Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Session6 02 Margaret Wachu Gichuhi

66 views

Published on

Presentation made at the Sustainable Tourism in Small Island Developing States conference, 23-24 November 2017, Seychelles. A partnership of the Seychelles Sustainable Tourism Foundation, IUCN WCPA Tourism and Protected Areas Specialist Group, University of Seychelles, Paris Tourism Sorbonne (IREST), and Global Sustainable Tourism Council.

Published in: Travel
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Session6 02 Margaret Wachu Gichuhi

  1. 1. Benefits and Costs Experienced by Communities living next to Amboseli National Park and Kimana Conservancy in Kenya Dr. Margaret Wachu Gichuhi Research Fellow (Environment & Climate Change) Email: mgichuhi@jkuat.ac.ke Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, P.O BOX 62000- 00200,Nairobi,Kenya.
  2. 2. • 8% of Kenya’s biodiversity is conserved through National Parks (NP), Reserves and Sanctuaries • Conservation areas serve as; breeding grounds, wildlife dispersal areas and corridors protected area buffer zones, eco-tourism and recreation facilities habitats for wildlife and endemic species, education and research • Communities’ negative perception of conservation areas is due to human-wildlife conflicts and the need to share resources equitably • Amboseli National Park and Kimana Community Conservancy are located in Rift Valley Province, Loitokitok District, Kenya Burning Issue: Linking Conservation to Community Benefits
  3. 3. • Swamps and riverine areas are suitable for agriculture; the range is suitable for wildlife and pastoralism • Kimana area has been used by the Maasai pastoral community to graze their livestock on a communal basis • Non-maasai migrants have permanent agricultural fields around the Ranch’s important wetland areas leading to conflict over water • The aim is to assess the benefits of involving community members in the management of Amboseli National Park and Kimana Conservancy • The specific objectives are; to analyze the public benefits and costs associated with the conservation area • Secondly, to assess the degree of community involvement in conservation management Contd.
  4. 4. • Primary data comprised questionnaires and interviews for household surveys • Questionnaires for household surveys were close-ended and with checklist options • Direct observations were used to clarify information from the respondents • Most households falling within the buffer zones were interviewed • Random and purposeful sampling was used to identify and select respondents • Purposeful sampling was used where a population was represented by a cluster • Secondary data was also used • Sample size ; Kothari (2004), Amboseli NP (n = 577, n=40, sample size used), Kimana (n = 642.6 n=34, sample size used • Data analysis: data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS 9.0)
  5. 5. Study Area: Amboseli Ecosystem
  6. 6. • The process of data analysis involved checking of erroneous data and making corrections • Variable types were defined, coded data was transformed and frequency tables created • Data was checked using frequency counts, descriptive statistics and measures of associations and relationships • Pearson’s correlation was used to measure how variables or rank orders are related • 34% of respondents living next to Amboseli National Park and 32% of the respondents next to Kimana preferred livestock keeping • 48% of the respondents living next to Amboseli and 50% living next to Kimana owned land individually • 68% of the respondents living next to Amboseli and 68% living next to Kimana indicated that resources were not well distributed
  7. 7. • 34% of the respondents living next to Amboseli Park and 35% living next to Kimana indicated a reduction in forest cover • 49% in Amboseli and 44% of the respondents in Kimana experienced crop destruction from wild animals. • 34% of the respondents living next to Amboseli and 29% in Kimana identified eco- tourism as the main conservation benefit • 48% and 43% of the respondents living next to Amboseli NP and Kimana identified compensation as the best solutions to human - wildlife conflicts Contd.
  8. 8. • Conservancy benefits and expected solutions has a significant correlation (r = .141, P < 0.000, n = 659) at (0.05level) and at 95% confidence level • Type of conflict and conservation benefits has a correlation of (r = 0.201, P < 0.000, n = 659) at 0.05 level • There is a symbiotic relationship between communities and benefits from conservation areas where there are no conflicts • An increase in conservancy benefits such as eco-tourism, community projects and infrastructure changes community’s perception to Wildlife conservation • Type of wild animal attacks and conservation benefits has a negative correlation of (r = -0.118, P < 0.000, n = 659) at 0.05 level Contd.
  9. 9. Contd. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Livestockdeaths Cropdestruction Wildlifeattacks None Human-wildlife Waterconflict Grassconflict Human-human Eco-tourism Communityprojects Infrastructure Business Anyother Compensation Sharingbenefits Grazingintheparks Fencing Problems Type of Conflict Conservancy benefits Expected solutions Amboseli NP Kimana Community Conservancy
  10. 10. • Socio-economic and socio-cultural aspects influenced community’s livelihoods and use of available resources • Benefits received by communities were eco-tourism, community projects, infrastructure development and business activities • Communities that practiced livestock keeping and owned conservancies received more benefits and experienced minimal human – wildlife conflicts • Communities should benefit economically from conservation areas • Frequent stakeholder consultations with communities to improve the governance of resources and increase appreciation of wildlife resources
  11. 11. • Conflict resolution measures i.e sharing of resources to improve the ratings of conservation areas by the communities • Education awareness programs and management plans should be fully implemented • Local communities should be involved in the decision making process. • Resource inventories for biodiversity should be updated frequently • Inspiration: The wildlife conservation areas will benefit from community appreciation of wildlife resources leading to improved conservation Contd.
  12. 12. • Policies on land uses in ASALS to incorporate community conservancies for sustainable use of rangelands • Research on Marine parks and reserves to assess the resources, impacts and community involvement in conservation • Integrate climate mitigation and adaptation strategies in resource use and conservation

×