Responses to wildlife crime – how do the research findings compare to wider theory?
•
1 like•637 views
This is a presentation by Dilys Roe, biodiversity team leader of the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). It compares the project research findings on how best to reduce wildlife crime in Uganda, to international work on engaging with local communities to reduce wildlife crime. The project is the three-year project ‘Building capacity for pro-poor responses to wildlife crime in Uganda’. Roe gave this presentation during the project’s research workshop, which was held in Kampala, Uganda, on 25 May 2016. More information: http://www.iied.org/building-capacity-for-pro-poor-responses-wildlife-crime-uganda
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (20)
Similar to Responses to wildlife crime – how do the research findings compare to wider theory?
Similar to Responses to wildlife crime – how do the research findings compare to wider theory? (20)
More from IIED
More from IIED (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Responses to wildlife crime – how do the research findings compare to wider theory?
- 1. 1 Author name Date Dilys Roe, IIED Responses to wildlife crime – how do the research findings compare to wider theory?
- 2. 2 Current responses to illegal wildlife trade Law enforcement Reducing demand for illegal products Supporting communities and livelihoods
- 3. 3 Steadily growing political momentum African Elephant Summit (2013) Engage communities living with elephants as active partners in their conservation London Declaration (2014) Increase capacity of local communities to pursue sustainable livelihood opportunities and eradicate poverty Work with, and include local communities in, establishing monitoring and law enforcement networks in areas surrounding wildlife Kasane Declaration (2015) Promote the retention of benefits from wildlife resources by local people where they have traditional and/or legal rights over these resources. We will strengthen policy and legislative frameworks needed to achieve this, reinforce the voice of local people as key stakeholders and implement measures which balance the need to tackle the illegal wildlife trade with the needs of communities, including the sustainable use of wildlife.
- 4. 4 …. continues Brazzaville Declaration (2015) Recognize the rights and increase the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the planning, management and use of wildlife through sustainable use and alternative livelihoods and strengthen their ability to combat wildlife crime. UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 69/314 on Tackling Illicit Trafficking In Wildlife (2015) Strongly encourages Member States to support,, the development of sustainable and alternative livelihoods for communities affected by illicit trafficking in wildlife and its adverse impacts, with the full engagement of the communities in and adjacent to wildlife habitats as active partners in conservation and sustainable use, enhancing the rights and capacity of the members of such communities to manage and benefit from wildlife and wilderness; … Sustainable Development Goal 15 (2015) “increase the capacity of local communities to pursue sustainable livelihood opportunities”
- 5. 5 A SOLID POLICY PLATFORM African Elephant Summit (2013) London Declaration (2014) Kasane Declaration (2015) Brazzaville Declaration (2015) UNGA Resolution 69/314 SDG Target 15.c ENGAGEMENT OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES IN COMBATTING IWT BUT HOW CAN WE DELIVER IT ON THE GROUND?
