Caro Stamm
Lecturer ◊ Best-Sabel University of Applied Sciences Berlin
PhD candidate ◊ University of Lincoln
Photo by Dan Stephens
Photo by macleans.ca
 The three premises of „New Conservation‟ (Hulme & Murphree 1999)
• Decentralisation
 Conservation should move from bein...
Resources CBO
Cultural (people) Accountable
Natural (e.g. elephants) and legal entity
Com m unity
use benefits for
wid...
 Strengths
• Have experience in working with local communities
• Can develop capacity at community level
• Have informati...
 49 semi-structured interviews in
four southern African countries
• NGOs 41%
• Academics 20%
• Private Sector 16%
• Gover...
 Powerful!
• Withhold participation
 Overtly, e.g. boycotting meetings
 Covertly, e.g. apathy, lack of enthusiasm
• Bar...
 Success
• Conceptual gap between implementers‟ and receivers‟ expectations and understanding of e.g.
benefits (example e...
Dependency
Can heavily
expert/expat
led projects be
sustainable?
Sustainability
What constitutes a
successful CBT
project ...
7 stamm updated
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

7 stamm updated

195 views
139 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Real Estate
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
195
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

7 stamm updated

  1. 1. Caro Stamm Lecturer ◊ Best-Sabel University of Applied Sciences Berlin PhD candidate ◊ University of Lincoln
  2. 2. Photo by Dan Stephens
  3. 3. Photo by macleans.ca
  4. 4.  The three premises of „New Conservation‟ (Hulme & Murphree 1999) • Decentralisation  Conservation should move from being state-centric to being more based in society  Conservation rooted at the local level: empowerment and ownership • Sustainable development  Both conservation and development goals at the same time NOT “environmental imperialism”  Two extremes: Sustainable utilization vs. biodiversity fundamentalists • Free market thinking  Uniqueness and scarcity of species will lead to high economic values being placed on them  likelihood of conservation greatly improved
  5. 5. Resources CBO Cultural (people) Accountable Natural (e.g. elephants) and legal entity Com m unity use benefits for wider development goals Governm ent CBNRM policy Donors Development funds for tourism as livelihood option Private Sector Joint Venture Partnerships Bilateral Agreement NGO NGOs 1. Play essential role in formulation of CBNRM policy, i.e. vesting of rights 2. Facilitate drafting of constitution spelling out rights of community and responsibilities of committee 3. Act as advisor to the community during JV negotiations with PS
  6. 6.  Strengths • Have experience in working with local communities • Can develop capacity at community level • Have information about and access to specific market segments • Advise communities during negotiations with private sector • Lobby for more responsible tourism and interests of local communities • Are able to identify and develop alternative livelihood options • May have capacity to strengthen the role of disadvantaged groups  and weaknesses • Lack sufficient business and marketing skills • Lack professionalism in developing tourism products • May offer only limited support due to dependence on external funding • Values may conflict with commercial viability of CBT ventures • Interests of NGOs and local communities may conflict
  7. 7.  49 semi-structured interviews in four southern African countries • NGOs 41% • Academics 20% • Private Sector 16% • Government 15% • Community 8%  Data analysis by means of • Position analysis • Agency analysis  Development of heuristics • Ambivalence and inconsistency • Self-narratives and own theories • „C-families‟: causes, consequences and conditions • Gradual families: degree, intensity and scope • Process families: stages, phases and progression
  8. 8.  Powerful! • Withhold participation  Overtly, e.g. boycotting meetings  Covertly, e.g. apathy, lack of enthusiasm • Bargaining powers  Learnt to tell us what we want to hear  Sophisticated consumers of development projects Passive receivers Comparing support organisations of development aid based on highest perceived value (Self-)constructed Apparent incapability as discourse of dependency actual strategy of „lying low‟ Lack of interest „Wait and see‟ mentality due to experiences with outsider intervention  Powerless? • Passive  Incapability of taking initiative  No local leadership • Disorganised  Inability to plan ahead  Limited understanding of their own responsibilities „Unwilling‟ „By choice‟
  9. 9.  Success • Conceptual gap between implementers‟ and receivers‟ expectations and understanding of e.g. benefits (example education) • Monitoring and evaluation of CBT projects are weak, e.g. quantifying community benefits • Redefining „a good partnership‟, e.g. need to recognise communities as credible partners and no longer as „trouble‟  Participation • Misconception that community members will automatically support CBNRM/ CBT initiatives (collective vs. individual benefit) • Opportunity cost, i.e. the high cost of participation • Tourism favours already existing elites  Dependence • Skills needed locally to meet Western style accounting and administration requirements • Ambivalence of promoting self-reliance and full community empowerment vs. losing control  working themselves out of a job • Disengagement strategies essentially need to be centred on the development agents • The higher the level of local ownership the more support is needed
  10. 10. Dependency Can heavily expert/expat led projects be sustainable? Sustainability What constitutes a successful CBT project (and for whom)? Participation Is active community participation a deal breaker?

×