ArticlePDF Available

The future of wildlife-based land uses in Botswana

  • Wildlife Conservation Network
There is currently uncertainty
regarding the future of wildlife
management policy in Botswana,
which has some of the largest populations
of wildlife in southern Africa, including
Africa’s largest national elephant herd.
During late 2008, the government
of Botswana expressed an intention
to prohibit safari hunting in several
Controlled Hunting Areas (CHAs)
adjacent to national parks in the north of
the country, following the expiry of current
leases. Specically, the government plans
to establish a 25 km buer zone around
protected areas in northern Botswana,
in which safari hunting is not permitted.
is article briey discusses the potential
implications of such recommendations
in terms of sustaining Botswana’s wildlife
Historical Context
During the 1960s and 1970s, a small group
of southern African nations (including
Botswana) introduced two key changes to
wildlife management practice which had
a dramatic impact on the prospects for
conservation: landowners were granted
user rights over wildlife through legislative
reforms, and safari hunting of wildlife was
promoted. ose changes resulted in a large-
scale switch from livestock to wildlife-based
land uses on private land, and stimulated
development of Community-based Natural
Resource Management (CBNRM) in
a variety of communally-owned areas.
As a result of nancial incentives for
conservation resulting from sustainable use,
and safari hunting in particular, southern
Africa experienced signicant increases in
the abundance and distribution of wildlife
outside of protected areas and the recovery
of a number of endangered species. e
expansion of wildlife populations was
particularly pronounced on private land.
For e.g., over 200,000 sq. km of private
land has been converted to game ranching
in South Africa. In parts of southern
Africa, the achievements are increasingly
extending to communal land. In Namibia,
for example, wildlife populations are
booming on communal land due to the
development of communal conservancies.
On both private and communal land,
safari hunting typically provides the entry
point for former livestock farmers to
adopt wildlife-based land uses because it
enables the derivation of nancial returns
from small and low diversity populations
of wildlife. Botswana has traditionally
been a strong proponent of the principles
of sustainable use, and the wildlife sector
relies heavily on returns from safari
hunting. Approximately 74% of the vast
(~227,000 sq. km) wildlife estate (and
81% of community land used for wildlife
production) is dependent on returns from
consumptive wildlife utilisation.
Implications of Restricting Utilisation
1. Community Benets
Safari hunting currently generates 72%
of income for CBNRM programmes in
Botswana, and restricting the industry has
the potential to severely curtail nancial
incentives for conservation. e proposal
to limit safari hunting represents one
component of a broader trend towards
centralisation of control of management
over wildlife resources in Botswana (as
has also occurred in several other parts of
southern Africa in recent years). For e.g.,
a clause in the Botswana CBNRM policy
(nalised in 2007) suggests that 65%
of wildlife revenues will be centralised
into a national trust fund. Similarly, a
moratorium was placed on lion hunting
(despite the absence of evidence of negative
impacts associated with the practice in
Botswana), signicantly reducing the
potential returns to communities from
safari hunting. e clearest successes in
promoting wildlife conservation outside
of protected areas in Africa have been
achieved where authority to manage and
utilise wildlife has been devolved to the
landholder level. In Botswana, by reducing
the freedom of communities to manage
wildlife and imposing restrictions on safari
hunting, the government risks reducing
community buy-in to natural resource
management and reducing incentives for
2. Hunting and Tourism Trade-os
Safari hunting generates 15% of tourism
revenues from only 1% of tourist arrivals,
making it one of the lowest impact forms
of tourism in Botswana. Safari hunting
typically focuses on male animals and
results in the removal of 2-5% of ungulate
populations and generally has minimal
impact on the viability of wildlife
populations. e trophy quality for most
species has been fairly constant over time
in Botswana, indicating that the quotas for
most species are sustainable.
