Linking Conservation, Equity and Poverty Alleviation Understanding profiles and motivations of resource users and local perceptions of governance at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda

1. “Biodiversity Conservation and Poverty Alleviation”
Linking Conservation, Equity and Poverty Alleviation
Understanding profiles and motivations of resource users and local perceptions
of governance at Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda
Mariel Harrison
Imperial College London

2. A brief history…
1992 – Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
2000 – Millennium Development Goals
“Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger”
“Ensure environmental sustainability”
2003 – IUCN World Parks Congress
“protected areas should strive to contribute to
poverty reduction at the local level, and at the
very minimum must not contribute to or
exacerbate poverty”
2010 – UN General Assembly
“Preserving biodiversity is inseparable from the
fight against poverty”
2011-2020 Strategic Plan for the CBD
encourages the support of “initiatives on the
role of protected areas in poverty alleviation”

3. Bwindi Impenetrable National Park
Gazetted as a:
• Forest Reserve 1932
• Game Reserve 1961
• National Park 1991
Covers 330.8 km2
Half the world’s population of
mountain gorillas (CR)
Border is densely populated, over
300 people per km2
>95% rely on subsistence farming
Conflict between Park and people

4. Integrated Conservation and
Development
Great investment and many ICDS, including
the Multiple Use Program (MUP)…
… The mountain gorilla population is
increasing…
… But the greatest threat is
poaching, which still
continues…

5. Unauthorised resource use
Increase law enforcement
Improve Integrated
Conservation and Development
? ?
Less unauthorised activity
Reduced threats to Bwindi and gorillas
Aim: to improve the effectiveness of conservation interventions by understanding
• who continues with unauthorised resource use and why, despite ICD and
law enforcement?
• how to govern and implement ICD in a suitable manner

6. Mixed methods
Household survey
Unmatched count technique (UCT)
Focus group discussions
Who?
What?
Why?
How?
Type of resource user n
Authorised (ARU) 72
Unauthorised (URU) 53
Baseline sample 240

7. Who extracts resources?
Compared to ARUs and the baseline sample, URUs:
• are poorer,
• live closer to the Park boundary,
• are more likely to live further from trading centers
Both ARUs and URUs have larger family sizes.
ARU Baseline URU
Basic Necessities Survey Score
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
ARU Baseline URU
Distance from Park boundary (km)
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2
ARU Baseline URU
Household size
0 2 4 6 8
ARU Baseline URU
Proportion living over 1 hour from center
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
ARU Baseline URU
Proportion living over 1 hour from center
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

8. What resources, and why?
Bushmeat Firewood Medicine Honey Poles
Proportion of population engaged in resource use
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
…because they lack
food, some get it to sell,
and some get it because
In the villages, there is a
…all the medicines are in
the forest, so people go
there collect them.
The land is scarce… We
have no where to grow
it treats worms
trees for firewood
poles… so you find them
going to get them from
They don’t grow in
villages.
There is no honey in the
communities, so people go
to collect it from the forest
illegally. They eat, and then
The medicine
in the clinics
does not work
the same.
scarcity of building
they sell. It is even
the forest.
medicinal.
You find people
collecting basketry
materials… which are
useful for weaving
baskets and trays

9. People are poor
and / or have negative attitudes
towards the Park
Unauthorised resource use
Corruption
“A person goes to the
Park because he is
angered. He is angry
because he does not get
“People are angered... Those
who are benefitting [from
revenue employment, sharing] so by he
receiving
goats goes to are destroy those who the
are not
living near the Park. People
near the Park (like us) are
denied goats, so we are angry
and go to the Park and poach.”
Law enforcement:
forest.”
arrest, fine and/or imprisonment
ICD implemented:
Receive equitable share of benefits and/or
fair compensation for costs of conservation
No Yes
People are wealthier
Positive attitudes towards the Park
Refrain from unauthorised
resource use
Live close to the Park
Crop raiding
No food, income
or compensation
Poor education
Lack of
employment
Inequity of
revenue sharing
for subsistence
and personal compensation
“When it [a crop grown near the
Park] is raided, you have no
harvest which you would have
taken to market and sold to make
money to buy eggs or meat for the
children. You end up going there
to hunt and get meat from the
forest.”
“People look at it as though
the present management is
not controlling the problem of
crop raiding animals, scaring
them or killing them, which
makes people angry so they
go into the forest”
“Schools have been
built so children
have benefitted and
their parents no
longer go to the
forest.”
“When you have
money, you can just
go across and buy
meat, so you don’t
need to go to the
forest.”

10. How do we ensure that ICD is equitably managed?
Good governance
What is good governance?
When there is collaborative project selection, decision making
and implementation between local people, donors, and
external experts
Does it work?
Yes! People who felt more involved in project design and
implementation perceived themselves to have received greater
benefits

11. Our Aim Our Findings
Who?
What?
Why?
How?
Poor and remote
• Close to Park boundary
• Far from markets
Important resources scarce or unavailable outside the Park
• Meat
• Firewood
1) Poverty - subsistence and minor income
2) Resentment – personal compensation for conservation
costs (crop raiding) and inequitable benefit sharing
• Collaborative decision-making and implementation
• Outreach to remote communities at village level

12. Challenges
Poor, live close to Park, far from markets
Cannot attend
meetings
Involvement in planning, decision making
and implementation
Cannot afford
travel
Have to guard
crops
Not informed of
meetings
Too far to travel
Can we ensure
equitable benefits?
What if their choice of
project is unconnected to
conservation?
How do we monitor
success?

13. Key lessons
Poverty + Conservation + Poaching =
Complicated story
Method A Method B Method C
Who? What? Why? How?
Challenges
Use law enforcement
to record who & why,
not just what &
Whatever you do, do it equitably!
where
Combine research
on resource users
with governance
Aichi Target 11 “… effectively and equitably managed…”

14. Thank you!
Mariel Harrison
Imperial College London
email: marielharrison123@gmail.com
Twitter: @mariel_harrison
Phone: +256 786 71 30 70