made by one of the
respondents:
Always we are required by ZRA [Zanzibar Revenue Authority] to show the
hotel expenditure. The local suppliers never give us the purchases receipt.
That works badly for us. ZRA never trusts us. Therefore we prefer buying
from supermarkets and get proper receipts
Some openly revealed that they wanted to evade taxes upon receiving the mo
ney, thus they preferred not to give any official receipts. While some cited the
lack of motivation to pay taxes to the government, others did not want to spend
money on buying receipt books. In the first group, the lack of knowledge on
how the taxpayers’ money was spent was one of the justifications for not paying the tax.
Many hotels were not sourcing beef and chicken locally because they lacked
confidence in the capacity of local suppliers to meet the hotel requirements.
In their responses, we captured statements such as:
The local supplier may bring several chicken one month and then not be seen
again for months ... when they appear they end up giving unacceptable excuses
including the illness of the chicken and so forth.
She used to supply us chicken. Sometimes she brings very tiny chicken, which
look like ‘birds’ ... as a result we are forced to serve the whole chicken as a
single portion, instead of two portions ... that is a total loss for us.
Most of the complaints could also be related to suppliers’ ignorance of the
needs and wants of the hotels. From what was ascertained from the hoteliers,
a list of their requirements was prepared. The meat suppliers were then explicitly asked about the attributes good quality beef or chicken meats should
possess in order to find out whether they were aware of the qualities needed
by their potential clients. The suppliers were expected to know attributes like
tenderness, size, cleanliness, low fat content, good quality cuts, proper storage
and transportation in refrigerated trucks or well packed in boxes certified by
veterinary doctors. The majority (57 per cent) of the meat suppliers were not
familiar with most of these quality requirements.
The results reveal a gap that exists between the local meat suppliers on one
side and the tourism providers on the other regarding quality attributes. A
possible explanation for this gap may be the lack of communication between
the two parties, which may further complicated by poor business-to-business
networks between stakeholders or even the lack thereof. The next section focuses on information from the suppliers’ viewpoints on the same issues.
Zellmer.indd 56
8-12-2011 16:55:25
57
The Supply-related Problems Encountered by Local Suppliers
It would not be realistic to conclude this case using demand-centred perspectives only. Therefore, the local suppliers of beef and chicken meats in Zanzibar were asked to describe their experiences in dealing with the tourism
businesses. There were mixed feelings from the respondents about their relationships with the hoteliers and restaurateurs. While some were supplying to
these tourism businesses, others were not. Of the 62 local suppliers of beef,
only 23 per cent indicated that they supplied to tourist hotels and/or restaurants. Likewise, it was only 25 per cent of the chicken suppliers supplying to
tourist hotels and/or restaurants.
When asked about the problems that constrain the business-to-business relationships with the tourism industry, suppliers revealed some common problems. Some respondents cited the problem of language, while others cited
the complexities involved in negotiating with foreign operators. Likewise they
mentioned the lack of trust between the two parties involved. These kinds of
problems have been acknowledged in previous studies, such as Torres (2003),
who attributes the mistrust and lack of communication between hoteliers and
small-scale producers to socio-economic and cultural differences between the
two parties. In Zanzibar, one respondent stated:
It is always difficult to trade with these wazungu [whites] as they bombard
you with many words we are not familiar with, and later they ask you to sign
a paper on something you do not know ... I prefer to sell my product [beef] to
Zanzibaris because we understand each other.
The language problem can be explained in two ways. Firstly, it can be a lack of
basic education. Of the total respondents, 38 per cent had attained secondary
school education, while almost half (49 per cent) had only attained primary
school education. A tertiary education had been attained by only 2 per cent.
Low education levels hinder basic business practice including negotiations,
keeping proper records, and obtaining credit and market information. In this
case, most suppliers with at least a primary level of formal education were
supplying to hotels. However, the ones without a formal education showed
some reluctance to deal with hoteliers, especially the foreign managed hotels. Secondly, the lack of experience in the business, and sometimes unwillingness and inability of the suppliers to learn might have contributed to the
lack of trust between the two parties. Building trust between parties always
requires investment in terms of time and money. The results indicate that
the more experienced the suppliers were, the more likely they were to supply beef or chicken to hotels. A possible explanation is that the suppliers had
studied the industry and developed working relationships with the hoteliers.
Long-term positive relationships signal the existence of trust and confidence
Zellmer.indd 57
8-12-2011 16:55:25
58
between the hoteliers and local suppliers. They also show that the suppliers
have developed appropriate mechanisms to deal with the corporate clients.
A majority of respondents in this case had over 10 years of experience in the
meat industry, with 26 per cent having between 10 and 15 years of experience,
27 per cent 15 to 20 years, and 22 per cent over 20 years.
The majority of suppliers mentioned the late payment they receive from the
hoteliers as one of the major challenges. Many hotels and restaurants prefer
the credit purchase when buying large stock, with credit terms requested by
the hoteliers varying between 30 and 60 days. On the other side, most local
suppliers require cash on delivery to enable them to continue with production.
To beef suppliers, 30 days without cash at hand was too long, as they could not
afford to order the next stock. For chicken suppliers, the main issue was the
money to feed the next round of supplies. The two sides – hoteliers and meat
suppliers – were both concerned about how to secure the right partner and
final financing of the products delivered.
Some of the local meat suppliers who were not supplying to hotels were also
not considering selling to hotels or restaurants in future. The main reason
given was their lack of knowledge about the requirements of the hoteliers and
restaurants, while others said that they were comfortable dealing with individual clients but they were not ready to deal with corporate clients, because
of the low prices offered by hoteliers and restaurant operators. One of the
respondents said:
If I can sell to individual client and get my 4500 Shillings [that is equivalent
to 3 US$] a kilo today, why should I go to hoteliers who never buy in cash and
they sometimes price our products below the market price.
To the hoteliers and restaurants, the selling price is one of the most important
factors when making the decision to buy. As a result, cheap imports from big
meat exporting countries such as Kenya, Brazil and South Africa substitute
local supplies in Zanzibar.
Conclusion
This chapter explored factors constraining the linkages between the tourism
industry and local suppliers of beef and chicken meats in Zanzibar. Hotels encounter a multitude of problems in sourcing beef and chicken meats from local suppliers. These include the poor quality of products supplied locally, high
transaction costs, and violation of agreements between suppliers and hotels,
and reluctance of local suppliers to issue formal receipts. There is also a certain degree of mistrust between the two parties. Other issues are inconsistent
Zellmer.indd 58
8-12-2011 16:55:25
59
supplies, shorter payment periods and unreliable prices. In order to realise
the benefits from the tourism industry, the meat sector could invest in production and marketing infrastructure including the construction of modern
slaughterhouses.
The small size of (immature) chickens from local suppliers was another problem, to the extent that some hotels were forced to shift from their normal
menu to suit the food portion provided by their suppliers. The problem is likely associated with the fact that in Zanzibar the chickens are sold in units rather than weight. Thus it is advisable to introduce the system of selling chickens
by weight. Related to that was the belief that many hotels underrate the capacity of local suppliers to maintain consistent supplies of beef and chicken meat
as per agreements. Even those hotels that currently source beef and chicken
meats from local suppliers do so without formal contractual agreements. This
is due to the fact that if they adopt a formal contracting system most of the
local suppliers would fail to meet their contractual obligations or agreements.
A large proportion of hotels that had stopped sourcing locally, and those that
had never sourced beef and chicken meats locally indicated their willingness
to source from local suppliers. Hence, there is potential for local suppliers to
increase the supply of these commodities to tourist hotels as long as their production and distribution methods are substantially improved.
With regard to the local suppliers’ perspective, the analysis of the results leads
to a number of issues. One is that the level of formal education of the majority
of local chicken and beef meat suppliers is generally low. This disadvantages
them when negotiating business contracts with hotels on matters pertaining
to supplying foodstuffs, such as price and terms of payment. They also face
difficulties in understanding the contents of the supply contracts. Similarly,
the lack or low levels of education incapacitate suppliers to keep proper records of their businesses and create difficulties in obtaining basic production
services such as credit and market information. The most serious problems
appeared to be late payments from the hotels and having inadequate capital.
The price offered by hotels was not acceptable to many local suppliers. These
findings are useful for all institutions responsible for promoting linkages between the tourism and agriculture sectors in Zanzibar. Based on the findings,
we give a number of recommendations.
First, training of local suppliers on skills and techniques related to postslaughter handlings is of paramount importance. This includes cutting,
packing, transportation storage and general cleanliness and hygienic requirements. The hotels’ decisions on whether to continue sourcing beef and
chicken meats from local suppliers are a function of various factors, such
as the quality of the products, consistent supplies and size and availability
of chicken. Thus, any program designed to promote the linkages between
Zellmer.indd 59
8-12-2011 16:55:25
60
tourism and local suppliers of beef and chicken meats should address these
problems holistically. Isolated interventions such as increasing production or
improving marketing infrastructures are unlikely to succeed in this respect.
There is also a need to provide at least basic business and entrepreneurship
skills for local suppliers.
Second, the formation of stronger associations or networks of local suppliers
would enable them to pool resources and benefits from economies of scale instead of competing between themselves. These networks could set their own
quality standards and quality control mechanisms that would guarantee that
the products supplied to tourist hotels were of acceptable quality. This would
not only increase their capacity to supply according to the hotels’ requirements, but also through their alliances they could forge effective partnerships
with public institutions and donor agencies.
Third, to overcome capital constraints, local suppliers ought to be assisted
to get working capital in terms of credit. This would enable them to comply
with hotel payment arrangements. The establishment of a guaranteed fund
specifically for local suppliers to tourist hotels would increase their access to
credit from formal financial institutions. Policy guidelines could be developed
alongside shifting the policy focus towards mainstreaming agricultural development interventions within the tourism development process. The focus
would include diversification of the tourism experience away from beach and
adventure excursions to culinary tourism.
Fourth, strong institutional support to look into the whole process of tourism
agriculture linkage could be established. The facilitating role of such an institution could involve the development of policies, regulations and strategies
that could ensure beef and chicken meats produced for the consumption of
tourist hotels and restaurants complied with food safety regulations. The
same institution could also address the problem of mistrust, the lack of communication between the hotels and local suppliers, and the promotion of local
beef and chicken meats for tourist consumption through regular meetings
with hotel managers and chefs. Through these meetings the local suppliers
could liaise with hotels to exchange information and determine agreements
that would guide both suppliers and hotels on matters pertaining to demand,
quality standards and pricing.
Finally, future studies may expand the scope of this research by deepening
the analysis particularly on the context of specific sectoral approaches, and
analyse in detail the legal and institutional factors constraining the linkages
between the tourism industry and local sectors in Zanzibar.
Zellmer.indd 60
8-12-2011 16:55:25
61
References
Abdool, A. and B. Carey (2004) Making all-inclusives more inclusive – a research project on the
economic impact of the all-inclusive hotel sector in Tobago. Bristol: The Travel Foundation.
Anderson, W. (2008) Analysis of all-inclusive travel mode: demand and supply perspectives in the
Balearic Islands. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of the Balearic Islands, Palma de
Mallorca.
Anderson, W. (2011a) Leakages in the tourism systems: case of Zanzibar. Tourism Development
Journal, forthcoming.
Anderson, W. (2011b) Enclave tourism and its socio-economic impact in Zanzibar. Anatolia,
forthcoming.
Ashley, C., Goodwin, H. and D. Roe (2002) Pro-poor tourism strategies: expanding opportunities
for the poor. Pro-Poor Briefing No. 1. London: ODI, IIED, CRT.
Ashley, C., Goodwin, H., McNab, D., Scott, M. and L. Chaves (2006) Making tourism count
for the local economy in the Caribbean: guidelines for good practice. Pro-Poor Tourism
Partnership. Bristol: The Travel Foundation.
Belisle, F. (1983) Tourism and food production in the Caribbean. Annals of Tourism Research
10 (4) pp. 497-513.
Department Of Livestock Development (2010) Zanzibar Agricultural Transformation for
Sustainable Development, 2010-2020 for Agricultural Productivity, Food Security and
Sustainable Livelihood. Zanzibar: Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Environment.
Goodwin, H. and A. Bah (2003) Improving access for the informal sector to tourism in The
Gambia. PPT Partnership Working Paper No. 15. www.propoortourism.org.uk/15_
Gambia.pdf. Accessed: 12.07.2011.
IFAD – International Fund for Agricultural Development (2003) Promoting market access
for the rural poor in order to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. IFAD Discussion
Paper. Rome: IFAD.
Lundgren, J. (1973) Tourism impact/island entrepreneurship in the Caribbean. In:
Momsen, R., ed., Geographical Analysis for Development in Latin America and the
Caribbean. Chapel Hill: CLAG Publications, pp. 12-19.
McBain, H. (2007) Caribbean tourism and agriculture: linking to enhance development
and competitiveness. ECLAC Study and Perspective Series - The Caribbean No. 2.
Washington: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Meyer, D. (2006) Caribbean tourism, local sourcing and enterprise development: review of
literature. PPT Partnership Working Paper No. 18 http://www.propoortourism.org.uk/18_
domrep.pdf. Accessed: 20.02.2011.
Meyer, D. (2010) Changing power relations: foreign direct investment in Zanzibar. In:
Modesale, J., ed., Political Economy of Tourism: a Critical Perspective. London: Routledge.
Mitchell, J. and S. Page (2006) Linkages and leakages: Local supply and imports. Brighton: id21
Development Research Reporting Service.
Mitchell, J. and C. Ashley (2010) Tourism and poverty reduction: pathways to prosperity. London:
Earthscan.
Zellmer.indd 61
8-12-2011 16:55:25
62
Mitchell, J and J. Faal (2006) The Gambian Tourist Value Chain and Prospects for Pro-Poor
Tourism, ODI draft report. http://www.zeegam.nl/download/de%20toeristen%20
indusrtie%20in%20Gambia.pdf. Accessed: 13.10.2011.
Momsen, J. (1998) Caribbean tourism and agriculture: new linkage in the global era? In:
Klak, T., ed., Globalisation and Neoliberalism: the Caribbean Context. Oxford: Rowman and
Littlefield, pp. 115-133.
O’Driscoll, J. (2005) Tourism and agriculture: creating linkages. Department of Tourism and
Hospitality Management; School of Business and Public Management The George
Washington University. http://www1.american.edu/ted/niagra.htm, accessed: 05.09.2011.
Pattullo, P. (1996) Last resource: the cost of tourism in the Caribbean. London: Cassell
Wellington House.
RGoZ – Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (2003) Zanzibar Tourism Policy Statement.
Zanzibar: Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.
RGoZ – Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (2005) Strategy for half a million tourists in
Zanzibar 2005-2014. Zanzibar: Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.
RGoZ – Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (2007) Zanzibar strategy for growth and
reduction of poverty: 2007-2010. Zanzibar: Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.
RGoZ – Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (2009) Draft Zanzibar livestock policy.
Zanzibar: Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.
RGoZ – Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (2010) The Zanzibar strategy for growth and
reduction of poverty: 2010-2015. Zanzibar: Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.
Steck, B., Wood, K., and J. Bishop (2010) Tourism, more value for Zanzibar: value chain analysis:
final report. Zanzibar: VSO, SNV and ZATI.
Telfer, D. (2000) Tastes of Niagara: building strategic alliances between tourism and
agriculture. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration 1 (1) pp. 71-88.
Torres, R. (2002) Toward a better understanding of tourism and agriculture linkages in the
Yucatan: tourist food consumption and preferences. Tourism Geographies 4 (3)
pp. 282-306.
Torres, R. (2003) Linkages between tourism and agriculture in Mexico. Annals of Tourism
Research 30 (3) pp. 546–66.
Torres, R. and P. Skillicorn (2004) Montezuma’s revenge: how sanitation concerns may injure
Mexico’s tourist industry. Cornell Hotel & Restaurant Administration Quarterly - May,
2004. http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournal/pub/3038.html. Accessed: 09.01.2011.
URT – The United Republic of Tanzania (2003) Indicative tourism master plan for Zanzibar
and Pemba. Dublin: URT. http://www.zanzibartourism.net/docs/masterplan.pdf.
Accessed: 07.09.2011.
ZBC – Zanzibar Business Council (2009) How tourism as the leading sectors can support
agricultural development. A paper presented at the Third Zanzibar Business Council
Meeting, December 2009.
ZCf T – Zanzibar Commission for Tourism (2010) Tourist database. Accessed in Tanzania
Tourist Board Statistics.
ZATI – Zanzibar Association for Tourism Investors (2009) Progress report. Prepared for the
ZATI Annual General Meeting, December 2009.
Zellmer.indd 62
8-12-2011 16:55:25
4 Governance of CommunityBased Tourism in Uganda:
An analysis of the Kibale
Association for Rural and
Environmental Development
(KAFRED)
Jockey Baker Nyakaana and Wilber Manyisa Ahebwa*
Due to the potential for diverse linkages to the local economy, tourism is increasingly being used by developing countries as a tool for community development and poverty reduction (Mbaiwa, 2009; Nelson, 2008; Simpson, 2008;
Wishitemi, 2008). Development organisations and national governments
in developing countries have widely embraced Community-Based Tourism
(CBT) as a viable mechanism to steer economic development especially in
rural and marginal areas where other economic activities are limited (Kiss,
2004). CBT models are rooted in the broader Community-Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) discourses and supported by both national
and international Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) (Van der Duim,
2011; Ruhiu, 2007). Examples of these organisations include the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), Fauna and Flora International (FFI), World Wildlife
Fund (WWF) and the United States Agency for International Development
(USAID) who work with various governmental and non-governmental entities
on conservation and development projects (Ahebwa et al., 2012a).
*
Zellmer.indd 63
Department of Forestry, Biodiversity and Tourism, Makerere University, Uganda
8-12-2011 16:55:25
64
In general, CBT initiatives can be grouped into two categories, namely locally
owned and operated tourism enterprises which are often fully or partially supported by donors and/or governments (Ahebwa et al., 2012b; Van der Duim,
2011; Ashley 2000a; 2000b), and joint ventures involving communities and
the private and/or public sector whose establishment is frequently supported
by donors and NGOs (Ahebwa et al., 2012a; Elliot and Sumba, 2010; Barnes
2008; Spenceley, 2003). CBT initiatives aim to use tourism to enhance the
livelihoods of the rural poor through empowerment, improved governance,
environmental conservation and increased socio-economic impacts (Ruhiu,
2007). In this respect one of the key concerns is whether community livelihoods are enhanced through CBT arrangements. A number of studies have
addressed this issue (Ahebwa, 2010; Sandbrook, 2008; 2006; Southgate,
2006; Spenceley, 2003; Ashley and Jones 2001; Salafsky et al., 2001; Ashley
and Garland 1994). While there are claims that some CBT models are relatively successful, there is increasing proof that many of them are constrained
and/or have failed (Van der Duim, 2011). The success or failure of CBT initiatives is largely shaped by how they are governed and how well they are able to
access the market (Van der Duim, 2011; Mitchell and Faal, 2008; Southgate,
2006; Kiss, 2004). This chapter deals with the governance aspect which is
particularly important as it helps to understand both the functioning of CBT
models and their outputs and outcomes, but which has received limited scholarly attention. It particularly analyses the Kibale Association for Rural and
Environmental Development (KAFRED) – a locally-owned and operated CBT
initiative in Uganda – from the value chain governance perspective (Kaplinsky and Morris 2000; Porter, 1985).
To start the chapter first introduces the concept of value chain governance
and the methodology adopted. Second, it describes the process by which the
K AFRED CBT initiative was designed and highlights the associated outcomes. Third, the chapter analyses processes of governance at KAFRED using the concept of value chain governance. The conclusions highlight the elite
capture of the entire governance process.
Value Chain Governance
The process of designing and implementing CBT arrangements constitutes a
‘chain’ of many activities of value-addition by various actors (Nelson, 2008).
This range of activities is required in order to develop a service or product for
the use of clients. This is what Kaplinsky and Morris (2000) and Porter (1985)
define as the ‘value chain’. The various activities in the ‘chain’ (such as those
associated with operationalisation of the KAFRED CBT initiative at Bigodi)
Zellmer.indd 64
8-12-2011 16:55:25
Governance of Community-Based Tourism in Uganda
65
are subject to governance as they involve the interaction of different actors in
a coordinated manner (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2000). Since there are diverse
actors in the chain who steer the activities and coordinate participation of
others, Kaplinsky and Morris (2000) argue that power asymmetry is central
to the analysis of value chain governance. Power and coordination can be exhibited in a number of ways such as performance of leadership roles, setting
regulatory parameters and ensuring conformity to these regulatory tools in
the chain (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2000).
An analysis of the value chain governance takes three forms, namely legislative, executive and judicial (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2000). The legislative
aspect looks at the process of setting the basic rules which define the boundaries and conditions for participation. It considers the actors involved in this
process and their different roles in accomplishing the task. An analysis of the
legislative aspect necessitates a critical exploration of the process of “setting
regulatory parameters governing the chain” (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2000:
29). Once the regulatory parameters are set, there is the need to put them into
practice. This necessitates proactive governance, which is the executive aspect
of value chain governance (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2000) and entails a critical look at the prevailing controls and assistance rendered to chain actors in
operationalising the rules of the game as well as the day to day operations of
an entity in question. Finally, there is the judicial aspect of governance which
considers by whom and how performance is audited as well as the process of
checking compliance with regulatory tools (Kaplinsky and Morris, 2000).
For the research that underlies this chapter we have chosen for a qualitative
research approach (Jennings, 2001; Miles 1994), necessitated by the wish of
gaining an in-depth understanding of the general governance dynamics of
the KAFRED CBT. Secondary data from KAFRED documents (constitution,
financial reports, end of year reports, school hand-over reports, and minutes
of meetings among others) was used. Primary data was collected from interviews with key stakeholders such as Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA)
officials, KAFRED officials and the founding members (N=10), while unstructured interviews were held with other KAFRED members (N=15) and
non-members based in Bigodi community (N=5). Four focus group discussions involving community members along the village trail and around Bigodi Wetland Sanctuary were held to capture their views about the functioning and governance of the KAFRED CBT arrangement. Data from interviews
and focus group discussions were transcribed and aggregated with data from
documentary reviews for generating meaningful discussion and conclusions.
Zellmer.indd 65
8-12-2011 16:55:25
66
Establishment of KAFRED
KAFRED was formed in 1992 by six individuals from Bigodi community with
technical guidance from an American Peace Corps volunteer who identified
the potential of developing CBT in Bigodi village. The idea to develop tourism was based on the resources found in Bigodi Wetland Sanctuary (BWS)
next to Kibale National Park in western Uganda. BWS covers approximately
four square kilometres and is endowed with a diversity of flora (flowering and
non-flowering plants), fauna (mammals, primates, fishes, reptiles and birds)
(Tinka, 2007) and was seen to hold good potential for a CBT project and community development. Consequently, the Peace Corps volunteer shared the
tourism idea with a group of six local elites who later founded KAFRED as a
community-based organisation (Tinka, 2007). The KAFRED founding members included (Tinka, 2007):
- a local council leader, teacher and assistant to the Peace Corps Volunteer
(chairperson);
- a local council leader, teacher and manager of the Kanyanchu Tourism
Development project at Kibale (vice chairperson);
- a teacher, research assistant (general secretary);
- a local business man (treasurer);
- a local farmer and village elder (advisor and committee member);
- a church leader and forester (advisor and committee member).
KAFRED’s overall aim was “to develop the rural community through the wise
use of natural and cultural resources” (KAFRED, 1992: 1). To achieve this aim,
the founder members developed six objectives (Tinka, 2007: 11):
- conservation of natural resources through wise use;
- development of rural communities adjacent to the natural areas by
establishing health centres, bridges, schools, roads, etc.;
- education to create awareness among local communities about the
importance of the natural environment;
- tourism promotion that will benefit the local community;
- training for guides and other staff;
- agriculture extension to assist local farmers in the development of
agriculture and improved yields.
KAFRED designed its objectives to ‘embrace’ other community members in
the village because the main tourism resource base of BWS is a common
property for all communities (KAFRED Official, Research Interview, 2010).
Open and uncontrolled utilisation of the wetland had threatened its existence
and yet conservation entities such as UWA valued it as a vital ecosystem link
to Kibale National Park, as it was expressed by one UWA Official:
Zellmer.indd 66
8-12-2011 16:55:26
67
We were encouraged to support the initiative of KAFRED founders because it
would ensure protection of the wetland which cushions our main ecosystem.
But to do this, we encouraged them to work with the larger community who
equally possessed user rights.
Mobilisation of Resources for Initiation of the CBT Venture
With technical support from UWA and the Peace Corps volunteer, KAFRED
obtained land use rights from the sub-county authorities who were overseeing
BWS on behalf of the community. With user rights, KAFRED was authorised
to manage tourism activities in and around the wetland. Developing tourism
was seen as a move that would generate community income, local development, employment, and conserve the wetland and its wildlife (Tinka, 2007).
After acquiring the resource user rights and authority to oversee the wetland,
the founders designed the KAFRED constitution and proceeded to register
the ‘community’ entity as a limited company. This reflected a contradiction
from the original stance as a CBO. According to the KAFRED Programme
Director; “registering KAFRED as a limited company [was] to ensure that liabilities are limited by shares”. However, some community members perceived
the company registration of KAFRED as a ploy by the founding members to
sustain their grip on the entity.
Upon registration, KAFRED began recruiting other members from the community. The membership fee in 1992 was UGX 11,000 (approx. US$ 10), which
has since been revised to UGX 50,000 (US$ 25) as of 2011. The membership
fee was based on a ‘one-off payment system’, which “was to act as incentive
to community members to join the association as it would be affordable”
(KAFRED Official, Research Interview, 2010). Payment of the membership
fee was a sign of commitment and was intended to raise the initial capital
to start the tourism business arrangement. Despite the low fees in the early
1990s, few community members were attracted to join and membership remained at just 50 in a village of over 2,000 adults (UBOS, 2010). Community
members explained that they were reluctant to pay for what they were unfamiliar with and something they did not trust. Despite the initial reluctance,
KAFRED’s membership had grown to 170 by 2010. This small fraction of total
village members was argued by community members in Bigodi to be a result
of KAFRED closing membership to some people. The KAFRED management
argues that:
We currently have 170 members and we have closed entry as the group becomes
ungovernable once the numbers are so big, however in an event of death or a
member opting out, we admit new members.
Zellmer.indd 67
8-12-2011 16:55:26
68
This has been unpopular with the majority of the Bigodi community members as it apparently contravenes the constitution which states that KAFRED
membership is open to all within the Kamwenge district.
Membership contribution in 1992 totalled about US$ 500 which contributed
to the start-up capital for the CBT project and registered members volunteered
labour, building materials and tools to clear a ‘tourist’ trail and a camp
ground. At this stage, the association targeted tourists interested in walks,
bird watching and camping. However, business remained low as they lacked
basic tourist facilities such as toilets, a visitor centre and trained guides. These
were later put in place with financial support from the American Embassy
in Uganda. In 1995, KAFRED secured more financial support from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) for the production of
their first brochure and for conducting research to determine tangible and
non-tangible values of the Bigodi Wetland Sanctuary (KAFRED, 2010; Tinka,
2007). Unfortunately the financial resources from the American embassy and
IUCN are not reflected in any of KAFRED’s documents.
The Growth and Development of Tourism at Bigodi
By 1996, tourism business had increased and focused on a combination of
the diverse tourism natural resources (flora and fauna) and rich culture such
as food, music, dance and drama (Tinka, 2007). Tourist facilities and services included the board walk around the wetland, tree houses that acted as
pavilions for bird watching, a visitor information centre that also served as a
community hall, an office and a canteen for drinks, snacks and handicraft
(Tinka, 2007). Guiding services were provided by local people trained in tour
guiding, first aid and interpretation skills. Tourist arrivals – Ugandans, foreign residents and foreign non-residents – continue to grow (Figure 1). As the
figure illustrates, the main market segment for KAFRED is foreign visitors,
mainly because the CBT project benefits from its proximity to Kibale National
Park. One UWA Official explained:
Visitors who come [to] Kibale National Park engage in primate trekking, forest
walks and bird watching. Most of the time, they have spare time and want to
venture into the village. The KAFRED initiative was enhanced by this demand
and they are always assured of a good market.
The large decrease in tourist numbers between 1999 and 2001 was due to the
perceived general insecurity in Uganda by foreign market sources due to the
massacre of eight foreign tourists at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park by
the insurgents operating in Rwanda and Uganda in 1999.
Zellmer.indd 68
8-12-2011 16:55:26
69
At the time of this study, KAFRED had diversified the tourism activities for
its clients to include swamp walks, village trails, bird watching, primate viewing, and cultural performances. Craft shops had been set up in the village
with support from the Uganda Community Tourism Association (UCOTA) of
which KAFRED is a member. This has not only increased KAFRED’s income
directly (to US$ 42,000 in 2008), but also benefits community members directly involved in selling crafts and offering services to tourists.
Figure 1: Tourists visiting Bigodi Wetland Sanctuary 1994-2010 (KAFRED, 2010)
4500
4000
Number of tourists
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
1996
0
Year
Ugandans
Residents
Non-Residents
Total
Currently, tourists to KAFRED are mainly day visitors that extend their stay
from Kibale National Park, as illustrated by a KAFRED Official:
Our clients come from Kanyanchu – the Headquarter of Kibale National
Park. They spend a short time partly due to inadequate and at times lack
of appropriate accommodation facilities in the village. Each tourist spends
US$ 10 on village and wetland walk, US$ 30 on bird watching, US$ 5 as entry
fees, US$ 5-20 on handicrafts, US$ 2 on cultural dances and to a limited extent
on restaurants where community members serve lunch and fresh food stuffs.
Zellmer.indd 69
8-12-2011 16:55:26
70
Results of KAFRED’s CBT Initiative
Through the KAFRED CBT initiative, several outcomes for both the general community and individual members were revealed. Some community
members have accessed the tourism supply chain by providing food stuffs
directly to tourists or through restaurants and offering accommodation services. An Elder in Bigodi village stated:
Tourism has been useful to our community. Ever since KAFRED started,
tourist numbers continue to grow. Most of the restaurants owners in Bigodi
trading centre have benefited by selling food to visitors.
Others have joined the supply chain directly and indirectly through employment as guides, receptionists, and as suppliers of handicrafts and agricultural
products.
KAFRED has facilitated the development of other CBOs namely the Bigodi
Women Group (BWG – 40 members), Enyange Dance and Drama group
(EDD – 25 members), Bigodi Peanut Project (BPP – 12 members) and Kiyoima
Women Group (KWG – 30 members). Other than BPP, which has one male
member, the rest are comprised only of female members. It was noted that the
Uganda Community Tourism Association (UCOTA) has been instrumental in
empowering members of these groups through training and marketing their
products. These CBOs are voting members of KAFRED. BWG was considered
the most successful of all the CBOs in terms of meeting supply requirements
and group coherence. Of all the CBOS, only the BWG runs a craft shop at
KAFRED’s visitor information centre and it exports its handicrafts to North
America. While KAFRED officials attributed this to the group’s enthusiasm
and expertise, it was interesting to note that the wife of the KAFRED Program
Director was the Chairperson of BWG. The fortunes of BWG have not been
well perceived by members of other CBOs. They highlighted issues of favouritism in terms of awarding craft supply orders, accessing the K AFRED shop
and in attaining vital trainings. One community member argued:
[The] Bigodi Women Group has only 40 members; they cannot allow others
to join. Yet, the fact that the Chair Person is a wife to the Program Director, it
gives it an advantage over members of other CBOs. We wonder why we cannot
combine all the women associations to form one strong one even if it is led by
her.
A member of another women group argued:
Zellmer.indd 70
8-12-2011 16:55:26
71
We only get orders to supply baskets, only and when BWG is overwhelmed
with what it has to supply. And even when we do so, they argue that the quality
of our products is low and under-price them. Most training opportunities are
awarded to BWG.
Several other dissenting voices captured during the focus group discussions
highlighted the same issues of conflict of interest which are common with
CBT initiatives in developing countries (Southgate, 2006; Kiss, 2004).
From the KAFRED tourism revenue, a revolving fund was initiated to benefit
families directly neighbouring BWS and affected by wildlife crop raiding. It
was introduced in 2008 with a total of UGX 1,300,000. By 2010 when this
study was conducted, the revolving fund had been expanded to about UGX
3,000,000. Individuals could borrow up to approximately UGX 100,000 (interest free) to start income generating activities, and then pay back the loan after one year. However, a key challenge arose, because the available funds were
never enough to satisfy the submitted applications (Revolving Fund Chairman, Research Interview, 2010). In addition, there were general complaints
that the repayment period of one year is unrealistic for the fund beneficiaries,
as no profit would have been made from the investment in that time. One
former beneficiary from Bigodi argued:
I received UGX 100,000 in this revolving schedule. I bought two goats. To my
surprise, while both goats were pregnant and about to deliver, the Chairman
of the revolving fund was at my door demanding repayment. I had no option,
but to resale the same goats. I just wasted my time.
In response to this, the Chairman of the revolving fund admitted that this did
happen, but argued that the sole reason was due to limited funds:
It is unfortunate that people have always raised complaints of this nature with
no solution since our funds are limited. We have appealed to the KAFRED
Program Director and hope that soon a solution will be found.
On the other hand, the Program Director argued that demands for financial
resources are many and there was the necessity to strike a balance between
individual benefits and general community benefits. Accordingly, the priority
of the KAFRED management is community projects, for example, the Bigodi
secondary school had been set up under the direct management of KAFRED.
At the time of this study, the total number of students at the school was 279,
of which 113 are girls and 166 boys. The school employs 13 teachers, three
cooks, two night watch men, one compound cleaner and one librarian – all
recruited locally. The head teacher and the bursar were outsourced. Other
outcomes of the KAFRED CBT initiative include (KAFRED, 2010):
Zellmer.indd 71
8-12-2011 16:55:26
72
- Conservation of the Bigodi Wetland Sanctuary;
- Through a program funded by North Carolina Zoo, a teacher and student
exchange programme between Bigodi secondary school and schools in the
USA, benefitted over 10 community members;
- Capacity building of KAFRED members and training of guides who are
now employed by Uganda Wildlife Authority;
- Donation of construction materials to neighbouring primary schools and
improving accessibility between the villages by constructing bridges across
the wetland;
- Education of the community on environmental issues (garbage collection,
recycling and disposal) with emphasis on polythene materials;
- Sponsoring local school study visits to wetlands and Kibale National Park.
Actors in the KAFRED Value Chain
Although the members govern KAFRED, the process leading to value addition and the outlined outcomes has been shaped by a heterogeneous array of
actors at different stages in time, playing different roles. These players include
local, national and foreign/international organisations as well as individuals
( Table 1). This partly explains its relative success despite governance shortfalls.
Table 1:
Actors in the KAFRED value chain
Stage
Actors
Roles
Initiation
Peace Corps Volunteer
Technical advice
Uganda Wildlife Authority
Technical advice
Donors (USA Embassy)
Financial and material support
Local Government
Granting the wetland user rights and
policy advice
Technical advice, training of guides,
marketing the CBT venture
Implementation and
Development
Donors (IUCN, UNDP, American Financial, material support and
schools, etc.)
marketing
UCOTA
Capacity building, marketing, advice
KAFRED Membership
Contribution of financial resources
through membership fees, moral
support
Promotion, marketing and advice on
product packaging
Uganda Tourism Board
Tour operators
Promotion and marketing of the CBT
activities
(Source: KAFRED 2010; Tinka, 2006)
Zellmer.indd 72
8-12-2011 16:55:26
73
It was evident that conservation was the main interest of UWA, UNDP (Global Environment Facility), IUCN and the North Carolina and Tulsa Zoos in
K AFRED affairs, as continued existence of the wetland (BWS) would protect
flora and fauna therein and cushion species conservation in and outside the
Kibale National Park. Playing its statutory mandate to promote tourism in the
country, the Uganda Tourism Board has and continues to market and promote
KAFRED tourism activities, and offers technical advice on product development. Tour operators were identified as valuable actors in KAFRED’s value
chain as they bring over 90 per cent of the tourists. This was made possible
by including KAFRED activities in their tour packages, which they market to
potential tourists. Overall, this boosted KAFRED’s business as they lacked
capacity to market their products.
Analysis of KAFRED’s Value Chain Governance
Legislative governance (enacting the regulatory parameters)
From the inception of KAFRED, the Peace Corps volunteer emphasised to the
founding members the need for a constitution to guide their activities (Tinka,
2007). This was echoed by UWA who advised the founding members to learn
from other organisations. UWA staff was instrumental in assisting the founding members to identify well drafted constitutions from other organisations
operating in the area:
The constitution was highlighted by the volunteer as a key document in starting any organisation and indeed it is. Some members had an idea about the development of bylaws for village groups (e.g. small credit and saving schemes),
but did not know how to develop a constitution. KAFRED was advised and
assisted by the park staff to identify an organisation with similar structure
and use their constitution as a guideline. An organisation was identified in
the neighbouring Kasese district and their constitution obtained (Tinka,
2007: 13).
Consequently, the six founding members were in full control of the process
of drafting and adopting the regulatory parameters within which KAFRED is
currently governed. Whether consciously or unconsciously done, the constitution served the interests of those who developed it (elaborated under executive governance). In addition, several contradicting issues that have caused
governance disharmony were revealed during the study. First, the enacted
constitution stipulated that “membership to KAFRED is open to any Uganda
Citizen who supports the cause for conservation and utilisation of natural and
cultural resources for the purpose of rural development and are residents of
Kamwenge District” (KAFRED, 1992: 7). However, joining KAFRED has not
been as open to residents as stipulated in the constitution. It was evident that
Zellmer.indd 73
8-12-2011 16:55:26
74
many community members would like to join, but according to non-members,
KAFRED was ‘closed’, as exemplified by a statement of an elderly resident of
Bigodi Trading Centre:
The administrators of KAFRED are very selfish; they have been in those
positions since the organisation started. Now they do not want new members.
We would like to join, but they first increased fees to UGX 50,000, and even
when we looked for the money to join they failed us.
Another local male elder narrated:
The Bigodi wetland was a common resource that we utilised to graze our
animals, we would hunt from there and collect other resources ... Now
KAFRED has monopolised it. Yes, some benefits from tourism can be seen,
but they should allow all community members to join.
These narratives imply that what was originally designed to be a community
entity had become ‘monopolised’ by a few who have put in place entry barriers
for other community members. It was a common voice in focus group discussions that recruitment of KAFRED members remained selective. In a further
demonstration of elite capture at the legislative level of governance, the powers to organise and manage the voting process were entrusted largely to the
executive committee which is dominated by the founder members.
Executive governance
Administratively, the power is endowed to the KAFRED executive committee which is generally controlled by the founding members. The executive
committee consists of the chairperson, vice chairperson, treasurer, secretary
and committee members. The chairperson and the vice chairperson of the
founding committee have maintained those positions in the executive committee to date (KAFRED, 2008; KAFRED Official, Research Interview, 2010).
The KAFRED executive committee works through the technical team headed
by the Program Director who oversees the tour guides, receptionist, school
administration staff and other support staff (Figure 2).
In other words, the Program Director handles the day-to-day business of
K AFRED and serves a technical role drawing programmes of action, controlling finances and briefing the General Assembly on what transpires and
actions to be taken. The Program Director was a Secretary General in the
founding committee. This illustrates the sustained grip over KAFRED by the
founder members since its inception. On one hand, this explains K AFRED’s
relative success as they are knowledgeable of its original objectives and have
gained relevant working experience to steer the venture over years. On the
other hand, the source of the prevailing conflicts and disharmony has given
Zellmer.indd 74
8-12-2011 16:55:26
75
rise to a new organisation – Bigodi Community Information Development
Centre (BICDC), which is challenging KAFRED’s current governance through
provision of information to the community.
Figure 2: KAFRED value chain governance structure (KAFRED, 2008: 8)
Executive
Committee
School
Administration
Program Director
Head
Receptionis
Guides
Support Staff
The General
With assistance of the technical team, the planning, prioritising and budgeting are undertaken by the Program Director who reports to the executive committee. The executive committee reports to the General Assembly in annual
meetings, where members are informed of the outcomes and plans passed by
the executive committee. However, according to the Chair Person of BICDC,
the one-day annual General Assembly does not provide sufficient time for
active participation of the wider KAFRED membership. Passive participation and insufficient transparency were highlighted as the key drawbacks in
K AFRED governance by members who attend the General Assembly meetings. These drawbacks have led to the breakdown in relationships of some
community actors, who have subsequently formed a countering entity whose
implications, are yet to be seen.
