FIGURE 5 - uploaded by Leonard Manda
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Co-management has been widely promoted in protected area management on the premise that it may simultaneously enhance biodiversity conservation outcomes and improve the livelihoods of the park-border communities. However, the success of this management approach remains a growing debate raising the question of its effectiveness. To contribute to thi...
Citations
Collaborative management partnerships (CMPs) between state wildlife authorities and nonprofit conservation organizations to manage protected areas (PAs) have been used increasingly across Sub-Saharan Africa since the 2000s. They aim to attract funding, build capacity, and increase the environmental effectiveness of PAs. Our study documents the rise of CMPs, examines their current extent, and measures their effectiveness in protecting habitats. We combine statistical matching and Before-After-Control-Intervention regressions to quantify the impact of CMPs, using tree cover loss as a proxy. We identify 127 CMPs located in 16 countries. CMPs are more often located in remote PAs, with habitats that are least threatened by human activity. Our results indicate that, on average, each year in a CMP results in an annual decrease in tree cover loss of about 55% compared to PAs without CMPs. Where initial anthropogenic pressure was low, we measure no effect. Where it was high, we see a 66% decrease in tree cover loss. This highly heterogeneous effect illustrates the importance of moving beyond average effect size when assessing conservation interventions, as well as the need for policy makers to invest public funds to protect the areas the most at risk.
In contrast to top-down conservation strategies, co-management is widely promoted as a bottom-up, participatory, and sustainable management strategy of natural resources. However, assessing the extent of community participation in wildlife co-management by integrating Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation and practical techniques recommended by the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) is rare in Malawi, particularly in Vwaza Wildlife Reserve management context. The current study examines the forms, extent (level), and satisfaction of community participation in the co-management of Vwaza Wildlife Reserve. Using an interpretive case study design and Arnstein’s participation and IAP2 models with purposive sampling of participants, qualitative data were collected through field notes, observations, and audio recording interviews that consisted of seventeen key informant in-depth-interviews (IDIs) and seven focus group discussions (FGDs) of ten participants each. A thematic content analysis of the data using NVivo 14 revealed that most local stakeholders were not fully involved and unsatisfied. As per Arnstein’s ladder, participation in the reserve fell under tokenism rung. Tokenism represents the third (informing), fourth (consultation), and fifth (placation) stages of the ladder, indicating top-down management, where authorities hand information and decisions to local stakeholders. The only participation that falls under active co-management is monitoring of resources. The reserve management has the final say in most decisions, imposing livelihood and diverting development projects to areas of their choice, leading to socio-ecological disorganizations at the reserve. Therefore, governments and policymakers should enhance local communities’ empowerment by sharing decision-making roles and authority to create shared solutions and enhanced stakeholder satisfaction in management of Vwaza Wildlife Reserve.