Photo-tourism is an important contributor
to GDP and to conservation eorts in
Botswana. However, there are a number of
drawbacks associated with photo-tourism
that prevent it from being a panacea for
natural resource management and rural
development. Most signicantly, photo-
tourism is generally only viable in areas
with very high densities of visible wildlife,
and/or spectacular scenery and large
areas of Botswana’s wildlife estate are not
suitable. Photo-tourism relies on visitation
by far greater numbers of tourists than
safari hunting, resulting in environmental
impacts through fossil fuel use and habitat
conversion for the creation of tourism
infrastructure. Furthermore, inequity
in receipt of benets can undermine the
conservation and development benets of
photo-tourism. Phototourism generates
relatively little direct employment in
Botswana, and most jobs created are
in menial support services. Leakage of
revenues from the photographic industry
is also a serious problem. Approximately
73% of photo-tourism revenues are leaked
from Botswana overseas, compared to 25%
of safari hunting income. e majority of
earnings from photo-tourism in Botswana
e Future of Wildlife-based
Land Uses in Botswana
Peter Lindsey
are generated via ‘enclave’ tourism
(i.e., tourism operations run by foreign
companies with a weak benet stream to
local communities), and comparatively
few benets accrue to CBNRM tourism
3. Regional Conservation Alliances
During recent decades, Botswana has
been a strong advocate for the principles
of sustainable use. Unity among southern
African nations has been crucial in
preventing and limiting the impact of
proposals tabled at CITES meetings
designed to limit the sustainable use of
wildlife in southern Africa. If Botswana,
a country traditionally so resolute in its
support of the principles of sustainable
use, was to impose stringent restrictions
on hunting, the impression among other
countries may be that such a decision
was based on negative environmental
consequences associated with hunting
(despite a lack of evidence to support such
assumptions, and regardless of the clear
conservation gains resulting from nancial
benets from hunting). Such nations may
then be persuaded to vote for proposals
designed to curtail sustainable utilisation
of southern African wildlife resources at
CITES meetings.
In addition, Botswana is a signatory
to the Southern African Development
Community (SADC) Protocol on
Wildlife and Natural Resources, the
primary objective of which is to: “establish
within the region and within the amework
of the respective national laws of each state,
common approaches to the conservation
and sustainable use of wildlife resources.
Increased centralisation of control over
wildlife management, and restrictions on
the freedom on communities to derive
benets from wildlife via safari hunting is
contrary to both the SADC Protocol on
Wildlife and Natural Resources, and to
harmonised trans-boundary management
of wildlife populations.
Botswanas conservation policies
during recent decades have been largely
progressive and eective, resulting in
the conservation of a vast wildlife estate
and increasing community involvement
in wildlife-based land uses. is success
has been achieved through a blend of
protection and sustainable use. Restricting
consumptive wildlife utilisation would
represent a retrogressive step and a top-
down imposition that would reduce the
protability of wildlife-based land uses in
many rural areas, and reduce community
earnings and buy-in to natural resource
management. Restricting hunting would
not likely be associated with compensatory
increases in earnings from photo-tourism
and the net impact would probably be
reduced incentives for people to conserve
wildlife. Instead, policy-makers in
Botswana should maximise the diversity
of options for generating income from
wildlife; allow market-forces, community
preferences and the characteristics of
individual areas to determine the ideal
form of wildlife uses outside protected
areas; and focus attention on key issues
aecting conservation in Botswana such as
blockages to migration routes created by
veterinary fencing, and livestock subsidies
which discourage wildlife-based land uses.
Further Reading
Barnett, R. and C. Patterson. 2006.
Sport hunting in the SADC Region:
An overview. TRAFFIC East/Southern
Africa. South Africa: Johannesburg.
Bond, I., B. Child, D. de la Harpe, B. Jones,
J. Barnes and H. Anderson. 2004. Private-
land contribution to conservation in South
Africa. In: Parks in transition (ed. Child,
B.). Pp. 29-62. UK: Earthscan.
Child, B. 2008. Community-conservation
in southern Africa: Rights-based natural
resource management. In: Evolution and
innovation in wildlife conservation (eds.
Suich, H., B. Child and A. Spenceley). Pp.
187-200. UK: Earthscan.
Jones, B. and M. Murphree. 2004.
Community-based natural resource
management as a conservation mechanism:
Lessons and directions. In: Parks in
transition (ed. Child, B.). Pp. 63-103. UK:
Jones, B. and C. Weaver. 2008. CBNRM
in Namibia: Growth, trends, lessons and
constraints. In: Evolution and innovation
in wildlife conservation (eds. Suich, H.,
B. Child and A. Spenceley). Pp. 223-243.
UK: Earthscan.
Kalahari Conservation Society. 2009.
Hunting and the future of wildlife
conservation in Botswana. Kalahari
Conservation Society report. 76 pp.
Lindsey, P., R . Alexander, L. Frank and S.
Romañach. 2006. e potential of safari
hunting to create incentives for wildlife
conservation in Africa where alternative
wildlife-based land uses may not be viable.
Animal Conservation 9: 283-298.
Lindsey, P., P. Roulet and S. Romañach.