Another critical issue relating to the elite capture is that of the home stay
business which is owned by the KAFRED Program Director. He developed a
number of accommodation establishments in Bigodi and therefore maintains
a competitive advantage over other community members due to his direct interaction with the tourists. According to one KAFRED member, the location
of one of his home stay establishments next to the visitor information centre
has given his business an advantage, because revenue from home stays is
not part of KAFRED income, but private business. This situation has raised
Zellmer.indd 75
8-12-2011 16:55:26
76
concerns among the majority of the Bigodi community. For example, one
member argued:
We cannot deny some achievements associated with KAFRED, but the fact is
that, the Program Director and his colleagues- the founding members have
kept KAFRED more or less a private business and they have benefitted more
than anybody else.
The issues of contention relating to the executive governance of KAFRED
were not limited to nepotism, but also to the failure to uphold the set regulatory parameters regarding election of office bearers. According to the K AFRED
constitution, the General Assembly should vote for executive committee
members every two years and there should be a fixed term limit of two years
for the position of the chairperson. In disregard of this constitutional clause,
it was noted that voting often does not follow the prescribed constitutional
calendar and even when the voting takes place, the set regulatory parameters
are ignored. For example, the chairperson has maintained that position since
the inception of KAFRED, despite the existence of the term limit clause. One
KAFRED member highlights some of the reasons why this is happening:
The four founding members who have remained on the executive committee
have a lot of power, and they have succeeded to keep that power by limiting
entry of people into KAFRED.
In addition, by restricting membership, the KAFRED officials have successfully managed to maintain power of the association which was meant to be
for the community. Lack of sufficient transparency was hence voiced as one of
the key outcomes of irregular executive governance, or as a former KAFRED
member argued:
KAFRED has remained more or less a project of the founding members.
I can assure you that those people write many proposals in the name of
the community ... in turn, they receive donor funding. But there is lack of
transparency with regard to what is received and how it is utilised.
This narrative was echoed by the former headmaster of Bigodi Secondary
School:
It is very unfortunate that whenever you ask about the achievements of
KAFRED after all these years of operation, the Program Director will always
refer to the school, visitor centre and other minor issues ... but the truth is,
tourism generates a lot of money, and more funds are solicited from donors,
but details about these funds are not provided to members. One particular
example relates to the school that I was heading. They solicited donor money,
Zellmer.indd 76
8-12-2011 16:55:26
77
but even me as a school headmaster was not informed of how much it was.
When I insisted, the executive members worked hard and I was dismissed on
trumped up reasons related to insubordination.
The growing discontent has been a breeding factor for raise of the Bigodi
Community Information Development Center (BCIDC). Together with other discontented members from Bigodi, some of whom had refused to join
KAFRED since its inception, the former head teacher of Bigodi Secondary
School formed BCIDC with offices in the Bigodi trading centre. A common
voice by members of BCIDC portrays the management of KAFRED as closed
and dominated by local elites. They argued that the founding members have
maintained a strong grip on KAFRED since its inception and do not accept
dissenting views. To counter the powerful KAFRED founding members,
BICDC had embarked on offering information to the community. A BCIDC
official stated that:
Communities in Bigodi generally lack information ... that’s why, some few
members capitalise on that to steer selfish interests ... we have opened up this
office to provide information to Bigodi community.
A KAFRED official however commented that members of BCIDC have the
right to start their organisation but added that most of them were disgruntled and had fallen out with KAFRED. These scenarios clearly demonstrate
that KAFRED and the associated CBT ventures have to some extent triggered
conflicts in the community despite the associated benefits. The long term
impacts of this might not be in the interests of the original objectives of the
CBT initiative.
Judicial governance
KAFRED’s constitution provides for performance auditing especially of the
books of accounts:
The executive committee shall cause proper books of accounts to be kept by
the treasurer with respect to: all sums of money received and spent; all sales
and purchases by the association; the assets and liabilities of the association.
The books of accounts shall be kept by the treasurer and shall be examined by
the executive committee at every meeting when they wish (KAFRED, 1992:
14).
Consequently, KAFRED’s performance auditing powers are also fully held by
the executive committee. It should be noted that lead actors on the executive
committee are the ones who set operational parameters, they are responsible
for implementing them as well as evaluating and auditing their own performance. In such a situation, objectivity cannot be attained.
Zellmer.indd 77
8-12-2011 16:55:26
78
The KAFRED constitution provides for a Board of Trustees and a Patron who
in principle would provide another level of performance check to KAFRED.
Interestingly, the executive committee has the power to decide on who the
patron should be and who should be on the Board of Trustees:
The executive committee shall appoint a patron who shall hold office for two
years but shall be eligible for reappointment. The executive committee shall
appoint a board of trustees comprising of three persons who shall hold office
for two years and are eligible for reappointment (KAFRED, 1992: 15).
Further, the constitution provides for external audit of KAFRED accounts
which in principle would ensure accountability and transparency. While this
has always been undertaken, some members of KAFRED doubt the credibility
of the auditor’s reports especially since the same executive committee whose
activities should be audited has the powers to appoint and terminate contracts
with the external auditor.
Discussion and Conclusion
This chapter analysed the KAFRED CBT initiative from a value chain governance perspective (Kaplinsky and Morris 2000; Porter, 1985). The chapter
shows that all the three governance aspects (legislative, executive and judicial)
are controlled if not dominated by the founding members. The most active
players in the value chain governance are the executive committee members
who set the regulatory parameters (legislative governance), implement and
oversee the functioning of the entity as well as compliance (executive governance) and control, dominate the auditing and accountability, determine who
to cooperate with, who to assist and how to discipline members and maintain order. This demonstrates a key issue of elite capture and other associated
problems such as nepotism, lack of transparency and corruption which have
led to conflicts that are threatening the original objectives of the KAFRED
CBT initiative. This finding confirms that governance related issues remain
critical in the implementation of CBOs in many developing countries (see
Mitchell and Faal, 2008; Southgate, 2006 and Kiss, 2004).
This chapter reveals how KAFRED was started as a CBO by a group of six local elites with technical support from a Peace Corps Volunteer. However the
CBO was later registered as a limited company by the six founding members.
With a regulatory instrument which originally allowed enrolment of other
community members, KAFRED’s membership expanded to 170 people in a
community of more than 2,000 adults. Registration of new members has
been constrained by selectivity propagated by the executive members, who in
fact should adhere to the constitution which stipulates that membership to
Zellmer.indd 78
8-12-2011 16:55:26
79
AFRED should be open to all residents of Kamwenge district willing and
K
able to pay the membership fee. The Program Director wields a lot of power
in the value chain and this has allowed him to recruit his wife and her close
friends as well as entrenching himself into the home stay business, which
unfortunately does not contribute financially to KAFRED.
Though this governance style remains imperfect, KAFRED is judged by many
actors including the Ministry of Tourism, UCOTA, UWA, donors, some of its
members and the community of Bigodi as successful due to the livelihood
projects it has funded and the socio-economic opportunities it has created
while conserving the once threatened wetland. This relative success can be
attributed to the overwhelming support from donors, UWA, UTB, UCOTA
and tour operators in the form of advice, technical support, marketing and
finances. In view of the limited available options to address the twin challenge of conservation and development in the developing world (Ahebwa et
al., 2012b), we do not propose ignoring CBT arrangements on the basis of the
associated governance shortfalls. Instead we argue that arrangements such as
KAFRED could be replicated and promoted elsewhere, but issues of governance, transparency and accountability need to be given due attention in the
related crusades.
Zellmer.indd 79
8-12-2011 16:55:27
80
References
Ahebwa, M.W. (2010) Bridging conservation and development through community-based tourism
enterprises (CBTEs): The case of Buhoma-Mukono model, Uganda. Research Report,
Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Ahebwa, M.W., Van der Duim, V.R. and C.G. Sandbrook (2012a) Private-community
partnerships: investigating a new approach to conservation and development in Uganda.
Ahebwa, M.W., Van der Duim, V.R. and C.G. Sandbrook (2012b) Tourism revenue sharing at
Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda: a policy arrangements perspective. Journal
of Sustainable Tourism, forthcoming.
Ashley, C. (2000a) The impacts of tourism on rural livelihoods: Namibia’s experience. Overseas
Development Institute Working Paper 128. London: Overseas Development Institute.
Ashley, C. (2000b) Applying livelihood approaches to natural resource management initiatives:
experiences in Namibia and Kenya. Overseas Development Institute Working Paper 134.
Ashley, C. and E. Garland (1994) Promoting community-based tourism development: why, what
and how? Research Discussion Paper No. 4. Namibia: Ministry of Environment and
Tourism in Namibia.
Ashley, C. and B. Jones (2001) Joint ventures between communities and tourism investors:
experience in Southern Africa. Journal of Tourism Research 3 (5) pp. 407-423.
Barnes, J.I. (2008) Community based tourism and natural resource management in Namibia:
local and national economic impacts. In: Spenceley, A., ed., Critical Issues for Conservation
and Development. London: Earthscan Publishers.
Elliot, J. and D. Sumba (2010) Conservation enterprise – what works, where and for whom? A
Poverty and Conservation Learning Group (PCLP). AWF Discussion Paper. Nairobi: AWF.
Jennings, G. (2001) Tourism research. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons.
Kaplinsky, R. and M. Morris (2000) A handbook for value chain research. http://www.int.gob.
ar/cadnasdevalor/manual. Accessed: 22.06.2011.
KAFRED (1992) Constitution. Unpublished.
KAFRED (2008) Report on income returns. Unpublished report.
KAFRED (2010) Report on funded activities. Unpublished report.
Kiss, A. (2004) Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity conservation
funds? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19 (5) pp. 233-237.
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2009) Tourism development, rural livelihoods and biodiversity conservation in
the Okavango Delta, Botswana. In: Hottala, P., ed., Tourism Strategies and Local Responses
in Southern Africa. Oxfordshire: CABI Publishers, pp. 90-99.
Miles, M.B. (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded source book. London: Sage
Publications.
Mitchell, J. and J. Faal (2008) The Gambian tourist value chain and prospects for Pro-Poor
Tourism. Overseas Development Institute Working Paper 289. London: Overseas
Development Institute.
Zellmer.indd 80
8-12-2011 16:55:27
81
Nelson, F. (2008) Livelihoods: conservation and community-based tourism in Tanzania:
potential and performance. In: Spenceley, A., ed., Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for
Conservation and Development. London: Earthscan Publishers, pp. 305-322.
Porter, M. (1985) Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance:
New York: Free Press.
Ruhiu, J.M. (2007) Capital for investment in community based tourism (CBT) - grants vs loans.
Unpublished Paper Presented at National Ecotourism Conference, Nairobi, Kenya.
Salafsky, N., Cauley, H., Balachander, G., Cordes, B., Parks, J., Margoluis, C., Bhatt, S.,
Encarnacion, C., Russell, D. and R. Margoluis (2001) A systematic test of an enterprise
strategy for community-based biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology 15 (6)
pp. 1585-1595.
Sandbrook, C.G. (2006) Tourism, conservation and livelihoods: the impacts of gorilla tracking at
Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. PhD Thesis, London: University of London.
Sandbrook, C.G. (2008) Putting leakage in its place: the significance of retained tourism
revenue in the local context in Rural Uganda. Journal of International Development 22 (1)
pp.124–36.
Simpson, M.C. (2008) The impacts of tourism initiatives on rural livelihoods and poverty
reduction in South Africa: Mathenjura and Mqobela’. In: Spenceley, A., ed., Responsible
Tourism: Critical Issues for Conservation and Development. London: Earthscan Publishers,
pp. 239-266.
Southgate, C. (2006) Ecotourism in Kenya: the vulnerability of communities. Journal of
Ecotourism 5 (1&2) pp. 80-96.
Spenceley, A. (2003) Tourism, local livelihoods and the private sector in South Africa: case
studies on the growing role of the private sector in natural resources management. Sustainable
Livelihoods in Southern Africa Research Paper 8. Brighton: Institute of Development
Studies.
Tinka, J. (2007) Community ecotourism: a turning point for Bigodi village. A history of the Kibale
Association for Rural and Environmental Development- KAFRED (1992-2007).
UBOS – Uganda Bureau of Statistics (2010) Population estimates for districts. Unpublished
Report, Kampala, Uganda.
Van der Duim, V.R. (2011) Safari: a journey through tourism, conservation and development.
Inaugural Lecture, Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Wishitemi, B.E. (2008) Sustainable community–based conservation and tourism development
adjacent to protected areas in Kenya. Moi University Inaugural Lecture 5, Series No.3. Moi
University Press.
Zellmer.indd 81
8-12-2011 16:55:27
Zellmer.indd 82
8-12-2011 16:55:27
5 New Institutional
Arrangements for Tourism,
Conservation and
Development in Sub-Saharan
Africa
René van der Duim*
Under the influences of forces such as globalisation, regionalisation, localisation and political modernisation since the early 1990s there has been a shift
from government to governance, which has had tremendous implications for
the role of the state, the relation between state and society and the relation
of the state versus other actors involved in the governing process (Büscher
and Dietz, 2005). Essential for this is that (a) the traditional divides between
state, market and civil society are slowly disappearing, while (b) the interrelations between these spheres increasingly exceed the nation state, (c) resulting
in new coalitions between state agencies, market agents and civic organisations both on local and global levels (Van Tatenhove et al., 2000). It leads to
new and changing relationships between state, market and civil society in
different political domains within countries and beyond, implying new conceptions and structures of governance (Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004).
This shift from government to governance also impacted the conservationdevelopment nexus which evolved from the state dominated fortress conservation paradigm in the 1960s and 1970s, via the community based conservation
paradigm in the 1980s and 1990s, to the increasing inclusion of the market
in conservation in the late 20th and early 21st century. Within these changing
*
Zellmer.indd 83
8-12-2011 16:55:27
84
René van der Duim
discourses and practices the state as the central actor had to make room for
a plethora of global and local actors, like (International) Non-governmental
organisations, community based organisations and businesses, in constantly shifting alliances and with different levels of power (Büscher and Dietz,
2005). In other words, apart from statist arrangements, other arrangements
entered the conservation-development arena, such as neo-liberal arrangements, dominated by market agents, liberal-pluralistic arrangements, where
resources are spread over a wide array of public and private parties, and also
(neo-)corporatist arrangements where the political authority was shared by the
state and some particular acknowledged intermediate organisations such as
nature conservation organisations (Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004; Liefferink,
2006).
In addition, within these new types of institutional arrangements and within
the changing discourse in the environment-development nexus, tourism increasingly entered the arena as a crucial link between communities’ livelihoods and conservation in developing countries. As Brockington et al. (2008)
claim, tourism has become a major argument in justifying the maintenance
of protected areas; and in particular conservation organisations, national governments and the private sector have argued that through the development
of tourism protected areas have become major revenue earners, especially for
developing countries.
Indeed, driven by the international conservation and development agendas
tourism researchers and practitioners have attempted to find ways to make
tourism meaningful for nature and for communities in the South (e.g.
Spenceley, 2010; Fischer et al., 2008; Spenceley, 2008; Butcher, 2007; Jackson
and Morpeth, 1999). This has led to a large number of different institutional
arrangements in which tourism plays a small or big role. However, there is
a lot of uncertainty about the extent to which tourism-related institutional
arrangements, seen as (in)formal regimes and coalitions for collective action
and inter-agent coordination (CIDIN, 2007), effectively work for the poor and
nature conservation.
To start bridging this gap, in this article I first discuss the role of tourism as
a crucial link between communities’ livelihoods and conservation. I analyse
the role of tourism in the conservation-development nexus in the last decades.
Second, I present seven categories under which institutional arrangements
can be classified, focusing on countries in Sub-Saharan Africa. Lastly, I draw
some conclusions from this overview and highlight some avenues for future
research.
Zellmer.indd 84
8-12-2011 16:55:27
New Institutional Arrangements for Tourism, Conservation and Development
85
Tourism, Conservation and Development in Sub-Saharan Africa: A
Brief History
One of the greatest challenges the world is facing in the 21st century is to
balance nature conservation and development in Africa. It is widely acknowledged that especially in Sub-Saharan Africa biodiversity loss and poverty are
linked problems, and that conservation and poverty reduction should be tackled together. However, there is also a fierce debate about the socio-economic
impacts of conservation programmes and the success of community-based
approaches to conservation (Adams et al., 2004). Although tourism plays an
important role in this debate, its role in the conservation–development nexus
has not been fully assessed, neither theoretically nor empirically – and that is
a crucial task if we are to adopt constructive solutions.
A concern about the extinction of species, especially in Africa, motivated 20th
century conservation ideas and practices. Both an ideological and an economic
foundation was laid under preservation by European hunters; it was strengthened by safari hunters in the 1920s and 1930s, and then by those who came
after World War II armed with cameras as their primary means of obtaining trophies (Adams, 2004). Modern transport widened the scope of tourists
from Europe to Africa, coinciding with the process of national park creation
after World War II. Consequently, many controlled hunting areas and game
reserves were reclassified as national parks: Nairobi National Park in 1946,
Tsavo in 1948 and Serengeti in 1951 (see Adams and Hulme, 2001). As part of
these and similar developments, tourism became a source of income, a means
to show and to enjoy the values of nature and wildlife, and to gain public support for conservation purposes (Adams, 2004). People and nature were separated and local people were predominantly seen as a threat to the protected
areas and reserves that were being established. The result was a ‘coercive conservation’ approach (Peluso, 1993), later to be known as ‘fortress conservation’,
that excluded people and limited or inhibited their rights for consumptive use,
and was paired with a strict enforcement of these rules through a ‘fines and
fences approach’ (Büscher and Dietz, 2005).
While ideas about conservation were central to the establishment of Africa’s
protected areas, they were also partly a by-product of the ideology of national development that dominated the late-colonial and independence periods
(Adams and Hulme, 2001). In this era of modernisation, Africa was mapped
and carved up not only for industrial and agricultural development, but also
for conservation and increasingly for tourism. The latter was identified as a
development strategy that could help emerging nations in Africa to increase
employment and GDP, attract foreign capital and promote a modern way
of life based on Western values (see Scheyvens, 2007; Sharpley and Telfer,
2002). As Sindiga (1999) argues, the proponents of modernisation supported
Zellmer.indd 85
8-12-2011 16:55:27
86
René van der Duim
tourism as an agent of change, and within a short period of time incipient
tourism, undertaken by a few rich people interested in hunting game and
collecting trophies, turned into ‘mass tourism’ whereby beach holidays and
safaris became part of all-inclusive packages.
However, around the 1970s, a critical stance arose towards the development
and conservation patterns of thinking and acting, which slowly led to a broader definition of conservation and development goals and the role of tourism in
general. There was a strong criticism of the fortress conservation paradigm:
it was recognised that an approach based on site protection and maintaining
biodiversity for its own sake was neither sufficient nor feasible (Adams, 2004).
Especially excluding locals from or limiting their access to areas destined for
conservation, caused severe economic, social and ethical conflicts over land
and resources and the increase in poverty, leading to the realisation that development and livelihood issues should have been included in the global conservation agenda (e.g. Colchester, 2002; Kiss, 1990). The focus of conservation
policies and plans slowly shifted to a community conservation counter-narrative where the involvement of communities, also through tourism initiatives,
was seen as a necessary step to ensure conservation. For example, Manyara
and Jones (2007) explain that in Kenya, community-based tourism mainly
stems from the realisation that success in conservation could not have been
achieved had local communities not been involved in and benefited from conservation strategies. However, it was not until the 1980s that ‘the community’
began to be taken seriously as a major actor in natural resource management
(Barrow and Murphree, 2001).
There was also strong criticism of the modernisation paradigm and the role
of tourism within it. Economic growth policies and practices were heavily
criticised since they seemed incapable of addressing and solving the growing social and political problems, especially in developing countries (Sharpley,
2000). Influenced by dependency and political economy theory and structuralist schools of thought, it was argued that poor local people in non-Western countries were typically excluded from or disadvantaged by what development, or more specifically tourism development, could offer (Scheyvens,
2007). Indeed, authors like Britton (1982) and Turner and Ash (1975) pointed
at core–periphery relationships that prevented destinations from fully benefiting from tourism.
An alternative perspective on development evolved after the 1970s. Alternative
forms of tourism were developed, focusing on small-scale tourism ventures
and involving local communities into management plans. They were often
situated in the vicinity of natural hot spots, which increasingly became tourism hot spots. Additionally, following the green agenda of the 1980s, attention
was paid to environmental and ecological issues, and tourism programmes
Zellmer.indd 86
8-12-2011 16:55:27
87
and plans were urged to favour conservation and take into account the environmental consequences of selected tourism strategies (Scheyvens, 2007).
At this stage, the conservation and the development agenda began to converge
and tourism was seen as a means to achieve both conservation and poverty
alleviation goals. Several international nature conservation organisations (e.g.
World Wildlife Fund, IUCN World Conservation Organisation, Conservation
International) and international, national and local NGOs interested in local community development, started to fund and/or support programmes,
including tourism programmes, to achieve conservation goals while simultaneously addressing development issues (e.g. Butcher, 2007). For example, the
mid 1980s saw the introduction of Integrated Conservation and Development
Projects (ICDPs). Within these ICDPs especially ecotourism was considered
a tool to address conservation and development goals for local communities
(Scheyvens, 2002). Such projects, which were set up in several developing
countries, argued that people and livelihood practices were a threat to biodiversity resources, and that communities would act to conserve resources if
they had a ‘stake’ in decision-making about use and management of the resources (Hughes and Flintan, 2001). In practice, these projects primarily focused on supporting communities, offering them compensation if they were
negatively affected by the establishment and management of parks and protected areas, in exchange for their support of conservation (Newmark and
Hough, 2000). They were implemented through a number of arrangements
that involved communities through revenue-sharing, consultation, provision
of community services and infrastructures or educational projects.
The 1990s were characterised by an increasing global awareness of environmental and developmental issues and the international agenda emphasised
the need to identify innovative ways to address these issues in an integrated
manner. For example, the 1992 Rio Earth Summit challenged actors at various levels, also in the tourism field, to adopt sustainable strategies and pursue
goals that were meaningful for both environmental and development purposes. Agenda 21 enriched the discussion by emphasising the need for community empowerment and participation in policy and planning; also in the
case of tourism resources (Jackson and Morpeth, 1999). Ideas about equity,
gender sensitivity and empowerment were embraced and communities were
encouraged to take more control over resources and management plans. ‘Eco
tourism’ became the buzzword and started to dominate the development
agenda (Scheyvens, 2007), culminating in the International Year of Ecotourism in 2002, which was proclaimed by the UN General Assembly. A considerable amount of aid was channelled through NGOs into the developing world,
often on local levels, favouring the development of bottom-up initiatives and
supporting local sustainable livelihoods (Butcher, 2007). Researchers and
practitioners focused their attention on community-based tourism and locally
Zellmer.indd 87
8-12-2011 16:55:27
88
René van der Duim
owned developments (Sharpley and Telfer, 2002). For example, several projects were established within the broad family of Community-Based Natural
Resources Management (CBNRM) programmes. These programmes mainly
used a bottom-up approach, reduced the role of the state and took local communities as a point of departure, aiming to empower them and to create a social movement around managing local natural resources. Unlike the ICDPs,
they did not offer development services in exchange for conservation, but
mainly focused on devolving management responsibility for natural resources to communities (see also Pellis, Boonzaaier and Wilson as well as Chipfuva
and Saarinen in this book). Based on this, several community-based ecotourism enterprises were developed with the support of donors and conservation
and development organisations.
However, the effectiveness of community-driven initiatives for conservation
and development has been under constant debate for the last 10 years. Although some positive results have been reported – with regard to, for example, increasing the skills, education, responsibility and empowerment of local
communities, as well as care and awareness of the environment (e.g. Fischer
et al., 2008; Spenceley, 2008) – many argued that achieving the twin goals
of conservation and development through tourism has proven infeasible and
that local people have not been able to effectively conserve wildlife and biodiversity (e.g. Oates, 1999). Furthermore it was argued that heavy reliance
on donor funding in the long run only reinforces dependency (Manyara and
Jones, 2007), that initiatives often collapse after funding dries up (Mitchell
and Muckosy, 2008), that internal conflicts and power struggles among
community members hamper the development of successful initiatives (e.g.
Southgate, 2006), and that there are often equity issues concerning the distribution of benefits especially in terms of individual households (Manyara and
Jones, 2007).
Partly because of these discussions, in the late 1990s both the development as
well as the conservation agenda showed a profound rise of corporatism: conservation and development organisations started to learn “to think as business
people” (Adams, 2004: 204). In the wake of the World Summit on Sustainable
Development (Johannesburg 2002) and the Millennium Development Goals,
partnerships were encouraged and more actors, particularly private sector organisations, were allowed to participate in the formation of tourism–conservation–development coalitions. For example, as Arts (2006) argues, environmental movements became strongly professionalised, and they realised that
the industry was not only part of the problem but also of the solution. In addition, businesses increasingly started to recognise that fulfilling their social
responsibilities was not necessarily a bad proposition. The role of private business actors was therefore encouraged and communities, which often lacked
business skills, started to develop joint ventures with private interests. Both
Zellmer.indd 88
8-12-2011 16:55:27
89
neo-liberal and liberal pluralistic arrangements developed ( Liefferink, 2006;
Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004), as exemplified by the model of conservation
enterprises of the African Wildlife Foundation (see below and also the Chapter of Nthiga, Mwongela and Zellmer in this book) and so-called Transfrontier
Conservation Areas (TFCAs), which encompass many different actors and a
variety of land tenure systems besides protected areas.
Büscher and Dietz (2005) assert that although communities are included in
some programmes as partners, these programmes mainly use the argument
of local participation and empowerment in order to gain the support of donors
and locals, and that in practice communities are playing a marginal role, or
none at all, in the process leading to the establishment and management of
these areas. They also argue that in many cases the underlying force and focus
of TFCA arrangements remain state-enforced structures of regulation and
authority in conserving nature, which are typical of the ‘back to the barriers’
movement (Hutton et al., 2005). Advocates of a return to strictly protected
areas with hard barriers argue that we need to rethink the ‘conservation with
development approach’ and return to the principles on which conservation
organisations were founded, namely the preservation of nature for its intrinsic
value and the aesthetic pleasures it brings to people (Adams, 2004)
Institutional Arrangements aimed at Tourism, Conservation and
Development
Over the years, the convergences and divergences in the conservation and development agenda have led to a large variety of institutional arrangements
using tourism in different ways and representing statist, neo-corporatist,
neo-liberal and liberal pluralistic perspectives (Liefferink, 2006; Arts and
Van Tatenhove, 2004). The process has not been a simple, diachronic or
evolutionary process; it has been, and still is, a complex one, synchronic and
largely unplanned (see also Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004).
Moreover, the array of institutional arrangements illustrates the importance
of social texture, path dependencies, local contexts and footprints (Kremer et
al., 2009). They reflect different historical and political–economic trajectories, processes of colonisation and decolonisation, and different balances between states, markets and civil societies over time. As a result, institutional
arrangements range from ‘traditional’ government-managed national parks
and reserves, either with or without tourism benefit sharing programmes,
to Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) programmes
in Namibia and Botswana, conservation enterprises initiated by the African
Wildlife Foundation in, for example, Kenya, Uganda and Rwanda, to such relatively new arrangements as Peace and African Parks. Consequently, there are
Zellmer.indd 89
8-12-2011 16:55:27
90
René van der Duim
different ways to classify these arrangements (e.g. Eagles, 2009; Brockington
et al., 2008; Spenceley, 2003; Ashley and Ntshona, 2002; Ashley and Jones,
2001; Barrow and Murphree, 2001; Ashley and Garland 1994). For example,
arrangements can be classified according to the type of actors involved, the
degree of centralisation/decentralisation, sustainable use versus preservation,
the type of management body or the main sources of income.
Graham and colleagues (2003) suggest four models for protected areas: government management, multi-stakeholder management, private management
and traditional community management. They suggest that government
management can be performed by a national, provincial, state or municipal
government agency, or be delegated to a non-governmental body. Multi-stakeholder management can take the form of collaborative or joint management.
Private management can be provided by individuals, not-for-profit organisations or for-profit corporations. Traditional community management is performed by indigenous peoples or local communities.
Barrow and Murphree (2001) developed a framework based on land tenure and
resources to classify arrangements. They used tenure to cover the rights of secure, long-term access to land and other resources, and the benefits, authority
and responsibility related to these rights. The nature and distribution of rights
of tenure among actors will largely define configurations of power, authority
and responsibility among actors, and will determine the capabilities of communities and other actors to operate and negotiate in tourism programmes.
Tenure is therefore a key element in determining the performances of various
actors in institutional arrangements of conservation initiatives. In Southern
and Eastern Africa, tenure is uncertain (especially for residents of most communal lands) and decisions on the use of resources are subject to a plethora of
conditionalities. As in colonial times, communal lands continue to be “in various degrees of fiefdoms of state bureaucracies, political elites and their private
sector partners” (Barrow and Murphree, 2001: 31). Focusing on community
conservation models, Barrow and Murphree (2001) developed a typology in
which they identified three types of community conservation approaches,
namely protected area outreach, collaborative management and communitybased conservation.
Building on the work done by Barrow and Murphree (2001), Graham and
colleagues (2003) and Spenceley (2003), I distinguish seven categories under
which institutional arrangements can be classified (Table 1). These categories
are obviously not all-encompassing and in daily realities many combinations
are found (see also van der Duim, 2011).
Zellmer.indd 90
8-12-2011 16:55:27
Table 1:
91
Relation between conservation arrangements and tourism
Conservation arrangement
Examples of tourism-related development
initiatives
State owns land, manages resources and
tourism
Tourism revenue-sharing programmes
State owns land, communities manage
resources and tourism
Conservancies in Namibia
State owns land, partners manage resources
and tourism
Public-private partnership
Community owns land, manages resources
and tourism
Community-based tourism enterprises
Community owns land, partners manage
resources and tourism
Community-private ventures
(e.g. AWF conservation enterprises)
Private parties own land, manage resources
and tourism
Private game reserves
(e.g. in South Africa)
Multi-stakeholder partnership owns land,
manages resources and tourism
Transfrontier conservation areas and Peace Parks
Below, I present within each of the above categories some examples of how
tourism fits into the conservation–development nexus, which developed at
various points in time following the evolution of conservation and development paradigms in Sub-Saharan Africa. However, largely they still exist side
by side.
In the classical case of conservation, where the state owns and manages the
land through the creation of parks and reserves, tourism generates large
sums of money through entry and user fees, concessions, and leases or the
direct operation of commercial activities (see Font et al., 2004). For example,
in 2007 almost 70% of the income of Kenyan Wildlife Services was directly
generated through tourism, that is, through entry fees, operation of tourism
services, etc. (KWS, 2008). In order to address the development needs of people living around these national parks, some countries have set up tourism
revenue-sharing programmes. These schemes are based on the assumption
that providing financial support (a share of the revenue derived from entry
and user fees, concessions, etc.) to communities affected by restrictions imposed on them for conservation and tourism purposes, can help to reduce
pressure on natural resources and thus support conservation and development. In exchange for the costs that the community needs to bear due to its
lack of or reduced access to land and resources, the community receives a
financial incentive.
In order to offset the costs incurred by locals who are obliged to move out of established national parks, and to improve local attitudes towards conservation
Zellmer.indd 91
8-12-2011 16:55:27
92
René van der Duim
and build support for parks, in Uganda a portion of the revenue from tourism
is given to locals (Ahebwa et al., 2012a, 2008; Archabald and Naugthon-Treves,
2001). Experiments in tourism revenue-sharing in Uganda were started in
1952. They were extended in subsequent years and led to the establishment of
a national tourism revenue-sharing policy for parks. According to this policy,
all parks in the country were required to set aside 12% of their total income for
revenue-sharing (Archabald and Naugthon-Treves, 2001). A study carried out
in three national parks in Western Uganda (i.e. Bwindi Impenetrable, Mgahinga Gorilla and Kibale national parks) reveals that tourism revenue-sharing
programmes can play an important role in improving local attitudes towards
conservation (Archabald and Naugthon-Treves, 2001). The analysis indicates
a number of conditions that may lead to the success of these programmes.
Long-term institutional support is a key element for achieving success. Additionally, revenue-sharing programmes can be more effective when the target community is properly identified and the programmes are combined with
complementary projects (conservation education, problem animal control,
etc.). Transparency and accountability are other aspects that can play an important role in improving local attitudes towards conservation. Similar findings are presented by Ahebwa and colleagues (2008) in their analysis of tourism revenue-sharing programmes at the Lake Mburo Conservation Area in
Uganda. They point out that the revenue that goes directly to the community
needs to be substantial if it is to improve local attitudes towards conservation.
Conservancies in Namibia are a good example of the second category. A conservancy is an institutionalised organisation that is formed by a community
and has a constitution, registered members, a committee and locally-agreed
boundaries, to which the Namibian government devolves conditional consumptive and non-consumptive rights of use over the existing wildlife (Novelli and Gebhardt, 2007; Ashley, 2000; see also Pellis in this book). The major driving forces behind this were the Community-Based Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM) programmes, which were launched after independence with the aim of linking conservation and rural development. According to the Namibian CBNRM Support Organisation (NACSO), there are currently 64 registered communal conservancies in Namibia, covering over 16%
of the country and embracing 25% of rural Namibians. Although tourism in
conservancies is community based, conservancies derive the vast majority of
their tourism income from joint-venture tourism lodges and camps by imposing levies or signing income sharing agreements. A total of N$17 million (cash
and in-kind benefits) were earned from these ventures in 2008, representing
52% of all conservancy income (NACSO, 2009). Quite a number of additional
joint-venture agreements are being finalised, and many new conservancies are
being formed. In many communal areas, conservancies have facilitated the
large-scale recovery of wildlife, including large predators and rare, high-value
species such as the endangered black rhino (NACSO, 2009). Nevertheless,
Zellmer.indd 92
8-12-2011 16:55:27
93
according to Lapyere (2009), insecure community land tenure and the resulting reduced value of land, the remoteness of lodges, and the community’s
impatience and attitude towards risk could explain why rural communities
have so far not been able to capture the lion’s share from tourism activities in
communal lands. As an institutional solution, clearer and more secure land
use rights need to be devolved locally in order to increase the value of land and
allow communities to really benefit from their tourism resources. The current
situation is one of legal pluralism whereby traditional and formal rights often
overlap and conflict (Pellis, 2011; see also Pellis in this book).
Public–private partnerships are a typical example of the third category of institutional arrangements. Especially in the current climate of shrinking funds
for the management of protected areas, coupled with increasing awareness
of the value of managed market forces, there is now a trend towards greater
cooperation with the private sector. Governments increasingly recognise the
value of providing an enabling environment for the private sector to operate
within protected areas. According to Font et al. (2004), around one in five
protected areas uses some form of concession or licensing system and the
increasing privatisation of service delivery in protected areas will increase
their popularity. South African National Parks (SANParks) has a policy of
increasingly outsourcing commercial services and functions, increasing the
funds available for management and allowing management to focus on the
core business of conservation. While there was considerable resistance to this
initiative, it has proven highly successful. Nine tourism concessions are likely
to generate profits of US$ 35-53 million over the next twenty years, create some
700-800 new jobs, and due to their design increase the participation of formerly disadvantaged individuals and enterprises (Font at al., 2004; see also
Varghese, 2008).
The fourth category – community-based tourism (CBT) enterprises – was particularly supported by NGOs and INGOs in the 1980 and 1990s. The Santawani
Lodge (AWF, 2005) and Buhoma Community Rest Camp in Uganda are two
examples that claim to be rather successful. However, there is increasing evidence that the large majority of CBT initiatives are not doing too well. A review
of 200 CBT projects across the Americas showed that many accommodation
providers had only a 5% occupancy rate. According to this review, the most
likely outcome for a CBT initiative is collapse after funding dries up. The main
causes of collapse are poor market access and poor governance (Goodwin and
Santilli, 2009; Mitchell and Muckosy, 2008; Jones and Epler Wood, 2007). In
2006 a survey of 150 CBT organisations by R
esponsibleTravel.com and Conservation International revealed that 25 (16.6%) had a non-functioning email
address, and that of the 53 (35.3%) that did return a questionnaire, only 27
(18%) qualified as CBT organisations. The average bed occupancy rate was
again close to 5% (Goodwin and Santilli, 2009). Similarly, S
penceley (2008)
Zellmer.indd 93
8-12-2011 16:55:27
94
René van der Duim
analysed 217 CBT enterprises in 12 Southern African countries (Botswana,
Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe) and identified that next to accessibility, the most important constraints to the development of communitybased enterprises are market access and advertising. As in other fields, such
as agriculture, CBT initiatives are unlikely to succeed unless the community
is able to penetrate the market (see Nel and Binns, 2000). According to Kiss
(2004: 232), “many community-based ecotourism projects (CBET) cited as
‘success stories’, actually involve little change in existing land and resourceuse practices, provide only a modest supplement to local livelihoods, and
remain dependent on external support for long periods, if not indefinitely.
Investment in CBET might be justified in cases where such small changes
and benefits can yield significant conservation and social benefits, although
it must still be recognised as requiring a long-term funding commitment”.
Not surprisingly, communities have increasingly partnered up with privatesector organisations, as joint ventures can help bridge the knowledge, ma
nagement and experience gap faced by communities that are trying to enter
the tourism business (Kiss, 2004). One of the first such community-private
ventures – the Kimana Wildlife Sanctuary – was set up in Kenya in the 1990s
and has been characterised by “institutional failure, corrupt governance, and
increasing resentment amongst community members to the very principle
of ‘ecotourism’” (Southgate, 2006: 88). Kimana Sanctuary is situated east of
Amboseli National Park, which has been a reserve since 1906 and has been
gazetted as a national park in 1974. Kimana Sanctuary has been a community
sanctuary (with 4 tourists camps, 200 beds and an airstrip bringing in tourists from Mombasa and Nairobi), founded on a 10-year agreement between
Kimana Group Ranch and the African Safari Club. This agreement ended in
December 2009. Since then, Kimana has been an ‘empty place’ and the dispute between the Group Ranch and the African Safari Club is still (two years
later) before the court. The original agreement afforded around € 100,000
per year income for around 840 Group Ranch members and around 70 jobs
for locals. However, the complexities of interactions between the community
and tourism operators are illustrated by inter- and intra-group ranch conflicts,
lack of transparency over funds (e.g. cash payments to Group Ranch officials),
corruption, poor leadership, inequitable patterns of access to and control over
resources, and poor communication between the African Safari Club and the
Group Ranch. Existing conflicts between, for example, tourism and livestock
were not addressed and cash payments to Group Ranch officials led to resentment. Consequently, the highly fragmented community of Kimana has failed
to capitalise on its immense ecotourism potential (Southgate, 2006).
The Kimana case clearly illustrates the need for external support in the multifaceted processes of negotiation and communication. Especially the African
Zellmer.indd 94
8-12-2011 16:55:27
95
Wildlife Foundation (AWF) has addressed this need and has
promoted
conservation enterprises, which exemplify the fifth category (see also Nthiga,
Mwongela and Zellmer in this book). Conservation enterprises are commercial activities designed to create benefit flows that support the attainment
of a conservation objective; such enterprises include ecolodges, campsites,
cultural and fishing villages, and the harvesting and processing of natural
resource products. AWF supports around 30 of these projects in Eastern
and Southern Africa. Examples of tourism-related conservation enterprises
in Kenya are Satao Elerai Safari Camp (Kiyiapi et al., 2005), Koija Starbeds
(Sumba et al., 2007) and Ol Lentille (see also the next chapter in this book).
So far, investments in conservation enterprises amount to US$ 11 million. The
enterprises employ about 225 community members full time, while approximately 76,000 local people benefit directly from associated capacity building,
share in net benefit streams and profit from community-designed social development projects. In terms of conservation value, these enterprises secure
commitments to improve conservation across 180,000 acres (approx. 73,000
ha) of communal and private land (Elliot and Sumba, 2010). Conservation
enterprises are likely to do well with sound private-sector and community
partners, clear contractual agreements and community ownership, transparent intra-community benefit sharing arrangements and a clear conservation
logic (Elliot and Sumba, 2010; Sumba and Elliott, 2010).
