Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) is an approach used in the management of natural resources worldwide. This approach could promote biodiversity conservation and socio-economic goals if implemented well. However, there is little research involving the reconciliation of environmental and social goals. To judge the effectiveness of CBNRM, six social and environmental indicators were used including biodiversity protection, empowerment, conflict resolution, gender balance, equity, and local participation. Mumbwa and Lupande Game Management Areas (GMAs) were the locations of this study. Data collection included 349 interviews with respondents among whom were 7 chiefs and 5 Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) officials, document analysis, and field observations. Study results indicated that in Zambia, utilization of CBNRM rarely resulted in the protection of biodiversity, neither did it guarantee the sustainable utilization of natural resources and nor offer social benefits previously attributed to it. However, the study established that with proper implementation suggested, desired benefits could be achieved.
Keywords: Biodiversity. Community – based natural resource management. Sustainability. Zambia.
La gestion communautaire des ressources naturelles (CBNRM) est une approche utilisée dans la gestion des ressources naturelles à travers le monde. Cette approche pourrait promouvoir la conservation de la biodiversité et les objectifs socio-économiques si elle était bien mise en œuvre. Cependant, il existe peu de recherches sur la réconciliation des objectifs environnementaux et sociaux. Pour juger de l’efficacité de la GCRN, six indicateurs sociaux et environnementaux ont été utilisés, notamment la protection de la biodiversité, l’autonomisation, la résolution des conflits, l’équilibre entre les sexes, l’équité et la participation locale. Les zones de gestion du gibier (GMA) de Mumbwa et de Lupande étaient les lieux de cette étude. La collecte de données a inclus 349 entretiens avec des répondants, dont 7 chefs et 5 responsables de la Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA), une analyse de documents et des observations sur le terrain. Les résultats de l’étude ont indiqué qu’en Zambie, l’utilisation de la GCRN entraînait rarement la protection de la biodiversité, elle ne garantissait pas non plus l’utilisation durable des ressources naturelles et n’offrait pas d’avantages sociaux qui lui étaient précédemment attribués. Cependant, l’étude a établi qu’avec une mise en œuvre appropriée suggérée, les avantages souhaités pourraient être obtenus.
Mots-clés: biodiversité. Gestion communautaire des ressources naturelles. Durabilité. Zambie.
We are a Chapter of the International Association for the Study of the Commons © 2024 All Rights Reserved
3 Responses
Very interesting presentation. Why did ZAWA establish a community based program if they had not the interest of the communities in mind? Who authorize ZAWA to establish such a program, and why does it continue? Difficult issues, but your analysis demonstrates a common problem in many parts of the world where lip service is done on community participation, without real participation, and I wonder why it persists in this context.
Exactly lip service for sure. Zambia Wildlife Act (ZAWA) clearly emphasises community particpation but this is not properly implemented in the GMAs
An interesting presentation Inonge.
What would be your recommendations on the devolution of powers to the communities?
As part of your study, it would be interesting to interview ZAWA on their perception of the role of communities in wildlife management. Some wildlife managers in developing countries still have ‘fortress conservation’ ideologies.
Comments are closed.