2007. Economic and conservation
signicance of the safari hunting industry in
sub-Saharan Africa. Biological Conservation
134: 455-469.
Martin, R.B. 2008. Review of safari hunting
in Botswana: Financial and economic
assessment dra report. Consultancy
for e Botswana Wildlife Management
Association. 40 pp.
Mbaiwa, J. 2008. e realities of ecotourism
development in Botswana. In: Responsible
Tourism (ed: Spenceley, A.). Pp. 205-224.
UK: Earthscan.
National Agricultural Marketing
Council (NAMC). 2006. Report on the
investigation to identify problems for
sustainable growth and development in
South African wildlife ranching. NAMC
Report, 2006-03.
Spenceley, A. 2008. Impacts of wildlife
tourism on rural livelihoods in southern
Africa. In: Responsible Tourism (ed:
Spenceley, A.). Pp. 159-186. UK:
Peter Lindsey ( is at
the Mammal Research Institute, University of
Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
... For example, Cgae Cgae Tlhabololo Trust photographic tourism project failed because appropriate land use was not considered during the formation of the project hence rendering it not economically viable. Lindsey (2010) argues that safari hunting generates revenues in areas where alternatives such as photographic tourism may not be viable. ...
... The hunting ban in Botswana has resulted in revenue loose to the country and to local communities. Lindsey (2010) argues that safari hunting generates 15% of tourism revenues from only 1% of tourist arrivals, making it one of the lowest impact forms of tourism in Botswana. In addition, safari hunting contributed 0.13% to Botswana's Gross Domestic Product (Lindsey et al., 2007). ...
Full-text available
This paper examines the effects of the safari hunting ban of 2014 on rural livelihoods and wildlife conservation in Northern Botswana using the social exchange theory. The paper used both primary and secondary data sources. Data were analysed qualitatively. Results indicate that the ban led to a reduction of tourism benefits to local communities such as: income, employment opportunities, social services such as funeral insurance, scholarships and income required to make provision of housing for the needy and elderly. After the hunting ban, communities were forced to shifts from hunting to photographic tourism. Reduced tourism benefits have led to the development of negative attitudes by rural residents towards wildlife conservation and the increase in incidents of poaching in Northern Botswana. The implications of hunting ban suggest that policy shifts that affect wildlife conservation and rural livelihoods need to be informed by socio-economic and ecological research. This participatory and scientific approach to decision-making has the potential to contribute sustainability of livelihoods and wildlife conservation in Botswana.
... Remote, rural communities often benefit the least from tourism (Mbaiwa, 2017b). Although CBNRM policy has produced mixed outcomes in Botswana (Lindsey, 2010;Mbaiwa, 2011), it can improve wildlife management as part of a comprehensive strategy for reducing illegal hunting ( Hilborn et al., 2006). There is opportunity in the region to expand tourism around the periphery of the Delta, precisely where bushmeat hunters are concentrated ( Winterbach et al., 2015). ...
... Further, introduction and implementation of fees for penalties against renegade road users are recommended as a punitive measure aimed at minimizing road kills. For ecological reasons related to barrier effects and geographic isolation, fencing of animal passages along the highway is not recommended (Lindsey, 2010). ...
... Botswana is widely credited for strong commitments to wildlife conservation (Lindsey, 2010) and anti-poaching (Henk, 2005;Hoon, 2013). It has sought to engage local communities through CBNRM initiatives (Pienaar et al., 2013). ...
Illegal bushmeat hunting is a global threat to wildlife, but its secretive and unregulated nature undermines efforts to mitigate its impacts on wildlife and wildlife-based industries. We investigated the scale of illegal bushmeat hunting in the Okavango Delta, Botswana (~ 20,000 km²) to assess its potential contribution to wildlife population declines. Approximately 1,800 illegal hunters each harvest an average of 320 kg of bushmeat annually, though some reported harvesting ≥ 1000 kg. While impala were the most commonly hunted species, buffalo and greater kudu accounted for most bushmeat. Hunters remove ~ 620,000 kg of medium-large herbivore biomass (equivalent to 15,500 impala) annually from the delta and humans are the fourth most prominent predator in the delta. Cumulative harvest by humans and other predators likely exceeds the intrinsic population growth rate of several species of ungulates in the delta, and helps explain purported declines in ungulate populations. Competition between humans and other apex predators for limited prey reduces the ecosystem's carrying capacity for large carnivores. Illegal bushmeat hunting represents an economically inefficient use of the delta's wildlife and a threat to the region's tourism industry. Strategies are required that provide clearer avenues for communities to benefit legally from wildlife, while concurrently curbing illegal hunting through effective law enforcement.