The sixth category is well exemplified by private game reserves. Especially
in South Africa, wildlife utilisation has become the fastest growing form of
land use (Prins et. al., 2000). Although the effects of private conservation are
often not studied in depth, it is argued that private landholders have played a
significant role in the growth of wildlife conservation, and that private conservation is an effective tool to promote wildlife recovery (Child, 2009). Jansen
(2010) recently compiled an overview of the current state of knowledge and debates on private game reserves in South Africa. The main sources of income
of the roughly 9,000 private reserves in South Africa are tourism, hunting
and trade in animals. In the 2003/4 hunting season, around 5,000–6,000
foreign hunters shot approximately 53,000 animals and generated a turnover
of roughly € 26 million (Smith, 2005). Further, each year around 20,000 animals are traded, generating a turnover of around € 10 million (Jansen, 2010).
For Namibia it has been recorded that wildlife numbers and diversity on private land increased substantially in recent decades and continues to increase
(Barnes and Jones, 2009). The same trend is described in the case of South
Africa (Bothma et al., 2009). Private conservation is therefore considered an
interesting alternative to state-protected areas, which are often degraded because of their underfunding (Child, 2009).
Research also indicates that tourism investments on private land can contribute to the socio-economic development of local communities, although
Zellmer.indd 95
8-12-2011 16:55:27
96
René van der Duim
in a limited way. For example, Spenceley and Goodwin (2007) investigated
the impacts of nature-based tourism enterprises in South Africa, including
two private enterprises – Jackalberry (which is in the Thornybush game reserve in the province of Limpopo) and Sabi Sabi (a private game reserve in
Mpumalanga) – developed on privately owned land and operating safari tourism as their core business. The study suggests that only a small proportion of
individuals living in neighbouring communities benefited from the tourism
activities of these private enterprises. However, the impacts on those individuals were both positive and significant. The majority of the employees of those
enterprises lived locally; on average, 62% of staff resided within 25 km of the
establishment. In the case of Sabi Sabi, about 4.1% of the local population had
been lifted above the poverty line of US$ 1 per day through local employment.
In order to increase net benefits and reach a wider section of the local population, it is suggested to improve the mechanism for advertising jobs. In fact,
locals who were interviewed pointed out that although they want to work in
the tourism industry, in some cases the lack of information about the recruitment process is a barrier to accessing new jobs.
In addition, results suggest that attention should be paid to the procurement of
goods and services by the tourism enterprises. In the case of Jackalberry, the
private enterprise purchased about 60% of its needs locally (within 50 km),
but only 0.2% of expenditure was on locally made products, therefore missing
the chance to create opportunities for poor communities. In the case of Sabi
Sabi, 65% of the services required by the enterprise (e.g. laundry and gardening) were provided by locals living within a 50 km radius, thereby contributing to the economic development of adjacent communities. Furthermore, the
research shows that the private sector enterprises have contributed to local
education by, for example, funding conservation education for local children
(in the case of Jackalberry) and supporting the development of a community
environmental education centre and library (in the case of Sabi Sabi).
Finally, in the last few years the shift from government to governance has
favoured the development of new programmes that involve a multitude of
actors. Environmental and social issues in the developing world became so
intertwined with global actors that this produced a new kind of global politics (Duffy, 2006). Therefore, complex and close relationships between states,
NGOs, landowners, donors, and public and private organisations from developing and developed countries were established and liberal–pluralism arrangements were created. An example of the evolution of arrangements towards the inclusion of an increasing number of stakeholders is offered by
the Bwindi National Park in Uganda. In Bwindi, especially the International
Gorilla Conservation Programme (IGCP) – which is supported by, for example, the World Wildlife Fund, Flora & Fauna International, the African Wildlife Foundation and Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) – developed a number
Zellmer.indd 96
8-12-2011 16:55:27
97
of policy interventions around gorilla tourism in villages around the park.
In 1993 they organised direct community involvement in tourism businesses
by helping community enterprises in Mukono village to take advantage of
tourism (see also Sandbrook, 2006). Second, to support the community they
developed from 1994 onwards tourism revenue-sharing arrangements, with
20% of total entry fees and 5% of the fees for gorilla visits channelled to communities surrounding the park (Ahebwa et al., 2012a). Third, and more recently, illustrating the increasing number of stakeholders involved in the partnership, they developed the Clouds Mountain Lodge (Ahebwa et al., 2012b).
The state (e.g. Uganda Wildlife Authority), the private sector (e.g. Uganda
Safari Company), INGOs (e.g. USAID, IGCP and AWF) and local communities (Nkuringo Conservation and Development Foundation NCDF) were all
involved in the development of this lodge. The land on which the lodge is built
belongs to NCDF, while the adjacent land belongs to the state (Ahebwa et al.,
2012b; Ahebwa, 2010). Although it is still too early to assess the results of especially the third model, a comparison between the community rest camp and
private lodges in Mukono village revealed that the estimated annual revenue
of private lodges in Mukono predominantly leaks out of the region, while the
revenues of the Buhoma Community Rest Camp largely remain in the village.
A comparison with other sources of revenues to the area revealed that despite
leakages, retained tourism revenue was clearly the dominant input to the local
economy (Sandbrook, 2006).
In addition, the need to expand and manage natural areas and parks beyond
established national borders has favoured the development of transboundary
initiatives involving a variety of actors and states. The rationales behind transboundary conservation include the development of ecological integrity and
biodiversity conservation, the socio-economic empowerment of marginalised
communities by considering them partners in established multi-stakeholder
ventures including ecotourism ones, cultural harmonisation of divided ethnic
groups, and the encouragement of peace, security and good political relations
among governments by giving them an agenda for mutual action on issues of
common concern, such as disputed borderlands and competition for resources
(Wolmer, 2003). These initiatives indicate a shift from a state-centric system
to a multi-centric global system involving various actors with shared authorities and responsibility (Duffy, 2006). Investments in tourism are considered
a key opportunity for cross-border collaboration and for favouring ecological
conservation and social economic development. Transnational initiatives led
to, for example, the establishment in 2001 of the Great Limpopo Transfrontier
Park. The park covers an area of 99,800 km2 and includes the Kruger National Park in South Africa, the Gonarezhou National Park in Zimbabwe, the
Zinave and Banhine national parks, the Coutada 16 Wildlife Utilisation Area
in Mozambique, private game reserves and communal land (Büscher and
Dietz, 2005). This initiative, which favours sustainable tourism d
evelopment,
Zellmer.indd 97
8-12-2011 16:55:28
98
René van der Duim
was supported by a number of bilateral and multilateral donor-funded projects (funded by the World Bank, USAID, etc.). However,
Transfrontier
Conservation Areas (TFCAs) have increasingly become the subject of ‘critical’ research, as exemplified by the work of, for example, Büscher (2009),
Ramutsindela (2007), Duffy (2006), Büscher and Dietz (2005), Draper and
Wels (2002) and Duffy (2001) . According to Büscher (2009) TFCAs are to
be seen as contemporary manifestations of the neo-liberal governance of conservation and development, constituted by three modes of political conduct: a
consensus rhetoric, a political strategy of anti-politics and a marketing strategy entailing the “manipulation of abstraction in order to gain competitive advantage in the conservation/development market-place” (Büscher, 2009: 308).
The brief summary of the history of the tourism–conservation–development
nexus and the subsequent discussion of seven categories of institutional arrangements in Sub-Saharan Africa shows that the emphasis has shifted from
government to first communities and later to all kind of partnerships. The
overview illustrated that institutional arrangements are multiple and varied
(ranging from public-private partnerships, community based tourism ventures, private sector networks to even more complex and messy institutional
arrangements), and increasingly multi-actor of nature combining state, market and civil society and may range from formal to informal arrangements.
They are also increasingly multi-scalar, linking the local and global. Moreover,
as the history of conservation and development has also clearly shown, they
may lead to compliance as well as to – sometimes fierce – resistance.
The overview also illustrates that the role of tourism in the conservation–development nexus in the last 20 years has become increasingly important and
has led to a lot of relatively new institutional arrangements (conservancies in
Namibia, conservation enterprises, the enormous increase of private game
reserves in South Africa, etc.), some of which are discussed in other chapters
in this book, of which ‘successes’ and ‘failures’ still have to be fully established and which generate many new challenges for the actors involved. Consequently, Sub-Saharan Africa is now confronted with a raging conservation-
development debate and a wide variety of conservation practices. It is plastered
with conservation areas, reserves, conservancies and parks in which a range
of governmental organisations, communities, (I)NGOs and private companies, whether they are local or global, generate or are confronted with costs
and benefits in terms of conservation and development. This chapter has conceptualised these practices in terms of institutional arrangements and tenure
of land and resources was used as the key element for classifying these institutional arrangements. It showed how tourism gradually became an integral
Zellmer.indd 98
8-12-2011 16:55:28
99
part of arrangements aiming at bridging the conservation-development gap.
This progressively is also reflected in scientific literature as for example illustrated by recent publications of Spencely (2010), Hottola (2009), Saarinen
et al. (2009), Suich et al. (2009), Brockington et al. (2008) and Spenceley
(2008), and the articles cited in this paper.
These developments raise important questions about the implementation of
tourism as a strategy for conservation and development. Increasingly these
questions have been voiced by political economists and political ecologists.
From their point of view especially the changing balances between states,
market and civil society and the rise of neo-liberal arrangements have been
questioned. Brockington et al. (2008: 5-6; see also Büscher, 2009) for example argue that:
Conservation and capitalism are shaping nature and society, and often in
partnership. In the name of conservation, rural communities will organise
themselves, and change their use and management of wildlife and landscapes.
They ally with safari hunters and tourist companies to sell the experience
of new tourist products on the international markets (….) as these types of
interventions spread and become more sophisticated, it becomes increasingly
different to determine if we are describing conservation with capitalism or
capitalism with conservation as its instrument. The lines between conservation
and capitalism blur. While it is debatable whether this alliance of conservation
and capitalism is capable of saving the world, there is no doubt that it is most
capable of remaking and recreating it.
In their view, geopolitical developments, changing conservation and development debates, the ‘neoliberalisation’ of nature conservation (see Büscher,
2009) and the ever increasing role and importance of tourism in Sub-Saharan
Africa have transformed the political economy of conservation from a predominantly state-led conservation model to one in which corporate interests
increasingly play a dominant role. Apparently there has been a paradigm shift
in which “economic growth and big businesses increasingly are presented as
essential to successful biodiversity conservation and a sustainable future for
our planet “(Igoe et al., 2009: 4). Tourism has become an integral part of this
new neo-liberal conservation-development nexus.
These new developments require more candid and inclusive evaluations of
how well they are actually working in order to create opportunities for learning (see Sachedina et al., 2009). In other words, research into institutional
arrangements for tourism, conservation and development should also address
the extent to which such arrangements are successful or not. In answering this
question one should not only forget that an answer to the question whether a
project is successful or how a project succeeds, is in the eyes of the beholder,
Zellmer.indd 99
8-12-2011 16:55:28
100
René van der Duim
but that one also should examine how ‘success’ is produced. According to
Mosse (2005) the ‘successes’ or failures of the institutional arrangements in
terms of conservation and development are network accomplishments. Actors
in tourism, conservation and development are constantly engaged in creating
order and unity through political acts of composition, in which heterogeneous
entities – people, interests, animals, objects, building structures and technologies – are tied together by translation into the material and conceptual order
of a successful project (van der Duim, 2011). Similarly, failures “arise from
the inability to recruit local interests, or to connect actions/events to policy or
to sustain politically viable models and representations” (Mosse, 2005: 232).
To be able to examine how tourism, conservation and development projects
work and how successes and failures are produced, we therefore have to open
the black box of implementation and continue our empirical and theoretical
journeys.
Zellmer.indd 100
8-12-2011 16:55:28
101
References
Adams, W.M. (2004) Against Extinction: the Story of Conservation. London: Earthscan.
Adams, W., Aveling, R., Brockington, D., Dickson, B., Elliot, J., Hutton, J., Roe, D., Vira, B.
and W. Wolmer (2004) Biodiversity Conservation and the Eradication of Poverty. Science
306: pp. 1146-1149.
Adams, W. and D. Hulme (2001) Conservation and community. Changing narratives, policies
and practices in African conservation. In: Hulme, D. and M. Murphree, eds., African
wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and performance of community conservation. London:
James Currey Lt., pp. 131-147.
Ahebwa, W. M. (2010) The Clouds Mountain Lodge; a policy arrangements approach. Research
report, Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Ahebwa, W. M., van der Duim, V.R. and J. Nyakaana (2008) Tourism, communities and
conservation: an analysis of the tourism revenue sharing programme at Lake Mburo
Conservation Area in Uganda. In: Kloek, M. and R. van der Duim, eds., Tourism, nature
conservation and wealth creation in Africa, Volume 4; Thematic proceedings of ATLAS
Africa conferences. Arnhem: Association for Tourism and Leisure Education, pp. 15-26.
Ahebwa, W.M., Van der Duim, V.R. and C.G. Sandbrook (2012a) Tourism Revenue Sharing
Policy at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park (BINP), Uganda: A Policy Arrangements
Approach (PAA). Journal of Sustainable Tourism, forthcoming.
Ahebwa, W.M., Van der Duim, V.R. and C.G. Sandbrook (2012b) Private - Community
Archabald, K. and L. Naugthon-Treves (2001) Tourism revenue-sharing around national parks
in Western Uganda: early efforts to identify and reward local communities. Environmental
Conservation 28 (2) pp. 135-149.
Arnouts, R. (2010) Regional nature governance in the Netherlands: four decades of governance
modes and shifts in the Utrechtse Heuvelrug and Midden-Brabant. PhD thesis, Wageningen:
Wageningen University.
Arts, B. (2006) Forests, institutions, discourses: A discursive-institutional analysis of global forest
politics. Inaugural address, Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Arts, B. and J. van Tatenhove (2004) Policy and power: A conceptual framework between the
‘old’ and ‘new’ policy idioms. Policy Sciences 37: pp. 339-356.
Ashley, C. and B. Jones (2001) Joint ventures between communities and tourism investors:
experience in Southern Africa. Journal of Tourism Research 3 (5) pp. 407-423.
Ashley, C. and Z. Ntshona (2002) Transforming roles but not reality? Private sector and
Community Involvement in Tourism and Forestry Development on the Wild Coast. Research
briefing 1, London: ODI.
Ashley, C. (2000) The impacts of tourism on rural livelihoods: Namibia’s Experience. Working
Paper 128, London: ODI.
Ashley, C. and E. Garland (1994) Promoting community-based tourism development. Why, what
and how? Research Discussion Paper no. 4, Windhoek: Ministry of Environment and
Tourism in Namibia.
Zellmer.indd 101
8-12-2011 16:55:28
102
René van der Duim
AWF – African Wildlife Foundation (2005) Community Owned and Run: A Case Study of
Santawini Lodge, Ngamiland, Botswana. AWF Working Papers, Nairobi: African Wildlife
Foundation.
Barnes, J. and B. Jones (2009) Game ranching in Namibia. In: Suich, H., Child, B. and
A. Spenceley, eds., Evolution and Innovation in wildlife conservation: parks and game ranches
to transfrontier conservation areas. London: Earthscan, pp. 113-126.
Barrow, E. and M. Murphree (2001) Community conservation: from concept to practices.
In: Hulme, D. and M. Murphree, eds., African wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and
performance of community conservation. London: James Currey Lt., pp. 24-37.
Bothma, J. du P., Suich, H. and A, Spenceley (2009) Extensive wildlife production on private
land in South Africa. In: Suich, H., Child, B. and A. Spenceley, eds., Evolution and
Innovation in wildlife conservation: parks and game ranches to transfrontier conservation
areas. London: Earthscan, pp. 147-161.
Britton, S. (1982) The Political Economy of Tourism in the Third World. Annals of Tourism
Research, 9 (3) pp. 331-358.
Brockington, D., Duffy, R. and J. Igoe (2008) Nature Unbound. Conservation, Capitalism and
the Future of Protected Areas. London: Earthscan.
Büscher, B. (2009) Struggles over Consensus, Anti-Politics and Marketing. Neoliberalism and
Transfrontier Conservation in Southern Africa. PhD thesis, Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit.
Büscher B. and T. Dietz (2005) Conjunction of Governance: the State and the Conservationdevelopment Nexus in Southern Africa. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental
Studies 4(2) pp. 1-15.
Butcher, J. (2007) Ecotourism, NGOs and Development. London: Routledge.
Child, B. (2009) Private conservation in southern Africa: practice and emerging principles.
In: Suich, H., Child, B. and A. Spenceley, eds., Evolution and Innovation in wildlife
conservation: parks and game ranches to transfrontier conservation areas. London: Earthscan,
pp. 103-112.
CIDIN (2007) Institutional arrangements in development: Poverty alleviation, participation
and empowerment. Research Programme 2007-2011. Nijmegen: Centre for International
Development Issues.
Colchester, M. (2002) Salvaging Nature: indigenous peoples, protected areas and biodiversity
conservation. Uruguay: World Rainforest Movement.
Draper, M. and H. Wels (2002) Super African Dreams. The mythology of community
development in Transfrontier Conservation Areas in Southern Africa. Paper presented at the
Seminar on Ecotourism and Nature Parks in East and Southern Africa, Leiden: African
Studies Centre.
Duffy, R. (2001) Peace Parks: the paradox of globalisation. Geopolitics 6 (2) pp. 1-26.
Duffy, R. (2006) Non-governmental organizations and governance states: the impact of
transnational environmental management networks in Madagascar. Environmental
Politics 15 (5) pp. 731-749.
Eagels, P. (2009) Governance of recreation and tourism partnerships in parks and protected
areas. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 17 (2) pp. 231-248.
Elliot, J. and D. Sumba (2010) Conservation Enterprise – What works, Where and for Whom?
A Poverty and Conservation Learning Group (PCLG) Discussion Paper, Nairobi: African
Wildlife Foundation.
Zellmer.indd 102
8-12-2011 16:55:28
103
Fisher, H., Magginis, S., Jackson, W., Barrow, E. and S. Jeanrenaud (2008) Linking
conservation and poverty reduction: Landscape, people and power. Gland: IUCN.
Font, X., Cochrane, J. and R. Tapper (2004) Tourism for Protected Area Financing:
Understanding tourism revenues for effective management plans. Leeds: Leeds Metropolitan
University.
Graham, J., Amos, B. and T. Plumptre (2003) Governance principles for protected areas in the
21st Century. Ottawa: Institute on Governance.
Goodwin, H. and R. Santilli (2009) Community-based Tourism: a Success? ICRT Occasional
Paper 11, Leeds: GTZ.
Hottola, P. (2009) Tourism Strategies and Local responses in Southern Africa. Wellington: CABI.
Hughes, R. and F. Flintan (2001) Integrating Conservation and Development Experience.
A review and bibliography of the ICDP literature. London: International Institute for
Environment and Development.
Hutton, J., Adams, W.M. and J.C. Murombedzi (2005) Back to barriers? Changing narratives
in biodiversity conservation. Forum for Development Studies 2: pp. 339-370.
Igoe, J., Sullivan, S. and D. Brockington (2009) Problematising Neoliberal Biodiversity
Conservation. Current Conservation 3 (3) pp. 4-7.
Jackson, G. and N. Morpeth (1999) Local Agenda 2001 and Community Participation in
Tourism Policy and Planning: Future of Fallacy. Current Issues in Tourism 2 (1) pp. 1-38.
Jansen, K. (2010) Private Protected Properties in South Africa. Tourism as a Tool for Conservation
and Development? MSc-thesis, Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Jones, H. and M. Epler Wood (2007) Community Based Tourism Research Initiative. Survey
Results Demonstrating the Connection that Community Based Tourism Projects have to
Protected Areas. Washington: EplerWood International.
Kiyiapi, J., Ntiati, P., Mwongela, B., Hartfield, R. and D. Williams (2005) A Community
Business: Elerai Ranch and Conservation Area, Kenya. AWF Working Papers, Nairobi: AWF.
Kiss, A. (1990) Living with wildlife. Wildlife resource management with local participation in
Africa. World Bank paper no. 130, Africa Technical Department Series. Washington:
Worldbank.
Kiss, A. (2004) Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity\conservation
funds? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19 (5) pp. 232-237.
Kremer, M., van Lieshout, P. and R. Went, eds. (2009) Doing Good or Doing Better.
Development Policies in a Globalizing World. Amsterdam: Scientific Council for
Government Policy/Amsterdam University Press.
KWS (2008) Annual Report 2008. Nairobi: Kenyan Wildlife Service.
Lapyere, R. (2009) Revenue Sharing in community-private sector lodges in Namibia: a
bargaining model. Tourism Economics 15 (3) pp. 653-669.
Liefferink, D. (2006) The dynamics of policy arrangements: turning round the tetrahedron.
In: Arts, B. and P. Leroy, eds., Institutional Dynamics in Environmental Governance.
New York: Springer.
Manyara, G. and E. Jones (2007) Community-based tourism enterprises development in
Kenya. An exploration of their potential as avenues of poverty reduction. Journal of
Sustainable Tourism 15 (6) pp. 628-644.
Mitchell, J. and P. Muckosy (2008) A misguided quest: community-based tourism in Latin
America. ODI Opinion, May 2008, London: ODI.
Zellmer.indd 103
8-12-2011 16:55:28
104
René van der Duim
Mosse, D. (2005) Cultivating Development. London: Pluto Press.
NACSO (2009) Namibia’s Communal Conservancies. A Review of progress 2008. Windhoek:
Namibian Association of CBNRM support organisations.
Nel, E. and T. Binns (2000) Rural self-reliance strategies in South Africa: community
initiatives and external support in the former black homelands. Journal of Rural Studies
16: pp. 367-377.
Newmark, W.D. and J.L. Hough (2000) Conserving wildlife in Africa: Integrated
Conservation and Development Projects and Beyond. Bioscience 50 (77) pp. 585-592.
Ntiati, P. (2002) Group Ranch Subdivision Study in Liotokitok Division of Kajiado District,
Kenya. LUICD Working Paper Series, number 7, Kenya: LUICD.
Novelli, M. and K. Gebhardt (2007) Community Based Tourism in Namibia: ‘Reality Show’ or
‘Window Dressing’? Current Issues in Tourism 10 (5) pp. 443-479.
Oates, J.F. (1999) Myth and Reality in the Rain Forest: How conservation strategy are failing in
West Africa. London: University of California Press.
Okello, M., Ole Seno, S. and R. Nthiga (2009) Reconciling peoples’ livelihoods and
environmental conservation in the rural landscapes in Kenya: Opportunities and
challenges in the Amboseli landscapes. Natural Resources FORUM 33: pp. 123-133.
Pellis, A. (2011) Access to community based tourism benefits. MSc-thesis, Wageningen:
Wageningen University.
Peluso, N. (1993) Coercing conservation? The politics of state resource control. Global
Environmental Change 3 (2) pp. 199-217.
Prins, H.T., Geu Grootenhuis, J. and T.T. Dolan, eds., (2000) Wildlife Conservation by
Sustainable Use. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Ramutsindela, M.F. (2007) Transfrontier Conservation in Africa. At the Confluence of Capital,
Politics and Nature. Wallingford: CABI.
Saarinen, J., Becker, F., Manwa, H. and D. Wilson, eds. (2009) Sustainable Tourism in
Southern Africa. Local Communities and Natural Resources in Transition. Bristol: Channel
View Publications.
Sachedina, H., Igoe, J. and D. Brockington (2009) The spectacular growth of a Conservation
NGO and the Paradoxes of Neoliberal Conservation. Current Conservation 3 (3) pp. 24-27.
Sandbrook, G. (2006) Tourism, conservation and livelihoods: the impacts of gorilla tourism at
Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. PhD thesis, London: University of London.
Scheyvens, R. (2002) Tourism for development: empowering communities. Harlow: Prentice
Hall.
Scheyvens, R. (2007) Exploring the Tourism-Poverty nexus. Current Issues in Tourism 10 (2&3)
pp. 231-254.
Sharpley, R. (2000) Tourism and Sustainable Development: exploring the theoretical divide.
Sharpley, R. and D. Telfer (2002) Tourism and Development, Concepts and Issues. Clevedon:
Channel View Publications.
Sindiga, I. (1999) Tourism and African Development. Change and Challenge of Tourism in
Kenya. Leiden: Ashgate/African Studies Centre.
Zellmer.indd 104
8-12-2011 16:55:28
105
Smith, C. (2005) De Wet: Professional Hunting Association of South Africa Conference
(21/11/2005). Available at: from http://www.polity.org.za/article/de-wet-professionalhuntingassociation-of-south-africa-conference-21112005-2005-11-21. Accessed: 17.03.2010.
Southgate, C. (2006) Ecotourism in Kenya: the vulnerability of communities. Journal of
Ecotourism 5 (1&2) pp. 80-96.
Spenceley, A. (2003) Tourism, Local Livelihoods, and the Private Sector in South Africa: Case
Studies on the Growing Role of the Private Sector in Natural Resources Management.
Sustainable Livelihoods in Southern Africa Programme, Environment Group, Institute of
Development Studies, Brighton: University of Sussex.
Spenceley, A. (2008) Responsible tourism: critical issues for conservation and development.
London: Earthscan.
Spenceley, A. (2010) Tourism Product Development. Interventions and Best Practices in subSaharan Africa: Part 1: Synthesis. Report to the World Bank, Washington: Worldbank.
Spenceley, A. and H. Goodwin (2007) Nature based tourism and poverty alleviation: impacts
of private sector and parastatal enterprises in and around Kruger National Park, South
Africa. Current Issues in Tourism 10 (2&3) pp. 255-277.
Suich, H., Child, B. and A. Spenceley (2009) Evolution and Innovation in wildlife conservation:
parks and game ranches to transfrontier conservation areas. London: Earthscan.
Sumba, D. and J. Elliott (2010) Conservation Enterprise. What works, Where and for Whom?
Presentation at the ZSL Symposium, London. Available at: http://povertyandconservation.
info/docs/20100429-1130_Sumba-Elliott.pdf Accessed: 12.11.2010.
Sumba, D., Warinwa, F., Lenaiyasa, P. and P. Muruthi (2007) The Koija Starbeds Ecolodge:
A Case Study of a Conservation Enterprise in Kenya. AWF Working Papers, Nairobi:
African Wildlife Foundation.
Turner, L. and J. Ash (1975) The Golden Hordes. International Tourism and the Pleasure
Periphery. London: Constable.
Van der Duim, V.R. (2011) Safari. A Journey through tourism, conservation and development.
Inaugural Lecture. Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Van Tatenhove, J., Arts, B. and P. Leroy (2000) Political Modernisation and the Environment.
The Renewal of Environmental Policy Arrangements. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers.
Varghese, G. (2008) Public–Private Partnerships in South African National Parks: The
Rationale, Benefits and Lessons Learned. In: Spenceley, A., ed., Responsible tourism:
critical issues for conservation and development. London: Earthscan, pp. 69-84.
Wolmer, W. (2003) Transboundary Conservation: the politics of ecological integrity in the
Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park. Journal of Southern African Studies 29 (1) pp. 261-278.
Zellmer.indd 105
8-12-2011 16:55:28
Zellmer.indd 106
8-12-2011 16:55:28
6 Conservation through
Tourism: The Conservation
Enterprise Model of the
African Wildlife Foundation
Rita Nthiga*, Ben Mwongela** and Katharina Zellmer***
Biodiversity loss and poverty are major challenges currently faced by humanity and they have been identified to be intricately linked (McGregor and
Anhern, 2007; Grimble and Laidlaw, 2002). As a result strategies have been
put forward to address them simultaneously. The Conservation Enterprise
Strategy of the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) is one such strategy drawing its roots from the Community-Based Natural Resource Management
(CBNRM) initiatives of the 1980’s. The development of CBNRM was premised
on the assumption that local people are best placed to conserve biodiversity
around them and they will only indeed practice and participate in conservation if they stand to gain (Elliot and Sumba, 2010).
The model of CBNRM is not new, especially in the Sub-Saharan context and
neither has it escaped the focus of scientific discussion, evaluation and critique (cf. Mbaiwa, 2011; Stone and Stone, 2011; Balint and Mashinya, 2006;
Sammy and Opio, 2005; Western, 2000; Emerton, 1999; Leach et al., 1999).
Therefore this chapter refrains from giving details on the development of this
specific conservation intervention (the chapters of Boonzaaier and Wilson
as well as Chipfuva and Saarinen in this book give more information), but
rather focuses on the adoption of the idea within a particular wildlife conservation organisation, namely the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF), as part
of their Conservation Enterprise Program. Building on existing work (mainly
*
Department of Hospitality Management, Moi University, Kenya
** African Wildlife Foundation, Kenya
*** Cultural Geography Group, Wageningen University, the Netherlands
Zellmer.indd 107
8-12-2011 16:55:28
108
from within the organisation itself, e.g. Elliot and Sumba, 2010) this chapter
moves beyond a donor-driven effectiveness study and towards an analysis of
the broader (global) discursive developments and their influence on the model
and its implementation.
No such analysis can take place without laying the basic groundwork of understanding the intervention model and its origins. For that reason the chapter
starts with a short introduction of the background of AWF, its Heartland approach and the Conservation Enterprise model in relation to the biodiversity
conservation discourses. This will be illustrated by an account of the Samburu Heartland, Kenya, one of the focus areas of AWF and one tourism-related
AWF Conservation Enterprise, the Koija Starbeds Eco-lodge located in this
Heartland. The analysis considers the actors involved, the benefits accrued
and the challenges faced. We conclude the chapter by zooming-out from the
case study towards a general discussion of the Conservation Enterprise model
within AWF.
The Adaptation of Biodiversity Conservation Discourses within AWF
Since inception, 50 years ago, African Wildlife Foundation (AWF)’s conservation agenda has been dogged by changing but seemingly never diminishing
threats to wildlife and their habitat. This has brought relevance to emerging
conservation ideas and practices in order to achieve sustainable wildlife conservation. As part of the international environmental conservation community, in which major discourse changes keep occurring like waves every so
many years, AWF could not close its eyes on the developments focusing on
conservation and development. Table 1 gives an overview of the relationship
between international conservation discourses, AWF interventions as well as
specific organisational and strategic milestones.
The foundation of AWF under the name African Wildlife Leadership Foundation Inc. (AWLF) in 1961 fell into a period when conservation in Africa
was still state-driven and conservation areas existed mainly in the form of
fenced National Parks and Reserves (Adams, 2004). At the same time many
African countries had just won their independence from colonialism and the
changes in political power made a re-thinking of conservation management
possible and necessary. The newfound independence raised concerns among
US American wildlife lovers, as they believed that local governments and
organisations would not be equipped with the capacities to manage the wildlife resources. Consequently they argued for outside assistance and created
a conservation organisation entirely focused on the preservation of African
wildlife, the African Wildlife Leadership Foundation (AWLF). Following the
conservation ideas that they knew best from their home country the founders
did not object when the newly independent states continued to practice the
Zellmer.indd 108
8-12-2011 16:55:28
Conservation Enterprise Model of the African Wildlife Foundation
109
US-based (‘fenced’) conservation model brought up under colonial rule and
AWFL limited its focus to operations not confronting this model: research and
education projects to conserve flagship species, foremost in Eastern Africa.
These interventions coincided with those of many other conservation organisations in the rest of the world, which similarly saw their role in conservation
as that of monitoring local and global ecologies and bringing the spatially
distant wildlife back to the people’s minds. Exemplifying this, the education
projects by AWLF such as the Mweka College in Tanzania in 1962 were aimed
at educating Africans on conservation issues in order to enable them to appreciate wildlife and participate in its protection.
The protected area model of conservation usually referred to as ‘fences and
fines’ or ‘fortress conservation’ has had both successes and shortcomings
(Adams and Hutton, 2007; Brown, 2002). Proponents point out that in National Parks, conservation is often the only land use activity and additionally
the areas have become important sources of water and carbon sinks, among
other benefits (Adams, 2004). With regard to species conservation, the parks
in Rwanda, Congo and Uganda have helped conserve the endangered gorillas,
thereby providing unrivalled evidence of the efficiency of the National Park
model in certain contexts. Opponents, however, draw attention to the fact that
protected areas have propelled the separation of man and nature by causing
considerable displacement and opportunity costs to the people around the
protected areas (Igoe, 2006; Adams 2004).
Therefore not surprisingly, the 1970’s and 1980’s witnessed an introduction
of new ideas to the conservation discourse because of dissatisfaction with
and resentment of the National Park model, especially by local communities
(Western, 2000). Local communities bore the majority of costs of living with
wildlife without receiving benefits or equitable compensation for the losses
or damages caused by the animals. Consequently, the idea of involving local
communities in conservation emerged to address these challenges (Adams
and Hulme, 2001). AWFL’s reaction to these developments was based on the
‘neighbours as partners’ program, which was the first cornerstone in a major discursive re-thinking process. AWFL as an organisation realised that different to many other regions in the world, wildlife in Eastern and Southern
Africa offers a realistic economic opportunity. Accordingly, discussion about
the economic value of wildlife were initiated and although these are still ongoing (and even intensifying) until today, within AWF it was agreed that the
idea of wildlife generating income for local communities has a high potential. Economic income then in return would give communities an incentive
to conserve the wildlife and its habitat. AWFL thus started looking for ways to
manage wildlife while including communities. However, at that point the role
of communities was merely that of a beneficiary.
Zellmer.indd 109
8-12-2011 16:55:28
110
Table 1: AWF interventions in relation to
international conservation discourses1
Time Frame
General conservation
discourses1
AWF main intervention
strategies
AWF ’s organisational and
strategic milestones
1920s – 1970s
‘Fortress conservation’
or ‘Fences and Fines’
Endangered/ flagship
species conservation
Research and education
on flagship species
1961 Founding of African
Wildlife Leadership
Foundation, Inc.
1962 Establishment of the
college of African Wildlife
Management in Mweka,
Tanzania (AWF’s first project)
1970s – 1980s
Community
development and
involvement around
protected areas, e.g.
in form of ‘Integrated
Conservation and
Development Projects’
(ICDPs)
Park Outreach Program
1983 Name changed to
African Wildlife Foundation
1987 AWF starts working in
Amboseli National Park to
enlist support of the Maasai
(local people) towards the
park
Late
1980s – 1990s
Sustainability debates
and actual community
ownership, e.g.
Community-Based
Natural Resource
Management (CBNRM)
projects, also in nonprotected areas
‘Neighbours as Partners’
Program
Conservation of
Biodiverse Resource
Areas (COBRA)
programme
1988 AWF works in Group
ranches between Amboseli
National Park and Tsavo West
National Park Kenya
End 1990s,
2000s
Conservation at
landscape level
Neo-liberalisation
of nature, ‘Nature
to pay for itself’,
resulting in private
sector involvement in
conservation
Partnerships among
different actors in
society
Conservation of
Resources through
Enterprises (CORE)
program
Conservation Enterprise
strategy
1998 African Heartlands
programme launched
1998 Conservation Enterprise
(CE) strategy adopted as a
key strategic intervention to
conservation
1998 Klein’s Camp in
Tanzania opened (First CE
by AWF)
2001 Koija Starbeds Ecolodge opened in the Samburu
Heartland, Kenya
The development of the idea of ‘community conservation’ is not inherent to
AWFL. Other organisations such as World Wildlife Fund (WWF) started similar projects in the 1980’s, aiming to improve the quality of life of rural people
through practical field projects that integrated the management of natural
resources with grassroots economic development (Adams, 2004; Hughes and
Flintan, 2001). Within the conservation and development discourse they became known as Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDPs).
1
Zellmer.indd 110
For a more complete account of the conservation and development discourse and the relation
to tourism development in Africa we refer to Van der Duim’s chapter in this book.
8-12-2011 16:55:28
111
They aimed at enhancing biodiversity conservation through approaches that
addressed human needs, constraints as well as opportunities for communities (Wells and Brandon, 1993). The ICDP strategy by WWF was mirrored by
other conservation organisations although different terminologies were used
and the scope of activities was very diverse.
Next to this discursive shift – from ‘fortress’ to ‘community’ conservation –
the 1980s also witnessed the change of the organisation’s name from AWFL
to AWF (African Wildlife Foundation). Although the change seems minor
on the surface, it did reflect the changing discursive motivations within the
organisation from a focus on research and education aiming at creating a leadership role in these areas to an organisation that is much broader in its focus,
combining active conservation with local development and capacity building.
In the early 1990’s AWF took the work with local communities’ one step further. This meant moving beyond treating local communities as beneficiaries
of conservation interventions towards giving them a real stake in wildlife conservation. The driving force behind this development was the realisation that
previously employed intervention strategies such as revenue sharing between
parks and surrounding communities for various reasons did not change the
attitude and behaviour of the communities toward wildlife and did not create
enough incentives to indeed engage them in conservation. This idea of ‘community-based conservation’ took shape independently in many different countries and resulted in for example the Community-Based Natural Resource
Management model (CBNRM) in Southern Africa and the implementation of
the COBRA program in Kenya.
In general the 1990’s were thus characterised by an increasing convergence
of development and conservation discourses and practices, because the challenges of biodiversity loss and poverty were perceived to be linked and strategies sought to address them simultaneously. Consequently this led, on the
one hand, to conservation strategies aiming to achieve both conservation
as well as social-economic goals. On the other hand, development organisations also started participating in biodiversity conservation. The United States
Agency for International Development (USAID) for example, funded projects
that were aimed at addressing biodiversity conservation and community development. AWF participated in the implementation of a few of these projects,
e.g. the Conservation of Bio-diverse Resource Areas (COBRA) project together
with the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) during 1992-1998 and the Conservation of Resources through Enterprise (CORE) project during 1999-2005. The
COBRA project was a grant by USAID to the Kenyan government through
the Kenya Wildlife Service (a government department responsible for wildlife
management) and was part of a multi-donor Protected Area and Wildlife Ser-
Zellmer.indd 111
8-12-2011 16:55:28
112
vices (PAWS) program which aimed at improving the overall performance of
the KWS (USAID, 1999).
In practice, the COBRA program translated the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) into action and piloted community involvement in conservation. AWF was sub-contracted as the implementing organisation alongside
Development Alternatives Inc. (DAI) and Management Systems International
(MSI). The program’s main objective was to ensure benefits to communities
residing in major dispersal areas and targeted benefit or revenue sharing arrangements and to a limited extent, enterprise development (USAID, 1996).
Through the funding period, AWF piloted different strategies: tourism revenue sharing, co-management, sustainable utilisation and also conservation
enterprises. In the evaluation of the COBRA project conservation enterprises
were put forward as a very – maybe the most – promising strategy to increased
community benefits and participation (USAID, 1999).
As the follow-up of COBRA, the CORE project scaled up the experiences,
particularly with regard to conservation enterprises. CORE’s overall goal was
“to improve conservation and management of natural resources through increased benefits to communities and land owners in areas critical to parks
and reserves” (USAID, 2002: 2). CORE’s hypothesis adopted the CBNRM
thinking, that if people benefit from wildlife and other natural resources, then
they will take care of these resources, using them sustainably. AWF’s roles in
CORE was to initiate wildlife-related businesses, increase community capacity to conserve, design innovative tools for conservation and ensure the establishment of active partnerships between communities and the private sector
(AWF, 2005). As noted earlier, the idea of using enterprises for conservation
purposes had its roots in WWF’s Integrated Conservation and Development
Projects of the 1980’s. However, the implementation over time had proven
that there were many challenges and many lessons to be learnt. As a result,
AWF’s use of the enterprise strategy during CORE attempted to generate solutions to the challenges faced by ICDPs. For example, as communities at
the time lacked financial, managerial and marketing resources to steer the
operations of the lodges, AWF sought private investors to partner with communities aiming to fill in the gaps and transfer specialist skills and expertise
to local communities over time.
AWF defines a Conservation Enterprise as a commercial activity which generates benefit flows that support a conservation objective (Elliott and Sumba,
2010; Sumba et al., 2007). The model is designed to address conservation
threats through provision of incentives (primarily through monetary and nonmonetary benefit flows) for communities and land owners, so that they would
conserve wildlife on their lands. As straightforward as the idea appears, the
enterprises can take many forms and types which include single businesses
Zellmer.indd 112
8-12-2011 16:55:28
113
(e.g. eco-lodges, campsites, coffee and natural product enterprises) and interventions in the value chain of a product (mostly with regard to agriculture and
forest products). AWF acts as a broker or facilitator for the deals between the
communities and private sector partners. The involvement of the private sector is supposed to ensure commercial success of the enterprise while the community involvement is expected to ensure the conservation success of the enterprises. The facilitation services offered by AWF include business planning,
due diligence reporting, identifying private sector partners, legal contracting,
and community mobilisation and raising capital (Elliot and Sumba, 2010).
