"Research to Policy: Building Capacity for Conservation through Poverty Alleviation in Uganda", Inception Workshop, 12- 14 July 2012, Kampala, Uganda

1. Research to Policy:
Capacity Building for Conservation
Through Poverty Alleviation
Project Inception Workshop
12-14th July 2012, Kampala Uganda
Day 2

2. Research & Our Darwin Project
Research findings are often decoupled from policy- making processes
This project will change that – making a direct link between research & the direction of subsequent pressures for policy change

3. Research Planning
•This research is to generate new information on conservation poverty linkages in order to better target ICD
•The research findings will be used to produce, through a collective effort, ICD Recommendations
•Its undertaking is an opportunity for shared learning of researchers & policy advocacy groups

4. Important!
This research is a collective effort
These are just our initial ideas
The following sessions are for your input into the design, planning & direction of the research & its outputs

5. Integrated Conservation & Development
•ICD is a tool for protected area managers to deliver conservation objectives through poverty alleviation
•Many studies exist on ICD effectiveness
•These have raised questions about ICD effectiveness in reducing conservation threats & improving livelihoods
•All focus on the need for better ICD targeting by identifying links between conservation & poverty alleviation

6. What is Uganda’s experience of ICD?

7. There is much focus on Bwindi
UNESCO website

8. UNEP / WCMC website

9. Blomley 2010 Key Findings
ICD was important for improving park-community relations
Tended to benefit wealthier community members rather than the poorer households assumed to be undertaking illegal activities
Little impact on reducing threats posed by illegal activities (unauthorized resource use)
As a result - limited effectiveness on linking conservation & poverty alleviation

10. Improving ICD Effectiveness
Blomley et al findings in line with other ICD evaluations
Recommended better ICD targeting
The more that we understand about natural resource users and links between resource use & poverty, then the better our ICD decision-making on how best to reduce conservation threats & alleviate poverty
There is extensive information at Bwindi… so what are the knowledge gaps that we need to address?

11. Understanding natural resource users
We have information on the types of natural resource use during different periods of governance at Bwindi
•Law enforcement data (RBMP)
•Mt gorilla censuses

12. Bwindi Types of Resource Use
Commercial trades & employment: pit- sawing, mining
Trade routes across borders to sell goods including cattle, coffee etc
Source of products that support a trade e.g. blacksmiths
Subsistence: agricultural, domestic
Bushmeat hunting
Specialist: beekeepers, medicinal herbalists, basket makers

13. Understanding Resource Users
We have also information on communities surrounding Bwindi including:
•Socio-economic status
•Livelihoods
•Population densities
•Health
•Costs of the national park (crop raiding)
•Benefits from the national park (ICD)
•Attitudes towards the Park!

14. Understanding Resource Users
There exists good information on authorized resource users
•Resource use patterns
•Group organization & governance

15. Understanding Resource Users
But what do we know about the individuals engaged with unauthorized resource use?
•Who are these individuals?
•What are their motivations for unauthorized resource use?

16. Bwindi’s unauthorized resource users
•What is their socio-economic status?
•What are their income sources?
•How close do they live to the Park?
•Are they affected by crop-raiding?
•Do they undertake resource use for a primary reason or for mixed motivations e.g. use & sale
•Have they been arrested &, if so, what was the outcome / penalties they incurred
•Have they received ICD benefits &, if so, what type of ICD benefits & when?
•What are their attitudes towards the Park?

17. Gaining this understanding of unauthorised resource users is the aim of our research

18. Information Sharing Session
•Aims:
–To identify what information exists on the profiles of natural resource user groups at Bwindi & other protected areas, & where this information is held
–To maximize this opportunity for shared learning
•Session Outputs:
–Building the evidence-base: the start of the literature review for this project
–The foundation for our next session: identifying key information gaps

19. Identifying Data to address Information Gaps
•Aims:
–To identify the data requirements to address the key information gaps identified during the plenary
•Session Outputs:
–A better understanding of our knowledge base
–Key data requirements identified
–Workshop participants help shape the direction & focus of the research