... Maximizing the economic value of wildlife and harnessing that value to generate incentives for conservation and income for wildlife management is important . Arbitrary restrictions on legal sustainable use (such as the ban on trophy hunting in Kenya, or the ban on lion hunting and the 25 km no-hunting buffer around protected areas in Botswana) are thus unadvisable (Norton-Griffiths, 2007; Lindsey, 2010a). In areas where state land is leased to tourism and hunting operators, long term leases should be allocated to incentivize investment in protecting the wildlife resource, and contracts should stipulate minimum contributions to anti-poaching (). ...
... Both countries subsequently cut quotas: in Central African Republic, a maximum of one lion per block is now generally allocated (blocks being a mean of 3,0266303 km 2 in size) [25]; and, in Benin, quotas were cut from 10 before the 2-year moratorium to 5 presently [26]. Botswana removed lions from quota during 2001-2004, and again from 2008 to the present [27]. Zambia cut quotas from ,100 in 2007 to 74 in 2012 and then imposed a moratorium in 2013 (Lindsey unpublished data). ...
Full-text available
This study was based on a temporal analysis of trophy quality trends and hunting effort in Chewore South Safari Area (CSSA), Zimbabwe, for the period 2009-2012. We selected four of the big five species, namely; buffalo (Syncerus caffer), elephant (Loxodonta africana), the leopard (Panthera pardus) and lion (Panthera leo) for analysis. Existing database of 188 trophies from 2009 to 2011 was reviewed and recorded using the Safari Club International (SCI) scoring system. Further, 50 trophies for 2012 were measured and recorded based on the SCI scoring system. Local ecological knowledge on trophy quality and hunting effort in CSSA was obtained through semi-structured questionnaires from 22 conveniently selected professional hunters in 2012. The results indicated no significant change in trophy quality trends of buffalo, leopard and lion (p > 0.05) over the study period. In contrast, there was a significant decline in elephant trophy quality trend over the same period (p < 0.05). The results showed no significant change in hunting effort over the study period for all the four study species (p > 0.05). Furthermore, seventy-two percent (72%, n = 13) of the professional hunters confirmed that elephant population was declining in CSSA and this was likely due to poaching. Professional hunters perceived trophy hunting as a source of financial capital generation for wildlife conservation (61%, n = 11), as well as positively contributing to the local economy (56%, n = 10). It was concluded that hunting has limited negative impact on species trophy quality trends when a sustainable hunting system is consistently followed in CSSA. CSSA management need to continuously monitor trophy hunting, animal populations and employ adaptive management approach to quota setting and species conservation.
Full-text available
This study investigated the dynamics and socioeconomic drivers of illegal hunting of wildlife animal commonly called bushmeatin Oba Hills Forest Reserve (OHFR) in Southwest Nigeria. Two hundred and thirty-four households in 8 host communities were subjected to direct household survey using a multi-stage sampling technique. The results revealed that mainly young and middle-aged men engaged in group and seasonal bushmeat hunting, mostly during the dry season. Also, the scale of daily illegal bushmeat hunting is high in the protected area. Non-selective hunting has increased over the last five years with traditional means of hunting still prominent during the hunting expedition. Thus, the socioeconomic drivers (age, ethnicity and household size) had a strong relationship with illegal bushmeat hunting, and their odds ratio ranged between 2.11 and 3.73. Failure to provide stakes for the host communities’ inhabitants and weak penal system influenced illegal bushmeat hunting in OHFR. We conclude that the aforementioned factors need to be addressed for illegal bushmeat hunting to be tackled effectively. However, in the absence of political and economic stability, controlling illegal bushmeat hunting will remain extremely difficult and the future of wildlife conservation will remain bleak.