Until 2011, AWF has facilitated the development of 62 enterprises, 20 (US$ 27
million) already open for business, 17 (US$ 8 million) in project development
stage and 25 (US$ 25 million) undergoing due diligence and business planning. One example of a Conservation Enterprise that was established under
CORE is the Koija Starbeds Ecolodge, which will be of more interest in the
later sections.
Also outside AWF and its projects the inclusion of the private sector in conservation became a widely discussed subject. Adams (2004: 26) for example, refers to it as the “engagement of conservationists with the corporate world”. The
focus on the private sector as a viable partner started after the 1992 Rio ‘Earth’
Summit which stated that sustainable development could only be achieved if
all sectors of society participated. Prior to the Rio summit, the corporate world
was viewed as the enemy of biodiversity conservation, but the ‘new’ concept of
sustainable development sought to include it as a stakeholder in biodiversity
conservation. The participation of various stakeholders was further reinforced
in the 2002 Johannesburg Summit when partnerships were launched as the
most practical way to achieve sustainable development.
The partnership approach was seen as a ‘pluralistic’ approach to sustainable development that gave diverse stakeholders a voice in decision making.
Thus, the partnerships paradigm emerged as an option for the most promising institutional arrangement in the advancement of sustainable development
(Glasbergen, 2007) under the premise that sustainable development requires
sustained and diverse efforts as well as pooling of strengths and resources.
AWF’s Conservation Enterprise Strategy (especially for eco-lodges on community lands) is following this idea and is implemented as a communityprivate sector partnership. The involvement of the private sector according to
AWF intends to bring in the ‘professionalism’ of enterprise management to
the nature-based conservation enterprises in an attempt to fulfil the urgently
voiced need for ‘nature to pay its way’ or in other words for ‘nature to prove
that it is worthwhile’ to be conserved. The partnership approach to the implementation of conservation enterprises also intends to help the partners to
bring in their strengths for the success of the enterprises and to achieve both
commercial and conservation rigor.
Zellmer.indd 113
8-12-2011 16:55:28
114
The engagement of conservationists with the corporate world also implies that
the conservationists’ thinking is changing, leading to the adoption of strategic
business approaches to deliver results. Moreover, the conservation sector
adopted the regime of ‘self-improvement’ from the business world, whereby
conservationists began to document mistakes and design strategies to improve them. The corporate sector demanded that ideas should be presented
in comprehensive and target-oriented ways, a thought that was then adopted
by the conservation community. In this respect, Adams (2004) argues that
conservationists have to make a convincing case that money given to them
will deliver results that can be specified within predetermined time frames.
The adoption of the above mentioned business ideas in conservation have also
led to the inclusion of systematic conservation planning processes in the work
of conservation organisations. This process takes into account the scientific,
economic and political factors as well as the different land use forms of an
area before engaging in conservation. The process according to Adams (2004:
205) has stimulated “the strategic and business-like approach to saving biodiversity by focusing on the best areas and concentrating resources on them”.
This approach to conservation is being used by different conservation organisations though with different terminologies. For example, Conservation International (CI)’s ‘Biodiversity Hotspots’, Birdlife International’s ‘Important Bird
Areas’ and AWF’s ‘African Heartlands Program’, adapted from The Nature
Conservancy (TNC)’s Site Conservation Planning (SCP) approach (Muruthi
and Forhardt, 2001). In addition to the adoption of the African Heartlands
Program, AWF’s engagement with the corporate world has also resulted in
partnerships with the Starbucks coffee company and coffee farmer cooperatives in the Samburu Heartland.
Alongside the implementation of the COBRA and CORE projects, AWF as
an organisation was also undergoing some learning experiences with regard
to and evolving from the Conservation Enterprise Strategy. The most notable
was on the issue of partnership arrangements and benefit sharing in the existing enterprises. AWF realised that the majority of partnership arrangements
at that time disadvantaged communities while favouring private investors,
motivating the organisation to come up with a complete enterprise program
within its strategic interventions to conservation. At first, AWF started the
Wildlife Enterprise and Business Services (WEBS) in 1998 as a consultancy
wing that would provide business advice and service to communities and
community advice to the private sector. The first conservation enterprise initiative under WEBS was the Klein’s (Ololosokwan) Camp in Tanzania, a deal
between the community and Conservation Corporation Africa, a private company. The successful set up and implementation of the Klein’s Camp as well
as the overarching belief of AWF that Conservation Enterprises could benefit
both biodiversity and livelihoods led to the use of the WEBS idea in the areas
Zellmer.indd 114
8-12-2011 16:55:29
115
they worked in (Heartlands). WEBS was later re-organised into the Conservation Service Centres (CSCs) which were hubs of expertise (legal business
enterprise and natural resource specialists) to guide the enterprise model as
part of AWF’s operations.
The CSC’s, under guidance of the Conservation Enterprise Department
(formed after the CORE project in 2005), thus began to apply the concept of
Conservation Enterprises as a strategic intervention to conservation in all of
the Heartlands. Initial conservation enterprises were developed in the field
of tourism (mostly ecolodges), mainly because as a conservation NGO, AWF
realised the strong link between tourism and wildlife in their Heartlands.
Despite the continued importance of tourism in these areas, AWF has also
diversified the Conservation Enterprise model to include other sectors such as
agriculture, bio-enterprises and livestock-based enterprises.
Next to increasingly answering to the call of integrating development issues
into the conservation agenda, AWF also responded to paradigm shifts of a
‘purely’ ecological nature in the conservation discourse. Over the years the
theory and practice of biodiversity conservation has shifted from focussing
on a single species to large scale/landscape conservation. This landscape conservation model is derived from the ‘Ecosystems Approach’ advocated by the
Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD), which entered into force in 1993.
The approach is intended to conserve the full range of species, natural habitats and ecological processes of a large area while taking into account relevant
cultural, political and economic considerations (BSP, 1993). The landscape
approach was necessitated by studies that revealed a high threat of species
extinction in small isolated areas (cf. Henson et al., 2009; Woodroffe and
Ginsberg, 1998). The landscape level conservation strategy thus aims at conserving wildlife in large conservation landscapes that have the scope to maintain wild species and conserve ecological processes in perpetuity. As part of
the international conservation community AWF as an organisation could not
close its eyes towards those developments and adopted the new ideas in its
African Heartlands Program in 1998. Currently, AWF works in nine priority
areas (Heartlands) covering parts of fourteen countries in East, Central, West
and Southern Africa (Elliott and Sumba, 2010; Fitzgerald, 2010; Sumba et al.,
2005). The next section discusses the role of conservation enterprises within
one of these Heartlands: the Samburu Heartland in Kenya. During the discussion we pay special attention to one particular conservation enterprise:
The Koija Starbeds Ecolodge.
Zellmer.indd 115
8-12-2011 16:55:29
116
The Samburu Heartland, Kenya
AWF’s initial approaches to biodiversity conservation were mainly single species conservation, research and education in line with the conservation discourses of the time. However, at the same time as the global conservation
discourses changed, AWF’s also altered its interventions. The most notable
shift was the adaptation of the landscape approach reflected in the adoption
of the African Heartlands program in the late 1990’s. AWF defines a Heartland as a large landscape of exceptional wildlife and natural value extending
across state, private and community lands (Muruthi and Forhardt, 2001). The
Samburu Heartland, by AWF usually referred to as the ‘Heart of Kenya’, is
located in the Rift Valley of Eastern Africa in the rain shadow of Mount Kenya.
It covers approximately 26,134 km2 of predominantly savannah habitat. The
Heartland encompasses two National Parks (Mount Kenya and Aberdares)
and three National Reserves (Samburu, Buffalo Springs and Shaba). Besides
the five protected areas, there are also extensive private ranches, government
land, small scale private farms and communal lands (group ranches) spread
across the landscape. The principle land uses within the Heartland include
pastoralism, livestock ranching, tourism and – on an increasing basis –
sedentary crop cultivation. In recent years wildlife conservation and tourism
have gained greater prominence for large land owners and local communities
(Bottrill et al., 2006).
Muruthi and Forhardt (2001) note that AWF’s adoption of the Heartland approach was aimed to address key threats and conservation trends in Africa
which translated to a focus on high biodiversity value landscapes. It further
aims at conserving species, natural/ecological processes and systems that
characterise a landscape. The Samburu area was selected as a Heartland according to those principles, mainly because of an important wildlife habitat
(acacia grassland savannah and dry montane forest) which provide important
movement corridors and dispersal areas used by a wide variety of wildlife.
Furthermore, the area supports Kenya’s second largest population of African
elephants, free ranging predators (lions, cheetahs, hyenas and African wild
dogs) and other Northern species such as the reticulated giraffe the and Somali ostrich. Additionally, it is home to globally threatened species such as
grevy’s zebra, wild dog and black rhino.
As noted earlier, conservation organisations are increasingly combining interventions that address biodiversity conservation and community development.
The current AWF interventions in the Samburu Heartland exemplify this
approach and fall under four main pillars: land and habitat protection, species conservation, conservation enterprises and leadership capacity building
(AWF, 2010). Thus, the initial single species research and conservation in the
Heartland has been expanded to include Community Conservation Enter-
Zellmer.indd 116
8-12-2011 16:55:29
117
prise (CCE) initiatives, rangeland rehabilitation and water management all
aimed at offsetting the threats to wildlife in the area, i.e. habitat fragmentation and loss, overgrazing on community lands and poor water management
techniques on the upstream area of the Heartland. The interventions are also
aimed at minimising the impacts of conservation on communities that were
in conflict with wildlife. Additionally, AWF also undertakes activities purely
focusing on species conservation, such as research and conservation of endangered and vulnerable species.
The use of the Conservation Enterprise strategy in the Samburu Heartland on
community land is also consistent with the discourse of CBNRM and community conservation. The Conservation Enterprises are intended to create benefit
flows to communities living in the area with the final goal of encouraging
them to support conservation. The enterprises are also believed to be avenues
for the delivery of win-win solutions for both poverty as well as biodiversity
conservation in the Heartland, a major premise of the neoliberal conservation
and sustainable development discourses mentioned earlier in this chapter.
For example, the Conservation Enterprises developed by AWF on community
group ranches are intended to empower people and communities by providing incentives for them to support conservation. According to internal AWF
jargon, this relationship is referred to as the ‘theory of change’ whereby increased benefits are hypothesised to provide alternative sources of livelihoods
which will reduce internal threats such as poverty and increase the value of
wildlife to communities, thereby reducing the conservation challenges. Major
Conservation Enterprises in the Heartland are implemented as partnerships.
For example, AWF’s partnership with Starbucks Coffee is aiming at linking
better coffee quality and improved livelihoods based on CAFÉ practices (Coffee and Farmer Equity); the partnership with the International Centre for Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE) is designed to develop capacity for beekeeping; and the partnership with a private investor is meant to support the
sustainable management of Koija Starbeds Ecolodge.
The participation of diverse actors in the implementation of the Conservation
Enterprise strategy has also been necessitated by the fact that partnerships
function in a complex institutional environment which influence discourses,
practices and outcomes usually shaped by relationships and power relations
amongst actors. With specific reference to the Samburu Heartland, AWF
works with various other partners like private sector partners, communities,
donor organisations, the Northern Rangelands Trust, the Samburu County
Council, the Laikipia County Council, the Laikipia Wildlife Forum, Ol Pejeta
Conservancy, the Mpala Research Centre and Kenya Wildlife Service in an
attempt to facilitate their work.
Zellmer.indd 117
8-12-2011 16:55:29
118
The Koija Starbeds Ecolodge
The Koija Starbeds Ecolodge, an 8-bed four-star lodge, is located on a 500 acre
conservancy, hived off from the 15,000 acre community owned Koija group
ranch, situated between two private ranches: Mpala ranch (owned by the
Mpala Research Centre) and the Loisaba Wilderness ranch. The lodge was
established in 2001 as a partnership between three partners. The first partner
is the Koija group ranch, the community partner, represented by the elected
leaders of the group ranch committee. The second partner is Oryx Limited,
a private company representing the Loisaba wilderness ranch (the private
partner), a game and cattle keeping ranch. Oryx Limited manages the lodge
through a management agreement and is entrusted with the responsibilities
of marketing, logistics, communication support and working capital. The
third partner is AWF which acts as the facilitating partner and continues to
ensure that there is adherence to the signed agreements by all parties. The
partnership is managed through the Koija Community Trust (KCT), governed
by a board of trustees comprised of two members from the Koija group ranch,
two members from Oryx Limited and one member from AWF.
As a response to the discourse of CBNRM and sustainable development which
advocate for community participation and benefit sharing, AWF works with
the Koija ‘community’ and acts as a broker and facilitator of the partnership
deals between the community and the private investor. The community has
organised itself into a group ranch (Koija group ranch) and although this body
is riddled with internal organisational and management challenges, having a
representative body makes it institutionally easier for the community to collaborate with both AWF and the private investor.
In addition to the above mentioned discourses, a combination of local and
external factors also contributed to the set-up of Koija eco-lodge. The Koija
community group ranch and the private partner investor (Loisaba Wilderness
ranch) occupy neighbouring pieces of land. In 1999 Loisaba Wilderness ranch
approached AWF to act as a broker in facilitating a partnership with the Koija
community, because several issues were happening in the neighbourhood
which made the private rancher decide to work with the community. First,
the private investor was operating a ranch (business) which dealt with livestock ranching and wildlife tourism (two lodges). The private operator’s ranch
was next to a poor pastoral community (the Koija group ranch) whose actions
had negatively affected an area critical for wildlife conservation. Taking this
into account the private operator saw his wildlife tourism business, which
accounted for over 70% of their revenues, in danger, thus realising that the
future of the business depends on the adjacent community land. Additionally,
there was a severe drought in the area that led to communities driving their
Zellmer.indd 118
8-12-2011 16:55:29
119
livestock to their private ranch thus further affecting the private investor’s
business.
On a national and continental scale, the late 1990s witnessed agitations for
land reforms and land invasions similar to those witnessed in Zimbabwe.
The Loisaba ranch investor (ranchers of settler origin) thus felt that having
a mutually beneficial relationship with the community would cushion the
ranch from such occurrences. At first, the Loisaba ranch investor (Oryx Limited) started providing employment to a few community members, supporting
schools and health care centres in the area and facilitating other community
projects. These interventions did not seem substantial to the community and
thus did not change the aforementioned situation. The private investor therefore felt the need to provide strong evidence to the community on the value for
wildlife and at the same time create a harmonious relationship. Oryx Limited
therefore planned to replicate the Loisaba Kiboko Starbeds (one of the private
investor lodges) concept on the community land to enable the community to
secure benefits from wildlife and participate in conservation. The replication
of the ‘Starbeds concept’ was also meant to facilitate the community tap in the
existing tourism-based economies of scale that already existed in the private
investor’s ranch such as the transport infrastructure, management and marketing links as well as the human resources.
These occurrences in Loisaba and Koija ranches further coincided with the
time AWF and partners were implementing the USAID funded Conservation of Resources through Enterprise (CORE) project that had a strong focus on enterprise development in Laikipia. The Private investor’s request was
thus honoured and CORE funded the initial construction of Koija Starbeds
Ecolodge. The total initial investment for the lodge was US$ 48,000 comprised of a grant from USAID, transactional costs from AWF as well as some
monetary input from the private investor and the community. As noted above
CORE’s basic hypothesis was that if communities benefited economically,
they would willingly support conservation, resulting in a win-win situation
for wildlife and communities.
As noted previously, the concept of sustainable development had considerable influences on the global conservation and development discourse. Donor
organisations, for example, which used to fund only development projects began to fund conservation projects that had a development or livelihood component. This is no different in the case of Koija Starbeds Ecolodge, where many
donor organisations were eager to support the idea financially. USAID, as one
of these funding organisations, was mainly interested in granting money, because the idea for the Ecolodge worked alongside their policies, which recognise the importance of biodiversity as the foundation of life and the fact that
the earth’s biodiversity is disappearing at a high rate especially in developing
Zellmer.indd 119
8-12-2011 16:55:29
120
countries (USAID, 2005). The decline and the interconnected nature of biodiversity and human well-being further make conservation of biodiversity an international development priority for USAID. In developing countries, Kenya
included, people’s livelihoods depend on biodiversity and USAID works with
communities, governments and NGOs to develop environmental policies and
management practices that conserve biodiversity and at the same time sustain
local livelihoods. USAID also empowers communities to be strong actors in
the management of resources through capacity building and promotion of
enterprise-based conservation initiatives (USAID, 2007; USAID, 2005). Similar to the general conservation discourse also USAID’s approach has evolved
over time from programs that focused on protected areas management such
as the COBRA project (USAID, 1999; USAID, 1996) to programs that emphasise biodiversity conservation across large landscapes, e.g. the CORE project
(AWF, 2005; USAID. 2002), the Global Conservation Program (GCP), the
Biodiversity Support Program (BSP) and the present funding of projects that
lead to increased community benefits. The current approach to conservation
recognises that biodiversity cannot be conserved only in isolated areas and
that much of the world’s biodiversity is not located in protected areas, more
over underscoring that participation by local stakeholders in conservation programs is critical to their success that biodiversity conservation should be integrated within development activities and goals (USAID, 2004; USAID, 2002).
A performance analysis of the first six years of operation of the lodge done
by Sumba et al. (2007) indicated that the lodge posted robust commercial
returns. However, the overall performance of the lodge could not be ascertained, because only the money that went to the community (US$ 108,271.20)
was reported. This money has been used for education, healthcare and water
provision. The lodge also provides employment to over 20 members of the
community as guides, security personnel and stewards. Moreover, the most
notable conservation benefits accruing from the lodge include the establishment of a 500 acre conservation area to provide opportunities for wildlife
viewing, establishment of a natural resource management strategy and community scouting which has ensured security for wildlife.
Implications of the Conservation Enterprise Model
From the above description of the conservation discourses in relation to AWF’s
work, the Samburu Heartland and the Koija Starbeds Ecolodge, several issues
come to the forefront. Firstly, AWF as part of the conservation community
reacted (and gave input itself) to the global discourse developments around
conservation by creating and continuously expanding their conservation enterprise strategy, thereby clearly mirroring the evolution of general discourses
and practices. However, although continuously evaluated and improved, the
Zellmer.indd 120
8-12-2011 16:55:29
121
Conservation Enterprises Strategy is not without shortcomings. The challenges include issues of financing, governance, benefit sharing as well as skills
and management transfer modalities by the private investors to the communities. The interventions are also not static or cast in stone, but undergo
modifications, depending on site conditions as well as lessons learnt and ‘best
practices’ established by other organisations within the conservation domain.
Igoe and Brockington (2007), point at another challenge by putting forward
the idea of ‘attractive’ discourses, which are used by competing networks of
people and organisations, especially NGOs, to mobilise resources quickly and
efficiently, leaving little room for evaluation of their applicability. This is in
reference to the application of untested popular and fashionable conservation
models and interventions such as ‘community conservation’ and ‘conservation
enterprises’. AWF, alongside other conservation organisations has embraced
‘community participation’ in the Conservation Enterprise model, but is struggling with the complex dynamics behind leadership and governance issues
that make the management and benefit sharing schemes very difficult (see
also Ahebwa et al., 2012). Exemplifying this, the Conservation Enterprises are
often founded on relatively weak institutional structures such as the group
ranches (in the case of Koija Starbeds Ecolodge) which are confronted with
challenges of representation, management and other governance related challenges that are also influencing the partnership arrangement in the Conservation Enterprises.
The operationalisation of the Conservation Enterprise strategy, with special
reference to the Koija Starbeds Ecolodge, has applied the partnership concept
by asking the local communities to ‘partner’ with the private sector under the
facilitation of AWF. This is in line with the current dominant conservation
discourse whereby different societal sectors are collaborating to work together to deliver conservation and livelihood benefits. Ideally this should create
synergies, where each of the partners brings in capabilities and competitive
advantage for the success of the venture. Despite the advantages that are assumed to be accrued from ‘working together’, Koija Starbeds Ecolodge experiences some problems with that. The Koija community for example seems dissatisfied with the benefits accruing from the lodge, owing largely to the management and distribution of benefits by the group ranch officials. Though
the Koija bed night levy of US$ 85 dollars per client is among the highest in
Kenya, there still pertains the widespread assumption that the private investor
gets the lion’s share. The benefits accrued to Koija, and the majority of other
similar ventures, are mostly viewed as communal with limited impact on the
individual level. In this case the benefits and conservation incentives do not
add up, as has been noted earlier by Newmark and Hough (2000) who argue
that communal enterprises present incentives mainly as public goods which
are insufficient to alter individual behaviour.
Zellmer.indd 121
8-12-2011 16:55:29
122
The use of Conservation Enterprises (including Koija Starbeds Ecolodge) as
a strategy for conservation has been based on the assumption that economic
benefits will lead to community support for conservation and that increased
standards of living and income from the enterprises will result in diversion
from destructive land uses. In the words of Newmark and Hough (2000)
this could be called an ‘erroneous assumptions’, potentially leading to l imited
success of the enterprises since increased living standards and income could
also lead to increased capacity of communities to unsustainably exploit natural
resources.
Additional challenges to the success of Conservation Enterprises such as Koija
Starbeds Ecolodge emerge from the relationships created within the communities because of the enterprise. These relationships have been found to lead
to dependency of communities on donors and outside assistance (e.g. private
investors and AWF), thereby increasing the power struggles within the communities. Other factors conspiring against or hindering the success of Koija
and other ventures may be related to limited knowledge by the implementers
of the existing social, ecological, political and policy-related dynamics of the
area and the context, ultimately hindering the realisation of the intervention’s
objectives.
The financing base and structure of the Conservation Enterprises within AWF
may have been successful and sustainable in the Koija case and other isolated
cases, but over time it proved to be untenable within a landscape context. The
reliance on donor funding has led to overdependence by communities on that
type of money, and the inclusion of the private sector often favoured strategies
focusing on quick return of investment. Consequently, other, more diversified
sources of investment had to be found: twinning grant funds, private equity
and structured debt. The foundation of the African Wildlife Capital in 2010 is
a major step in the evolution of the enterprise strategy to increase and diversify sources of financial capital, at the same time addressing the inefficiencies
and risks associated with supply-led financing.
Improvements and adaptations like these show that the Conservation Enterprise model is evolving and that AWF – as its facilitator – is looking for the
optimal intervention to satisfy both development needs of local communities
and the global conservation agenda. Since the implementation of the model
only really took off in the last decade it is too early to make final statements
about the success or failure of it, but it is safe to say that it is an interesting approach which is suitable for the AWF’s African Heartlands context.
Zellmer.indd 122
8-12-2011 16:55:29
123
References
Adams, W. and D. Hulme (2001) Conservation and Community: Changing narratives,
Policies and Practices in African Conservation. In: Hulme, D and M. Murphree, eds.,
Africa Wildlife and Livelihoods: The promise and performance of community conservation.
Oxford: James Currey, pp. 8-29.
Adams, W. M. and J. Hutton (2007) People, Parks and Poverty: Political Ecology and
Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation and Society 5 (2) pp. 147-183.
Adams, W.M. (2004) Against Extinction: The story of conservation. London: Earthscan.
Ahebwa, W.M., Van der Duim, V.R. and Sandbrook, C.G. (2012) Private - Community
AWF – African Wildlife Foundation (2001) AWF 40 Years Report. Washington, D.C.: African
AWF – African Wildlife Foundation (2005) AWF 45 Years Report. Washington, D.C.: African
AWF – African Wildlife Foundation (2005) AWF CORE and FORREMS programs. Annual
work plan July 2004-June 2005. Nairobi: African Wildlife Foundation.
AWF – African Wildlife Foundation (2009) AWF Annual Report 2008. Nairobi: African
AWF – African Wildlife Foundation (2010) AWF Annual Report 2009. Nairobi: African
Balint, P.J. and J. Mashinya (2006) The decline of a model community-based conservation
project: Governance, capacity and devolution in Mahenye, Zimbabwe. Geoforum 37 (5)
pp. 805-815.
BSP – Biodiversity Support Programme (1993) African Biodiversity: Foundation for the Future:
A framework for Integrating Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development.
Biodiversity Support Programme.
Bottrill, M., Didier, K., Baumgartner, J., Boyd, C., Loucks, C., Oglethorpe, J., Wilkie, D. and
D. Williams (2006) Selecting Conservation Targets for Landscape-Scale Priority Setting:
A comparative assessment of selection processes used by five conservation NGOs for a landscape
in Samburu, Kenya. Washington: World Wildlife Fund.
Brown, K. (2002) Innovations for conservation and Development. The Geographical Journal
168 (1) pp. 6-17.
Elliott, J. and D. Sumba (2010) Conservation Enterprise: What works, where and for whom?
A Poverty and Conservation Learning Group (PCLG) Discussion Paper. London:
International Institute for Environment and Development.
Emerton, L. (1999) Community-based incentives for nature conservation. Nairobi: IUCN Eastern
and Southern Africa Regional Office.
Fitzgerald, K.H. (2010) Securing forested land through carbon offset projects: Pilot projects from
the African Wildlife Foundation in East Africa. AWF Working Papers. Nairobi: African
Glasbergen, P. (2007) Setting the scene: The partnership paradigm in the making. In:
Glasbergen, P., Biermann, F., and P.J.A. Mol, eds., Partnerships, Governance and
Zellmer.indd 123
8-12-2011 16:55:29
124
Sustainable Development Reflections on Theory and Practice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar
Publishing, pp. 1-26.
Grimble, R. and M. Laidlaw (2002) Biodiversity management and local livelihoods: Rio plus
10. Briefing Paper. ODI Natural Resource Perspectives 73: pp. 1-4.
Henson, A., Williams, D., Dupain, J., Gichohi, H. and P. Muruthi (2009) The heartland
conservation process: enhancing biodiversity conservation and livelihoods through
landscape-scale conservation planning in Africa. Oryx 43 (4) pp. 508-519.
Hulme, D and M. Murphree (2001) Community conservation in Africa: An Introduction.
In: Hulme, D and M. Murphree, eds., Africa Wildlife and Livelihoods: The promise and
performance of community conservation. Oxford: James Currey, pp. 1-8.
Hughes R. and F. Flintan (2001) Integrating conservation and development experience: A review
and bibliography of the ICDP literature. London: International Institute for Environment
and Development.
Igoe, J. (2006) Measuring costs and benefits of conservation to local community. Journal of
Ecological Anthropology 10 (1) pp. 72-77.
Igoe, J. and D. Brockington (2007) Neoliberal Conservation: A brief introduction.
Conservation and Society 5 (4) pp. 432-449.
Mbaiwa, J. (2011) The effects of tourism development on the sustainable utilization of natural
resources in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Current Issues in Tourism 14 (3) pp. 251-273.
McGregor, S. and J. Ahen (2007) Biodiversity Conservation and Ecosystem Protection.
In: Hamin, E.M., Geigis, P. and L. Silka, eds., Preserving and Enhancing Communities:
A Guide for Citizens, Planners and Policymakers. Amherst: University of Massachusets
Press.
Muruthi, P. and K. Forhardt (2001) Study on the development of Transboundary Natural
Resource Management in Africa: Kilimanjaro Heartland case study. Nairobi: African Wildlife
Foundation.
Newmark, W.D. and J.L. Hough (2000) Conserving Wildlife in Africa: Integrated
Conservation and Development Projects and Beyond. BioScience 50 (7) pp. 585-592.
Sammy, J. and C. Opio (2005) Problems and prospects for conservation and indigenous
community development in rural Botswana. Development Southern Africa 22 (1) pp. 67-85.
Stone, L.S. and M.T. Stone (2011) Community-based tourism enterprises: challenges and
prospects for community participation: Khama Rhino Sanctuary Trust, Botswana.
Sumba, D., Bergin, P. and C. Jones (2005) Land Conservation Trusts: A case study of Manyara
Ranch, Tanzania. AWF working Papers. Nairobi: African Wildlife Foundation.
Sumba, D., Warinwa, F., Lenaiyasa, P. and P. Muruthi (2007) The Koija Starbeds Ecolodge:
A Case Study of a Conservation Enterprise in Kenya. AWF Working Papers. Nairobi: African
USAID – United States Agency for International Development (1996)
Mid-Term evaluation of the Conservation of Biodiverse Resource Areas (COBRA).
Washington: USAID.
USAID – United States Agency for International Development (1999) Conservation of
Biodiverse Resource Areas (COBRA) Project Kenya (1992-1998). Summary Report.
Washington: USAID.
Zellmer.indd 124
8-12-2011 16:55:29
125
USAID – United States Agency for International Development (2002) Conservation of
Resources through Enterprise (CORE) Mid-term evaluation final report. Washington:
USAID.
USAID – United States Agency for International Development (2004) USAID–CORE
Enterprise Development Fund Report. Washington: USAID.
USAID – United States Agency for International Development (2005) Biodiversity
Conservation: A guide for USAID staff and partners. Washington: USAID.
USAID – United States Agency for International Development (2007) Gender assessment of
sustainable conservation-oriented enterprises: preliminary findings. Kenya: USAID.
Wells, P.M. and K. Brandon (1993) Principles and Practice of Buffer Zones local participation
in Biodiversity conservation. Ambio 22 (2-3) pp. 157-162.
Western, D. (2000) Conservation in a human-dominated world. Issues in Science and
Technology 16 (3) pp. 53-60.
Woodroffe R. and J.R. Ginsberg (1998) Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside
protected areas. Science 280 (5372) pp. 2126-2128.
Zellmer.indd 125
8-12-2011 16:55:29
Zellmer.indd 126
8-12-2011 16:55:29
7 Modern and Traditional
Arrangements in CommunityBased Tourism: Exploring an
Election Conflict in the Anabeb Conservancy, Namibia
Arjaan Pellis*
After independence in 1990, a great number of transformations in relation
to nature conservation and economic development took place in and around
Namibia. Former South West Africa, as Namibia was known under the occupation of South Africa, developed into an official democratic republic. At
the same time, the end of apartheid led to a radical and rapid shift from centralised decision-making to participatory conservation practices that included
“socially disadvantaged local communities living in and around or expelled
from the resources to be protected” (Büscher and Dietz, 2005: 6). Within
these transformations, the Namibian government embraced the institutional
innovation of Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) as
a national solution to both nature conservation as well as economic development.
CBNRM prescribes local community empowerment for those people who rely
upon their natural environment and therefore would know best how to conserve it (Dressler et al., 2010). The Namibian program has a strong reputation
for its innovative approach to provide “communities with unprecedented incentives to manage and conserve their areas and wildlife” (MET, 2011). These
incentives consist of new common property rights to natural resources that
enable communities to profit from sustainable natural resource management.
*
Zellmer.indd 127
8-12-2011 16:55:29
128
Arjaan Pellis
The Namibian CBNRM is perceived as getting very close to the ideal of complete community conservation with virtually full ownership and management
by local communities (Hulme and Murphree, 1999). However, according to
Brockington (2004) nature conservation does not always depend upon ‘local support’ and social injustices are not necessarily resolved with involving
communities in conservation. CBNRM has in fact reported limited success
around the world (Dressler et al., 2010). Proponents of ‘Fortress Conservation’
go even further and argue that the “limits of community ownership over natural resources have been reached” (Büscher and Dietz, 2005: 2). Interestingly,
Namibia continues to be a showcase for the potentials inherent in community
conservation and indeed, over the past two decades, CBNRM in Namibia led
to respectable outcomes in both nature conservation and the economic development of people (NACSO, 2011, 2010, 2009).
As promising as this might look, merely ‘having’ property rights to benefits
does not automatically mean that one can have ‘access to benefits’ from these
rights (Ribot and Peluso, 2003). This chapter will therefore look into the introduction of modern conservancy arrangements and its interaction with local
community conservation practices.
Conservancies in Namibia
In the 1980s, local nature conservation organisations and traditional leaders
in Kunene, a province in North-Western Namibia, started experimenting with
community managed conservation (Blaikie, 2006; Jones, 2006; Barrow and
Murphree, 2001; Jones and Murphree, 2001). Prior to modern conservancy
management initiatives, local community game guards were appointed by
traditional leaders to monitor wildlife and participate in anti-poaching patrols
(Novelli and Gebhardt, 2007). Although this intervention promised to make
local communities understand the threats of wildlife extinction, commercial
and subsistence hunting continued.
As a counter-initiative, local leaders designed community managed conservation schemes in cooperation with a regional NGO called Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation (IRDNC). This initiative in Kunene symbolised a move against the centralised political climate of apartheid and has
inspired a national community based movement ever since (IRDNC, 2011). In
fact, the Kunene experience has found support from different (non-) governmental and private organisations related to nature conservation, tourism and
poverty alleviation. Subsequent policy documents and legal changes have formally institutionalised the initiative into the concept of a ‘conservancy’, which
is defined by the Namibian Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) as:
Zellmer.indd 128
8-12-2011 16:55:29
Modern and Traditional Arrangements in Community-Based Tourism
129
A group of farms on which neighbouring landowners have pooled their
resources for the purpose of conserving and utilising wildlife on their
combined properties. The conservancy concept does not have to be restricted
to the commercial farming areas, but can be extended to communal land as
well (MET, 1995: 4).
The distinction between commercial and communal rights refers to former
apartheid divisions that have marginalised opportunities for ethnic groups in
homelands. Before independence the rural poor living in these homelands
were incapable to legally benefit from wildlife (in form of trophy hunting,
tourist lodging or revenues from game meat). Since 1968, in the time of South
African occupation, only commercial (white) private farms were allowed to
benefit from consumptive and non-consumptive rights to wildlife (Jones and
Murphree, 2001). Understandably, the removal of the ‘white favouritism’ has
been on the Namibian political agenda since independence. It has been used
as an argument to indigenise public and private enterprises and is seen as
a political “legacy to legitimise the concentration of political and economic
power in the hands of the new post-independence elite” (Jones and Murphree,
2001: 39).
During apartheid in South Africa and Namibia, homelands were established
to cluster ethnic groups into separate geographic areas. Homelands were
meant to form autonomous self-managed regions in the larger nation state of
South West Africa. Communal land was often perceived to be owned or ma
nagement by local chiefs and/or ruled by customary law. After independence,
new national policies have put a halt to such local practices (Corbett and
Daniels, 1996) and the newly established conservancies are now meant to be
managed by modern democratic routines where an official community committee is chosen amongst members of a conservancy. This committee repre
sents the will of the community and is formally in charge of conservancy resource allocations, by guiding staff members in the management conservancy
benefits and costs. Consequently, traditional chiefs or headmen do no longer
play an official role in this regard.
It is widely argued that the conservancy concept has enabled communities
to reap benefits from good management. According to Novelli and Gebhardt
(2007: 466) the movement is commonly seen by Namibian stakeholders as a
“very good concept”, but the implementation of the concept has revealed difficulties. Especially conservancies consisting of many ethnically diverse groups
seem to have difficulties with the idea of one decentralised conservancy committee being authorised to manage wildlife in a region. Not being able to work
with all of these groups, some NGOs are prompted to work with a handful of
powerful local community leaders, who have strong support from people in
Zellmer.indd 129
8-12-2011 16:55:29
130
Arjaan Pellis
the area. Although this seems like a rather excluding way of working, it is an
effective way to achieve conservation goals.
This latter finding provides interesting perspectives to understand external
power relations present in regional, national or even international contexts
around conservancy management. In this respect, Lapeyre (2011) proposes to
study conservancies from an institutional perspective in order to understand
the different governance structures and reveal deep, far reaching and powerful relations in community conservation.
Lapeyre (2008: 26) furthermore points out that some local arrangements
of conservancies are instable due to “community conflicts, rivalry between
actors, uncertainty and opportunistic behaviours”. To counteract this clearer and more secure property rights would be beneficial for communities to
access tourism income in the future (Lapeyre, 2009; Libanda and Blignaut,
2008). What is missing yet in this discussion is the role of cultural norms in
local and non-local contexts. In his study on conservancies Lapeyre (2011: 305)
has purposefully left out cultural norms, because:
… cultural norms, traditions and informal rules at the community level are
slow to evolve; in this context little can be recommended to policy makers to
change incentives in [embedded informal institutions].
However, omitting the role of cultural norms and traditions and framing
conservancy imperfections into stories of simple community conflict seems
to overlook embedded deeper political relations in community conservation.
Cultural norms and traditions might be slow to evolve, but they are powerful
to allow the acceptance of drastic policy changes within a community.
A New Perspective on Conservancies
This chapter discusses the conservancy development from an institutional and
political perspective. After all the success of new policy arrangements, such as
the conservancy program depends “on how stakeholders define, perceive and
strategise for this success in relation to their own logics of action” (Arts and
Goverde, 2006: 76). Namibia’s conservancies are currently represented in a
widespread story about growing statistics of wildlife populations, income generation and best practices in local nature conservation (NACSO, 2010; 2009).
On top of that tourism is currently considered a priority sector in Namibia
(Novelli and Gebhardt, 2007; WTTC, 2006), as it provides for the bulk of income opportunities in conservancies (NACSO, 2011a; 2010; 2009). Namibia’s
Vision 2030 specifies that especially in rural areas tourism can contribute to
income generation, because these areas are where most tourism takes place.
Zellmer.indd 130
8-12-2011 16:55:29
131
The claim is that direct or indirect employment in these conservancies can
lead to poverty alleviation (RN, 2002). Following this line of thought it is not
surprising that the number of conservancies has increased exponentially. By
now, 64 conservancies have been established throughout Namibia (NACSO,
2011a), 23 conservancies are located in Kunene region alone.
An institutional analysis of this phenomenon can provide for a better understanding of why community conflicts and rivalry arise. Not only from an economic governance perspective (Lapeyre, 2011), but also from studying different cultural discourses of how community conservation ought to be managed.
This chapter nuances the Namibian success story from a critical perspective
by focusing on how policy innovations work in local traditional governance
contexts. Analysing what new policy developments do for local ‘business-asusual’ is critical in identifying the governance capacity of new policy arrangements (Gonzalez and Healey, 2005). A single case study is presented here to
reflect upon overly positive discourses of progress in Namibia’s community
conservation. The aim is not to call for a return of centralised ‘Fortress Conservation’ practices, but rather to nuance the importance of addressing different cultural beliefs in community conservation.
One particular conservancy arrangement – the Anabeb Conservancy – illustrates how different people within a community have difficulties to deal with
overlapping formal and informal rules in community conservation. The study
is performed during a particular hectic time of this conservancy: the committee elections of 2010. It shows how a conflict over election procedures, where
one group favours traditional and another group modern ideas of community
conservation, has had far reaching effects on people’s relations in the region.
To explore how inclusive policy innovations such as conservancies work in
steering local traditional practices, this study makes use of the so-called Policy Arrangements Approach (PAA) (Arts et al., 2006; Arts and Van Tatenhove,
2004) and the concept of ‘Governance Capacity’ (Arts and Goverde, 2006;
Gonzalez and Healey, 2005). The findings are based on an ethnographic study
of the election conflict in Anabeb Conservancy. I executed 38 interviews in
combination with participant observations of two election conflict meetings
in August 2010. I have executed semi-structured interviews using a topic-list
related to the Policy Arrangements Approach. Interviewees were selected by
means of snowballing and they represent community members who are selected on basis of their belonging to either one of the conflicting groups in the
conservancy. Next to community members, I interviewed associated regional
and national members of the Namibian Conservancy program to contextualise external relationships.
Zellmer.indd 131
8-12-2011 16:55:29
132
Arjaan Pellis
In the remaining part, this chapter will first introduce the concepts of policy
arrangements and governance capacity. Subsequently, the context of Anabeb
Conservancy will be discussed in relation to traditional leadership structures.
This context helps to understand complexities of modern day policy arrangements in Anabeb which will be reviewed in terms of governance capacity in
the concluding part of this chapter.
Policy Arrangements and Governance Capacity
The Namibian conservancy approach can be characterised as a ‘political innovation’ since it represents active regeneration of existing policies by actors
(Arts et al., 2006). ‘Active’ regeneration results from both structural societal
developments – independence and deregulation – and powerful actions of
individuals involved with the conservancy movement of Namibia (i.e. nongovernmental organisations involved with community conservation). To study
both agency and structural development, one can make use of the so-called
Policy Arrangements Approach.
