“Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Alleviation”

Linking Conservation, Equity and Poverty Alleviation Understanding profiles and motivations of resource users and local perceptions

of governance at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda

Mariel HarrisonImperial College London

A brief history…1992 – Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)

2000 – Millennium Development Goals“Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger”

“Ensure environmental sustainability”

2003 – IUCN World Parks Congress“protected areas should strive to contribute to poverty reduction at the local level, and at the

very minimum must not contribute to or exacerbate poverty”

2010 – UN General Assembly“Preserving biodiversity is inseparable from the

fight against poverty”

2011-2020 Strategic Plan for the CBDencourages the support of “initiatives on the role of protected areas in poverty alleviation”

Bwindi Impenetrable National Park

Gazetted as a:• Forest Reserve 1932• Game Reserve 1961• National Park 1991

Covers 330.8 km2

Half the world’s population of mountain gorillas (CR)

Border is densely populated, over 300 people per km2

>95% rely on subsistence farming

Conflict between Park and people

Integrated Conservation and Development

Great investment and many ICDS, including the Multiple Use Program (MUP)…

… The mountain gorilla population is increasing…

… But the greatest threat is poaching, which still continues…

Unauthorised resource use

Increase law enforcementImprove Integrated

Conservation and Development

Less unauthorised activity

Aim: to improve the effectiveness of conservation interventions by understanding

• who continues with unauthorised resource use and why, despite ICD and

law enforcement?

• how to govern and implement ICD in a suitable manner

Reduced threats to Bwindi and gorillas

? ?

Mixed methodsHousehold survey

Unmatched count technique (UCT)

Focus group discussions

Who?

What?

Why?

How?

Type of resource user n

Authorised (ARU) 72

Unauthorised (URU) 53

Baseline sample 240

Who extracts resources?Compared to ARUs and the baseline sample, URUs:

• are poorer,

• live closer to the Park boundary,

• are more likely to live further from trading centers

Both ARUs and URUs have larger family sizes.

ARU Baseline URU

Ba

sic

Ne

ce

ssitie

s S

urv

ey S

core

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

ARU Baseline URU

Dis

tan

ce f

rom

Pa

rk b

ou

nda

ry (

km

)

0.0

0.4

0.8

1.2

ARU Baseline URU

Ho

use

hold

siz

e

02

46

8

ARU Baseline URU

Pro

port

ion

liv

ing

ove

r 1

hou

r fr

om

cen

ter

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

ARU Baseline URU

Pro

port

ion

liv

ing

ove

r 1

hou

r fr

om

cen

ter

05

10

15

20

25

30

35

What resources, and why?

Bushmeat Firewood Medicine Honey Poles

Pro

po

rtio

n o

f po

pula

tion

en

ga

ge

d in

re

sou

rce u

se

05

10

15

20

25

30

…because they lack food, some get it to sell, and some get it because

it treats worms

The land is scarce… We have no where to grow

trees for firewood

…all the medicines are in the forest, so people go there to collect them.

They don’t grow in villages.

The medicine in the clinics

does not work the same.

There is no honey in the communities, so people go to collect it from the forest illegally. They eat, and then

they sell. It is even medicinal.

In the villages, there is a scarcity of building

poles… so you find them going to get them from

the forest.

You find people collecting basketry

materials… which are useful for weaving baskets and trays

People are poor

Unauthorised resource use

Law enforcement: arrest, fine and/or imprisonment

ICD implemented:Receive equitable share of benefits and/or fair compensation for costs of conservation

YesNo

People are wealthier

Refrain from unauthorisedresource use

Positive attitudes towards the Park

Live close to the Park

Crop raiding

No food, income or compensation

Poor educationLack of

employment

Inequity of revenue sharing

Corruption

for subsistence

and / or have negative attitudes towards the Park

and personal compensation

“When it [a crop grown near the Park] is raided, you have no

harvest which you would have taken to market and sold to make money to buy eggs or meat for the children. You end up going there to hunt and get meat from the

forest.”

“People look at it as though the present management is

not controlling the problem of crop raiding animals, scaring them or killing them, which

makes people angry so they go into the forest”

“A person goes to the Park because he is

angered. He is angry because he does not get

employment, so he goes to destroy the

forest.”

“People are angered... Those who are benefitting [from

revenue sharing] by receiving goats are those who are not living near the Park. People

near the Park (like us) are denied goats, so we are angry

and go to the Park and poach.”

“Schools have been built so children

have benefitted and their parents no longer go to the

forest.”

“When you have money, you can just

go across and buy meat, so you don’t need to go to the

forest.”

How do we ensure that ICD is equitably managed?

Good governance

What is good governance?

When there is collaborative project selection, decision making and implementation between local people, donors, and

external experts

Does it work?

Yes! People who felt more involved in project design and implementation perceived themselves to have received greater

benefits

Our Aim Our Findings

Who?

What?

Why?

How?

Poor and remote• Close to Park boundary• Far from markets

Important resources scarce or unavailable outside the Park• Meat• Firewood

1) Poverty - subsistence and minor income2) Resentment – personal compensation for conservation

costs (crop raiding) and inequitable benefit sharing

• Collaborative decision-making and implementation• Outreach to remote communities at village level

Challenges

Poor, live close to Park, far from markets

Involvement in planning, decision making and implementation

Cannot attend meetings

Cannot afford travel

Have to guard crops

Not informed of meetings

Too far to travel

Can we ensure equitable benefits?

What if their choice of project is unconnected to

conservation?

How do we monitor success?

Key lessons

Poverty + Conservation + Poaching = Complicated story

Method A Method B Method C

Who? What? Why? How?

Challenges

Whatever you do, do it equitably!

Use law enforcement to record who & why,

not just what & where

Combine research on resource users with governance

Aichi Target 11 “… effectively and equitably managed…”

Thank you!

Mariel HarrisonImperial College Londonemail: marielharrison123@gmail.comTwitter: @mariel_harrisonPhone: +256 786 71 30 70