The Chobe National Park River Front (CNPRF) is renowned for a high population and variety of wildlife species in Botswana. The park has become popular for nature-based tourism and wildlife safaris. With increased numbers of wildlife tourists there have been reports on problems of overuse and vehicle congestion in some parts of the Chobe National Park. In order to mitigate crowding and vehicle congestion on the popular Chobe River Front route, the DWNP introduced and implemented Upper and Nogatshaa routes. The purpose of the study is to assess wildlife tourists’ frequency of use and potential environmental impacts on the Chobe River Front, Nogatshaa and Upper routes of the Chobe National Park. Data were collected in June 2013. A semi-structured questionnaire and face-to-face interviews were employed to elicit information from guides operating from fixed lodges, guides from mobile tour safaris and wildlife officials based at Sedudu gate. In addition, participant observation was also used to collect additional data for this study. The results revealed that the Chobe River Front of the CNP was heavily utilized by wildlife tourists, followed by the Upper route and the least used was Nogatshaa. The Chobe River Front route was the most preferred, while Nogatshaa is the least preferred route. The study revealed that there are benefits associated with the newly created vehicle decongestion routes at the CNP. Observations have been made to indicate that the two new routes have relatively relieved the Chobe River Front from tourist vehicle pressure; lessened the congestion of tourist vehicles particularly at animal sightings or encounters of predators (leopards, lions), have relatively relieved the Chobe River Front from tourist vehicle pressure; lessened the congestion of tourist vehicles particularly at animal sightings or encounters specifically predators (leopard, wild dogs, lions) and also creation of a few waterpoints along the Upper and Nogatshaa routes appears to have contributed towards spreading of wild animals over a large area thereby alleviating competition for foraging and water and thereby reducing grassing pressure at the CRF. However, there are still issues of congestion during game drives particularly along the River bank route and at the CRF viewing site. Hence, we still can make a general statement that the decongestion strategy that was meant to alleviate tour operators and tourists’ traffic pressure from the Chobe River Front has possibly not achieved the intended purpose as yet. Managerial implications include improving the use of Upper and Nogatshaa routes by providing better facilities and service to all types of visitors and tourists to make it appealing. It is recommended that the park management should consider devising a strategy to attempt to demarket the Chobe River Front route to reduce visitor pressure, vehicle congestion and alleviate negative impact on animals and associated resources of the CNP.
Full-text available
This paper discusses the future of traditional customary uses of wildlife in Africa. The continent's wildlife is as old as humanity or perhaps even older. Indeed wildlife has through the ages remained a valuable re-source for the African society; both in its traditional setting and in its modern form. While wildlife has some conventional and universal uses to society, there are some uses that are anthropologically unique to the African traditional way of life and therefore warrant special consideration. Such uses, for instance, manifest the inextricable attachment of the African peoples to the continent's wildlife. Indeed there is a crucial link between wildlife and many traditional African cultural values and practices. One way in which these values manifest themselves is through the traditional customary uses of wildlife by the people. These uses are consumptive in nature and largely geared towards meeting the basic needs of humankind such as food, health and clothing. Research for this study was conducted in the Laikipia region of Kenya and the Okavango Delta region of Botswana. Information was obtained by the use of semistructured in-terviews, self-administered questionnaires, focus group discussions, and literature survey. The respon-dents included government officials, NGOs, experts as well as local communities. A total of 44 respon-dents were interviewed from each country, comprising households from the local communities within wildlife areas, senior ranking government officials, leaders of NGOs that actually work on wildlife issues, experts in natural resource management as well as eminent scholars in environmental and natural re-sources law and policy. The study established that these traditional uses continue to be either relegated by modern (or rather Western) way of life especially Christianity or restricted by the laws that are fashioned on American and European perceptions. This state of affairs has been largely engendered by western val-ues as a result of colonialism, modern lifestyles as well as religious transformation from traditional Afri-can religions to Islam, Christianity and other present day religions. Admittedly, traditional wildlife uses are not necessarily undesirable and there is need for them to be recognized and promoted by the existing policies and laws. The paper recommends that African governments should, through their policies and laws, recognize and promote these traditional uses of wildlife. This is one way of ensuring that wildlife contributes to the day to day life of the people. It is only when this is achieved that the people of this needy continent of Africa will begin to appreciate the value of wildlife as a valuable resource to the present and future generations. Notably, the value of wildlife in western societies differs radically from its value in the traditional African context. While in western societies the importance of wildlife is perceived from its in-trinsic value, in the traditional African context it is perceived from its direct uses—consumptive uses.