Policy Arrangements Approach
A policy arrangement is defined as “the temporary stabilisation of the content and organisation of a policy domain” (Arts et al., 2006: 96). To study
changes in these arrangements, the Policy Arrangement Approach (PAA) is a
useful analytical tool (Arts et al., 2006, Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004). The
PAA makes two important assumptions. First, political life can be studied by
purposefully distinguishing agency and structure. This distinction (or ‘analytic dualism’) is used for analytic purposes (Archer, 1996) – since a person’s
rational behaviour is to some extend bound to surrounding structures. Therefore, the interplay between agency and structure helps us to understand why
social practices happen.
Second, an improved understanding of the relationship between agency and
structure needs to be found in terms of actors (i.e. policy coalitions), resources
(whose mobilisation empower actor positions), ideas (i.e. policy discourses),
and rules of the game (i.e. formal and informal regulations). Every political
case can be deconstructed in terms of actor constellations that evolve into
different temporal groups. These groups develop from different perspectives
framed within structural discourses, which bring forward certain ideas of
what rules need to be applied. The resourcefulness (i.e. having necessary
knowledge, financial capital or position in society) of these actor groups creates a direct form of power over what rules are used. In natural resource ma
nagement, rules apply to what is considered good management on the basis of
discursive influences. The discursive represents an indirect form of power, as
Zellmer.indd 132
8-12-2011 16:55:29
133
explained by Barnett and Duvall: “the socially diffuse production of subjectivity in systems of meaning and signification” (2005: 43).
According to Agrawal and Gibson (1999), some actors in community conservation seem to have particular abilities to strategically bypass existing constraints of institutions and actively create new ones for their own interest. The
PAA studies this by distinguishing actor groups that share certain ideas in
form of so-called ‘discourse coalitions’ (Hajer, 1993) leading to a temporary institutionalisation of rules over the management of resources valuable to these
actor alliances. PAA emphasises how institutions are embedded in policy processes in a network of actors, how policy developments have been structured,
the different roles of power, and the relevance of content, organisation and
change to policy arrangements.
Governance Capacity
Policy arrangements can also be discussed in terms of Governance Capacity
(Arts and Goverde, 2006; Nelissen et al, 2000), which puts forward as a main
question: how well does a policy design fit to a particular situation to steer
desired practices at a distance? In terms of this chapter the main question is:
How do conservancy ideas created in Windhoek – Namibia’s community conservation policy hub – resonate in rural traditional ideas of communal wildlife
management in Anabeb Conservancy?
Useful in answering this question is the application of the Governance Capacity Approach (GCA), which can assess existing arrangements in terms of their
performative and indicative capacities (Arts and Goverde, 2006). Whereas
performative refers to the actual achievement of a policy arrangement, the indicative looks at the potential capacity of an arrangement to “contribute to the
solution of societal or administrative problems” (Arts and Goverde, 2006: 75).
Arts and Goverde (2006) distinguish three possible aspects of performative
capacity: juridical (i.e. how well does a conservancy operate as a constitutional entity?), economic-managerial (i.e. how effective can conservancy tasks be
managed? How much do current arrangements allow for flexible exchange of
capital, knowledge and labour?) and political/civic (i.e. how well are democratic
processes structured and valued? How is inclusive decision making possible?).
The indicative capacity needs to assess whether a policy arrangement can remain productive in the future. As Arts and Goverde explain in terms of the
PAA, it is necessary:
that there are enough resources available, that the key policy actors are involved,
that the rules of the game do not prohibit appropriate (change) behaviour, that
the dominant policy discourse is (to some extent) shared, etc. (2006: 80).
Zellmer.indd 133
8-12-2011 16:55:29
134
Arjaan Pellis
To assess indicative capacities it is useful to apply the concept of congruence
by Boonstra (2004; in Arts and Goverde, 2006: 80). Congruence can be seen
in terms of strategic (how well do policy actors share discourse and common
interests?), structural-internal (how coherent are different dimensions of a
policy arrangement?) or structural-external dimensions (how are dimensions
of a policy arrangement part of a wider institutional context?).
The Anabeb Conservancy and Local Leadership
The Namibian conservancy program started in the region of Kunene in
North-Western Namibia. During apartheid, Kunene used to be divided into
two separate homelands, namely Kaokoveld and Damaraland. The Anabeb
Conservancy can be found on the exact border of these former homelands
(see also Figure 1), 666 km away from Windhoek. The Anabeb Conservancy is
inhabited by seven different clans that once lived separated in the two former
homelands. Each clan is represented by a traditional chief or headmen, the
latter being a traditional leader who falls under the authority of a traditional
chief elsewhere. Many clans, especially Herero clans in Kunene, are dispersed
in groups who live independently from one another. Due to the past division
into homelands, it is no wonder to find three Damara and four Herero clans
living together in Anabeb Conservancy.
Damara clans (Uises, Taniseb and Ganaseb) used to live in former Damaraland. The Herero clans are commonly found in more areas of Namibia, but the
clans of this study (Kasaona, Kangombe, Mbomboro and Uakazapi) have lived
live in the Kaokoveld homelands area for several generations. Clan members
are dispersed beyond the conservancy borders. Many similar family lines are
found in the north and west of Anabeb which had once been embedded in a
larger conservancy, (Sesfontein Conservancy). Regional conflicts over land use
in the larger region of Sesfontein resulted in Sesfontein Conservancy being
split up into three separate conservancies over the past eleven years: Purros
(since May 2000), Sesfontein (since July 2003) and A
nabeb Conservancy
(since July 2003) (NACSO, 2011a).
As mentioned above, a conservancy assigns a formal role to a conservancy
committee to manage wildlife resources in a conservancy. The committee is expected to democratically represent the community, so consequently the conservancy staff should consist of the best possible candidates to
execute conservancy tasks, such as game guarding, community projects or
administration. The role of traditional leaders in this formal arrangement
is limited. In post-independence Namibia indigenous leaders were regularly
seen as formerly appointed colonial “lower-level bureaucrats who administer
Zellmer.indd 134
8-12-2011 16:55:29
135
the ‘native areas’ on behalf of the administration in return for an annual salary” (Werner, 1993: 136). But traditional leaders remain – directly and indirectly – recognised in Namibian law (Hinz, 2007). According to the memory
of one local headman in Warmquelle (Anabeb’s main village), formal patronage administrative rights have been effective for a while: “ [in] 1976 we started
with this [chieftainship] system...”
Figure 1: Position Anabeb Conservancy (#27) (Based on: NACSO, 2011b; University
of Texas, 2011)
Yet, according to Gewald (1999), chieftainship was already invented in an earlier stage. For example, political Herero unity is claimed to be established
in response to trade relations with the Cape colony in the 1840s. Chieftainship was not only created by means of close kinship, but also through the
fact that “skills and contacts acquired through association with the frontier
were applied to create and maintain a new form of centralised Herero polity”
(Gewald, 1999: 28). Although the role of traditional leaders in conservancy
arrangements may be formally diminutive, Anabeb Conservancy has installed
an official ‘advisory’ position to each traditional leader in the conservancy
management. In this way, former traditional authority over land allocation in
communal land is being accounted for. Next to ten officially elected members,
seven additional traditional leader representatives advise the official committee to make decisions on behalf of the whole community.
Zellmer.indd 135
8-12-2011 16:55:30
136
Arjaan Pellis
Policy Arrangements and Conflict in Anabeb
In the summer of 2010, the Anabeb Conservancy planned to have democratic
elections for the new conservancy committee. In four different villages conservancy members could vote for community representatives. In general,
these elections are held every three to five years in order to have a respectable
representation of all +/- 500 members of the conservancy. With exception of
Warmquelle, Anabeb’s largest settlement, all elections were reported to have
been executed ‘as usual’.
Three out of four Herero groups in Anabeb are settled in Warmquelle: the
Kasaona, the Mbomboro, and the Kangombe. During the Election Day, only
the Kasaona had been reported to attend the elections while the other two
clans – led by their headmen – refused to participate due to different ideas on
the proper procedure to elect. According to the Kangombe and Mbomboro,
elections could only be done after presenting the results of committee that
governed during the last term. In contrast, the Kasaona argue that due to
problems with presenting the results, one should do elections first and present
committee results on some other occasion. Election support officials – from
the local Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) and the Integrated
Rural Development and Nature Conservation (IRDNC) – supported the latter
claim since all elections “had been planned in advance”. According to them
delays would have caused planning-problems in other villages. As a result,
three Kasaona members had been elected for the committee in Warmquelle
filling the three available seats.
The two opposing Herero clans, in support of the Uakazapi and Taniseb clan,
officially complained to the national Ministry of Environment and Tourism
(MET). They asked to intervene in the perceived unconstitutional procedures
of the elections and feared that the former committee (which was, and continues to be, under the leadership of a Kasaona) had “something to hide”. The
Kasaona diminished such accusations by referring to the new constitution of
Anabeb, which allows that elections can take place prior to committee reporting. The objecting clans consider this constitution non-existent since it had
never been agreed upon by all clan leaders. According to some Kasaona, the
fact that Kasaona had obtained all Warmquelle positions in the committee
was due to the simple ‘democratic’ majority rule. The opposition, however, rejects the reference to democracy, as they have refrained from any participation
in the elections out of dissatisfaction over the used (undemocratic) procedure.
On the surface this conflict over election procedures seems simple. However,
the actual reason for conflict is considerably more complex if we consider
shifting relations between groups in Warmquelle, Anabeb Conservancy and
even beyond the borders of the conservancy.
Zellmer.indd 136
8-12-2011 16:55:30
137
Actor coalitions
The new conservancy structure has led to two different temporal coalitions
that move beyond traditional divides in the region and beyond ethnic Damara and Herero divides. On the one hand there is a ruling coalition of the
Kasaona clan that is tolerated by one Damara clan: the Uises. This coalition
works closely with support organisations, particularly with the Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation (IRDNC). The Kasaona are well
represented in the former and especially current conservancy committee; they
have access to most of the conservancy jobs and are well connected with the
IRDNC. For example, one of the co-directors of the IRDNC is a Kasaona and
one of the assistant directors is the current chief of the Kasaona. The Uises
clan has established good relations with the Kasaona in Kwowarib (Anabeb’s
second village) where members of both clans have lived side by side for a long
time.
On the other side of the divide, a resistance coalition formed against the strong
position of the Kasaona. This coalition consists of remaining Herero and Damara clans in Anabeb: Kangombe, Mbomboro, Uakazapi, Taniseb and Ganiseb. The Kangombe and Mbomboro live next to the premises of the Kasaona
in Warmquelle and are regularly confronted with Kasaona being granted
better positions. Other clans (the Uakazapi, Taniseb and Ganiseb) feared the
strong position of the Kasaona too and joined into the temporary coalition.
This is unusual as Damara (Taniseb and Ganiseb) and Herero (Kangombe,
Mbomboro and Uakazapi) are not typical allies. To illustrate the traditional
divide one Damara resident in Kwowarib village explained:
We see that only Herero people are benefitting [in the conservancy]. They are
the ones who come to hunt; they receive the fat meat … the Damara get the
meagre ones. We hate therefore the Herero people.
Discourses
The two actor coalitions coincide with two policy discourses, which are entrenched in larger discursive backgrounds:
- Discourse 1: The Kasaona coalition favours democracy & efficiency, or in
other terms conservancies need to be run ‘as a business’. Therefore the
rule should be that elections have to occur prior to reporting for efficiency
reasons.
- Discourse 2: The ‘concerned’ groups speak of important traditional
structures and suspect nepotism and problems with the former committee.
They argue that the rule should be that conservancy reports have to be
ready and presented prior to elections.
Figure 2summarises this divide in Anabeb. The IRDNC and the regional
Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) have been included here as
Zellmer.indd 137
8-12-2011 16:55:30
138
Arjaan Pellis
(discursive) partners of the Kasaona coalition, mainly because they have similar perceptions on the proper procedures for elections and the management
of the conservancy ‘as an effective business’. However, officers of IRDNC and
MET perceive themselves as neutral partners in conservancy development.
Figure 2: Discourses and rules
Rule 1
Non-concerned: Elections first!
IRDNC
/ Regional
MET
Kasaona
Discourse 1
• Conservancy is a business...
• Democracy; majority rules...
• Conservancy is apolitical...
Uises
SWAPO
Mbombora
Discourse 2
• Old committee is hiding something...
• IRDNC and Kasaona’s cooperating...
• Conservancy is for community...
Kangombe
Taniseb
Uakazapi
Rule 2
Concerned: Reporting first!
Ganaseb
UDF
The concerned groups (discourse 2) did not talk of ‘effective businesses’ and
continued to bring up traditional structures. According to them, conservancies ought to benefit all members of the conservancy; the new constitution
had never been presented to all traditional leaders and the conservancy represents a project of hope for all community members. The cooperation of the
Kasaona with the IRDNC stands in the way of this, as it is voiced by a villager
belonging to the concerned coalition:
Wherever you go in the region, there are problems because of the IRDNC.
There is a lot of money going into conservancies. And a lot of money is missing,
while the community is in poverty.
The Kasaona and the IRDNC deny these accusations. Conservancies are
claimed to be ‘apolitical’ and they are strictly seen as a business for conservation and development. Figure 2 contradicts such a view by illustrating a robust division of political backgrounds of either the national SWAPO or UDF
Zellmer.indd 138
8-12-2011 16:55:30
139
party. SWAPO is the leading national party since independence, whereas the
UDF is popular with particularly Damara in Kunene. Traditionally, people
tend to follow the political preference of their leader. The divide in political
parties is recognised by respondents in Anabeb Conservancy. However, the
Uises, as a Damara group, are an exemption to traditional Damara preference.
This group does not vote for the UDF, as one Uises headlady explained:
... my people vote what I vote for. I convinced them to vote for SWAPO. [...] In
all regions there is development, but not in this region. That is why we think
that we must vote for SWAPO to change.
The issue of national politics was often argued to have a minimal influence on
local everyday politics of the conservancy. Yet, one Kasaona headman admits
that:
SWAPO-UDF politics […] is dominating this area. It is more important than
the difference between Damara and Herero.
Then again, it is acknowledged that voting for SWAPO is beneficial. When
asked whether someone would know of the political backgrounds of his conservancy colleagues, the project manager of the conservancy responded: “Yeah
very well, why not? They are all the same. We are ruling, so we are SWAPO.”
On the bright side – and from a slightly different discursive perspective – it
must also be emphasised that both coalitions seem to be fairly satisfied with
conservancies as a positive and important development for the community.
Conservancies provide hopeful ownership over resource management that
members never had prior to independence.
Resources
The coalition of the Kasaona is relatively more resourceful in comparison
to the opposition coalition. The Kasaona are considered well educated, have
strong ties with other organisations in the region, are the largest group in the
region and occupy most available jobs in the conservancy. The Kasaona clan
is recognised as the more experienced and educated group in comparison to
other groups. The former chairperson explained:
... people get jealous, since [the Kasaona] are the literate people. Some are at the
Polytechs, some are at the university. They work hard in school.
Education and early involvement with the program legitimises knowledgeable
positions in the conservancy, just as much as power in numbers does for election outcomes:
Zellmer.indd 139
8-12-2011 16:55:30
140
Arjaan Pellis
If we talk of democracy … then off course this will be in the interest of the
Kasaona since they are the majority (Former chairperson of Anabeb).
In terms of financial benefits, most revenues are spent on personnel and field
running costs, whereas some membership benefits are spent on community
projects. This seems to result into financial leakages and questions of what is
actually happening with project funding, which was confirmed by the financial administrator of the conservancy:
For example, the sports activities get about 3 x 5,000 NAD per year. Then you
hear: those Kasaona, they have just used some of that money to fill up their car
for about 1500 NAD, and the food was maybe 800 NAD, the rest of that money,
we don’t know where that money is. It is gone … this can happen, and I don’t
have control over that.
Most of the tangible community benefits come in the form of jobs related to
the conservancy. The best paid jobs are management positions of the conservancy, while the most powerful positions are with the Conservancy Committee. Figure 3 provides a sense of these distributions and includes recent
outcomes of the elections in 2010.
Figure 3: Job distribution amongst clans
Vice secretary
Secretary
Chair person
Vice Treasurer
Committee member
Manager
Community Activator
Senior game guard
Game guard
Game guard
Campsite officer
Campsite Security
Kasaona
Uises
Mbomboro
Office Administrator
Game guard
Game guard
Zellmer.indd 140
Driver
Kangombe
Taniseb
Uakazapi
Vice Chair person
Committee member
Game guard
Committee member
Committee member
Financial Administrator
Campsite manager
Treasurer
Game guard
Ganaseb
8-12-2011 16:55:30
141
Clans that are marginally represented feel left out and fear the strong position
of the Kasaona, who have access to especially well paid and powerful positions. Some interviewees translate this into nepotism which can be retraced
up to the IRDNC, resulting in statements like the one from a conservation
NGO officer in Windhoek:
... if you look at IRDNC, ... nobody is alone there. It is either your brother in
law, or the girlfriend of whatever, or nephew, or niece, or … all these things. It
is one big family.
The introduction of conservancy policy clearly has brought forward some
tensions amongst different community groups in the Anabeb Conservancy.
Where traditionally Herero and Damara used to vie over past homeland territories, contemporary alliances show a different divide between the modern (where innovative policy propagates democracy and business efficiency)
or the traditional (as a form of resistance against elite/nepotistic progress in
conservancies).
The role of the traditional leader seems to remain a stronghold against the
claimed ‘apolitical’ character of conservancy management. The Policy Arrangement Approach has proven useful to understand that a conservancy is
in fact political. This is clear from the division in ideas, rules and resources
between both actor coalitions. According to respondents, national politics
were claimed not to effect the distribution of policy arrangements in Anabeb.
Yet this research draws a different picture. Büscher (2010: 43) explains that
political preferences are often hidden in Southern Africa to cover underlying
cooperation and claims to economic gains, something he refers to as “pragmatic anti-politics”.
What are the consequences of these pragmatic anti-politics for the governance
capacity of Anabeb Conservancy? In terms of performative capacity, this study
illustrated some critical issues:
- Due to the contestable and ambiguous use of the proper constitution
(old or new?), people are insecure of how simple election matters in the
conservancy ought to be dealt with.
- According to regional/national policy makers, the economic-managerial
logic of conservancies prescribe that conservancies need to be run like
a business: ‘to conserve is to make money’. In order to make money,
communities need to be connected to global tourism capital and discourses
of market efficiency. Such a connection might be relevant for some
members in the conservancy, but for the majority it seems rather abstract.
Zellmer.indd 141
8-12-2011 16:55:30
142
Arjaan Pellis
- The political/civic capacity is limited due to different ideas about the use
of democracy. Now the majority always wins and consequently oversees
traditional structures in the conservancy.
Even though a discursive divide can have severe consequences for the future
of Anabeb as a conservancy, the idea of self-management remains a powerful
post-independence idea. This idea has been embraced by all interviewees in
this study and therefore enforces a strong belief in conservancies. The problem, however, lies in structural political favouritism and explicit discursive
differences. Consequently, Anabeb’s indicative capacity is not congruent as
long as:
- limited or no available resources remain to exist for members to benefit
from;
- not all important traditional structures are involved in decision making;
- rules of the game remain ambiguous when different constitutions continue
to be used; and
- different strong policy discourses (‘conservancy as a business’ versus
‘conservancy for all’) remain to exist around ideas of conservancy
management.
A strategic mutual gain is difficult to establish when the ‘concerned’ group continues to fear the position of the IRDNC and the Kasaona. Fear of favouritism
has caused tensions, but the temporary structural divide seems to go further
than the Anabeb Conservancy alone. Where Gewald (1999) spoke of emerging alliances between a centralised Herero polity and the Cape Colony in the
1840s, contemporary alliances of a strong Herero clan have established relations with regional (non-) governmental actors in conservancy developments.
For the time being, this analysis has shown a practical way to understand complex everyday politics in a conservancy that has experienced drastic changes
in how people ought to deal with nature conservation. On the one hand there
are different discursive ideas to what is considered ‘proper’ management. On
the other hand, actors seem well capable to actively frame local practices to
create beneficial outcomes for their own clan. The conservancy model of community ownership and management does ‘rightfully’ provide hope to community development and nature conservation in Anabeb Conservancy. It does
nevertheless take little notice of traditional community structures in the conservancy. If current governance incapacities remain unaddressed it is likely
that the new ‘democratic’ routine will continue to be resisted in Anabeb. This
could lead to a similar split of Anabeb Conservancy as we have seen in former
Sesfontein Conservancy. However, since there is widespread belief that nature
conservation needs to stay in the hands of the community and that conservancies are a ‘good’ project for development, conservation goals prevail to be
achieved with or without local resistance.
Zellmer.indd 142
8-12-2011 16:55:30
143
References
Agrawal, A. and C.C. Gibson (1999) Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of
Community in Natural Resource Conservation. World Development 27 (4) pp. 629 – 649.
Archer, M. (1996) Social Integration and System Integration: Developing the Distinction.
Sociology 30 (4) pp. 679-699.
Arts, B. and H. Goverde (2006) The Governance Capacity of (new) Policy Arrangement:
A Reflexive Approach. In: Arts, B. and P. Leroy, eds., Institutional Dynamics in
Environmental Governance. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 69-92.
Arts, B., Leroy, P. and J. van Tatenhove (2006) Political Modernisation and Policy
Arrangements: A Framework for Understanding Environmental Policy Change. Public
Organizational Review 6 (2): 93-106.
Arts, B. and J. van Tatenhove (2004) Policy and power: A conceptual framework between the
‘old’ and ‘new’ policy idioms. Policy Sciences 37 (3) pp. 339-356.
Barnett, M. and R. Duvall (2005) Power in international politics. International Organization
59 (1) pp. 39-75.
Barrow, E. and M. Murphree (2001) Community Conservation: From Concept to Practice.
In: Hulme, D. and M. Murphree, eds., African Wildlife and Livelihoods: The Promise and
Performance of Community Conservation. Oxford: Marston Book Services Limited,
pp. 24-37.
Blaikie, P. (2006) Is Small really Beautiful? Community Based Natural Resource
Management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34 (11) pp. 1942-1957.
Brockington, D. (2004) Community Conservation, Inequality and Injustice: Myths of Power
in Protected Area Management. Conservation and Society 2 (2) 411-432.
Büscher, B. and T. Dietz (2005) Conjunctions of Governance: The State and the ConservationDevelopment Nexus in Southern Africa. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental
Studies 4 (2) pp. 2-15.
Büscher, B. (2010) Anti-Politics and Political Strategy: neoliberalism and Transfrontier
Conservation in Southern Africa. Development and Change 41 (1) pp. 29-51.
Corbett, A. and C. Daniels (1996) Legislation and Policy Affecting Community-Based Natural
Resource Management in Namibia. SSD Research Report 26. Windhoek: University
Namibia (MDRC).
Dressler, W., Büscher, B., Schoon, M., Brockington, D., Hayes, T., Kuli, C.A. and K. Shresta
(2010) From hope to crisis and back again? A critical history of the global CBNRM
narrative. Environmental Conservation 37 (1) pp. 5-15.
Gewald, J.B. (1999) Herero Heroes: A Social-Political History of the Herero of Namibia 18901923. Ohio: University Press.
Gonzalez, S. and P. Healey (2005) A sociological institutional approach to the study of
innovation in governance capacity. Urban Studies 42 (11) pp. 2055-2069.
Hajer, M.A. (1993) Discourse Coalitions and the Institutionalisation of Practice: The Case of
Acid Rain in Britain. In: Fischer, F. and J. Forester, eds., The Argumentative Turn in Policy
Analysis and Planning. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 43-76.
Hinz, M.O. (2007) Traditional governance and African customary law: Comparative
observations from a Namibian perspective. In: Horn, N. and A. Bosl, eds., Human rights
Zellmer.indd 143
8-12-2011 16:55:30
144
Arjaan Pellis
and the rule of law in Namibia. Windhoek: Human Rights and Documentation Centre
(HRDC), Faculty of Law, University of Namibia, pp. 59-87.
Hulme, D. and M. Murphree (1999) Communities, wildlife and the ‘new conservation’ in
Africa. Journal of International Development 11 (2) pp. 277-285.
IRNDC – Integrated Rural Development and Nature Conservation (2011) An IRNDC
summary: Doing African Conservation the Sustainable Way. http://www.irdnc.org.na/.
Accessed: 07.06.2011.
Jones, B. and M. Murphree (2001) The Evolution of Policy on Community Conservation in
Namibia and Zimbabwe. In: Hulme, D. and M. Murphree, eds., African Wildlife and
Livelihoods: The Promise and Performance of Community Conservation. Oxford: Marston
Book Services Limited, pp. 38-58.
Jones, S. (2006) A Political Ecology of Wildlife Conservation in Africa. Review of African
Political Economy 33 (109) pp. 483-495.
Lapeyre, R. (2008) “Local is Lekker”: Devolution of Land Rights to Community-Based
Organizations and the Sustainable Use of Local Natural Assets: The CBNRM National
Programme in Namibia. In: Eberhard, C., ed., Law, Land Use and the Environment.
Afro-Indian Dialogues. Pondichery: Institut Français de Pondichéry, pp. 191-218.
Lapeyre, R. (2009) Revenue sharing in community-private sector lodges in Namibia:
a bargaining model. Tourism Economics 15 (3) pp. 653-669.
Lapeyre, R. (2011) Governance structures and the distribution of tourism income in Namibian
communal lands: A new institutional framework. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale
Geografie 102 (3) pp. 302-315.
Libanda, B. and J.N. Blignaut (2008) Tourism’s Local Benefits for Namibia’s CommunityBased Natural Resource Management Areas. International Journal of Ecological Economics
and Statistics 10 (W08) pp. 40-52.
MET – Ministry of Environment and Tourism (1995) Wildlife Management, utilisation and
Tourism on Communal Land: Using Conservancies and Wildlife Councils to enable communal
area residents to use and benefit from wildlife on their land. Windhoek: MET.
MET – Ministry of Environment and Tourism (2011) Conservancies. Windhoek: MET.
http://www.met.gov.na/Directorates/Parks/Pages/Conservancies.aspx.
Accessed: 02.11.2011.
NACSO – Namibian Association of Community-Based Natural Resource Management
Support Organisations (2009) Namibia’s Communal Conservancies. Windhoek: NACSO.
Support Organisations (2010) Namibia’s Communal Conservancies – a review of progress and
challenges in 2009. Windhoek: NACSO.
Support Organisations (2011a) Summary of Conservancies. Windhoek: NACSO.
http://www.nacso.org.na/SOC_profiles/conservancysummary.php. Accessed: 20.09.2011.
Support Organisations (2011b) Conservancies: Registered Conservancies. Windhoek:
NACSO. http://www.nacso.org.na/SOC_profiles/conservancies_by_map.php.
Accessed: 10.11.2011.
Zellmer.indd 144
8-12-2011 16:55:30
145
Nelissen, N.J.M., Goverde, H. and N. van Gestel (2000) Bestuurlijk vermogen: analyse en
beoordeling van nieuwe vormen van besturen. Bussum: Coutinho.
Novelli, M. and K. Gebhardt (2007) Community-Based Tourism in Namibia: ‘Reality Show’ or
‘Window Dressing’? Current Issues in Tourism 10 (5) pp. 443-479.
Ribot, J. and N.L. Peluso (2003) A theory of access. Rural Sociology 68 (2) pp. 153-181.
RN – Republic of Namibia (2002) Vision 2030. Windhoek: RN.
University of Texas (2011) Map of Namibian Homelands. http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/
africa/namibia_homelands_78.jpg. Accessed: 10.11.2011.
Werner, W. (1993) A Brief History of Land Dispossession in Namibia. Journal of Southern
African Studies 19 (1) pp. 135-146.
WTTC – World Travel and Tourism Council (2006) Namibia – the impact of travel and tourism
on jobs and the economy. London: WTTC.
Zellmer.indd 145
8-12-2011 16:55:31
Zellmer.indd 146
8-12-2011 16:55:31
8 Community-Based Natural
Resource Management,
Tourism and Local
Participation: Institutions,
Stakeholders and Management
Issues in Northern Botswana
Tsitsi Chipfuva* and Jarkko Saarinen**
During the past two decades the role of local people in natural resource ma
nagement and conservation has changed considerably. In traditional conservation strategies communities and human activities were actively separated
from nature (cf. Adams and Hulme, 2001), whereas current conservation
ideologies increasingly advocate active participation of communities in natural resource management. In this context the Community-Based Natural Resource M
anagement (CBNRM) has become a popular policy tool that highlights the role of local communities and people in resource management
(Harrington et al., 2008; Nelson and Agrawal, 2008). As a strategy CBNRM
states local communities must have direct control over the use and benefits of
adjacent resources, thereby giving value to the natural resources and manage
them in a sustainable way (Blaikie, 2006).
In Africa CBNRM has become the dominant development discourse for environmental management processes (Jones and Murphree, 2004; Long, 2004)
and is increasingly integrated into tourism related activities and seen as a tool
for community development. Zimbabwe is one of the pioneering countries in
*
**
Zellmer.indd 147
Botswana Accountancy College/University of Derby, Botswana
Geography Department, University of Oulu, Finland
8-12-2011 16:55:31
148
CBNRM and the idea of Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) has been copied and adopted in countries
such as South Africa and Zambia. Similarly, Botswana’s CBNRM programme
has been used as a good practice example, although the success rate has been
noted to differ from one community to another (Mbaiwa and Stronza, 2010;
Mbaiwa, 2005a; Arntzen et al., 2003). Thus, in addition to commonly known
success stories, there are also failures and critical views on CBNRM policies
and related projects; in Botswana and elsewhere in Southern and Eastern Africa (cf. Poteete, 2009; Nelson and Agrawal, 2008; Musumali et al., 2007;
Swatuk, 2005). Blaikie (2006) has actually claimed that CBNRM programmes
have failed to address local community issues altogether.
Despite the negative examples, CBNRM continues to play a significant role
in environmental management the model is constantly expanded and revitalised. Recently tourism activities have found their way into CBNRM initiatives,
because tourism is increasingly seen as providing economic relevance for
communities and new opportunities for nature conservation (Poteete, 2009;
Stronza and Gordillo, 2008; Balint, 2006). Considering this, the CBNRM approach can offer an institutional framework for communities to manage not
only natural resources, such as wildlife and natural heritage, but also tourism
resources and activities in their everyday environment. The importance of
tourism for local development is highligthed in numerous large scale international and regional development programmes (see Spenceley, 2008; Goudie
et al., 1999), which not only acknowledge the importance of tourism businesses but also growing concerns over the sustainability and local level benefits of
the global scale industry (Saarinen, 2006). On the positive outlook tourism
has the potential to significantly contribute to poverty reduction, environmental sustainability and the empowerment of local communities (cf. Saarinen
et al., 2011). To actually achieve this, approaches such as Community-Based
Tourism (CBT) and local participation in natural resource management have
been given a central role in national development policies (see Nelson and
Agrawal, 2008; Blackstock, 2005).
A key issue in approaches like CBNRM and CBT is the transfer of authority
from central governments to local communities, a development that has been
evident in Eastern and Southern Africa in the past decades (Hulme and Murphree, 2001; see also Adams and Hulme, 2001; Kellert et al., 2000; Brosius et
al. 1998). However, in spite of political rhetoric, policy changes and international pressure towards a devolution of rights, many African governments still
hang on to wildlife policies and related structures created by their former colonial masters in order to retain the stream of income from wildlife resources
(Neumann, 1998). This is also the case in Botswana where the central government has on the one hand emphasised local needs, but on the other hand
recently intended to pass the authority over natural resource management and
Zellmer.indd 148
8-12-2011 16:55:31
Community-Based Natural Resource Management, Tourism and Local Participation 149
benefit distribution from a local scale to district and national levels (Mbaiwa
and Stronza, 2010; Mmegi, 2010; Poteete, 2009; Swatuk, 2005). This may
evoke major problems for communities and finally to natural resources; and
the new policies, if implemented, may have detrimental effects on the success
and outcomes of CBNRM programmes in Botswana.
This chapter provides a review of the CBNRM Programme in Botswana. It
identifies institutional structures pertinent to the CBNRM programme and
discusses stakeholder participation. Based on a general overview the paper
focuses on the Chobe Enclave as an example of a CBNRM project. The Enclave, established in 1993, was the first CBNRM project in Botswana and it has
faced some of the characteristic challenges of management and community
participation in CBNRM.
Community Based Natural Resources Management in Botswana
Botswana’s CBNRM system has its roots in the Wildlife Conservation Policy
of 1986 which converted stretches of communal land into Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs). The WMAs were further sub-divided into 163 units
by the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP) and the Division of Land Use Planning into Controlled Hunting Areas (CHAs) (Cassidy,
2000). These CHAs are the major units utilised for CBNRM activities. As
the central government agency responsible for Botswana’s wildlife resources,
DWNP spearheads the development and implementation of the CBNRM programmes, which has been clearly centred on wildlife resources at the expense
of cultural and veld resources (Artzen et al., 2003).
The CBNRM programme of Botswana has been mainly steered by the central
government as well as international donors and NGO’s, like the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID) (cf. Nelson and Agrawal,
2008; Arntzen et al., 2003; Gujadhar, 2000). One of the main aims of the
CBNRM programme was to relieve the pressure on the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management with regard to sustainable management
of wildlife resources (Rozemeijer, 2003). On top of that, there was an urgent
need to offer opportunities for the rural population to develop economically
and to empower local communities in natural resource management.
While CBNRM represents a devolutionary process, it also may involve various institutional strategies and arrangements. Although institutions and
related arrangements have been rather widely studied in CBMRM contexts
and in general natural resource management literature (see Nelson and
Agrawal, 2008), they have received relatively little attention in tourism studies (Hall, 2003: 22). In general, institutions are very important as they provide
Zellmer.indd 149
8-12-2011 16:55:31
150
overnance structures (DFID, 2003) and also determine accessibility to and
g
limits of use and benefits derived from natural resource management (Johnson, 1997). The importance of institutional structures is also emphasised by
Agrawal (2001a) who affirms that institutions set up for natural resources
management affect the sustainability of natural resource use as well as livelihoods of individuals who depend on the resource. The creation of institutions and related management processes that empower local people to be in
control of natural resources is fundamental to sustainable utilisation of those
resources (Van der Jagt et al., 2000; Thomson, 1995). In addition, there is an
urgent need to contextualise the natural resource management processes in
wider policy frames on different scales (cf. Poteete, 2009). As Swatuk (2005:
119) indicates “CBNRM cannot be understood outside of on-going global/local
political economic processes”.
Although CBNRM programmes focus on a local scale, support at national level
is still required. This support should be characterised by devolution of power
from governmental and para-statal institutions to local communities, thereby
giving them sufficient control over their resources (Campbell et al., 1998), but
local control is only possible when local organisations have a vested interest in
natural resource conservation. According to many commentators local institutions are critical to avoid the ‘tragedy of the commons’; the scenario in which
resources that are exposed to open access are over-utilised (Berkes, 2004;
Agrawal, 2001b; Ostrom, 1990; McCay and Acheson, 1987). However, next to
other factors weak local organisational structures will impede successful local
institutions and by extension nature conservation (Becker, 2003; W
einberg
et al., 2002; Barrett et al., 2001). Therefore local organisational structures
created for natural resource management need to be carefully designed,
taking into account equal representation of all stakeholders in participating
communities (Pero and Smith, 2008). Conversely, organisational credibility
is low when the organisations fail to represent the diversity of cultures and
values of individuals within communities (see also the chapters of Pellis and
Boonzaaier and Wilson in this book).
In Botswana, as in many other Southern African countries, most communities had their governance structures in place before any central government
existed. They regulated in simple way who can use the resources and when
and how this is supposed to happen. More recently communities have started
to set up natural resource management organisations independent of existing
government structures because of the ineffectiveness of the latter (Steiner and
Rihoy, 1995). In this respect Bosuyt and Gould (2000) argue that for the devolution of power to be effective, community institutional structures should
be created independently from the central government. This independence,
however, potentially deprives the community structures of the political will
and support from government-linked organisations. Thus, as Mbaiwa (2002)
Zellmer.indd 150
8-12-2011 16:55:31
Community-Based Natural Resource Management, Tourism and Local Participation
151
notes, the adoption of non-government-linked structures is not unproblematic
as government bodies give Community-Based Organisations (CBOs) recognition on both national and local levels which is essential in successful devolution of power within CBNRM (see Ribot, 1999).
According to many commentators, most CBNRM initiatives cannot claim
full devolution of power, because the central government’s custody of ownership rights over natural resources outweighs the control of natural resources
management by local communities (see Nelson and Agrawal, 2008; Swatuk,
2005). The CBNRM policy adopted in Botswana in 2007 states that 35% of the
revenues generated from wildlife management go directly to the communities, while 65% is channelled to National Environment Fund (Ndlovu, 2007,
cited in Poteete, 2009). Despite the nobility of the idea in terms of generating
finances for national environmental conservation, such a decision is likely to
act as a drawback for community conservation efforts and community empowerment, because it is hard to understand for communities that they have
to give up such a big share of the revenues, although the activities take place
on their land. Obviously, this sentiment is counterproductive, because based
on the CBNRM idea sustainability cannot be achieved unless people are able
to benefit directly from resource conservation.
Figure 1 shows the simplified organisational structure for CBNRM projects
in Botswana. The community based organisations (CBOs) are the legal entities for the administration and implementation of the CBNRM projects in
Botswana. The CBOs exist in the form of one-, two- or three-tier structures
depending on the number of villages involved and they consist of community
members who have resided in the villages for five or more years (Rozemeijer
and Van der Jagt, 2000).
Figure 1: Organisational structure for CNBRM
Stakeholders
Implementing Agencies
Community-Based
Organisations
(CBOs)
Zellmer.indd 151
Joint Venture
Partnerships
(JVPs)
Support Organisations
NGOs
Donor
Agencies
Government
Departments
8-12-2011 16:55:31
152
Most of the CBOs are located in rural areas and they are relatively well spread
over the different parts of the country. However, the CBOs located in the
northern parts of the country (Chobe and Ngamiland Districts) make up over
96%of the total revenue (Arntzen et al., 2003). This uneven spatial distribution of economic benefits stems from the fact that most of the international
tourism targets the northern parts of the country, including places such as the
Okavango Delta (Maun) and Chobe National Park (Kasane).
Next to CBOs, another implementing agency can be observed: the joint venture
partnerships (JVPs), which include private sector companies that are hired by
communities to undertake hunting and photographic safaris or other kinds
of tourism activities in a village. The other stakeholders, non-governmental
organisations (NGOs) together with different governmental departments and
donor agencies, provide technical, advisory and financial support. Although
these support organisations should obviously cooperate with each other, coordination and collaboration is often limited or even absent. The CBMRM programme in Botswana is characterised by a top-down approach where many of
the “local communities have played at best a small role” (Nelson and Agrawal,
2008: 568). Thus, in practice the different government departments have
kept their central role instead of devolving power to local levels. Different government departments also provide the main policy instruments to facilitate
CBNRM implementation. Below follows a short introduction to the CBNRMrelated government departments and their major role.
The main mandate of the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP)
is the protection of wildlife resources and ensuring its sustainable utilisation.
In addition the DWNP allocates hunting quota to communities. At policy level
the DWNP’s role is the development of a viable wildlife industry, the realisation of the full potential of the wildlife resources, the increase in supply of
meat and the promotion of sustainable utilisation of wildlife. Based on the
Wildlife Conservation and National Parks Act (1992) the department also sets
up wildlife management areas.
The National Conservation Strategy Agency is responsible for the co-ordination of trainings, community mobilisation, institutional development and
the establishment of partnerships within CBNRM. It also provides financial
assistance to NGOs and community-based organisations (CBOs) involved in
natural resources management and community development. Thus, its policy
role is focused on natural resource conservation and utilisation as well as promoting the inclusion of local people in conservation, which is an important
aspect in CBNRM.
The task of the Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism (MEWT),
especially the Community Service Division, in the context of CBNRM is to
Zellmer.indd 152
8-12-2011 16:55:31
153
obilise communities to form trusts, assist CBOs in drafting constitutions,
m
conducting elections and financial management training and to provide advice on JVPs .Until 2010 the policy frame of the MEWT’s was based on the
Tourism Policy of 1990, which has been revised in 2008–09 in the new National Tourism Policy 2009. The MEWT’s policy role in CBNRM is to promote rural development, generate employment in rural Botswana and curb
rural-urban migration through provision of income earning opportunities in
rural and poor areas.
