News & updates

The impact of wildlife hunting prohibition on the rural livelihoods of local communities in Ngamiland and Chobe District Areas, Botswana

Originally published in Cogent Social Sciences.

Abstract: The community-based natural resources management (CBNRM) pro- gramme in Botswana was developed to facilitate a partnership between local communities and government for the conservation of natural resources whilst giving local communities usufruct rights to natural resources. This study sought to establish the impact of the wildlife hunting prohibition on the livelihoods of rural communities. Data for this study was obtained through a cross-sectional survey. The findings of the study suggest that the wildlife hunting prohibition which was introduced in 2014 impacted on the livelihoods of rural communities in areas such as employment and income from community-based organisations (CBOs). Prior to 2014, CBOs had found themselves in a rentier-ship status without any direct parti- cipation in the operation and management of hunting safaris. The wildlife hunting prohibition, however, did not void existing leases such as leases for hotels and lodges or other natural resource uses such as gathering veldt products. Since its inception, the implementation of the CBNRM programme had been largely focused on the utilisation of wildlife resources with the result that wildlife hunting had generated revenues quickly and easily for local communities. This paper argues that the removal of the wildlife hunting prohibition should be considered for wildlife species noted for causing damage and/or whose population has shown an increase such as elephant and buffalo. The loss incurred by rural communities from the damage caused to property and crops by wildlife militates against the perceived earlier successes of the CBNRM programme in wildlife conservation and poverty reduction.

Download PDF.

Related content

IWMC Feature

Conservation Influencers

Conservation Influencers is a searchable directory of the animal activist, environmental and ecological lobby. It examines the history, mission, methodology and reputation of NGOs to assess their impact on the global conservation cause.

Franz Weber Foundation

From 1990 until 2015, Franz Weber Foundation (FFW) managed the Fazao-Malfakassa National Park in Togo, which was, according to an in-depth investigation by Duke University, ‘established by forcing the local communities off their land and without taking into consideration their point of view’. That same study cited convincing evidence from reports published in 1990, confirming that competition for land use was already ‘creating conflict between the local communities and park managers’. In 2015 Togo refused to renew FFW’s contract because, the report says, ‘local communities were still excluded from the management of the natural resources of their land’ and FFW had ‘failed to fulfil its contract’. Franz Weber Foundation plays a major role within CITES because it funds and manages from Switzerland the African Elephant Coalition (AEC), which represents 32 African range states, some of which have barely any elephants and others none at all. Contrary to the wishes of the range states in Southern Africa, which manage most of the world’s wild elephant populations, the AEC at CITES’ CoPs repeatedly tables proposals to put all of the world’s elephants in appendix I. And the AEC uses its voting power to keep in place prohibitions on ivory sales and all other trade in elephant-related derivatives, including skins and hair, which Southern African nations wish to legalise.