A presentation by IIED principal researcher Dilys Roe that summarises the key findings from work on wildlife crime and poverty in Uganda. The presentation was made at an event to launch a report into the drivers and impacts of wildlife crime in Uganda on Wednesday, July 8, 2015. More details: http://www.iied.org/what-drives-wildlife-crime-uganda

1. 1
Wildlife Crime
A review of the
evidence on
drivers and
impacts in
Uganda

2. 2
Evidence Review
Mariel Harrison,
Dilys Roe,
Julia Baker,
Geoffrey Mwedde,
Henry Travers,
Andy Plumptre,
Aggrey Rwetsiba,
E.J. Milner-Gulland
Pro-Poor Responses
To Wildlife Crime in
Uganda
Funded by the UK
Government
Illegal Wildlife Trade
Challenge Fund

3. 3
What is wildlife crime?
“any harm to (or intent to harm or
subsequent trade of) non-domesticated
wild animals, plants and fungi, in
contravention of national and
international laws and conventions”

4. 4
Wildlife Crime and Poverty
Three key questions:
1. Is poverty a driver of wildlife crime?
2. What impacts does wildlife crime
have on poor people?
3. What impacts do responses to
wildlife crime have on poor people?

5. 5
Methodology

6. 6
Nature and extent of wildlife
crime in Uganda
• Most common crimes: bushmeat hunting,
protected area incursions (land
encroachment), firewood collection and timber
harvesting
• “Serious crime”: less widespread in Uganda
compared to many other African countries,
BUT
• “Uganda, Ethiopia and Nigeria rarely supply
ivory from local elephant populations, but
frequently function as entrepôt and/or exit
countries for ivory sourced elsewhere” (CITES
2013).

7. 7
Wildlife crime
Any harm to (including intent to harm and subsequent trade of) non-
domes cated wild animals, plants and fungi, in contraven on of
na onal and interna onal laws and conven ons
Na onal
e.g. from rural to
urban areas
Local
Within ‘local’ community
of similar social status
Subsistence
For use/consump on personally/
within household
Commercial
To generate monetary income or to
be used as currency
Injus ce
Damage caused without material ‘use’, due to
nega ve a tudes towards wildlife and/or
conserva on, for example because of livestock
preda on, crop raiding or social injus ce
Interna onal
To meet the demand
of the diaspora
community
To meet foreign
demand
Pre-emp ve Reac ve
Tradi onal
For tradi onal cultural purposes
NB. Purposes of wildlife crime are
overlapping, so these categories
should not be seen as mutually
exclusive.
1. Is poverty a driver of wildlife
crime?

8. 8
… to provide the
resource they need
… to provide a
subs tute for the
resource they need
… to generate income
to meet needs
e.g. bushmeat,
firewood, land
e.g. grass for
thatch instead
of iron sheets
e.g. mber,
bushmeat
High and increasing
popula on density
Households fail to sa sfy
basic needs, so conduct
wildlife crime…
Environmental stress,
e.g. dry season,
drought, crop damage Conflict
Immigra on
High dependence
ra o and low income
Poaching for subsistence

9. 9
Perceived injus ce leads people
to take ma ers into their own
hands by….
Crop raiding Livestock loss Human injury or death
Inequity of benefit sharing,
including revenue and resource
sharing, lack of employment
Lack of response,
compensa on or support
from authori es
…killing individual
raiders or predators
…killing raiders or
predators
indiscriminately
… disregarding rules
and regula ons of
protected area
Poaching in response to
perceived injustice

10. 10
2. What are the impacts of
wildlife crime on poor people?

11. 11
3. What are the impacts of
anti-crime interventions on
poor people?
• Disincentives – eg law enforcement,
penalties and fines
• Incentives – eg jobs, rewards for
intelligence, HWC mitigation
• Alternatives – eg improved agriculture,
non-wildlife enterprises

12. 12

13. 13
Intervention Positive Negative
Law enforcement Improved local security Abuse of power by officials
Reprisals on local informants
Penalties easier for wealthier to
pay
Imprisonment exacerbates poverty
Revenue sharing Income, social infrastructure,
new livelihood opportunities
Inequitable distribution
Corruption
Benefits do not exceed costs
Regulated
resource access
Access to subsistence
resources
Income opportunities
Cultural traditions maintained
Some elite capture
Reformed
Poachers
Associations
Some jobs
Income opportunities
Loss of access to hunted meat
Conservation
education
Improved relations with park
managers
Improved recognition

14. 14
Recommendations
Different responses needed for different
crimes and different drivers:
• Commercial/large-scale – strengthen law
enforcement
• Subsistence/cultural: improve revenue sharing
and resource access. Could there be a case
for regulated bushmeat hunting?
• Improve revenue sharing so those who bear
the cost receive the benefits

15. 15
THANK YOU
Funded by the UK
Government Illegal
Wildlife Trade
Challenge Fund