The Department of Lands and Land Boards works as an administrator of tribal land and the Department has developed land lease systems together with
the DWNP governing the use of CHA by Community Based Organisations. In
addition, District Officers co-ordinate land use planning and provide technical advice to communities. Based on the tribal Grazing Land Policy (TGLP)
the department can set aside land for creation of wildlife management areas,
and based on the Tribal Land Act (1968) it also allocates and administrates
land and provides land leases to CBOs.
The mandate of the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning is the
formulation, monitoring and implementation of the government’s rural development policies. It also implements the Community Based Strategy for
Rural Development (CBSRD) and facilitates implementation of Community
Action Plans (CAPs), a pre-requisite for CBNRM. This Ministry supports all
facets of rural development and oversees the implementation of community
action plans. The Remote Area Development Department (RADD) works for
poverty alleviation amongst marginalised rural dwellers, including many who
are part of the existing or potential CBNRM activities. The Department promotes natural resource utilisation as a livelihood option for rural dwellers and
focuses on constitutional and land use rights in general. The District Councils’ mandate is to implement the RADP and to assist to CBOs in selecting
a joint venture partner through its technical advisory committee. Thus, its
policy role is to promote development in remote areas involved in the CBNRM
programme.
In addition to government policy instruments, international donor agencies often provide the major financial support necessary for the viability of
CBNRM programmes. At the local level, the institutional structures for natural resource management exclude Village and District Development Committees in the planning and management of CBNRM programmes. CBOs have
be inclined to trivialise the roles of Village Development Committees and
District extension workers in village development, planning and feeding impoverished people (Rozemeijer and Van der Jagt, 2000). The collaboration of
CBOs, Village Development Committees and District Councils could harmonise plans and actions and avoid duplication of efforts regarding f ormulation
Zellmer.indd 153
8-12-2011 16:55:31
154
and implementation of Village and District development initiatives. The natural resource institutions should have representative stakeholders who have a
stake in local development issues. Even after the inception of CBNRM, traditional village institutions made up of the chiefs, village headmen and ward
heads, continued to have a direct link with the government and the local community, and their inclusion in CBNRM should be mandatory. In general, the
management structures implemented for CBNRM programmes and the roles
of various authorities devoid of CBNRM participation remain a challenge. For
example, it is necessary that current CBO structures undergo some form of
transformation. The proposal points towards a fusion of the newly formed
CBO structures with already existing traditional governance structures in
communities so that they can gain political mileage and support. In addition, there is a need to create a common platform for all stakeholders involved
in CBNRM programmes. Presently the different policies and institutions involved in CBNRM are located across various Ministries, posing a major challenge to the coordination of functional roles. Creation of a ‘one stop shop’ for
CBNRM support services is recommended to eradicate the bureaucratic processes involved in CBNRM management at the national level. Such ‘one stop
shops’ could be replicated countrywide to increase access for all communities
involved in CBNRM programmes.
However, also at community level CBNRM faces challenges. Communities
are neither homogenous nor static groups of people who happen to live next to
each other: they have a history and a variety of interests and roles that are subject to perpetual internal and/or external change (Cassidy, 2000). By taking
a community for granted and by considering it as a spatially limited organisation, one may ignore the fact that geographically bound communities are
often heterogeneous entities with diversity in and usage of natural resources.
As Harvey (1996) argues, communities represent dissimilar ideals, attitudes,
norms and interests symptomatic of differences and conflict across space and
time. These differences reflect the heterogeneous nature of communities, a
fact that is posing challenges to natural resources management (Agrawal and
Gibson, 1999). Therefore CBNRM needs to take into account that different
stakeholders in the community need to have their interests represented in the
formulation, planning and implementation of community natural resource
conservation. The establishment of CBNRM in Botswana takes place in an
environment where different ethnic groups may pursue different livelihood
strategies and use resources differently (Rozemeijer and Van der Jagt, 2000).
Related to this, the purpose of the next section is to examine how the CBNRM
programme in Botswana operates at a local scale by utilising the Chobe Enclave as an example.
Zellmer.indd 154
8-12-2011 16:55:31
155
Case Chobe Enclave, Botswana
The Chobe Enclave was the first CBNRM project in Botswana. It was established in 1993 and it is situated in Northern Botswana close to Chobe National Park and Chobe Forest Reserve. The Enclave is adjacent to Controlled
Hunting Area 1 (CH1) and Controlled Hunting Area 2 (CH2) (Jones, 2002).
Five villages make up the Enclave: Kachikau, Kavimba, Mabele, Satau and
Parakarungu. These villages are inhabited by various ethnic groups: Basubiya
(70%), Batawana (27%), Basarwa (San) (1%) and other ethnic groups such as
the Ndebele and Kalanga (Painter, 1997).
According to Jones (2002) the Chobe Enclave Conservation Trust (CECT)
administers and manages the CBNRM project in the Chobe Enclave. The
members of the CECT are all residents above 18 years of age. Each of the
participating five villages has a Village Trust Committee (VTC) comprising
10 individuals, two of whom sit on the Board of Chobe Enclave Community
Trust (CECT) (Jones, 2002). Local residents of the villages have received user
rights and authority through their trust to receive revenues and distribute
benefits. According to Jones (2002) all community members in the CECT
were involved in the drafting of the constitution and trust boards were given
the mandate to implement the decisions made by the community. This process of decentralisation of authority to village-level institutions is one factor
that has positively contributed to the outcomes of the CBNRM programme in
the Chobe Enclave.
A general cause for concern during the implementation of the CBNRM project
has been public participation in tourism operations. Rather than being directly involved, communities are indirectly engaged through leasing their hunting quota to a private operator. In relation to the Chobe Enclave, A lexander et
al. (1999) have noted shortfalls which relate to absenteeism from meetings
by community members, power struggles between village and trust leaders,
and lack of communication between trusts and the community. However, if
resource management is to be successful, input from community members is
of critical importance. If they do not attend meetings, they exclude themselves
from participation in resource management and hence they may become increasingly alienated from the process. Thus, one of the pillars of success for
CBNRM is commitment to participation. The lack of thereof can be attributed
to the dominance of the local elites in village meetings and the lack of realisation of direct benefits of the programme to individual households (Jones,
2002). In addition, the low levels of participation may also result from insufficient training and capacity building processes among the stakeholders
involved. The low number of attendees to village meetings is a reflection of
the fact that CBNRM is not well appreciated in the Chobe Enclave. There are
still communication barriers resulting from the dominant use of Setswana
Zellmer.indd 155
8-12-2011 16:55:31
156
and English at the expense of the locally spoken Subiya language (Denkler,
2009). Additionally women and ethnic groups such as the Basarwa (San) feel
excluded from the CBNRM project.
To benefit from wildlife, management communities in the Enclave elect representatives to their Village Development Committees (VDCs) (DWNP, 1995).
However, the major weakness of this newly formed structure is that it is independent from traditional structures that long existed in the village. In this
respect De Georges and Reilly (2009) state that many of the institutions endorsed by governments, NGOs and donors such as trusts, communal conser
vancies, and communal property associations (CPAs) and Wildlife Management Areas (WMAs), conflict with the customary or informal constitutions
that operate in communities. They deviate from the traditional institutional
arrangements and systems of decision-making in communities that are based
on negotiation and often consensus seeking. This makes the new structure
vulnerable due to lack of political support. Lack of integration of existing local
government institutions in the newly formed resource management institutions will potentially derail CBNRM programmes. A possible solution should
include an intertwining of para-statal institutions with the newly formed
CBOs. In practice the development of institutions working parallel to already
existing village level institutions has resulted in power struggles between
the Village Trust Committees (government installed) and Village Development Committee (traditionally elected) in Kachikawu and Satau Villages (see
Alexander, 1999). Mbaiwa (2002) further notes that the Basarwa had traditional leadership institutions which governed use of natural resources sustainably and such structures now have been disrupted with the adoption of
the CBNRM project. Traditionally hunting permissions were granted by the
chief, but with the implementation of CBNRM hunting is under the jurisdiction of the Central Government now, thus taking away the traditional rights
and obligations of village chiefs (see Cassidy, 2000). However proponents of
CBNRM argue that it potentially can involve traditional and modern methods
of natural resources management (Bendsen and Motsholapheko, 2003). For
this to work an active management and interaction between different stakeholders would be crucial, as ongoing conflicts, if not managed and solved, can
divide the communities and act as a drawback of progress made in CBNRM
in the Chobe Enclave. Considering this, in the Chobe Enclave an effort has
been made to ensure that all village chiefs (dikgosi) are part of the technical
consultative role of CBNRM (Jones, 2002). It is vital that the institutions created in that way are intertwined with the already existing village governance
structures (see also Ostrom, 1992).
Elections for new Village Trust Committee members are held after every
two years. However, Jones (2002) indicates that the new members selected
have lacked appropriate knowledge and skills. Thus, in order for CBNRM
Zellmer.indd 156
8-12-2011 16:55:31
157
institutions to be effective, a training of office bearers needs to be in place to
ensure continuity of operational management in the communities. This can
only be achieved if the departing leaders are fully capacitated to transfer the
relevant skills to new elected leaders, requiring prior capacity building initiatives. In Botswana, capacity building for communities involved in CBNRM
has often been provided by Non-Governmental Organisations such as the Private Agencies Collaborating Together (PACT) and the Institutional Reinforcement Community Empowerment (IRCE) (Jones, 2002). They have developed
training packages for VTC and CECT members, Community Action Plan
(CAP) coordinators as well as some other community members. In relation
to the Chobe Enclave, Jones (2002) further mentions that an evaluation of
the training – which focused on leadership, financial management, governance, and understanding of the joint venture and CBNRM concepts – revealed
that it did not yield the intended results as the trainees were unable to guide
their community counterparts in project planning, management and selection. The involvement of NGOs and their commitment to training shows that
they want communities to be fully capacitated. However, it is vital to carry out
an analysis of the literacy levels of intended beneficiaries, so that training programmes are developed in such ways that they address the prevailing needs.
To date external support provided to CECT has focused on community mobilisation at the expense of institutional development issues such as regulatory
frameworks concerned with decision-making among different stakeholders
in and outside the community (Jones, 2002).
Another issue of concern with regard to implementation of CBNRM is equal
participation of all community members. The Village Trust Committee meetings are normally scheduled at the Kgotla – a public community meeting
place – to ensure full membership participation, but this platform has been
criticised because women hardly voice their concerns at the Kgotla and decisions made result from influential male or opinion leaders (Magole, 2003;
Thakadu, 2005). In addition, women living in rural areas are often more illiterate than men. Thus, they may not have the capacities to be informed about
concepts such as CECT. The level of youth participation is also low and ethnic
groups, such as Basarwa (San) are frequently side-lined in decision making
(Jones, 2002). Therefore the interests of various sub-groups in the community are not fully represented. This failure to get adequate representation of all
sub-groups is one of the pitfalls that undermine the credibility of the Chobe
Enclave Conservation Trust.
On top of that, there is a lack of awareness of the concept of the Community
Trust, indicating flaws in the community mobilisation process prior to the implementation of the CBNRM concept. Many commentators have stressed the
importance of awareness and wider community participation in natural resource management and community-based tourism (Saarinen, 2010; Tosun,
Zellmer.indd 157
8-12-2011 16:55:31
158
2000; Mulolani, 1997). Especially gender-issues are of great importance as
highlighted by Scheyvens (2000) who emphasises that active involvement of
all groups may lead to better overall participation, sharing of benefits, skills
and knowledge which ultimately benefits natural resource management and
conservation. Therefore, the CECT needs to adopt a pro-gender approach
to natural resources management to be able to reap the intended gains of
CBNRM. Pearce (1992) argues that CBNRM can result in local control of the
tourism industry, consensual decision making and equitable distribution of
benefits. However, because of the domination of Kgotla meetings by local
elites, in the Chobe Enclave Conservation Trusts, and some other community
organisations in Ngamiland, mainly the management elites have benefited
(Mbaiwa, 2004). Such inequities in participation and benefit realisation can
undermine the gains of CBNRM in the long run.
Conclusions
There are many success stories of community conservation. But there is also
increasing discussion and criticism concerning the practices of related programmes at a local scale (cf. Swatuk, 2005; Fortmann et al., 2001; Li, 2002;
Kellert et al., 2000; Leach et al., 1999). While CBNRM has remained popular
with international donor and funding institutions, there is a growing evidence
of its disappointing outcomes and insufficient empowerment of local actors
(cf. Blaikie, 2006). Taylor (2001) emphasises that in practice the programme
favours government-led processes of decision making due to inadequate transfer of powers to local government institutions and communities by the central
government (see Poteete, 2009). Despite its policies advocating decentralisation, there is often a lack of commitment by the state to truly devolve authority
to a local level. This major factor could impinge on the success of community
initiatives in future. The partial devolution of authority to communities may
also indicate a top-down approach in resource conservation, which obviously
conflicts with the basic premises of CBNRM.
Despite obvious management and institutional challenges, Mbaiwa (2005b)
notes that CBNRM approaches, with mutual partnership and appropriate institutional structures between stakeholders, can enhance ownership or stewardship of wildlife and other resources by local people. Indeed, if used in a
transparent way, CBNRM programmes can work for and with local communities. In principle, the programme is meant to give local people the mandate to
control and utilise natural resources. However, in the future the government
should be committed towards a real devolution of authority and responsibility to community stewards in charge of natural resource conservation. The
government’s recent move to transfer the earnings from CBNRM projects to
District Councils challenges the principle of devolution and is likely to be met
Zellmer.indd 158
8-12-2011 16:55:31
with resistance as communities may think that the government is taking away
the responsibility over the use of their own funds. This transfer of benefits
and shift in policy is likely to negatively affect the sustainability of CBNRM
projects in Botswana. In the past communities that were granted wildlife
quota kept 100 % of revenues generated by wildlife-based enterprises. But
because of the alleged misuse (or non-use) of funds generated from CBNRM
projects all financial benefits generated from community enterprises will now
be channelled to the District Councils. Then communities will have to apply
to the District Commissioners to make use of the funds (Mmegi, 2010). Thus,
communities may perceive that the benefits are transferred but the costs will
remain at the local level.
In addition, the issue of financial proceeds from CBNRM programmes has
been a cause for concern, because there is no established benefit distribution
strategy and over the years Village Trust Committees have been using a large
amount of the revenue generated at the expense of the community. Thus,
there is a need to clearly define the proper revenue distribution mechanisms,
as it was the case of the successful CAMPFIRE Programme in Zimbabwe
(cf. Artzen et al., 2003). Moreover, there is need to ensure that cash dividends
flow to the communities so that communities can link cash flows to natural
resource conservation and thus increase proprietorship.
In the case of the Chobe Enclave, where the Basarwa (San) people have been
side-lined in decision making, a critical analysis of the CECT organisational
structure is essential. It would be misleading to assume that communities
consist of a homogenous and egalitarian group with similar objectives and
views. Local institutions need to consider the diversity of interests inherent
in communities involved in nature conservation. The institutions designed
to implement community conservation initiatives should also be integrated
into already existing governmental and traditional structures in order to sustain and create collaboration and participation involving all stakeholders. This
would also ensure that interests of all community members and governmental bodies are represented in decision making and are informed on issues
regarding for example hunting quota, benefit distribution and reinvestment
of funds generated. Such a move would also increase participation and commitment from all community members and groups involved.
Zellmer.indd 159
8-12-2011 16:55:31
160
References
Adams, W.M. and D. Hulme (2001) If community conservation is the answer in Africa, what
is the question? Oryx 35 (3) pp. 193–200.
Agrawal, A. (2001a) The decentralizing state: Nature and origins of changing environmental
policies in Africa and Latin America 1980–2000. Paper prepared for the 97th Annual
Meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, California,
30 August - 2 September 2001.
Agrawal, A. (2001b) Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources.
World Development 29 (10) pp. 1649-1672.
Agrawal, A. and C. Gibson (1999) Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of
Community in Natural Resource Conservation. World Development 27 (4) pp. 629-649.
Alexander, E.M., Molokomme., I.M. and M. Murray (1999) Chobe Enclave End of Project
Evaluation Final Report. Natural Resources Management Project. Gaborone: IUCN/
Netherlands Development Organisation (SNV) CBNRM Support Programme.
Arntzen, J.W., Molokomme, D.L., Terry, E.M., Moleele, N., Tshosa, O. and D. Mazambani
(2003) Main findings of the review of CBNRM in Botswana. Gaborone: IUCN/
Netherland Development Organisation (SNV) CBNRM Support Programme.
Balint, P.J. (2006) Improving community-based conservation near protected areas: The
importance of development variables. Environmental Management 38 (1) pp. 137–148.
Barrett, C.K., Brandon, C. and H. Gerstein (2001) Conserving Tropical Biodiversity Amid
Weak Institutions. BioScience 51 (6) pp.497–502.
Becker, C.D. (2003) Grassroots to Grassroots: Why Forest Preservation was Rapid at Loma
Alta, Ecuador. World Development 3 (1) pp.163–176.
Bendsen, H and M.R. Motsholapheko(2003) The Role of Indigenous Technical Knowledge in
Natural Resource Management in Ngamiland. Gaborone: Harry Oppenheimer Okavango
Research Centre, University of Botswana. http://www.the-eis.com/data/literature_OK/
Bendsen3.pdf. Accessed: 26 .05. 2010.
Berkes, F. (2004) Rethinking community-based conservation. Conservation Biology 18 (3)
pp.621–630.
Blackstock, K. (2005) A critical look at community based tourism. Community Development
Journal 40 (1) pp. 39–49
Blaikie, P. (2006) Is Small Really Beautiful? Community-based Natural Resource
Management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34 (11) pp.1942–1957.
Bosuyt, J. and J. Gould (2000) Decentralisation and poverty reduction: elaborating the Linkages.
Maastricht: European Centre for Development Policy Management.
Brosius, J. P., Tsing, A. L. and C. Zerner (1998) Representing communities: histories and
politics of community-based natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources
11 (2) pp. 157–168.
Campbell, B., Byron, N., Hobane, P., Matose, F., Madzudzo, E. and E. Willy (1998) Taking
CAMPFIRE beyond Wildlife: What is the potential? A paper presented at the Proceedings
of Pan-African Conference on ‘Sustainable use of Natural Resources and Community
Participation’, Harare, June 1996.
Zellmer.indd 160
8-12-2011 16:55:31
161
Cassidy, L. (2000) CBNRM and legal rights to resources in Botswana. Gaborone: IUCN/
Netherlands Development Organisation (SNV) CBNRM Support Programme.
De Georges, P.A. and B.K. Reilly (2009) The Realities of Community Based Natural Resource
Management and Biodiversity Conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Sustainability 2009
(1) pp. 734-788.
Denkler, J.L. (2009) Community-Based Natural Resource Management: Power, Isolation and
Development in Rural Botswana. MSc Thesis, Gainesville: University of Florida.
http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE0041360/denkler_j.pdf. Accessed: 20.10.2011.
DFID – Department for International Development (2003) Sustainable Livelihoods. London:
Department for International Development.
DWNP – Department of Wildlife and National Parks (1995) Savingram: Minimum conditions
for communities seeking hunting quotas and resource leases. Gaborone: Department of
Wildlife and National Parks.
Fortmann, L., Roe, E. and M. van Eeten (2001) At the threshold between governance and
management: community-based natural resource management in Southern Africa.
Public Administration and Development 21 (2) pp. 171-185.
Goudie, S.C., Khan, F. and D. Kilian (1999) Transforming tourism: black empowerment,
heritage and identity beyond apartheid. South African Geographical Journal 81 (1) pp. 21-33.
Gujadhur, T. (2000) Organisations and their approaches in community based natural resources
management in Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Gaborone: IUCN/SNV
CBNRM Support Programme.
Hall, C.M. (2003) Institutional Arrangements for Ecotourism Policy. In: Fennell, D. and
R. Weaver, eds., Ecotourism Policy and Planning. Cambridge: CABI, pp. 21-38.
Harrington, C., Curtis, A. and R. Black (2008) Locating communities in natural resource
management. Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning 10 (2) pp. 199–215.
Harvey, D. (1996) Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Hulme, D. and M. Murphree, eds. (2001). African wildlife and livelihoods: the promise and
performance of community conservation. Oxford: James Currey.
Johnson, C. (1997) Rules, Norms and the Pursuit of Sustainable Livelihoods. Brighton: IDS.
Jones, B.T.B. (2002) Chobe Enclave, Botswana Lessons learnt from a CBNRM Project 1993-2002.
Gaborone: IUCN/SNV CBNRM Support Programme.
Jones, B. and M. Murphree (2004) Community-Based Natural Resource Management as a
Conservation Mechanism: Lessons and Directions. In: B. Child, ed., Parks in Transition.
London: Earthscan, pp. 233-267.
Kellert, S.R., Mehta, J.N., Ebbin, S.A. and L.L. Lichtenfeld (2000) Community natural
resource management: promise, rhetoric, and reality. Society and Natural Resources 13 (8)
pp. 705-715.
Li, T.M. (2002) Engaging simplifications: community-based resource management, market
processes and state agendas in upland Southeast Asia. World Development 30 (2)
pp. 265–283.
Leach, M., Mearns, R. and I. Scoones (1999) Environmental Entitlements: Dynamics and
Institutions in Community-Based Natural Resource Management. World Development 27
(2) pp. 225–247.
Zellmer.indd 161
8-12-2011 16:55:31
162
Long, S. (2004) Livelihoods and CBNRM in Namibia. Windhoek: Directorate of Environmental
Affairs and Ministry of Environment and Tourism.
Magole, L.A. (2003) Tragedy of the commoners: the evolution of communal rangeland
Management in Kgalagadi, Botswana. UK: Phd thesis, University of East Anglia.
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2002) The socio-economic and environmental impacts of tourism development in
the Okavango Delta, Botswana: A baseline study. University of Botswana, Maun, Botswana.
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2004) The Success and Sustainability of Community-Based Natural Resource
Management in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. South African Geographical Journal 86 (1)
pp. 44-53.
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2005a) The Problems and Prospects of Sustainable Tourism Development in
the Okavango delta, Botswana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 13 (3) pp. 203-227.
Mbaiwa, J.E. (2005b) Wildlife resource utilisation at Moremi Game reserve and Khwai
community area in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Journal of Environmental Management
77 (2) 144–156.
Mbaiwa, J. and A. Stronza (2010) The effects of tourism development on rural livelihoods in
the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 18 (5) pp. 635-656.
McCay, B. and J. Acheson. (1987) The Question of the Commons; The Culture and Ecology of
Communal Resources. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Mmegi (2010) State interference in CBOs Needs balance. Gaborone: Mmegi (Botswana)
http://www.mmegi.bw/index.php?sid=9&aid=2831&dir=2010/June/Wednesday9.
Accessed: 26 .05. 2010.
Mulolani, D. (1997) Traditional democracy? Resource Africa 1 (4) 8.
Musumali. M.M., Larsen, T.S. and B.P. Kaltenborn (2007) An impasse in community based
natural resource management implementation: the case of Zambia and Botswana. Oryx
41 (3) pp. 306–313.
Nelson, F. and A. Agrawal (2008) A Patronage or Participation? Community-Based Natural
Resource Management Reform in Sub-Saharan Africa. Development and Change 39 (4)
pp. 557–585.
Neumann, R.P. (1998) Imposing Wilderness: Struggles over Livelihood and Nature Preservation
in Africa. Berkley: University of California Press.
Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ostrom, E. (1992) The Rudiments of a Theory of the Origins, Survival and Performance of
Common Property Institutions. In: D. Bromley, ed., Making the Commons Work. San
Francisco: International Centre for Self Governance, pp. 293-318.
Painter, M. (1997). DWNP’s monitoring and evaluation experience with the Natural Resources
Management Project: Lessons learned and priorities for the future. Natural Resources
Management Project. Gaborone: Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism.
Pearce, D. (1992) Alternative tourism: concepts, classifications and questions. In: Smith, V.L.
and W.R. Eadington, eds., Tourism Alternatives: Potentials and Problems in the Development
of Tourism. New York: John Wiley and Sons, pp. 18–30.
Pero, V.L. and T.F. Smith (2008) Institutional credibility and leadership: critical challenges
for community-based natural resource governance in rural and remote Australia.
Environmental Change 8 (1) pp.15–29.
Zellmer.indd 162
8-12-2011 16:55:32
Poteete, A.R. (2009) Defining Political Community and Rights to Natural Resources in
Botswana. Development and Change 40 (2) pp. 281–305.
Ribot, J.C. (1999) Decentralization, Participation and Accountability in Sahelian Forestry:
Legal Instruments of Political-Administrative Control. Journal of the International African
Institute 69 (1) pp. 23-65.
Rozemeijer, N. (2003) CBNRM in Botswana 1989 – 2002, A select and annotated bibliography
and other stories. Gaborone: IUCN/SNV.
Rozemeijer, N. and C. van der Jagt (2000) Community based natural resources management
in Botswana: How community based is community based natural resources management
in Botswana? In: Shackleton, S. and B. Campbell, eds., Empowering Communities to
Manage Natural Resources: Case Studies from Southern Africa. Harare: WWF.
Saarinen, J. (2006) Traditions of Sustainability in Tourism Studies. Annals of Tourism
Research 33 (4) pp. 1121–1140.
Saarinen, J. (2010) Local tourism awareness: community views on tourism and its impacts
in Katutura and King Nehale Conservancy, Namibia. Development Southern Africa 27 (5)
pp. 713–724.
Saarinen, J., Rogerson, C. and H. Manwa (2011) Tourism and Millennium Development
Goals: Tourism for Global Development? Current Issues in Tourism 14 (3) pp. 201-203.
Scheyvens, R. (2000) Promoting Women’s Empowerment Through Involvement in
Ecotourism: Experiences from the Third World. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 8 (3)
pp. 232 -249.
Spenceley, A. (2008) Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for Conservation and development.
London: Earthscan.
Steiner, A. and E. Rihoy (1995) A review of lessons and experiences from natural resources
management programmes in Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe. In: Rihoy, E.,
ed., The Commons Without Tragedy? Strategies for Community-based Natural Resources
Management in Southern Africa. Lilongwe: SADC Wildlife Technical Sector Coordinating
Unit, pp. 1–36.
Stronza, A. and J. Gordillo (2008) Community Views of Ecotourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 35 (2) pp. 448–468.
Swatuk, L. (2005) From “Project” to Context”: Community Based Natural Resource
Management in Botswana. Global Environmental Politics 5 (3) pp. 95–124.
Taylor, M. (2001) Whose Agenda? Reassessing the role of CBNRM in Botswana. Gaborone,
National Museum of Botswana.
Thakadu, O.T. (2005) Success factors in Community Based Natural Resources Management in
northern Botswana: Lessons from practice. Natural Resources Forum 29 (3) pp. 199–212.
Thompson, J. (1995) Participatory approaches in government bureaucracies: facilitating the
process of institutional change. World Development 23 (9) pp. 1521–1527.
Tosun, C. (2000) Limits to community participation in the tourism development process in
developing countries. Tourism Management 21 (6) pp. 613-633.
Van der Jagt, C., Gujadhur, T. and F. van Bussel (2000) Community Benefits through
Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) in Botswana. Gaborone:
Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) Support Programme.
Zellmer.indd 163
8-12-2011 16:55:32
164
Weinberg, A., Bellows, S. and D. Ekster (2002) Sustaining Ecotourism: Insights and
Implications from two Successful Case Studies. Society and Natural Resources 15 (4)
pp. 371–380.
Zellmer.indd 164
8-12-2011 16:55:32
9 Institutionalisation of
Community Involvement in
Nature Conservation:
The Case of the Masebe Nature
Reserve, South Africa
Chris Boonzaaier* and Deon Wilson**
In nature conservationist circles today, the World Commission on Environment and Development’s report Our Common Future of 1987, better known
as the Brundtland Report (WCED, 1987), is commonly held to be a milestone
in global conservation thinking. It had a major impact on global approaches
to environmental projects, because it introduced the new basic principle of
sustainable development. The Report also signified a clear shift away from
the old nature-based premise of the need to conserve ecosystems to a new approach premised on the socio-economic context of development. The Report
emphasised the involvement of people in decision-making, arguing that the
success of the concept of sustainable development would depend on people’s
political will (Van der Duim, 2005; Wells and Brandon, 1992). In practice, this
shift towards a more people-oriented approach implies that the strict separation of people and wildlife conservation areas practised extensively in previous
centuries was no longer necessary. The new approach is also associated with
creating Integrated Conservation and Development Projects (ICDPs), a policy
proposed by American conservationists and adopted by the World Wildlife
Fund (WWF) (Hinz, 2003).
*
**
Zellmer.indd 165
Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of Pretoria, South-Africa
Department of Tourism Management, University of Pretoria, South-Africa
8-12-2011 16:55:32
166
In pursuit of this new ecological paradigm, a deliberate effort was made to
research people’s involvement in nature conservation. Studies by researchers
such as Boonzaaier (2010), De Beer (1999) and Els (1994) have shown that
successful nature conservation cannot be separated from a people’s worldview
and concomitant values, because such values inform a people’s notions about
‘useful’ or ‘valuable’ resources, accepted behavioural norms and the setting
of priorities. The key to a people’s worldview is their local knowledge, which
is largely the result of structured experiences and underlying values that are
often unexpressed, but guide the behaviour of people to a considerable extent.
Hence, any management and planning of nature conservation will have to
take into account people’s perceptions and take these perceptions seriously.
If communities are not involved in the active management of their natural
resources, they might not use resources in line with principles of conservation
and sustainability. By contrast, if communities are involved in conservation,
the benefits they receive can act as incentives for them to become good stewards of resources (Eckert, De Beer and Vorster, 2001; Semali and Kincheloe,
1999; Agrawal and Gibson, 1998; IIED, 1994).
In a Third World context, nature conservation requires a very fine balance to
be achieved between wildlife conservation in protected areas, its contribution
to the economic benefits of people living adjacent to such protected areas and
the value systems of these local communities. Some natural phenomena have
sacred meanings, while others may have particular aesthetic and/or utility
values for different actors. In such circumstances, no proper conservation ma
nagement is possible without local involvement (Kolkman, 2002; Bell, 1987).
At the same time, there is an increasing realisation among conservationists
that local people cannot be expected to support nature and wildlife conservation if they are excluded from the tangible benefits of such endeavours.
Consequently, conservationists are beginning to address the problems experienced in wildlife conservation (such as misunderstandings and a lack of
communication), as well as the lack of benefits experienced by local people
living adjacent to protected areas (Kolkman, 2002; Wells and Brandon, 1992).
An important outcome of the new approach which includes community involvement in conservation management practices has been the adoption of
the concept of Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM)
by conservationists. This concept implies that decision-making power and
responsibilities (such as planning, implementation and monitoring) should
be entrusted to the local communities and that they should have a generous
share of the benefits. Furthermore, a CBNRM approach implies that indigenous local authority structures should be used as the basis for the management and that, if necessary, such structures need to be adapted to conserve and
develop natural resources in the most effective and acceptable way (Agrawal
and Gibson, 1999; Van den Breemer, et al, 1995; Wells and Brandon, 1992).
Zellmer.indd 166
8-12-2011 16:55:32
Institutionalisation of Community Involvement in Nature Conservation
167
In addition, according to Turner (2004: 163), CBNRM also requires “more
democratic than centralised state control of natural resources” (cf. Collins,
2007; Lurie 2007). However, research (Boonzaaier, 2010; Eckert et al., 2001;
De Beer, 1999; Leach et al., 1999) revealed that there is a general void in the
literature on the possible democratisation of CBNRM, particularly in terms
of the principles on which the composition of local institutions is based and
their relationship with larger institutions.
Hence, the focus of this chapter is an examination of the possible institutionalisation of community involvement in nature conservation, particularly in
areas where there is conflict over land and resource use. It should be noted
that there are still major questions about the real involvement of communities
under such conditions and how such involvement can be achieved in practice
(Tyler, 2006; Twyman, 2002; De Beer, 1995; Wells and Brandon, 1992). Consequently, the objectives of this study are twofold: first, to examine the local
institutional capacity of local communities in respect of nature conservation;
and second, to identify principles deemed to be important for CBNRM arrangements and consider their general applicability to other communities.
Research by Boonzaaier (2010) conducted in 2009 among the residents of
seven rural villages surrounding the Masebe Nature Reserve in the Limpopo
Province of South Africa revealed that the Reserve presents a classic example
of the problems and developments related to the involvement of local communities in nature conservation by means of CBNRM. Hence, it was assumed
that the choice of the Masebe Nature Reserve would enable the researchers to
achieve the indicated objectives.
Masebe Nature Reserve
The Masebe Nature Reserve is situated in the Waterberg area of the Limpopo
Province and falls into the Langa Ndebele chiefdom of Chief Phillip Bakenberg. Seven villages, each under the leadership of a village headman, surround
the Reserve. The Reserve was established in accordance with a resolution of
17 February 1984 when the Langa Ndebele chief, his councillors, 48 village
headmen (who constitute the Bakenberg Tribal Authority) and 500 members
of the Langa tribal community agreed to develop 4,540 hectares of trust land
as a nature reserve. Until that date, this particular tract of land had been used
as communal grazing land for the seven villages. The primary motivation for
the establishment of the Masebe Nature Reserve was the protection of several
rock art sites, as well as the perceived tourism potential related to the scenic
beauty of the area, which is characterised by impressive sandstone outcrops,
and to a number of archaeological and historical sites and an exceptionally
large variety of indigenous plant species.
Zellmer.indd 167
8-12-2011 16:55:32
168
The establishment of the Masebe Nature Reserve was based on a negotiated
agreement with the Bakenberg Tribal Authority. The agreement entailed that
the Reserve would be used for environmental education, the introduction and
utilisation of game and ecotourism, with the objectives of generating income
and providing job opportunities for village residents. At the same time, it
would serve as a communal resource area, where access to renewable resources such as thatching grass or fire wood would be allowed ‘on a controlled basis’
(Department of Finance, Economic Affairs, Tourism and the Environment, no
date). Today, the Masebe Nature Reserve forms part of the greater Waterberg
Biosphere Reserve which was awarded international status and was registered
with UNESCO in March 2001. The reason for this inclusion was to allow the
Langa Ndebele to become a stakeholder in the development and conservation
of the Waterberg region. Because it is part of the Langa Ndebele chiefdom, the
Masebe Nature Reserve would play a pivotal role in the promotion of the overall objective of the Waterberg Biosphere, namely to integrate the conservation
of the natural resources of the Waterberg with the economic development of
the local villages. According to a report from January 1993, this development,
amongst other strategies, would be achieved through increased opportunities for decision-making through a process of organisational development and
community empowerment (Pollett and Mander, 1993).
The field research reported in this chapter was conducted in two phases. The
first phase occurred from March to May 2009, when the village headmen
of each of the seven villages surrounding the Masebe Nature Reserve were
interviewed. These interviews were followed by group discussions held with
residents of the villages who volunteered to attend the discussions. The group
discussions were followed by 31 in-depth individual interviews – a particular
effort was made to interview women and young people, since traditional behavioural norms in rural areas normally inhibit the participation of women
and young unmarried people in public debates. Although the interviews were
essentially unstructured, questions focused on relevant issues such as interviewees’ perceptions of wildlife and nature conservation, with specific reference to the Masebe Nature Reserve, the values attached to particular places
and natural phenomena as well as control over and the utilisation of natural
resources in the Reserve (cf. Boonzaaier, 2010).
The second phase of the fieldwork focused on a deliberate application of the
Participatory Action Research (PAR) approach. In accordance with the principles of this approach, the researchers adopted a subject-subject relationship
with the participants, instead of the subject-object relationship that typically
characterises traditional academic research (Prozesky and Mouton, 2001;
Fals-Borda and Rahman, 1991). This approach was deemed appropriate, as it
ensured ‘reciprocity and symmetry’ in the relations between the researchers
and the ‘participants’ (Prozesky and Mouton, 2001). Hence, basic points of
Zellmer.indd 168
8-12-2011 16:55:32
169
concern that had been identified during the first phase of the field research
(cf. Boonzaaier, 2010), were discussed in-depth – first with Chief Phillip Bakenberg and his councillors and, thereafter, with the seven village headmen,
on a subject-subject basis. Prior to these discussions, the research findings
of Boonzaaier (2010) regarding the indigenous authority system of the Langa
Ndebele (including the Masebe Nature Reserve Management Committee)
were analysed. Then, based on a literature study (cf. Murphree, 2004; Hartman et al., 1993), basic points were identified and discussed with the chief and
his councillors, as well as the headmen of the seven villages. The purpose was
to identify important elements that should be considered in CBNRM arrangements. These discussions, which took place during January and February
2010, enabled the researchers to achieve the objectives of this study, namely
to gain insight into the local institutional capacity of the Langa Ndebele in
respect of nature conservation in the Masebe Nature Reserve and to identify
the principles deemed to be important for the successful management of the
Masebe Nature Reserve and, by extension, for CBNRM arrangements.
Community, Conservation and Worldview
The image of ‘community’ as the centrepiece of conservation and resource
management is an attractive one. The common image of ‘community’ is one
of harmony, equilibrium or balance between community livelihoods and natural resources (Agrawal and Gibson, 1999; IIED, 1994; Kiss, 1990). In rural
areas where communities normally tend to be more homogeneous in composition, conservation could be promoted or endangered in at least four ways, as
demonstrated in the case of the Masebe Nature Reserve.
Firstly, community-level norms could specifically permit or prohibit certain
actions, because some norms require particular kinds of behaviour in respect
of natural phenomena (trees, mountains, totem animals) to which particular
cultural or religious meanings may be attached. As sacred objects, these phenomena are protected (Eckert et al., 2001; De Beer, 1999, 1996, 1995). As mentioned above, the Masebe Nature Reserve features impressive mountains with
sandstone formations and a wide variety of indigenous tree species, as well as
a considerable variety of antelope. The Langa Ndebele chiefdom attaches particular cultural meanings to many of these natural phenomena. These meanings represent the worldview and concomitant values of the Langa Ndebele in
that they inform people’s views about what constitutes ‘valuable’ and ‘useful’
resources, as well as the accepted behavioural norms and setting of priorities.
The fact that people regard certain places, such as rivers, water pools, forests
and mountains, as sacred places where sacrifices can be made to the ancestral
spirits is common in various rural communities, not only in the Limpopo
Province, but also in the rest of southern Africa (Ramutsindela, 2009; Stayt,
Zellmer.indd 169
8-12-2011 16:55:32
170
1968; Mönnig, 1967). If sacrifices are not made to the ancestors, such dereliction of duty may inflame the ancestors’ wrath to the detriment of their living
descendants. For instance, the soil of the Reserve has a religious meaning
and carries a highly emotional connotation for the residents, because their
ancestors (badimo) are buried in the soil and sacrifices have to be made to the
ancestors (cf. De Beer, 1995). One particular water source and a mountain
in the Reserve were also indicated by residents as places of religious significance. The mountain was referred to as thaba ya badimo [lit. “mountain of the
ancestors”], and no ordinary resident of the area is allowed to climb it. Rainmaking rituals used to be performed at these places prior to the fencing of
the Reserve (Boonzaaier, 2010). There is also a local belief in a colossal water
snake, known as mamogašwa, who is associated with rivers and pools close to
mountains. Young interviewees pointed out a mountain on the Reserve where
mamogašwa is said to reside and told of legends of people who had disappeared because they entered a pool without knowing that it was mamogašwa’s
dwelling (Boonzaaier, 2010). In any attempt to implement nature conservation in the area, these sentiments and beliefs have to be taken into consideration when policy and management strategies are established. This requires
the involvement of local people in natural resource management, so that they
can express their views regarding particular environmental issues.
