Community based Natural Resource Management: Impacts and Lessons Learned from Southern Africa Mike McGahuey and Bob Winterbottom USAID/FRAME May 7, 2007

A word about FRAME Funded by USAID to build knowledge sharing networks among NRM professionals and decision makers Organized to facilitate access and use of knowledge about NRM experiences, including: What’s working and why Emerging trends in NRM Innovative and strategic options to address key issues See: www.frameweb.org

FRAME/IUCN Assessments of CBNRM in Southern Africa Launched in 2005 with IUCN/SA and national CBNRM partners to assess approaches for biodiversity conservation and mainstreaming of CBNRM in implementation of UNCCD Designed to improve cross-sectoral information sharing and to maximize synergies between CBNRM, UNCCD, NWP 5 Country Studies: Botswana, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe Cross cutting papers: linkages between CBNRM and desertification control CBNRM impacts on livelihoods, poverty reduction and food security Planning a forum with practitioners and decision makers in the SADC region in July 2007

Affinities between CBNRM Programs and UNCCD National Action Plans Promote favorable enabling environment (policies, legislation, recognition of rural organizations) Participatory, integrated approach with emphasis on capacity building and partnerships Increased management authorities by local communities Support for sustainable utilization and improved management of NR Encourage diversification of income generating activities and increased livelihood security Increasing emphasis on impact monitoring, improved reporting CBNRM: proven approach to deliver results targeted by UNCCD; not a panacea but can be embedded in broader sustainable livelihood / rural development strategies

Impacts of CBNRM on Biodiversity Conservation Significant, positive impacts on wildlife populations following community mobilization for patrols and monitoring, and transfer of rights for increased local benefits and sustainable use 6 fold increase in game in Nyae Nyae Conservancy Wildlife utilization has emerged as an alternative land use (SLM) more likely to prevent or reverse degradation than traditional agriculture / livestock grazing Positive impacts on biodiversity now affecting large areas outside of PA networks (e.g. 11 million ha covered by 50 Conservancies of Namibia)

Impacts of CBNRM on Poverty Reduction Generated significant material benefits although average direct economic impacts per household generally modest Livelihood options and benefits from CBNRM programs can supplement income from agriculture and livestock and reduce dependency on traditional land uses Serving as a vehicle to access micro-credit (Botswana) Contributing to increased food security (Malawi) Non material benefits also very important Diversification, expanded economic options Empowerment, negotiation with joint ventures Enterprise development opportunities Improved relations with government

Impacts of CBNRM on Governance CBNRM proponents served as catalysts for legislation to devolve authority, strengthen local role in NRM Clarification of community rights to benefit from wildlife has encouraged the organization of transparent, democratic institutions to manage wildlife and benefit distribution Community based CBNRM institutions also serve as a forum to reconcile conservation / economic development objectives Functioning CBOs also provide a means for local level implementation of UNCCD action plans Emerging federations of CBNRM organizations increase advocacy / voice of local CBOs in national dialogue

Experiences and Lessons learned from the FRAME/IUCN assessments Programs launched with an emphasis on conservation objectives and revenue sharing from wildlife based tourism, but longer term support is tied to effectiveness in addressing poverty reduction, enterprise development opportunities Economic impacts more easily leveraged in areas with abundant wildlife resources; continuing challenge to generate positive impacts and local buy-in from less well endowed areas Synergies could be enhanced by more attention to information sharing and cross sectoral collaboration with UNCCD, others Continued attention needed for capacity building and long term institutional development, clarification of rights, equitable benefit distribution and facilitation of market access

Summing up… Instead of asking, “How should we conserve biodiversity?”, the CBNRM Assessment asked, “How has biodiversity been conserved?” Major finding: The more that rules for managing natural resources are made/agreed to by local populations and the more they address local socio-economic concerns, the more likely they will be followed and the more likely biodiversity will be conserved.

Looking ahead… To extent this is true, should not USAID be asking about programs it funds: Do local populations participate in rule-making processes and do these rules address local interests?, or Are rules an artifact of an outside-driven project and therefore require long-term funding to enforce? For continued dialogue: please go to www.frameweb.org/cbnrmlessons