20. Data Requirements - Information Gaps
Working in groups on your assigned ‘gap’, discuss the following:
•What information is needed to address the gap
•What ‘new’ data needs to be collected
•What form should the ‘new’ data be collected in

21. Research Aim
To improve the effectiveness of future ICD interventions by better understanding who continues with unauthorized natural resource use - despite ICD - and why

22. •Who undertakes unauthorized resource use?
Establish profiles of resource users over time
Need profile data: socio-economic status; livelihoods; ethnicity….
•Why – what are their motivations for unauthorized resource use
Identify all possible motivations
Establish drivers of their resource use
Key Research Questions

23. Proposed Methods
•New data collection on URU
Generating the ‘who & why’ data on unauthorized resource users is difficult
Best obtained by a variety of data gathering means & information sources to build a comprehensive, robust picture

24. Ideas for new data collection - overview
•Ranger datasheet to obtain basic profile data on unauthorized resource users
•Follow-up interviews with the unauthorized resource user & comparison community surveys
•Ranger & community warden interviews & comparison local leader interviews

25. Park & local leader knowledge
Ranger & community warden interviews
Comparison interviews with local leaders
Local communities
Comparison surveys
Modified to assess likelihood of URU
URU
Ranger datasheet
Follow-up interviews
Variety of information sources to obtain profile & motivation data on URU

26. Ranger Datasheet
Aim
•To gather basic profile data on URU encountered in the national park – current data
•This will be followed by interviews to obtain detailed profile data on URU
Method
•Design a short datasheet that rangers complete when they encounter URU
Duration
•One year depending on data collection

27. Ranger Datasheet Possible Design
•Sex: male / female
•Age: adult / juvenile / child
•Ethnic group
•Parish of residence
•New or re-arrest
•Arrest outcomes
•Type of illegal activity & location (RBMP)

28. Ranger Datasheet Dilemmas
Advantage – direct identification of URU
•What if rangers do not arrest anyone?
•This will be a biased sample only of URU that are arrested but not of all URU (those escaped; those not encountered)
•Rangers might not complete the datasheet or it might be a burden on their work

29. URU Interviews
•The ranger datasheet identifies URU (or information from UWA)
•This is followed by an interview to obtain:
Socio-economic data
Motivations
Attitudes toward the Park & ICD

30. Comparison community surveys
•The URU interview is undertaken on a random sample of households within the same parish
•The modified interview to obtain:
Socio-economic data
Motivations – (need to establish likelihood of unauthorized resource use via indirect questioning)
Attitudes toward the Park & ICD

31. Interviews
Rangers & Community Wardens
•Interviews on profiles & motivations of resource users over time
Comparison interviews with local leaders
•Interviews on profiles & motivations of resource users over time

32. Research = ICD Recommendations

33. ICD Recommendations
•Aim:
–To plan & design our ICD Recommendations (a key output from this project)
•Session Outputs:
–The planning & design of the ICD recommendations is a collective effort by workshop participants
–An opportunity for stakeholder discussion on ICD improvement recommendations
–Framework established for our ICD Recommendations

34. ICD Recommendations
•Our project comprises a combined programme of research & capacity development for policy advocacy
•The intention is to
–build on the good work in Uganda on conservation & poverty alleviation
–improve conservation & poverty alleviation policy & practice in a number of areas

35. ICD Recommendations
•Our research is to better understand who continues with unauthorised resource use & why despite ICD
•Use this information to
–assist conservation practitioners report on progress in poverty alleviation
–help identify poverty alleviation schemes most effective for reducing threats to gorillas
–agree new ICD Implementation Guidelines for use by ICD practitioners & policy makers

36. ICD Recommendations
The recommendations are to help improve:
•Targeting ICD interventions for more significant development impacts & more effective conservation
•Allocating resources for both conservation & development priorities

37. ICD Recommendations
In groups, discuss the following to report back to the plenary:
•Would ICD Guidelines be a useful output
–Key features
–Media (book; video; presentation; workshop; radio etc)
–Format:
•A list of SMART actions
•General descriptions / intentions
•Cartoons
•What other outputs should we consider