Secondly, communities can promote conservation through community-level
norms that facilitate resource management by preventing certain behaviours
or encouraging others. For instance, where a community is involved in nature
conservation, poaching could be reduced (IIED, 1994; Wells and Brandon,
1992). However, research by Boonzaaier (2010) shows that community-level
norms may also be responsible for precisely the opposite outcome with regard to resource management. The Masebe Nature Reserve is managed by
the Masebe Nature Reserve Management Committee (MNRMC), the majority of whose members (21 in total) are residents of the villages. The fact that
poaching is one of the main problems in the Reserve raises some suspicion
about the community’s norms regarding illegal hunting. This suspicion is
strengthened by the general attitude of the headmen of the villages that “it
is the rangers’ job” to prevent poaching. One would have expected the village
headmen to oppose poaching more strongly, as they are supposed to support
the chief in the execution of his duties, among which land management and
justice (judicature) are particularly important. Their reluctance to speak out
strongly against poaching could be partly ascribed to the fact that poaching
is a criminal offence and therefore has to be dealt with by the South African
Police Service and the judiciary system of the country.
Thirdly, communities are composed of subgroups, and within subgroups
there are individuals with varying and even conflicting interests in conservation programmes, the politically marginalised may dispute the acts of the
Zellmer.indd 170
8-12-2011 16:55:32
171
olitically dominant (Agrawal and Gibson, 1999; Leach et al., 1999). The
p
Masebe Nature Reserve is no exception in this respect. Village residents have
conflicting perceptions of nature conservation. Some community members
believe that the fence around the Reserve must be removed, while others argue that a lot has been spent on the Reserve and that it must be properly managed; some tolerate poaching, while others maintain that poaching should
be stopped as it jeopardises the potential of the Reserve to attract tourists.
Some members are against the relocation of predators and other dangerous
animals to the Reserve, while others disagree, claiming that more visitors will
be attracted; some members feel that Masebe belongs to the seven surrounding villages only and that the chief and the rest of the tribal community of
the Langa Ndebele have no claim to it. However, in fact, the Masebe Nature
Reserve is located on trust land and should therefore be regarded as a government-owned reserve. Only in one respect are all the residents of the seven surrounding villages in total agreement, namely that they do not benefit from the
Masebe Nature Reserve in any tangible way. In retrospect, this seems to be
the key cause of all the discontent among village residents (Boonzaaier, 2010).
Finally, people used to claim customary right of access to natural products,
although this ‘right’ is not necessarily in line with the statutory system of
the country. The differences between the national legal system and local indigenous traditional law arise from different views about a given activity or
‘right’, such as the hunting of game, the grazing for cattle or the collection of
thatching material and firewood in a government-owned nature reserve. Such
differences often result in conflict when the (re)sources in question become
scarce in absolute terms (Leach et al., 1999). However, research by Boonzaaier
(2010) and Eckert et al. (2001) reveals that natural resources and taboos associated with them do traditionally form part of culture, as almost everything in
nature normally has some utility value. In this regard, Okafor (1982) remarks
that, in terms of an African mind-set, life is not only part of an economic
or political agenda, but also includes the concept of the ultimate meaning
of phenomena. Seeland (1997: 1) makes a similar point when he says: “The
separation of the world into natural habitats, man-made environments and
civilisation, however, bypasses the perception of local communities living a
more or less traditional lifestyle, where both nature and culture amalgamate
into a reality where material, social and spiritual aspects merge into an encompassing view.” Bushell (2003: 201) rightly points out that “consideration of
the rights of indigenous peoples to ‘protected areas’ reinforces the concept of
‘nature’ as a social construct” (cf. Seeland, 1997). Under these conditions, the
risk of discontent and conflict is obvious. Murphree (2004: 212) cautions that
these issues push approaches to community-based nature conservation ma
nagement into the political arena and may exacerbate “the difference between
rural democratic representation and the continuation of perpetual minority
status for the communal peoples of southern Africa in national structures of
Zellmer.indd 171
8-12-2011 16:55:32
172
governance”. In developing countries, several kinds of formal and informal
institutions have emerged as important mediators of access to and control
over natural resources. Property rights serve as an example in this respect.
Such rights are legitimate in the eyes of local resource claimants who regard
government-reserved land as ancestral farmland, but illegitimate in the eyes
of the state (Scholz, 2009; Zeppel, 2007; Bushell, 2003; Leach et al., 1999;
Furze et al., 1996).
The case of the Masebe Nature Reserve clearly corresponds with the situation
described in the preceding paragraph. People’s rights to natural products have
been infringed by fencing off the Reserve. Since the mid-1980s, people have
been deprived of grazing land for their cattle, and have been unable to collect
firewood or hunt game in the Reserve, and traditional practitioners have not
been allowed to collect medicinal plants there. As found elsewhere and in
line with the issues described above, residents’ discontent with the fencing
appears to lie deeper than economic or political agendas. The fact that the
Reserve does not benefit residents in any way is the single most important
factor for considerable discontent among them, and the situation is aggravated
in times of draught. In addition, there are religious meanings attached to
natural and landscape phenomena within the Masebe Nature Reserve which
contribute to the people’s intimate association with the Reserve (Boonzaaier,
2010). Hence, the whole situation in respect of the Masebe Nature Reserve
requires residents to be involved in policy-making, decision-making and ma
nagement.
In a case such as the Masebe Nature Reserve, original impressions of homogeneity and common interests are shattered in the face of such discontent
and the threat of potential conflict, not only between community members,
but also between different institutions at all levels: from the provincial government to the ward/village level, between local authorities, the traditional
council, and the Masebe Nature Reserve Management.
Local Institutional Capacity
In contrast to what is generally assumed, as already mentioned above, communities are seldom homogeneous. Communities are composed of sub-groups,
and within these sub-groups, there are individuals with varying preferences
for resource use and distribution. Recognising and working with the multiplicity of actors and interests is crucial for those who advocate communitybased programmes. Such recognition empowers local actors to use and manage their natural resources, from the central government level to community
level (Swatuk, 2005; Agrawal and Gibson, 1999; Leach et al., 1999).
Zellmer.indd 172
8-12-2011 16:55:32
173
At community level, local decision-making processes involve multiple actors,
as well as a variety of local institutions. It is important to realise that local
interactions are influenced by the existing distribution of power and the structure of incentives in a given social group. Within these structures individuals
negotiate the use, management and conservation of resources. Furthermore,
local interactions can only be understood within the context of larger social
forces. Attempts by governments to implement community-based conservation and specific projects of Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) that
seek to involve communities are examples of direct influence on conservation
at a local level. They regulate interactions between humans and with nature.
Institutions are the primary mechanisms which facilitate particular outcomes
and actions (Swatuk, 2005; Fabricius, 2004; Murphree, 2004; Leach et al.,
1999).
The Langa Ndebele chiefdom is no exception in this respect and, in fact,
serves as a case in point. Like other rural communities in the Limpopo Province, the Langa Ndebele, in whose area the Masebe Nature Reserve is situated,
is organised into chiefdom. The chief and his traditional council (which is
composed of members of the royal family and most village headmen) form
the local community administration. The chieftainship is hereditary, and in
order for the chief to administer his area of jurisdiction effectively, the chiefdom is divided into different wards, each of which is under the jurisdiction
of an appointed headman. Within each ward members are settled in rural
villages. The village headmen are responsible for supporting the chief in the
performance of his duties, such as the allocation of residential stands and arable land, as well as for administering justice (judicature).
However, the multiplicity of actors and the variety of institutions mentioned
above is particularly clear in the composition of the Masebe Nature Reserve
Management Committee (MNRMC). The Committee consists of the seven village headmen (mantona), two elected members from each village, the Reserve
Manager, the Manager of the Camp, members of the provincial department
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, as well as members of the Bakenberg
Local Authority. This implies that the seven surrounding villages are strongly
represented in the Management Committee, as the majority of the Committee members (21 in total) are residents of these villages (Boonzaaier, 2010).
As mentioned above, local interactions are influenced by the existing distribution of power and the structure of incentives within a given social group.
Research by Boonzaaier (2010) shows that in respect of the Reserve management, there is no proper coordination between the different levels of authority.
For instance, the Masebe Nature Reserve Management Committee is only
represented at the traditional council of the chief by one village headman.
His capabilities are questioned by the members of the MNRMC, as he has not
Zellmer.indd 173
8-12-2011 16:55:32
174
been able to resolve existing problems between the MNRMC and the chief
and some of his councillors, clearly indicating a lack of proper communication, resulting in misunderstandings and a lack of mutual trust. Likewise,
there is some discontent amongst members of the MNRMC, with the result
that some village headmen do not attend the meetings of this body regularly.
Obviously, this has a negative effect on the way in which resources are managed.
Furthermore, as stated above, local interactions can only be understood in the
context of larger social forces. In addition to the poor communication b
etween
the different levels of authority in respect of the MNRMC, there is also no
proper communication between the local government and the MNRMC. Decisions taken by the local government have allegedly been conveyed only to the
Camp Manager and Reserve Manager, and the MNRMC claims never to have
been informed or consulted. As a result, the link between the village headmen
and the Camp and Reserve Managers can be described as poor (Boonzaaier,
2010). Murphree (2004: 209) contends that this kind of situation is a huge
void which applies to “large parts of the African landscape”; he adds that “governments have not effectively penetrated downward into this landscape with
their bureaucratic structures, their incursions into it being prescriptive, unenforceable and frequently appropriative”.
Some village headmen who are members of the MNRMC are reluctant to attend meetings. It is interpreted as a direct result of the top-down approach
prevalent in the management of the Reserve. If the village leaders do not get
involved, it would be unrealistic to expect the ordinary villagers to do so.
In fact, in the case of Masebe, locals are not interested in the conservation of
wildlife as such, but rather in accruing tangible benefits from the Reserve.
Not receiving any benefits from the Reserve is undoubtedly the single most
important reason why they express negative attitudes towards the Reserve.
Villagers also expressed their dissatisfaction with the government’s top-down
approach, as they are neither recognised nor involved in any decisions taken.
This situation is exacerbated by the fact that access to the Reserve is by permission only, and such permission is given by the Reserve staff, not the MNRMC,
thereby excluding local communities entirely from the decisions made with
regard to access. It is obvious that this situation has to be revised. In this
regard, Kiss (1990:18) says, “if local communities are to have any interest in
incorporating wildlife into their economic activities, they must either own
or control access to the land or the animals […]. Mechanisms should then be
developed to distribute accrued benefits not only within the community but
also among communities which share a wildlife resource” (cf. also Kolkman,
2002).
Zellmer.indd 174
8-12-2011 16:55:32
175
Nature conservation in the Masebe Nature Reserve has become the responsibility of the provincial government, including policy-making and the implementation of tourist ventures. Despite the representation of locals in the
MNRMC, the village residents receive limited benefits from tourism and
hunting. According to the seven village headmen, all income received from
those activities in the Masebe Nature Reserve is first paid to the provincial Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, after which 50% is paid into
a so-called ‘community account’, a trust account specifically opened for this
purpose. According to the village headmen, to date no money has been paid
into this account. Obviously, this situation annoys residents and is the reason
that they claim that they do not accrue any benefits from the Reserve. When
councillors of the chief were interviewed about the possible reason(s) for the
failure to transfer the money from the communal account to the trust account
of the seven surrounding villages, they replied that each village has to identify
a community project and submit a business plan before any money can be
transferred. The seven village headmen and residents were totally unaware of
this requirement and responded by saying that this was just a ploy of the community council to escape its responsibilities (Boonzaaier, 2010).
Elsewhere in the world there has been a growing realisation of the importance
of understanding the needs and perspectives of local people, of interactive
communication, and of strengthening local institutional capacity (Nelson and
Agrawal, 2008; Swatuk, 2005; Phuthego, 2004). Although in the case of the
Masebe Nature Reserve, cognisance has been taken of these trends, the participation approach in this case can be described as passive and much still
has to be done to achieve the desired results. Passive participation approaches
are characterised by central decision-making and control, dominated by foreign and national technocrats, whilst the participation of local communities
is limited to labour or the provision of information. The whole process of development, decision-making and management regarding the Masebe Nature
Reserve is a typical case in this respect.
Quest for Institutional Adaptation
The above discussion, in so far as it relates to the institutional capacity of
the Langa Ndebele, especially with regard to the management of the Masebe
Nature Reserve, suggests that the institutions at local community level need
some adjustment in order to manage the Reserve more efficiently. However,
any proposals in this respect should be made against the theoretical background presented below.
Communities are not static, rule-bound entities – they are composed of people who actively monitor, interpret and shape the environment around them
Zellmer.indd 175
8-12-2011 16:55:32
176
(Leach et al., 1999). This statement is similar to the view of Murphree (2004:
209), who remarks that conservation is “better perceived of as resilience in
a complex, evolving biophysical-cum-social system comprised of structures
which interact across scales of place and time and which move through adaptive cycles of growth, accumulation, restructuring and renewal”.
When role-players do not share goals for the conservation of resources and
have unequal power, institutions are significant for two reasons. On the one
hand, they represent the power relations that define the interactions among
role-players who created the institutions; on the other hand, they also help to
structure the interactions that take place around resources. Furthermore, the
performance of individuals around conservation goals has the potential to reshape institutions. Institutions can also change when they are explicitly renegotiated by role-players (Swatuk, 2005; Leach et al., 1999). The relationships
between institutions and between scale levels (national/state, provincial, local) are of central importance in determining which social actors (both within
and outside the community) gain access to and control over local resources.
In turn, they influence the uses to which resources are put and the ways in
which they are managed, and thus progressively help to modify and shape the
landscape (Leach et al., 1999).
An institutional approach focuses on the ability of communities to create and
enforce rules. In some cases, the homogeneity or heterogeneity of residents
or their norms may be crucial in explaining the rules that people follow and
the outcomes that their behaviour engenders. An institutional approach also
highlights relations of power (Leach et al., 1999; Seeland, 1997; Furze et al.,
1996). Hence, any proposals in respect of institutional reforms must consider
the fact that all local community institutions are not equally powerful.
There are substantial arguments in favour of recognising that actors in the local space may be the most appropriate source in making rules for a significant
range of problems, because of their specialised knowledge of the local context
and resources. Communities have survived because they have succeeded for
millennia in shaping and using their environments in sustainable ways. This
implies that communities possess more knowledge about natural resources
than other potential (outside) actors (such as government agencies and bureaucracies). They are, therefore, potentially the best managers of resources.
Hence it may be possible to establish partnerships that accomplish the noble
ideals of nature conservation (Kgathi et al., 2004; Phuthego, 2004; Bushell,
2003; Agrawal and Gibson, 1999; Maurial, 1999; Tsing et al., 1999). Hence,
one has to agree with Kolkman (2002:20) that “capacities to manage natural
resources should be based on local knowledge and may be adapted to changing environmental conditions by appropriate training in ‘new’ technologies”.
Zellmer.indd 176
8-12-2011 16:55:32
177
This does not eliminate the need for national or regional government involvement. Local communities often do not possess the material or political clout to
fend off invasive actions by outsiders. Nor do they necessarily have the means
to acquaint outsiders with knowledge relating to communities’ beliefs regarding sacred places or animals (when these are used as a basis for conservation
efforts), which may lead to misunderstandings and conflict between outsiders
and community members. These dangers exist especially in relation to tourism, where examples of conflicting utilisation of sacred places and resources
are numerous. Equally, intra-community conflict may need the arbitration
or enforcement efforts of formal government agencies (Boonzaaier, 2007;
Kolkman, 2002; Agrawal and Gibson, 1999).
Acknowledging the fact that the institutions at local community level need
some adjustment in order to manage the Masebe Nature Reserve more efficiently and taking the theoretical background against which such adjustment
should happen into consideration, the question arises how any institutional
reforms should be approached. Since the concept of Community-based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) recognises the right of communities to
decide over their natural resources in order to encourage nature conservation
to the benefit of the community (Rozemeijer and Van der Jagt, 2000), the
concept was considered for the purposes of this chapter. In this regard, some
guiding principles have been identified.
CBNRM – Guiding Principles
Based on the preceding findings, Agrawal and Gibson’s (1999: 639) statement
that “it is precisely because of the deficiencies of centralised, exclusionary policies (‘Communities should protect wildlife, stop cutting trees, stop overgrazing, leave protected areas, etc.’) that we have now begun to talk about community-based management” appears to be correct. The concept of CBNRM has
become a well-established and accepted concept in the field of nature conservation, because it allows for various actors, which includes local institutions of
authority, community members, NGO activists, government officials or scientists, to get involved (Kolkman 2002; Leach et al.; 1999; Rihoy, 1995).
In view of the research findings, any future approach in respect of community-based natural resource management will have to comply with the following
four requirements:
- people’s perceptions regarding nature and nature conservation have to be
taken into account;
- the institutional arrangements must be based on existing authority
structures in order to be relevant and functional;
Zellmer.indd 177
8-12-2011 16:55:32
178
- community actors have to organise themselves into larger institutions in
order to bridge the gap between the local, regional and even the national
levels of governance; and
- a different conceptualisation of the relationship between various aspects of
community and resource management has to be developed
(cf. Hinz, 2003; Kolkman, 2002; Kiss, 1990).
A community-based management model implies a negotiated model. Any attempts to introduce changes without the participation of the community must
be avoided, because such attempts will be contested in the local context, their
limits tested, and their meanings transformed by the communities whose actions they are supposed to change (Agrawal and Gibson, 1999). A negotiated
model should therefore be regarded as an attempt to link conservation goals
and effective resource management to the quest for social justice for historically marginalised people – a void that exists in many CNRM programmes
(cf. Hinz, 2003; Tsing et al., 1999). Any proposed model should also be in line
with the definition given by Adams and Hulme (quoted by Murphree, 2004:
204) for ‘community conservation’ as “those principles and practices that argue that conservation goals should be pursued by strategies that emphasise
the role of local residents in decision-making about natural resources”.
Hence, if a model for natural resource management is proposed, it should be
regarded as an attempt to submit a few ideas and principles as points of departure to be considered and negotiated with people at grassroots level. Based on
the findings of the fieldwork and the work of others such as Murphree (2004),
Hinz (2003), and Hartman et al. (1993), at least the following ten points of
departure should be considered:
- the indigenous authority system has remained largely intact in Africa
and is still an essential part of the social, economic and political fabric of
societies;
- efforts to replace indigenous institutions (authorities) by representative
local governments in Africa have failed and there is an increasing tendency
all over the continent to acknowledge and reinstate indigenous authorities
for the purposes of decentralised local government;
- research has shown that the existing indigenous institutions have, in
various ways, been prevented from functioning as vehicles for development
and nature conservation, but they have the potential to be remodelled into
such institutions;
- the successful elements of existing development and nature conservation
structures at regional level (and even at national level) should be used in
combination with an adapted institutional (authority) system to make
sound nature conservation and development decisions and apply them;
- community-based institutional systems of authority cannot continue to
exist in their present form – some form of representative government
Zellmer.indd 178
8-12-2011 16:55:32
-
-
-
-
-
179
will have to be introduced at community level to facilitate the process of
democratisation;
an administratively, economically and socially viable structure which ties
in with the present and a possible future dispensation should be taken as
a point of departure for the development of community-based institutions
(authorities) as rural local governments;
community-based institutional (authority) structures should include both
decision-making components and executive (administrative) components;
community-based institutional (authority) structures must be integrated
with adapted regional and local level governments in order to involve
people at grassroots level in the administration, as well as in the decisionmaking and development process (including nature conservation);
community-based institutions as decision-making bodies must, in an
adapted form, be provided with the financial means and administrative
personnel to facilitate sound local government in rural areas; and
conservation areas are economic assets which should be managed according
to sound economic principles; thus appropriate training must be provided
to ensure that the proposed adapted community-based institutions of
authority can manage conservation areas in a sustainable manner.
The researchers trust that the preceding discussion will contribute to our understanding of the concept of CBNRM as an approach towards nature conservation.
Concluding Remarks
This chapter examines the possible institutionalisation of community involvement in nature conservation among the Langa Ndebele. Hence, it implies that
the institutional capacity of the Langa Ndebele in terms of nature conservation needs to be examined and that principles deemed to be important for
CBNRM arrangements have to be identified and considered for their general
applicability not only to the Langa Ndebele, but also to other communities.
The CBNRM approach was adopted for this study, as it implies that indigenous authority structures be used as a basis for the management of natural
resources, and if necessary can be adapted to conserve and develop natural
resources. Such adaptations should also consider the possible democratisation
of CBNRM to create management practices that represent the people’s needs
and wishes. Such institutionalisation of community involvement may help
to ensure that indigenous worldviews, in so far as they inform people about
‘valuable’ and ‘useful’ resources, as well as accepted behavioural norms and
the setting of priorities, be taken into consideration. It is concluded that communities will only start recognising the aesthetic and intellectual significance
Zellmer.indd 179
8-12-2011 16:55:32
180
and benefits of nature and nature conservation once their dominant quest for
utilitarian and monetary benefits accruing from nature and nature conservation are satisfied. Such recognition has far-reaching implications for land-use
strategies, in particular with regard to access to protected areas and the sustainable utilisation of natural resources.
With regard to the Langa Ndebele authority system and the Masebe Nature
Reserve Management Committee in particular, the Committee is an institution that was initiated from outside the Langa tribal community, and
therefore did not form part of the traditional community (tribal) authority
structure. The fact that this body is not functioning effectively implies that
the entire institutional system of the Langa Ndebele community should be
revised and adapted to ensure the viability and proper management of the
Reserve. In practical terms, it implies, firstly, that the institutional (authority)
structures of the Langa Ndebele should be adapted in order to include both
decision-making components and executive (administrative) components.
Secondly, some form of representative government needs to be introduced at
all local community levels (the central community level, the village level and
the Masebe Nature Reserve management level) to facilitate the process of democratisation. Thirdly, the adapted community-based institutional structures
must be provided with the financial means and administrative personnel to
improve community attitudes towards nature conservation and development
and to facilitate sound governance. Lastly, the research confirms that the establishment of adapted institutions of local authority should not be looked at
in isolation, but that local institutions can only be composed and local interactions can only be understood in the context of larger social forces. In view of
the fact that the area of the Langa Ndebele (which includes the Masebe Nature
Reserve) forms part of the Bakenberg local authority and the greater Waterberg Biosphere, it is important that any adaptation to the community-based
institutional (authority) structures allow provisions for integration between
these two structures at the local and regional level respectively. In this regard,
one can only agree with Murphree’s (2004: 205) comment that “communal
approaches and state management are understood as complementary rather
than mutually exclusive alternatives” and “communal regimes are integrated
into national systems of conservation planning and implementation”.
Different institutions (and different social actors) have very different capacities to voice and stake their claims. State officials and community representatives operate in asymmetric organisational structures. For community actors
to acquire some leverage in their negotiations with state officials, they have to
organise themselves into larger collectives that can bridge the gap between the
local, the regional or national interests. Hence, it would be naïve to assume
that all negotiation processes occur on a level playing field. It could rather be
argued that all negotiation processes tend to reflect prevailing power relations.
Zellmer.indd 180
8-12-2011 16:55:32
181
To conclude, it is our opinion that the principles and points of departure indicated in the preceding section are not only applicable to the Langa Ndebele
but also to all communities which are settled adjacent to protected areas and
whose daily livelihoods are affected by such areas. Hence, it is also our opinion
that these principles (as supported by the Masebe Nature Reserve experience)
make a substantial contribution to our understanding of Community-based
Natural Resource Management (CBNRM), not only as a theoretical concept,
but also as a model for negotiation in practice.
Zellmer.indd 181
8-12-2011 16:55:32
182
References
Agrawal, A. and C.C. Gibson (1999) Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of
community in natural resource conservation. World Development 27 (4) pp. 629-649.
Bell, R.H.V. (1987) Conservation with a human face: conflict and reconciliation in African
land use planning. In: Anderson, D. and R. Grove, eds., Conservation in Africa: people,
policies and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 79-101.
Boonzaaier, C.C. (2007) Community dynamics and the quest for sustainable tourism
development: an exploratory study. In: Wishitemi, B., Spenceley, A. and H. Wels, eds.,
Culture and community: tourism studies in Eastern and Southern Africa. Amsterdam:
Rozenburg, pp. 81-103.
Boonzaaier, C.C. (2010) Rural people’s perceptions of wildlife conservation – the case of the
Masebe Nature Reserve in Limpopo Province of South Africa. Anthropology Southern
Africa 33 (1&2) pp. 55-64.
Bushell, R. (2003) Balancing conservation and visitation in protected areas. In: Buckley,
R., Weaver, D.B. and C. Pickering, eds., Nature-based tourism, environment and land
management. Wallingford: CABI, pp. 197-208.
Collins, A. (2007) Community-based natural resource management in Kenya. Management
of Environmental Quality: An International Journal 18 (5) pp. 531-541.
De Beer, F.C. (1995) Utilisation of renewable resources: perceptions of blacks in the northern
region of South Africa. South African Journal of Ethnology 18 (1) pp. 1-11.
De Beer, F.C. (1996) Mountains are not simply mountains: black people’s perceptions about
Modimolle. South African Journal of Ethnology 19 (1) pp. 1-6.
De Beer, F.C. (1999) Mountains as cultural resources: values and management issues. South
African Journal of Ethnology 22 (1) pp. 20-25.
Department of Finance, Economic Affairs, Tourism and the Environment (n.d.) Masebe
Nature Reserve File, Section PQ. Limpopo Provincial Government.
Els, H. (1994) Socio-economic development orientation towards the sustainable utilisation
of renewable natural resources in rural areas. South African Journal of Ethnology 17 (1)
pp. 8-17.
Eckert, B., De Beer, F.C. and L.P. Vorster (2001) Worldviews and decision making: natural
resource management of the Laka of Mapela in an anthropological perspective. South
African Journal of Ethnology 24 (3) pp. 88-97.
Fabricius, C. (2004) The fundamentals of community-based natural resource management.
In: Fabricius, C., Koch, E., Turner, S. and H. Magome, eds., Rights, resources and rural
development. Community-based natural resource management in southern Africa. London:
Earthscan, pp. 3-43.
Fals-Borda, O. and M.A. Rahman (1991) Action and knowledge: breaking the monopoly with
participatory action-research. New York: Apex and London Intermediate Technology
Publications.
Furze, B., De Lacy, T. and J. Birckhead (1996) Culture, conservation and biodiversity. New York:
Wiley, pp. 179-208.
Hartman, J.B., Kriel, J.D., Boonzaaier, C.C., Els, H. and I. Wassermann (1993) Report on the
development of tribal authorities in Gazankulu. Pretoria: University of Pretoria.
Zellmer.indd 182
8-12-2011 16:55:33
183
Hinz, M.O. (2003) Without chiefs there would be no game: customary law and nature
conservation. Windhoek: Out of Africa.
IIED (1994) Whose Eden? An overview of community approaches to wildlife management.
London: International Institute for Environment and Development by the Overseas
Development Administration of the British Government.
Kiss, A. (1990) Living with wildlife. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Kgathi, D.L., Bendson, H., Blaikie, P., Mbaiwa, J.E., Ngwenya, B.N. and J. Wilk (2004)
Rural livelihoods, indigenous knowledge systems, and political economy of access to natural
resources in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Botswana: University of Botswana, Maun,
Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre.
Kolkman, H. (2002) Baleni – a research on community-based natural resource management in
South Africa. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Leach, M., Mearns, M. and I. Scoones (1999) Environmental entitlements: dynamics and
institutions in community-based natural resource management. World Development 27 (2)
pp. 225-247.
Lurie, S. (2008) Community-based natural resource management: ideals and realities for
Oregon Watershed Councils. Society and Natural Resources 21 (5) pp. 430-440.
Maurial, M. (1999) Indigenous knowledge and schooling: a continuum between conflict
and dialogue. In: Semali, L.M. and J.L. Kincheloe, eds., What is indigenous knowledge?
New York and London: Falmer, pp. 59-77.
Mönnig, H.O. (1967) The Pedi. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Murphree, M. (2004) Communal approaches to natural resource management in Africa:
from whence to where? Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy 7: pp. 203 – 216.
Nelson, F. and A. Agrawal (2008) Patronage or participation? Community-based natural
resource management reform in Sub-Saharan Africa. Development and Change 39 (4)
pp. 557-586.
Okafor, S.O. (1982) Bantu philosophy: Placide temples revisited. Journal of Religion in Africa 13
(2) pp. 83-100.
Phuthego, T.C. (2004) Traditional ecological knowledge and community-based natural
resource management: lessons from a Botswana wildlife management area. Applied
Geography 24 (1) pp. 57-77.
Pollett, E.A. and M. Mander (1993) Working Report: A concept for integrating conservation
of Waterberg Conservancy with the economic development of nearby rural communities.
Pietermaritzburg: Institute of Natural Resources.
Prozesky, H. and J. Mouton (2001) The participatory research paradigm. In: Coetzee, J.K.,
Graaf, J., Hendricks, F. and G. Wood, eds., Development – theory, policy, and practice.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Ramutsindela, M. (2009) Transfrontier conservation and local communities. In: Saarinen, J.,
Becker, F., Manwa, H. and D. Wilson, eds., Sustainable tourism in southern Africa. Bristol:
Channel View, pp. 169-185.
Rihoy, E. (1995) From state control of wildlife to co-management of natural resources –
the evolution of community management in southern Africa. In: Rihoy, E., ed., The
commons without tragedy? Strategies for community-based natural resources management in
Southern Africa. Proceedings of the Regional Natural Resources Management Program
Annual Conference: SADC Wildlife Technical Co-ordinating Unit, Kasane, 1-36.
Zellmer.indd 183
8-12-2011 16:55:33
184
Rozemeijer, N. and C. van der Jagt (2000) Community-based natural resource management
in Botswana: how community-based is community-based natural resource management in
Botswana? Occasional Paper Series, IUCN/SNV CBNRM Support Programme, Gaberone.
Scholz, S. (2009) Tourism, nature conservation and environmental legislation in Namibia.
In: Saarinen, J., Becker, F., Manwa, H. and D. Wilson, eds., Sustainable tourism in
southern Africa. Bristol: Channel View, pp. 150-168.
Seeland, K. (1997) Introduction. In: Seeland, K., ed., Nature is culture. London: Intermediate
Technology Publications, pp. 1-6.
Semali, L.M. and J.L. Kincheloe, eds. (1999) What is indigenous knowledge? New York and
London: Falmer Press.
Stayt, H.A. (1968) The BaVenda. London: Thomas Frand Cass.
Swatuk, L.A. (2005) From ‘Project’ to ‘Context’: community-based natural resource
management in Botswana. Global Environmental Politics 5 (3) pp. 95-125.
Tsing, A.L., Brosius, J.P. and C. Zerner (1999) Assessing community-based natural resource
management. Ambio 28 (2) pp. 197-198.
Turner, R.L. (2004) Communities, wildlife conservation, and tourism-based development:
can community-based tourism live up to its promise? Journal of International Wildlife Law
and Policy 7 (3) pp.161-182.
Twyman, C. (2002) Participatory conservation? Community-based natural resource
management in Botswana Geographical Journal 166 (4) pp. 323-335.
Tyler, S.R. (2006) Co-management of natural resources: local learning for poverty reduction.
Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
http:///www.idrc.ca/openebooks/346-1/. Accessed: 08.06.2010.
Van den Breemer, J.P.M., Drijver, C.A. and L.B. Venema (1995) Local resource management in
Africa. Chichester: Wiley.
Van der Duim, V.R. (2005) Tourismscapes, an actor-network perspective on sustainable tourism
development. Wageningen: Dissertation Wageningen University.
WCED (1987) Our common future. In: Nelissen, Straaten, J. van der and L. Klinker, eds.,
(1997) Classics in environmental studies. An overview of classic texts in environmental studies.
International Books, Amsterdam.
Wells, M. and K. Brandon (1992) People and parks: linking protected area management with local
communities. Washington, DC: World Wildlife Fund.
Zeppel, H. (2007) Indigenous ecotourism: conservation and resource rights. In: Higham, J.,
ed., Critical issues in ecotourism: understanding a complex tourism phenomenon.
Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 308-348.
Zellmer.indd 184
8-12-2011 16:55:33
10 Managing Conservation and
Development on Private Land:
An Assessment of the Sport
Hunting Approach around
Lake Mburo National Park,
Uganda
Jim Ayorekire, Wilber Manyisa Ahebwa and Amos Ochieng*
Over the last two decades, the potential for sport hunting (also referred to as
trophy or safari hunting) as a link between conservation and development
has been well acknowledged. Several African countries supported by international conservation and development organisations have propagated sport
hunting as a policy intervention to address livelihood as well as conservation
concerns in and outside protected areas. For example, in Zimbabwe, sport
hunting has been part of the Community Areas Management Plan for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) Project, in Zambia it formed part of the
Administrative Management Design Programme (ADMADE), and in East,
Central and West Africa it was included in many forms of community conservation programmes (Lindsey et al., 2007). In Namibia, sport hunting has
been integrated in the management and governance of communal conservancies (Becker, 2009; NACSO, 2009).
In general, sport hunting is one of the widely recognised market-oriented approaches of helping the survival of wildlife ‘pay its way’ through cash flows
from payments made by trophy hunters (often tourists). Such tourists pay with
*
Zellmer.indd 185
Department of Forestry, Biodiversity and Tourism, Makerere University, Uganda
8-12-2011 16:55:33
186
an objective of selecting and hunting animals with exceptional physical characteristics like large horns, tusks, enormous body size and skull length, usually in company of licensed professional hunting guides (Lindsey et al., 2007).
Currently, sport hunting is legally permitted in 23 African countries most
of which are located in Sub-Saharan Africa (NACSO, 2009). The intervention is estimated to generate gross revenue of more than US$ 201millions per
year in Sub-Saharan Africa from about 18,500 clients (Lindsey et al., 2007).
Where sport hunting interventions have been adopted, it is conducted on state
owned land (Baldus, 2005), privately owned land (Krug, 2001) or communally
owned land (Lindsey et al., 2007) and at times a combination of all three,
with the aim of giving value to wildlife occupying those spaces. Considering
the economic potential, it is not surprising that professional sport hunting
companies have increasingly emerged. They tender for hunting concessions
and sign agreements with the state/community conservation agencies for a
set time frame guided by specific rules which vary from state to state. These
companies then design hunting safaris that are marketed and sold to the pros
pective clients, mainly from the western world (Lindsey et al., 2007).
Sport hunting is however not free from criticisms. Animal rights’ activists and
protectionists for example, argue that the killing of animals just for pleasure
is unethical, lacks respect for life and cannot be an approach to achieve conservation (Loveridge et al., 2006). In addition, the critics have highlighted
issues such as over-shooting, failure to follow stipulated rules (the do’s and
don’ts), unequal distribution of benefits and corruption as other issues discrediting sport hunting as a conservation intervention (Booth, 2005). On the
other hand, sport hunters and pragmatic conservationists are strong proponents of this intervention as they regard it an effective and important economic incentive to address conservation and development concerns in Africa
(Hutton and Leader-Williams, 2003). To them, sport hunting – if well ma
naged – is a better strategy for achieving conservation and development compared to other conventional tourism activities since sport hunters pay higher
fees and (hence) participation rate is minimal (Mayaka et al., 2004; Baker,
1997; Heberlein, 1991). Accordingly, this implies that sport hunting generates
more revenue to fund conservation and development activities from limited
participants and with minimal environmental impacts. Based on these arguments, two extreme scenarios can be deduced: a) animal rights organisations/
activists and protectionists opposing sport hunting on one hand and b) the
hunters and pragmatic conservationists supporting the intervention. The fact
that these opposing ideas exist call for better contextualisation of sport hunting as a conservation approach in order to generate deeper understanding
of its outcomes in relation to conservation and development. Guided by the
Policy Arrangements Approach (PAA), this chapter analyses the introduction,
implementation and outcomes of sport hunting on private community farms
around Lake Mburo National Park (LMNP), Uganda.
Zellmer.indd 186
8-12-2011 16:55:33
Managing Conservation and Development through Sport Hunting
187
Short Historical Overview of Sport Hunting
Historically, the evolution of sport hunting can be traced back to England
and later the United States of America in the early 1800’s where the idea of
sportsmanship was introduced in the conventional hunting for meat, fur and
reduction of vermin (Dunlap, 1988). Sport hunting was then introduced in Africa in the early 1900’s through explorers and colonial regimes who ventured
into the hinterland of Africa (Akama, 1999). These settlers largely practiced
sport hunting in rather uncontrolled manner which caused adverse effects to
wildlife populations (Roulet, 2004), eventually leading to a growing awareness. Following the devastating impact by early settlers and explorers, by the
late 19th Century, there was a growing need and recognition by some hunters
to protect the remaining game (Adams, 2004). Several former hunters played
a big role in the establishment of protected areas in many African countries
in the early 20th Century (Lindsey et al., 2007; Adams, 2004). With protected areas and wildlife laws in place, controlled and organised trophy hunting
was developed in Kenya carried out by rich tourists from the Western world
(Booth, 2005). Shortly thereafter, professional sport hunting and hunting safari companies also emerged elsewhere in Africa, including Uganda (Lindsey
et al., 2007).
In Uganda sport hunting became popular and was at its height in the 1960’s
under the Game Department which was charged with monitoring and issuing of licences (Ochieng, 2011). However, due to political instability and
the declining number of wildlife in the 1970s and 1980s, sport hunting was
suspended by the government of Uganda to allow for wildlife regeneration
(Ochieng, 2011). For that reason the government of Uganda passed a policy,
which banned sport hunting and re-affirmed that all wildlife was owned by
the government (UWA, 2009). However, the same policy included a provision
that allowed for future review of this ban in case a need arose. This challenge
in fact later emerged when the population of wildlife recovered and numbers
increased (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010). Animals started looking
for grazing areas outside the protected areas on private land, thereby creating
conflict with the surrounding communities. To resolve those issues, measures
were put in place that would ensure continued wildlife conservation and reduced conflict with communities. Controlled hunting was introduced as one
of these measures, mainly because it would generate benefits to the land owners while conserving wildlife. Section 299 of the Uganda Wildlife Act (2000)
provided for sport hunting as one of the six Wildlife Use Rights (WUR), others being farming, ranching, trade, research/education and resource access
(UWA, 2008). The main goal behind WUR is to promote sustainable extractive utilisation of wildlife and the involvement of landowners and users in
managing wildlife on private land. The underpinning principles of the WUR
(UWA, 2008) are:
Zellmer.indd 187
8-12-2011 16:55:33
188
- sustainable extractive utilisation of wildlife can provide cultural, customary,
and socio-economic benefits at the local, district and national levels;
- the consumption of wildlife resources can contribute significantly to food
security and poverty reduction in rural areas;
- the profit motive and leisure factors are important in encouraging
private sector and community involvement in wildlife conservation and
management and;
- benefits accruing from WUR can lead to better wildlife management and
wildlife population increase.
Based on these principles, sport hunting was advanced as an appropriate
intervention to conserve and manage wildlife on private land around Lake
Mburo National Park (LMNP).
The Policy Arrangement Approach (PAA)
In this study sport hunting around LMNP was analysed using the Policy Arrangement Approach (PAA) (cf. Buizer, 2008; Arts and Leroy, 2006; Van der
Zouwen, 2006; Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004). This approach was developed
as an analytical framework to study and understand policy domains (in this
case sport hunting) and the context within which they are operationalised
(Arts and Leroy; 2006). Any policy analysis using the PAA perspective, tackles
four dimensions, namely actors, resources, institutions/rules of the game, and
discourses (Arts and Leroy, 2006). Through these aspects, PAA captures both
technical and political dimensions of policy enactment as well as its functioning (Van der Zouwen, 2006; Wiering and Arts, 2006). Although each dimension is individually discussed in the following paragraphs, it should be noted
that they are in fact interrelated and intrinsically interwoven (Arts and Leroy,
2006). Therefore, conducting an analysis of a policy domain can be done from
any angle as long as all aspects are finally addressed (Ahebwa, 2010).
Actors can be defined as players (individuals, associations and organisations)
involved in or associated with the design, introduction and implementation
of an intervention or any other management practice (Mahonge, 2010; Arts
and Buizer, 2009; Arts and Van Tatenhove, 2004; Arts and Van Tatenhove,
2000). Actors, therefore, can include governmental staff at various levels such
as central, district/local, conservation organisations, private sector, farmers,
as well as their associations/organisations. In this chapter the ‘actors’ dimension is used to analyse and understand the players either involved or excluded
in the formulation, direction and implementation of the sport hunting intervention. The concept is further used to understand the relations and roles of
actors while putting the intervention into practice.