Conservation efforts are often seen to be in conflict with local livelihoods and resource use - the park versus people debate. Responsible tourism and Ecotourism are often invoked as a third way that serve both ends. Yet do they actually work in practice? This volume delves deep into practice in southern Africa, the hotbed of innovation on the issue, and provides a comprehensive, evidence-based examination of what works and what fails, using a wealth of information from scholars and practitioners working in the region. This book opens with an overview of the issues, looks at what sustainable and responsible tourism are in practice and how they may contribute to conservation, poverty alleviation and local economic development. Part 1 examines policies and institutional activities in responsible tourism by governments, donor agencies and nongovernmental organizations, and addresses the market for responsible travel. Part 2 considers responsible nature-based tourism, the economics of wildlife tourism and ecotourism, transfrontier conservation areas, ecological impacts of tourism and other issues. Part 3 looks at more detailed case studies of community-based tourism projects, and highlights the reasons for successes and failures in this sector. The book concludes with a synthesis of the key findings with implications for policy, destination planning, business management, and future private sector and donor interventions. Published with the Southern African Sustainable Use Specialist Group (SASUSG) of IUCN
There is a lack of consensus among conservationists as to whether trophy hunting represents a legitimate conservation tool in Africa. Hunting advocates stress that trophy hunting can create incentives for conservation where ecotourism is not possible. We assessed the hunting preferences of hunting clients who have hunted or plan to hunt in Africa (n=150), and the perception among African hunting operators (n=127) of client preferences at two US hunting conventions to determine whether this assertion is justified. Clients are most interested in hunting in well-known East and southern African hunting destinations, but some trophy species attract hunters to remote and unstable countries that might not otherwise derive revenues from hunting. Clients are willing to hunt in areas lacking high densities of wildlife or attractive scenery, and where people and livestock occur, stressing the potential for trophy hunting to generate revenues where ecotourism may not be viable. Hunting clients are more averse to hunting under conditions whereby conservation objectives are compromised than operators realize, suggesting that client preferences could potentially drive positive change in the hunting industry, to the benefit of conservation. However, the preferences and attitudes of some clients likely form the basis of some of the problems currently associated with the hunting industry in Africa, stressing the need for an effective regulatory framework.
There is a lack of consensus among some conservation NGOs and African governments concerning the acceptability and effectiveness of trophy hunting as a conservation tool. This lack of consensus is due partly to a lack of reliable information on the economic significance and ecological impact of the industry. We provide a review of the scale of the trophy hunting industry, and assess both positive and negative issues relating to hunting and conservation in Africa. Trophy hunting occurs in 23 countries in Africa, with the largest industries occurring in southern Africa and Tanzania, where the industry is expanding. The trophy hunting industry has remained static or is shrinking in Central and West Africa. A minimum of 1,394,000 km2 is used for trophy hunting in sub-Saharan Africa, which exceeds the area encompassed by national parks. Trophy hunting is thus of major importance to conservation in Africa by creating economic incentives for conservation over vast areas, including areas which may be unsuitable for alternative wildlife-based land uses such as photographic ecotourism. However, there are a number of problems associated with the industry which limit conservation benefits. Several of these problems are common to multiple countries, suggesting that if solutions were developed, conservation benefits would accrue over large areas.
Privateland contribution to conservation in South Africa
  • I Bond
  • B Child
  • D De La Harpe
  • B Jones
  • J Barnes
  • H Anderson
Bond, I., B. Child, D. de la Harpe, B. Jones, J. Barnes and H. Anderson. 2004. Privateland contribution to conservation in South Africa. In: Parks in transition (ed. Child, B.). Pp. 29-62. UK: Earthscan.
The realities of ecotourism development in Botswana Report on the investigation to identify problems for sustainable growth and development in South African wildlife ranching
  • J Mbaiwa
  • A Spenceley
Mbaiwa, J. 2008. The realities of ecotourism development in Botswana. In: Responsible Tourism (ed: Spenceley, A.). Pp. 205-224. UK: Earthscan. National Agricultural Marketing Council (NAMC). 2006. Report on the investigation to identify problems for sustainable growth and development in South African wildlife ranching. NAMC Report, 2006-03.
Review of safari hunting in Botswana: Financial and economic assessment-draft report. Consultancy for The Botswana Wildlife Management Association
  • R B Martin
Martin, R.B. 2008. Review of safari hunting in Botswana: Financial and economic assessment-draft report. Consultancy for The Botswana Wildlife Management Association. 40 pp.
Community-based natural resource management as a conservation mechanism: Lessons and directions
  • B Jones
  • M Murphree
Jones, B. and M. Murphree. 2004. Community-based natural resource management as a conservation mechanism: Lessons and directions. In: Parks in transition (ed. Child, B.). Pp. 63-103. UK: Earthscan.
Sport hunting in the SADC Region: An overview
  • R Barnett
  • C Patterson
Barnett, R. and C. Patterson. 2006. Sport hunting in the SADC Region: An overview. TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa. South Africa: Johannesburg.