- 6. DEVELOPING A THEORY OF CHANGE FOR ENGAGING COMMUNITIES IN TACKLING IWT Developed by IIED, IUCN, CEED (UQ) and TRAFFIC Discussed and refined at an international symposium Published for consultation as a discussion paper Undergoing field testing in Kenya
- 7. A. Strengthening disincentives for illegal behaviour B. Increasing incentives for stewardship C. Decreasing costs of living with wildlife (reduce incentive for illegal behaviour) D. Supporting non wildlife- related livelihoods/economic development (De-coupling people from wildlife) Strengthen Enabling Conditions Support institutional framework to enforce against IWT Buildcommunity capacity Strengthencommunity engagementin enforcement Startactivities to generate Financialbenefits fromwildlife Decreasehuman-wildlifeconflict Buildcommunity capacity to benefit fromwildlife Buildcapacity for livelihoods alternativeto wildlife Develop existingor novel livelihoodswhich are alternativeto wildlife Better trained and better equippedlocal rangers and community guards Stronger collaboration betweenlocal community and rangers and other enforcement agencies Communities perceive non-financial benefits from wildlife – e.g. pride, sense of ownership Communities perceive and receive financial and non- financial benefits (e.g. meat, pride, sense of ownership) from wildlife – e.g. Communities are more empoweredto manage and benefit from wildlife Costs to communities imposed by presence of wildlife are reduced More empowered communities have a greater diversity of livelihood options Stronger action becomes possible against poachers Communities value wildlife more Increased incentive to protect wildlife Decreased incentive to tacitly or actively support poaching it Communities can mitigate conflict better Decreased antagonism toward wildlife Stronger action against poachers from outside community Stronger action against poachers from within the community Reducedpoaching by community Reducedpoaching from outside of community ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACT Communities less dependant on IWT as a source of revenue ENABLING ACTIONS Fightcorruption andstrengthen governance More empowered communities create positive pressure, drawing people away from illegal or corrupt activities, particularly unemployed youth Increaseperceived fairness of wildlifelaws Strengthen laws for community managementof and benefitfromwildlife
- 8. ULTIMATE IMPACT: Decreased pressure on wildlife from illegal wildlife trade PRIMARY OUTCOMES: •Reduced poaching from inside the community •Reduced poaching from outside the community
- 9. ULTIMATE IMPACT: Decreased pressure on wildlife from illegal wildlife trade PRIMARY OUTCOMES: • Reduced poaching from inside the community • Reduced poaching from outside the community 4 MAIN PATHWAYS: • Strengthening disincentives for illegal behaviour • Increasing incentives for stewardship • Decreasing the costs of living with wildlife • Supporting alternative, non-wildlife based livelihoods/economic development
- 10. B B: Increasing incentives for stewardship Start activities to generate Financial benefits from wildlife Build community capacity to benefit from wildlife Communities perceive and receive financial and non-financial benefits (e.g. meat, pride, sense of ownership) from wildlife . Communities value wildlife more Increased incentives to protect wildlife Strengthen laws for community management of and benefit from wildlife Enabling conditions Actions Outputs Outcomes
- 11. UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS • Pathway D • Pathway C • Pathway B • Pathway A State-led enforcement agents are willing to work constructively with local communities Benefits accompanied by accountability and shared equitably Illegal wildlife products are not so valuable that income from IWT dwarfs that from other activities Compensation levels set by government are sufficient to placate the individuals sustaining the losses
- 12. 12 Research Findings • Introduce/expand agri-environmental enterprise schemes • Improve human-wildlife conflict mitigation through 1) increased allocation of revenue sharing funds; 2) village eco-guards • Increase law enforcement
- 13. A. Strengthening disincentives for illegal behaviour B. Increasing incentives for stewardship C. Decreasing costs of living with wildlife (reducing incentive for illegal behaviour) D. Supporting non IWT- related livelihoods INCREASE REVENUE SHARING TO TACKLE HWC AGRI-ENV ENTERPRISE SCHEMES Stronger action becomes possible ainst poachers Communities value wildlife more Increased incentive to protect wildlife Decreased incentive to tacitly or actively support poaching it Decreased antagonism toward wildlife Stronger action against poachers from outside community Stronger action against poachers from within the community Reducedpoaching by community Reducedpoaching from outside of community ACTIVITIES OUTPUTS OUTCOMES IMPACT Communities less dependant on IWT as a source of revenue ENABLING ACTIONS More empowered communities create positive pressure, drawing people away from illegal or corrupt activities, particularly unemployed youth (INCREASE PATROL EFFORT) EMPLOY ECO- GUARDS EMPLOY ECOGUARDS (REGULATED HUNTING)
- 14. 14 Next steps for Uganda Pathways will work differently in different contexts Key for Uganda is to understand the conditions under which these approaches will and will not work - do they require a major policy change? Do they require a change in budget allocations? How do we bring about that change? Who will bring about that change