Zellmer.indd 188
8-12-2011 16:55:33
189
Institutions are a multifaceted concept and can have different and at times
contrasting definitions depending on the context in which it is applied. North
(1981) defines ‘institutions’ as a set of rules and compliance procedures designed to constrain the behaviour of individuals or organisations. These set
rules can manifest themselves in form of formal and informal rules. Whereas
the formal rules are fixed legally (for example, in constitutions, agreements
and/or operational laws), the informal rules are simply the do’s and the don’ts
for actors (Arts et al., 2006) or they could be seen as norms, conventions and
self-governing codes. This chapter analyses the formal rules governing sport
hunting as specified in the policy document which stipulates ‘the do’s’ and
‘the don’ts’, as well as informal rules in the implementation and enforcement
procedures.
Resource bases can have be of financial nature, or they can take the form of
authority, knowledge, land, legitimacy or being a member of an association
(Ahebwa, 2010). Access, possession or ability to mobilise and allocate resources determines the power of the actors to influence decision making (Buizer,
2008). This chapter uses the ‘resource’ dimension to understand and analyse
the generation and allocation of financial resources arising from sport hunting and how it has influenced attitudes of the community towards conservation and contributed to the development of the communities. Furthermore,
we use the same dimension to analyse the distribution of authority, when
it comes to sharing and allocating financial resources accruing from sport
hunting.
As the last dimension, discourse refers to narratives, sets of ideas, beliefs, concepts, stories and sometimes buzzwords which are used to give meaning to
a certain phenomenon in real world setting (Wiering and Arts, 2006; Hajer,
1995). Therborn (1980, in: Wiering and Arts, 2006) further points out that
discourses theoretically consist of three layers (i.e. ontological, normative and
strategic). The ontological nature of discourse in our case refers to how the
problem of wildlife outside protected areas has been portrayed by the actors,
the nature of problems resulting from it, the effects on the communities and
how different actors opt to deal with this challenge. The normative nature of
discourse deals with values at stake (Wiering and Arts, 2006). This chapter
deals with the ‘ideals’ that have been created by the introduction of sport hunting as an intervention aiming to solve conservation and development challenges around LMNP. The third layer which is strategic (Wiering and Arts,
2006) deals with projects that have been introduced, because of the sport
hunting policy to manage conservation and development in the communities
around LMNP.
In order to collect the required data about actors, institutions/rules and resources associated with sport hunting around LMNP, a thorough review of
Zellmer.indd 189
8-12-2011 16:55:33
190
relevant policy and other regulatory documents was carried out. The reviewed
documents included the Wildlife Act (2000), sport hunting licences, revenue
sharing agreements and implementation evaluation reports by Uganda Wildlife Authority. Through this process, data about operational rules, financial
flows, the actors involved, revenue sharing mechanisms and projects funded
from sport hunting revenue were generated. Additionally, interviews with key
stakeholders (n=29) both at implementation and beneficiary levels were carried out. The interviews were distributed as follows: representatives from the
three parishes around LMNP where sport hunting is practised – Rurambiira,
Nyakahita and Rwakanombe (n=14), Community Protection Area Institutions
(n=3), the private sector (n=3), the civil society (NGOs) (n=1), and Uganda
Wildlife Authority (n=7). In addition, two focus group discussions (comprising 10-15 participants) were held in each of the three study parishes. These
were often followed up with informal discussions with individual respondents
in the evenings. This method, combined with participant observation, was
mainly used to capture the attitudes of the community towards sport hunting
and assess how the generated funds have been used both at household and
community level to enhance their livelihoods.
Background to the Introduction of Sport Hunting around LMNP
In 2001, a pilot sport hunting project was introduced by Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) on private land around LMNP in an attempt to address the
long standing history of human-wildlife conflicts in this area (UWA, 2010).
The genesis of these conflicts can be traced back to the post-colonial period
when the government of Uganda, in accordance with the Game Act of 1964,
declared 650 km2 of the Lake Mburo area to become a game reserve. Before it
was gazetted, the area was occupied by communities largely living as pastoralists and cultivators. After gazettement, these communities were allowed to
remain in the area, but only after acquiring permits from the Game Department (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010), implying that the communities had to seek permission from the government to occupy their ancestral
land. However, although arbitrary, the new rules accommodated the interests
of the community and they were able to co-exist with wildlife in the game
reserve (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010). The land outside the game
reserve remained communal, allowing for grazing, cultivation and for wildlife to freely roam the area (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010). However, the s ituation soon begun to change, when private land ownership around
the game reserve was becoming more common and communal lands were
grabbed by the local elites leaving out poorer community members, especially the pastoralists without adequate land (Ayorekire, 2002; Kafureka, 1992).
Worsening the situation for the pastoralists, another big part of community land was alienated by the government to establish government ranches,
Zellmer.indd 190
8-12-2011 16:55:33
191
t hereby pushing the pastoralists to the margins of these ranches (Local Elder,
Research Interview, 2010). Consequently, many homeless and landless pastoralists resorted to grazing their cattle inside Lake Mburo game reserve. The
1975 land reform decree caused further ‘grabbing’ of the remaining communal land by the government turning it into additional government ranches,
pushing even more people into the game reserve, thereby intensifying the
competition over resources (Kafureka, 1992). In 1983, in a move to tame this
growing pressure on the game reserve, the government of Uganda declared
the entire game reserve a National Park (UWA Official, Research Interview,
2010).
This land use change came with a new set of rules, terminating all previous
forms of land tenure, traditional or otherwise (Turyaho and Infield, 1998). In
this process, about 300 families living in the game reserve were evicted to the
outskirts of the park (NEMA and MTTI, 2008). These people were neither
consulted nor compensated for the loss of their homes and land, and no real
attempt was made to explain the intention of the government (Local Leader,
Research Interview, 2010). As a result, the community viewed the existence
of the National Park as the cause of their uncertainty, creating negative atti
tudes towards the existence of the park and all wildlife in the area (Turyaho
and Infield, 1998). When the National Resistance Movement Government
came to power in 1986, many of the communities were resettled as part of
the Kanyaryeru Resettlement Scheme in an attempt to end the land-use conflict (Emerton, 1999), allowing them to occupy some areas of the park from
which they had been previously evicted. Unexpectedly this process even attracted new pastoralists from other areas (UWA Official, Research Interview,
2010), causing the government to realise that ‘re-evicting’ people would not
be the best option and yet, a solution had to be found as wildlife conservation and people’s livelihoods were at crossroads. On orders of the Ugandan
government, the Uganda National Parks in conjunction with the Lake Mburo
Task Force (LMTF) de-gazetted more than 50% of the park to allocate land
to the landless people, by this means reducing it to the current size of about
260 km2 (UWA, 2009).
Despite these major interventions aimed at meeting community livelihood
needs, a big challenge was yet to come. Wild animals do not realise the changes in park boundaries and they naturally continued to spend most of the time
outside the park boundaries on the land that was now owned by communities, resulting in re-ignition of conflicts (UWA Official, Research Interview,
2010). Communities complained of their livestock having to compete with
wildlife for pastures and water on their private farms, that wildlife would
spread disease and ticks as well as destroy their crops and killing their livestock or even some community members (Ahebwa et al., 2008; Ayorekire,
2002) without receiving compensation from UWA or the government (Local
Zellmer.indd 191
8-12-2011 16:55:33
192
Leader, R
esearch Interview, 2010). In retaliation, communities resorted to the
killing of wild animals sighted on their land, while visualising a scenario of
freeing their land from wildlife interference and constantly calling for relocation of these animals back into the park and having the park boundaries
fenced (Local Leader, Research Interview, 2010).
At this stage, the government of Uganda could not resist the global conservation and development policies that had penetrated Africa, causing a general
policy shift. The underlying principles of the shift in policy were threefold
(based on Hulme and Murphree, 2001):
- conservation should be community-based;
- conservation should be managed to achieve community development and;
- markets should play a role in shaping incentives for conservation.
Consequently, Uganda National Parks (UNP) adopted the Community Conservation Policy (CCP) in 1989 (UWA, 2010). At a local scale, the policy marked
a shift from the old rules of fines and penalties to a more people-oriented
conservation approach (UWA, 2010). The CCP set out with the theme ‘Protected areas, Neighbours as Partners’ and aimed at creating a link between
conservation, communities and their livelihoods. Initially, this was implemented through the Park Management Advisory Committees (PMAC) set up
by the Uganda National Parks in each parish, but later the PMAC transformed
into Community Protection Area Institutions (CPIs) to strengthen its performance (Ahebwa et al., 2008). Reflecting the three policy shift principles outlined above, the Wildlife User Rights (WUR) was adopted by UWA as one of
the key instruments of the CCP. Based on the WUR provisions, UWA started implementing a pilot sport-hunting project in the parishes surrounding
LMNP. The intervention was first implemented in three parishes (Rurambira,
Nyakahita, and Rwakanombe), which had experienced many conflicts due to
large herds of wildlife roaming from the park (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010). The overall aim of the sport hunting intervention around LMNP
was, and still is, “to provide economic value to wildlife which would act as an
incentive for the community to manage and protect the wildlife on their land”
(UWA 2009: 2). Four objectives were set to achieve this aim (UWA, 2009):
- provide incentive to landowners to manage and protect wildlife on their
land by giving wildlife as a resource an opportunity to
- contribute towards reduction of the human-wildlife conflicts among the
people surrounding Lake Mburo National Park;
- positively change the attitude of residents on ranches towards wildlife
and conservation by demonstrating the economic value of wildlife to
landowners;
- provide lessons and information that would guide UWA management
in developing guidelines and procedures for implementation of sport
hunting.
Zellmer.indd 192
8-12-2011 16:55:33
193
Implementation of Sport Hunting Intervention around LMNP
In June 2001, UWA, based on the Uganda Wildlife Act Cap 200, granted a one
year pilot sport-hunting use right licence to a private company – Game Trails
(U) Ltd (GTL). The licence involved GTL entering into an agreement with
UWA and the local community to reduce illegal hunting in the area (NEMA
and MTTI, 2008; Lamprey et al., 2003). Realising that proper community
involvement and participation would only be possible with the help of an appropriate body, Community Wildlife Associations (CWAs) were established.
One of these organisations, the Rurambiira Wildlife Association (RWA), was
established in August 2001 by the community members of the Rurambiira
Parish with the help of UWA. The parishes of Rwakanombe and Nyakahita
joined the sport hunting pilot scheme in 2004 after forming their respective
wildlife associations. In order to ensure wider stakeholder involvement, the
sport hunting project worked closely with the existing sub-county administration, Local Councils and Community Protected Area Institutions (CPIs)
whose roles were clearly spelt out (see Table 1).
As noted in Table 1, there is a variety of actors, who cut across various institutional frameworks, with a common goal of trying to achieve conservation and
development in the affected areas. Important to note is that although a number of agreements were signed and draft regulations were developed at the inception of the pilot project, no comprehensive legislative framework has been
developed to guide and control the implementation of sport hunting (UWA,
2009), instead it has been managed based on the general provisions of the
Wildlife Act of 2000. In order to operationalise sport hunting, GTL (private
sport hunting company), Rurambiira CWA (on behalf of the community) and
UWA (on behalf of government) signed an agreement specifying the sport
hunting quota, the wildlife hunting fees and the revenue sharing procedures.
In the following paragraphs, we will explain each of the above specifics of the
agreement.
Zellmer.indd 193
8-12-2011 16:55:33
194
Table 1:
Actors and their Roles in Implementing Sport Hunting in LMNP
Actor
Role in the implementation of Sport Hunting in LMNP
Game Trails (U) Ltd.
- Carry out professional hunting in the project area
- Record hunting activities on daily basis and submit the data to UWA
for quarterly analysis
- Providing quarterly operational reports
- Enforce wildlife laws on the clients and ensure that personnel they
employ abide by the law
- Ensure that animals wounded by clients were humanely handled and
accounted for
- Maintain appropriate camping facilities for clients, in the hunting
blocks where necessary
UWA
- Grant use-right and license professional hunters
- Monitor the professional hunter’s activities and advising accordingly
- Determine the animal and area booking fees -in consultation with the
professional hunter and the community association
- Conduct wildlife management related training for community
association members - together with the professional hunter
- Control illegal hunting in the project area
- Build capacity among stakeholders to monitor and evaluate the
project operations
- Facilitate registration and legalisation of the associations
Local Government
(Local councils and sub- - Provide guidance and support to the project to ensure sustainable
utilisation of wildlife
county administration)
- Assist in policing and monitoring illegal activities in the project area
Community Wildlife
Associations (CWAs)
- Ensure wildlife within the hunting blocks is protected against illegal
hunting through participating in policing and monitoring of project
activities
- Report instances of poaching
- Ensure land use practices that are consistent with promotion of
wildlife conservation
- Secure protection of clients and employees of the professional
hunter while within their hunting block – working together with local
authorities
- Keep proper books of accounts and granting UWA access thereto
- Provide information to the professional hunter and UWA on the status
and distribution of wildlife within the hunting blocks
Community Protected
Area Institutions (CPIs)
- Ensure project activities are integrated into local government (subcounty and district) development plans
- Facilitate dialogue and conflict resolution
- Represent local community interests and concerns with regard to
wildlife conservation
- Mobilise local people to support project implementation
(based on NEMA and MTTI, 2008; UWA, 2008)
Sport hunting quota
A hunting quota sets the number of animals per species that should be availed
for hunting in a specific geographical area (UWA, 2009). UWA utilised data
from base line surveys and animal censuses of 1997-2000 in order to scientifically arrive at specific quota for each animal species. In general, a 2% annual
Zellmer.indd 194
8-12-2011 16:55:33
195
off take was set. Based on this formula, the first quota (for the year 2002)
was proposed by the GTL, discussed by several units within UWA and was
later submitted to the Wildlife Use Rights (WUR) committee, which advices
UWA’s top management on all technical aspects of wildlife use rights. UWA’s
top management approved the quota with some adjustments (see Table 2) and
it was sent to the CITES Management Authority in the Ministry of Tourism,
Trade and Industry for approval (UWA, 2009). The same procedure has since
then been followed to obtain subsequent quotas as indicated in Table 2.
Table 2:
Animal
Sport hunting quota for areas around LMNP
Oct 01 – Sep 02
Proposed
Oct 04 – Dec 05
2007
Approved
Proposed
Approved
Proposed
Approved
-
15
22
12
20
20
Buffalo
10
10
15
14
20
20
Bushbuck
04
10
04
14
13
13
Baboon
Bushpig
Duiker
Eland
None
15
27
20
20
20
04
04
04
04
05
16
19
07
10
06
06
06
Hippo
None
06
05
05
05
05
Impala
125
50
50
24
50
50
Oribi
None
06
04
06
10
07
Reedbuck
05
05
04
08
06
08
Topi
04
04
06
10
06
06
Warthog
14
14
20
15
15
15
Waterbuck
10
10
10
10
16
16
Zebra
93
31
40
25
25
35
(Source: UWA, 2009)
As shown in Table 2, the approval of new hunting quotas is done after a period of one or two years on recommendation of UWA’s animal monitoring
unit. The power to reduce or increase the proposed numbers of animals to
be hunted lies in the hands of UWA’s top management and the CITES Ma
nagement Authority based at the Ministry of Tourism. For this reason, the approved numbers for some animals are lower/higher than the proposed ones.
One interviewed UWA official argued that the variations are the result of the
assessments that determine the threats of extinction per species, i.e. if a high
threat is detected a low quota is set and vice versa.
In an attempt to ensure efficient monitoring and overall sustainability of the
project, the sport hunting guidelines require that all stakeholders (especially
the local communities) should be involved in the process of setting the quota
Zellmer.indd 195
8-12-2011 16:55:33
196
(UWA, 2009). However, interviews and focus group discussions held with
some community and CWA executive members indicated that little has been
done to formally consult the communities when UWA and GTL are setting
the hunting quota. They claimed that even when they later held meetings
with UWA, their views and concerns were never taken into consideration. It
was also revealed that the CWAs never received copies of the approved annual
quotas hence could not participate in the monitoring. Overall, the community
felt excluded from the decision making process, yet they are told to care for the
wildlife on their land and regard it as their own.
Wildlife hunting fees
Under the Wildlife Act (2000), UWA is mandated to set the fees for any user
right granted. At LMNP, wildlife hunting fees were determined for various
species (see Table 3) with input from the GTL. According to UWA (2009),
two factors were considered in the process of setting the hunting fees. First,
it was important to compare the hunting fees charged in other Sub-Saharan
African countries where sport hunting has been in existence for a longer period. Secondly, the attractiveness of the environment where the sport hunting is to take place was deemed a significant factor. It is important to note
that LMNP and its environs are characterised by several land uses and the
area has experienced degradation in the past, which makes it less attractive
to many sport hunters who prefer to hunt in the wilderness. Consequently, a
slightly lower price (compared to other wild areas in the region) was deemed
necessary in order to gain a competitive advantage. However, as Table 3 illustrates, the hunting fees for various animal species have over the years been
revised and increased (in 2006 and 2008) in order to ensure that optimum
revenue is generated. The revision of prices was also intended to ensure better
management of wildlife populations in the sense that those species with little
animals would have higher prices. Despite being key actors, the communities
were again not consulted in the process of setting the initial hunting fees.
CWA leaders revealed that the communities were only brought on board in
the process of reviewing the fees in 2006 and even then, it was through the
local government.
In addition to the hunting fees, the hunting company (GTL) also pays other
fees to UWA: block entrance fees (currently US$ 300), trophy handling fees
(US$ 100), professional hunters’ license (US$ 1500) and annual wildlife use
right fees (US$ 100) (UWA, 2009). The block entrance fees, the professional
hunters’ licence fees and the wildlife use right fees are paid on an annual basis, whereas trophy handling fees are when trophies are due for export.
Zellmer.indd 196
8-12-2011 16:55:33
Table 3:
197
Hunting fees for different animal species (2001–2008)
Animal
Fees Per Animal in US$
2001
2006
2008
Baboon
90
90
90
Buffalo
600
650
900
Bushbuck
250
300
500
Bushpig
150
150
150
Duiker
130
150
200
Eland
600
650
800
Hippo
500
500
600
Impala
250
300
350
Leopard
NA
NA
3500
Oribi
150
150
300
Reedbuck
250
300
400
Warthog
250
300
350
Waterbuck
500
550
600
Zebra
500
500
550
(Source: UWA, 2008)
Revenue sharing
As for the hunting fees, the revenue sharing agreement was signed between
UWA and GTL in 2001 and has since been reviewed in 2003 and 2008 (Table 4). In 2001, there was little community involvement, but it was noted from
focus group discussions that in 2003 and 2008, community leaders were involved in negotiating the sport hunting revenue sharing procedures. As per
the 2001 agreement, 65% of the generated revenues would be channelled to
the wildlife Association (Rurambiira Wildlife Association). This money was
used to fund common community projects as explained in the sections that
follow. UWA was entitled to 25%, CPI got 5% and the Sub-County also received 5%, while land owners were not entitled to anything, naturally the latter showed substantial discontent with this arrangement.
This percentage distribution applies only to hunting fees charged per animal
(see Table 3). With regard to the revenue generated from other fees (block
entrance fees, professional hunters’ licence fees, wildlife use right fees and
the trophy handling fees) UWA takes 100%. Obviously, this issue caused dis
satisfaction among community members. During focus group discussions
the community members expressed that UWA is making profit at their expense and that they would like to see a revision in this arrangement.
Zellmer.indd 197
8-12-2011 16:55:33
198
Table 4:
Hunting Revenue Sharing Details
Partner
Percentage share (%)
2001
2003
2008
Community Wildlife Associations (CWAs)
65
65
45
Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA)
25
15
15
Local Land Owners
0
10
30
Community Protected Area Institutions (CPIs)
5
5
5
Sub-county Administration
5
5
5
(Source: UWA, 2008)
Land owners raised concerns that wild animals graze on their land, drink
from their water wells and lick their salt, while they were not receiving any
share of the money. They wondered why stakeholders like UWA, who were
not directly involved in managing the wildlife outside the park and not suffering the consequences of damages, is receiving that much money. In trying
to reduce this imbalance, the UWA’s share in hunting revenue was reduced
to 15%, and allocated the remaining share to individuals on whose land the
hunting takes place (land owners). In 2008, the percentage share allocated
to wildlife associations was reduced from 65% to 45% to further increase the
land owners share from 10% to 30%, thereby acknowledging that the land
owners are the ones who are shouldering the bigger burden of conservation
(UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010). Direct income to individual land
owners was presumed to help improve their attitudes towards the presence of
wildlife on their farms.
The annual revenues from sport hunting have been steadily increasing over
the years, from US$ 33,305 in 2002 to US$ 88,200 in 2010. UWA attributed
this to a number of factors, namely: the lower hunting fees as compared to
other hunting areas in the region; the importance hunters generally attach
to sport hunting as a tool for conservation and development among the poor
nations in the world; the efficiency in the management of the intervention;
and attempts to work closely with community associations and land owners to
monitor the frequency of hunting and animals hunted.
Based on the earlier discussed percentage share of revenues (Table 4), Table 5
gives details on the absolute numbers of revenues per year. Unfortunately the
official numbers are only available until 2007, the year before the significant
change in the sharing-scheme (see Table 4).
Zellmer.indd 198
8-12-2011 16:55:34
Table 5:
199
Allocation of Sport hunting Revenues (2001- 2007 in US$)
Community Wildlife
Associations(CWAs)
(UWA)
Local Land Owner
Community Protected Area
Institutions (CPIs)
Sub-County Administration
Total
2001/02
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Total
21,568
21,757
22,934
30,385
39,937
50,239
186,820
8,421
8,369
5,294
7,015
9,217
10,894
49,210
0
0
3,528
4,674
3,900
7,260
19,362
1,658
1,672
1,762
2,333
3,069
3,626
14,120
1,658
1,672
1,762
2,333
3,069
581
11,075
33,305
33,470
35,280
46,740
59,192
72,600
280,587
(Source: UWA, 2009)
Table 5 reveals that apart from the Sub-County Administration, revenue for all
actors steadily increased over the years with the CWA taking the largest share.
Analysis of the allocation shows that in 2007 the sport hunting revenue received by the community (through CWA, land owners, CPI) was six times the
amount of revenue received by the government (through UWA and the SubCounty). This trend is attributed to the deliberate efforts among stakeholders
to negotiate better terms for communities in order to increase their incentive
for wildlife conservation (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010).
Implications of Sport Hunting Revenues for Community Livelihoods
The implication of sport hunting revenues for community livelihoods can be
assessed at two levels: the individual household level and the community level.
At the individual household level the financial benefits to all land owners together have increased from US$ 0 in 2001 to US$ 7,260 in 2007 (see Table 5).
Through focus group discussions and interviews with land owners it was
revealed that the money received has improved the household well-being by
enabling families to send their children to school, access better medical services and build better houses. Other land owners revealed that the amount of
money received has been invested in a number of ways that enhance their livelihoods, such as acquisition of plots of land in neighbouring trading centres
and towns where they have built houses for rent; buying more cows (especially the exotic Friesians) to improve the quality of their breed and increase
milk production; buying farm supplies like acaricides for spraying their cattle
against ticks; and buying food stuffs (like maize flour, beans) to compensate
crop losses due to wild animals. In general, the revenue has improved their
Zellmer.indd 199
8-12-2011 16:55:34
200
financial security and diversified their income, which originally was mostly
based on cattle.
At community level, a total of US$ 200,940 has been allocated to Community
Wildlife Associations and Community Protected Area Initiatives from 2001 to
2007 (see Table 5) as representatives of the community. The funds have been
invested in development projects that benefit the entire community including
those members who may not have had an opportunity for hunters to shoot
wildlife on their land and even those who do not have land. Examples of such
projects are construction and equipment of health centres and class rooms,
cattle vaccinations, construction of water dams and roads and contribution to
the administrative costs of Sub-county headquarters (Ochieng, 2011; UWA,
2009). These community projects are identified for each parish based on a
needs assessment conducted by CWA leaders from various parishes and later
funds are released for their implementation.
The communal projects have not only benefited the residents of the sporthunting parishes, but also the wider community around the park. For example, it was noted that some pupils in the project aided schools come from
areas outside the parishes involved in sport hunting. Equally important, the
central government has supported these projects to ensure their sustainability, by for example providing drugs and medical personnel to the newly built
health centres. In schools, the government has constructed additional classroom blocks, hired teachers and provided supervision services through cofinancing mechanisms.
Implications of Sport Hunting for Conservation
The attitude of the communities towards wildlife conservation around LMNP
has improved over the last few years (UWA Official, Research Interview,
2009). In the focus group discussions with farmers, the majority of them
indicated that they now treasure the presence of wild animals on their farms
and view them as an asset rather than a liability. However, some farmers still
hold negative views about the wildlife. They complain that they ‘host’ wildlife
on their land and incur losses (in form of pasture and water consumed by
wildlife) but they never receive hunters therefore they never get paid. They
also argue that at times, animals are spotted by the hunter on their land, but
then killed on another farm and no money is paid to the owner of the land
where the animal originated. However, UWA clarifies that, such scenarios
are among the reasons why the percentage of revenue sharing to CWA was
increased to offer benefits to all members of the community including those
on whose land wildlife is found but shot in another area.
Zellmer.indd 200
8-12-2011 16:55:34
201
This general attitude change is paralleled with an increasing trend in wildlife
populations in and around LMNP since the establishment of sport hunting. A
positive increase for example can be observed for common animals at LMNP
such as Kobs baboons, bushbucks, duikers and oribis. Although no specific
factors could be attributed to the variation in the rate of increase for different
types of animals, the overall increase in the number of animals is attributed
to the positive change in attitudes of the local people towards wildlife. In an
interview with an official of UWA, he noted that:
‘Before the introduction of sport hunting, the communities viewed wildlife on
their lands as a liability… since they were not receiving any tangible benefits
from them. They encouraged poachers from neighbouring communities
to come and hunt them with hopes of exhausting them from their farms….
But since they started receiving cash benefits from wild animals, as well as
benefiting from community projects, they started protecting the animals from
poachers and allowing them to graze together with their cows. This has caused
the number of wild animals outside the park to shoot up’.
The increase in the number of wildlife is also attributed to the presence of
GTL – the private sport hunting company – that has played a role in surveilling the area under its jurisdiction, leading to the reduction of illegal activities
such as poaching, hence favouring animal populations to increase (UWA Official, Research Interview, 2010).
Conclusion
The sport hunting case at LMNP portrays how a multitude of actors can play
different roles but end up achieving common goals. On realising the wildlifecommunity conflicts, UWA introduced sport hunting and set specific rules to
monitor its development and implementation. The private sector (GTL) came
in with a business perspective by taking advantage of the animal resources
that attracted financial resources in form of expenditures from sport hunting
tourists. Shortly after sport hunting started in the area, the communities who
used to view the presence of wildlife on their farms as a burden started benefitting from the tourism activities and livelihood projects could be initiated
in the area. At this stage, community attitudes improved and wild animals are
viewed as an asset on their farms.
Consequently, the LMNP case can be seen to confirm the prominent role of
the market (attaching monetary value to wildlife) in wildlife conservation.
Normatively, the discourse of wildlife on private land is being handled by the
present Ugandan sport hunting policy in such a way that all the landowners
around LMNP are involved in the management debate and sharing of benefits
Zellmer.indd 201
8-12-2011 16:55:34
202
in form of cash and community projects. Initially, the landowners were even
excluded from the revenue sharing list. The assumption was that they would
benefit from what goes into the accounts of CWAs. This scenario created tension among the stakeholders, as landowners demanded that the percentages
that went to UWA and CPI should be reduced to cater for their (land owners)
demands. It was also evident that the communities were actually the primary
individuals who suffered losses from wildlife. Their inclusion into the revenue sharing scheme would therefore go a long way in securing the survival
of wildlife outside protected areas. Indeed, in 2003 when the revenue sharing
percentages were revised, the landowners were allocated 10% and after 2008
even 30% of sport hunting revenue. The inclusion of land owners has caused
more involvement from the hitherto excluded communities members, because
many of them now believe that the more they influence decisions about sport
hunting the more they will be able to benefit. Landowners have even formed
a coalition within CWAs themselves by advocating that, for one to be a member of the CWAs he/she has to own land around LMNP. They have also gone
ahead to form an advocacy group to enhance their ability to influence debates
both locally and nationally about sport hunting (Ochieng, 2011). Strategically,
a number of initiatives aimed at promoting conservation and development
around LMNP have been set up. For example a study by Ochieng (2011) shows
that the park authorities are working hand in hand with local communities to
promote both conservation and development outside protected areas. In fact,
sport hunting was introduced to conserve the animals on private land as well
as to provide financial benefits to the communities. However, the communities also perceived it as a means of reducing the number of animals outside
the park besides the benefits they get. Paradoxically, the animal populations
are increasing despite the sport hunting activity.
Balancing nature conservation and development in most developing countries still remains one of the greatest challenges the world is facing in the
21st century (Ahebwa et al., 2011), but the ‘standard’ attempt to conserve wildlife by gazetting protected areas has proven troublesome (Adams, 2004). As
the LMNP situation illustrates, wildlife knows no boundaries and conservation organisations have little control over wildlife on private land. Therefore
a more persuasive approach that would make wildlife pay for its survival appears to be more appropriate (Elliot and Sumba, 2010). Biodiversity loss and
poverty are intertwined and therefore conservation and development should
be handled simultaneously. Interventions such as sport hunting are being
propagated despite them being heavily criticised by several actors. Results of
this study indicate that if implemented with proper planning and transparent
stakeholder involvement, sport hunting can enhance both conservation and
development. Financial resource sharing has had a significant positive influence on the community in relation to an increased positive attitude towards
conservation as well as an increase in the number of community development
Zellmer.indd 202
8-12-2011 16:55:34
203
projects. Following the successes associated with sport hunting at LMNP,
it has been recommended for replication in other wildlife areas of Uganda
as an intervention that could help to solve community-wildlife conflict and
enhance conservation and development (UWA Official, Research Interview,
2010; UWA, 2009).
However, it is also important to note that sport hunting at LMNP has not
been fully appreciated by all stakeholders. Although a significant amount of
benefits has been registered at the community level through community projects, a number of people at individual household level still hold a negative
perception towards sport hunting. They argue that the development projects
benefit everyone in the community including those without any wildlife on
their land, yet only households near the park are constantly inconvenienced by
wildlife (especially through crop raiding). Some households even claim they
do not benefit from community projects at all since they neither send their
children to the community aided schools nor visit the health centres due to
poor services offered. They argue that more focus should be put on enhancing household income levels rather than on community projects, the latter
already being funded through other tourism revenue sharing arrangements,
such as the 20% National Park gate collection share. They suggest that all the
revenues should be collected in a pool and later distributed to each household
in order to increase its impact. However, this option does not seem to be viable considering the number of households in the parishes, as each household
potentially could end up receiving less than US$ 100 per year.
At the national level some conservation NGO’s such as Nature Uganda have
raised concerns on a number of issues regarding the implementation and
management of sport hunting. Among the concerns raised is the methodology and accuracy of the data collected by UWA to determine the hunting quota
and the rate of increase of wildlife in the area. Owners of eco-lodges in the
park claim that some species such as elands are now rarely sighted inside the
National Park because of sport hunting. Yet UWA argues that regular animal
censuses have been carried out, but they also admit the difficulty in conducting accurate wildlife population censuses in the region. However, having accurate and on-time data is important since experiences from other countries
have shown that poorly regulated hunting can cause drastic decline or even
extinction of wildlife (Loveridge et al., 2006).
Furthermore, the general monitoring and managing capacities of UWA have
been doubted given their limited human resource capacity in the region, potentially encouraging corruption as well as illegal or unethical hunting. For
example, there is a limited number of staff handling WUR issues at the UWA
headquarter, making monitoring of trophy exportation and implementation
of agreements difficult. However, UWA indicated that all sport hunters are
Zellmer.indd 203
8-12-2011 16:55:34
204
accompanied by rangers to ensure that no illegal hunting is carried out. A
special form with details of the hunting expedition is filled in by the staff
member and kept as a record at the park headquarters. This practice comes
with a lot of challenges though, since some rangers are not adequately trained
and are not well braced with the contents of sport hunting agreements. Other
concerns have been raised by owners of eco-lodges who argue that sport hunting will reduce the chances of the park and the surrounding communities
to attract eco-tourists who are more conscious about conserving the environment and the resources therein. They therefore foresee challenges of attracting eco-tourists who would not like to stay in an area where animals are being
shot for leisure.
In conclusion, sport hunting has the potential to become an effective intervention in the conservation and management of wildlife outside protected areas
as the LMNP case can illustrate. It has also been revealed that it can act as a
vehicle for socio-economic development for communities living near conservation areas. However, it should be noted the success of sport hunting interventions highly depends on having a consultative, transparent and collaborative management and monitoring system. The management of sport hunting
should be based on accurate and on-time data to avoid any negatives impacts
on the ecosystem. Above all the implementation of sport hunting should not
compromise the development of other forms of tourism such as ecotourism.
This is only possible if sport hunting can be confined in areas outside parks.
Zellmer.indd 204
8-12-2011 16:55:34
205
References
Adams, M.W. (2004) Against extinction: The Story of conservation. London: Earthscan.
Ahebwa. W., Van der Duim, R. and J.B. Nyakaana (2008) Tourism, Communities and
Conservation: An analysis of Tourism Revenue Sharing Programme at Lake Mburo
National Park, Uganda. In: Van der Duim, V.R. and Kloek, M. E., ed., Thematic
Proceedings of Atlas Africa conferences Volume 4. Arnhem: Atlas.
Ahebwa, M.W. (2010) Tourism, Power and Partnerships: Investigating a new approach to
conservation and development in Uganda. Research Report. Wageningen: Wageningen
University.
Akama, J.S. (1999) The evolution of tourism in Kenya. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 7 (1)
pp. 6-25.
Arts, B. and M. Buizer (2009) Forests, discourses, institutions: A discursive-institutional
analysis of global forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics 11 (5-6) pp. 340-347.
Arts, B. and P. Leroy (2006) Institutional Dynamics in Environmental Governance. Dordrecht:
Springer.
Arts, B., Leroy, P. and J. van Tatenhove (2006) Political Modernisation and Policy
Arrangements: A Framework for Understanding Environmental Policy Change. Public
Organization Review 6 (2) pp. 93-106.
Arts, B. and J. van Tatenhove (2000) Environmental policy arrangements: A new concept.
In: Goverde, H., ed., Global and European Policy? Organizations, Policy and Contexts.
Aldershot: Ashgate.
Arts, B. and J. van Tatenhove (2004) Policy and Power: A conceptual framework between the
‘old’ and new policy idioms. Policy Sciences 37(3-4) pp. 339-356.
Ayorekire, J. (2002) Conflicting Land Use: Lake Mburo National Park. French Institute for
Research in Africa (IFRA) les cahiers (22) pp. 1-22.
Baker, J.E. (1997) Trophy hunting as a sustainable use of wildlife resources in Southern and
Eastern Africa. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 5 (4) pp. 306-321.
Baldus, R.D. (2005) African wildlife—must it be subsidized. African Indaba 2: pp. 2-8.
Becker, F. (2009) Tourism, Conservation Areas, and Local Development in Namibia: Spatial
Perspectives of Private and Public Sector Reform. In: Saarinen, J., Becker, F., Wilson,
D., and H. Manwa, eds., Sustainable Tourism in Southern Africa: Local Communities, and
Natural Resources in Transition. Bristol: Channel View Publication, pp. 93-115.
Booth, V. (2005) International and Regional Best Practice and Lessons Applicable to Sport and
Recreational Hunting in Southern Africa. Pretoria: Department of Environmental Affairs
and Tourism.
Buizer, M. (2008) Worlds Apart; Interactions between Local Initiatives and established Policy.
PhD Thesis. Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Dunlap, T.R. (1988) Sport Hunting and Conservation. Environmental Review 12 (1) pp. 51-60.
Elliot, J. and D. Sumba (2010) Conservation Enterprise – what works, where and for whom? A
Poverty and Conservation Learning Group (PCLP). AWF Discussion Paper. Nairobi: AWF.
Emerton, L. (1999) Balancing the Opportunity Costs Of Wildlife Conservation For Communities
Around Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda. Evaluating Eden Series, Discussion Paper
No.5.
Zellmer.indd 205
8-12-2011 16:55:34
206
Hajer, M.A. (1995) The politics of environmental discourse ecological modernization and the policy
process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heberlein, A.T. (1991) Changing Attitudes and Funding for Wildlife: Preserving the Sport
Hunter. Wildlife Society Bulletin 19 (4) pp. 528-534.
Hulme, D. and M. Murphree (2001) African Wildlife and Livelihoods: The Promise and
performance of Community Conservation. Oxford: James Currey.
Hutton, J. M. and N. Leader-Williams (2003) Sustainable use and incentive-driven
conservation: realigning human and conservation interests. Oryx 37 (2) pp. 215-226.
Kafureka, B.M. (1992) The dynamics of the land question and its impact on agricultural
productivity in Mbarara District. Working Paper No. 25. Kampala: CBR Publications.
Krug, W. (2001) Private Supply of Protected Land in Southern Africa: A Review of Markets,
Approaches, Barriers and Issues. Workshop Paper World Bank/OECD International
Workshop on Market Creation for Biodiversity Products and Services Paris, 25–26
January, 2001.
Lamprey, R., Buhanga, E. and J. Omoding (2003) A Study of Wildlife Distributions, Wildlife
Management Systems and Options for Wildlife-based Livelihoods in Uganda. Kampala:
IFPRI/USAID.
Lindsey, P.A., Roulet, P.A. and S.S. Romanach (2007) Economic and Conservation
Significance of the Trophy Hunting Industry in South Africa. Biological Conservation 134
(4) pp. 455-469.
Loveridge, A.J., Reynolds, C.J. and E.J. Miner-Gulland (2006) Does sport hunting benefit
conservation? In: MacDonald, D. and K. Service, ed., Key Topics in Conservation Biology.
Oxford: John Wiley and Son Ltd., pp. 222-238.
Mahonge, C.P.I. (2010) Co-managing complex socio-ecological systems in Tanzania: the case of
Jipe wetland. PhD thesis. Wageningen: Wageningen University.
Mayaka, T.B., Hendriks, T., Wesseler, J. and H.H.T. Prins (2004) Improving the benefits
of wildlife harvesting in northern Cameroon: a co-management perspective. Ecological
Economics 54 (1) pp. 67-80.
NEMA and MTTI (2008) Building a foundation for sustainable wildlife trade in Uganda: A
review of the national wildlife trade policies in support of the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species Of Fauna And Flora (CITES) Uganda: NEMA.
North D.C. (1981) Structure and Change in Economic History. New York: W. W. Norton.
Ochieng, A. (2011) Linking Tourism, Conservation and Livelihoods outside Protected Areas: An
analysis of Sport Hunting Intervention around Lake Mburo National Park, Uganda. MSc
Thesis submitted to Wageningen University.
Roulet, P.A. (2004) Chasse sportive et gestion communautaire de la faune sauvage en Afrique
Centrale. Game and Wildlife Science 21: pp. 615-632.
Turyaho, M. and M. Infield (1998) Pastoralists, fishermen and Farmers in and around Lake
Mburo National Park: Changing Conflict into awareness and Responsibility. Community
Conservation Discussion Paper No.6. Nairobi: AWF.
UWA – Uganda Wildlife Authority (2008) Wildlife User Rights in Uganda. Kampala: Uganda
Wildlife Authority. www.uwa.or.ug/hunting.htm. Accessed: 08.01.2011
UWA – Uganda Wildlife Authority (2009) Pilot sport hunting program in the ranches
surrounding Lake Mburo National Park. Kampala: Uganda Wildlife Authority.
Zellmer.indd 206
8-12-2011 16:55:34
207
Van der Zouwen, M. (2006) Nature policy between trends and traditions: dynamics in nature
policy arrangements in the Yorkshire Dales, Donana and the Veluwe. PhD thesis.Delft:
Eburon.
Wiering, M.A. and B.J.M. Arts (2006) Discursive shifts in Dutch river management: ‘deep’
institutional change or adaptation strategy? Hydrobiologia 565 (1) pp.327-338.
Zellmer.indd 207
8-12-2011 16:55:34

the book (pdf).

Transcription

Similar documents

Fire-bellied Toads

Examples from Brazil - The Conservation Fund

title of presentation

COMMUNITY - Ol Pejeta Conservancy

Development vs Tourism

Glen Haffy Conservation Area Trail Map

Jessica Dempsey - Department of Geography

Palmate Newt

Hospitality And Tourism Research

here - Color Country Natural Resource Camp