Community conservancies and payments for wildlife conservation (PWC) as a coping strategy under different conservancy institutional arrangements

Community conservancies and payments for wildlife conservation (PWC) as a coping strategy under different conservancy institutional arrangements Regina Birner and Philip Osano Enabling Livestock Based Economies in Kenya to Adapt to Climate Change: A Review of PES from Wildlife Tourism as a Climate Change Adaptation Option, ILRI, Nairobi, 15 February 2012

Presentation Outline ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Temperature Change (1970-2025) ,[object Object]

Precipitation change (1970-2025) ,[object Object]

[object Object],Kitengela (WLP) Mara (OOC and Naboisho) Ol Kiramatian Group Ranch Land Tenure Private Private Communal Payment arrangements Public funding Market funding (private investors) Market funding Environmental conditions Governance Intermediary: NGO (The Wildlife Foundation) Intermediaries (OOC): Private company (Ol Purkel Ltd) and Land Committee Group Ranch Committee Landuse regulations Restrictions on sale, subdivision, fencing Restriction on settlements, grazing Land zonation (irrigated crops, wildlife and grazing)

2. Criteria for case studies Olare Orok & Naboisho Kitengela Ol Kiramatian

Introduction Payment for Environmental Services (PES) ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],3. Institutional arrangements

Research Tool: “Net-Map” (Influence-Network-Mapping) ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

http://netmap.ifpriblog.org/ Using Net-Map in different contexts

Step 1: Identifying actors and their linkages ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Step 2: Identifying the influence level of different actors ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Step 3: Using the map to discuss governance issues ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Outside Landowners Naboisho Landholding Company Land owners (518) Narok County Council Community projects NEMA Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife Board of members (23) Auditor Private banks Enkutotos (customary) Local administration incl. police Naibosho Tourism Partners Company Tour operators (5) Other offices issuing licenses (~10) Executive Board (5) Tourists Donors Seyia Ltd. Base Camp Foundation Lands Office Kenya Wildlife Service Insurance companies Project benefits Fines Funds Contracts Licenses Membership Maasai Mara Reservie Manco Naboisho Conservation Ltd.

Outside Landowners Naibosho Landholding Company Land owners (518) Community projects NEMA Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife Board of members (23) Auditor Private banks Manco Naibosho Conservation Ltd. Enkutotos (customary) Local administration incl. police Naibosho Tourism Partners Company Tour operators (5) Executive Board (5) Tourists Donors Seyia Ltd. Base Camp Foundation Lands Office Kenya Wildlife Service Insurance companies “ Balance of power” Maasai Mara Reservie Narok County Council Other offices issuing licenses (~10) 5 6 x Perceived influence on outcome (Scale 0-6) 4 4 4 2 1

Outside Landowners O.C.C. Ltd. O.C.C. Land owners (157) Community projects NEMA Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife Private banks Tour operators (5) Tourists Donors O.C.C. Trust Lands Office Kenya Wildlife Service Insurance companies Motorogi land owners (119) Motorogi Conservancy Ltd. Tusk Trust Northern Rangelands Trust Board of Trustees Guiding School Orpunkel Ltd. (5 directors) Research Maasai Mara Reservie Narok County Council Other offices issuing licenses (~10)

Narok County Council Outside Landowners O.C.C. Ltd. O.C.C. Land owners (157) Community projects NEMA Ministry of Tourism and Wildlife Private banks Tour operators (5) Tourists Donors O.C.C. Trust Lands Office Kenya Wildlife Service Insurance companies Motorogi land owners (119) Motorogi Conservancy Ltd. Tusk Trust Northern Rangelands Trust Board of Trustees Guiding School Orpunkel Ltd. (5 directors) Research Maasai Mara Reservie Other offices issuing licenses (~10) 6 x Perceived influence on outcome (Scale 0-6) 4 6 2 2 1 1

Why is a “balance of power” possible? ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Questions for discussion ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Questions for discussion ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Questions for discussion ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Questions for discussion ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

How do the institutional arrangements influence opportunities to use PES for climate adaptation? ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

Strategies to make PES in conservancies “climate-smart” ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

4. Coping and risk management strategy ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],6) Investments in water infrastructure 7) Social networks 8) Insurance 9) Buying/selling/leasing land Climate Change Adaptation 1 ) Mobility (negotiations) 2) Species composition 3) Stocking levels 4) Livestock market participation 5) Breeding/feeding Herd related Herd related

5. Conservancy Effects: Synergies and Trade-offs ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]

5. Conservancy Effects: Synergies and Trade-offs Synergy: Fencing and mobility

5. Conservancy Effects: Synergies and Trade-offs Synergy: storage and market creation

5. Conservancy Effects: Synergies and Trade-offs Trade-off: cropping and diversification http://www.pbase.com/image/41391886

6. Concluding reflections Public (State) Private (Market) Civic (civil society) Types of institutions Government agencies (local, national and global levels) Service organisations Private business Membership organisations Co-operatives NGO’s PES “Users” /Buyers ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],Public PES Intermediary The Wildlife Foundation (TWF) Civil society Households (participants, non-participants and ex-participants) Individual land owners

Community conservancies and payments for wildlife conservation (PWC) as a coping strategy under different conservancy institutional arrangements

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Community conservancies and payments for wildlife conservation (PWC) as a coping strategy under different conservancy institutional arrangements

Similar to Community conservancies and payments for wildlife conservation (PWC) as a coping strategy under different conservancy institutional arrangements (20)

More from ILRI

More from ILRI (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Community conservancies and payments for wildlife conservation (PWC) as a coping strategy under different conservancy institutional arrangements