A presentation by Holly Dublin introducing the First Line of Defence (FLoD) initiative, which uses an interactive methodology underpinned by a theory of change approach, to help engage communities more directly in the design of projects aimed at tackling the illegal wildlife trade. Dublin, a senior associate at the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), highlights how the FLoD theory of change identifies four key approaches to effective community participation; this presentation focuses on one of these – decreasing the costs of living with wildlife. The presentation was given at a webinar on community-based approaches to tackling poaching and illegal wildlife trade hosted by IIED on 30 March 2020. More details: https://www.iied.org/iied-webinar-community-based-approaches-tackling-poaching-illegal-wildlife-trade

1. LOCAL COMMUNITIES:
“First Line of Defence” in tackling illegal wildlife trade
Photo credit: Lion Guardians
Holly T. Dublin

2. Law enforcement
along the entire
value chain
Reducing
demand for
illegal products
Engaging local
communities
Responses to Poaching Crisis

3. IT’S ABOUT…
Changing the relationship
between people and wildlife
in trying to achieve
POSITIVE OUTCOMES FOR BOTH

4. The Basic Equation
BENEFITS
FROM
CONSERVING
WILDLIFE
COSTS OF
CONSERVING
WILDLIFE
BENEFITS
FROM
ENGAGING IN
IWT
COSTS OF
ENGAGING IN
IWT>
Photo credits: H. Dublinfrom Cooney et al 2016 Conservation Letters
NET BENEFITS OF CONSERVING NET BENEFITS OF POACHING>

5. A. Increase the cost of
participating in IWT
B. Increase incentives for
stewardship
C. Decrease costs of living
with wildlife
D. Increase non-wildlife-based
livelihoods
e.g. Strengthen
partnerships between
community scouts &
formal LE agencies
e.g. Support other
activities to generate
livelihoods & other
benefits fromwild plants
& animals
e.g. Support practical approaches to
deterring problemanimals at the site
level
e.g. Support interventions to generate
livelihoodoptions from non-wildlife-based
activities
Stronger and more effective collaboration
between well-capacitated community scouts
and well-trained formal enforcement
agencies
Communities recognise and access
tangible and intangible benefits from
wild plants and animals
Communities are more empowered
to manage and benefit from wild
plants and animals
Costs to communities imposed by
presence of wildlife are reduced
Communities have a greater diversity of
non-wildlife-based livelihood options
Communities can mitigate conflict
better
Decreased antagonism toward wildlife
Reduced active or tacit community support for poaching / trafficking for IWT
Strengthened community action against internal or external poachers / traffickers engaged
in IWT
Reduced poaching / trafficking for IWT by community
B-IA-I C-I D-I
B-RA-R
B-P C-P
C-R
E
INDICATIVE
ACTIONS
RESULTS
OVERALL
OUTCOMES
LONG-TERM
IMPACT
Viable non-wildlife-based livelihood
strategies in place & generating
sufficient income to substitute for
poaching income
D-R
F
ENABLING
ACTIONS
Support development & implementation of legal & institutional frameworks for effective & fair wildlife protection & management
Build community capacity and institutions
Fight corruption and strengthen governance
Analyze to better understand the differences in accrual of costs and benefits at the individual vs. community level.
PATHWAY
OUTCOMES
Formal and traditional disincentive
mechanisms are strengthened, socially
acceptable, and applied
Social norms effectively imposed on
individuals engaged in poaching /
trafficking for IWT
Communities value wild plants and
animals more as a result of increased
benefits
Reduced recruitment of community members by poachers / traffickers
engaged in IWT
e.g. Strengthentraditional
sanctions protecting wild
plants & animals
e.g. Recognise & profile
effectivecommunity
approaches against
poaching / trafficking for
IWT
e.g. Support insurance,
compensation or offset
schemes that reduce the
cost of living withwildlife
CROSS-CUTTING
OUTCOMES
e.g. Train & equip
community members to
act as effectivelaw
enforcement partners
e.g. Train & equipformal
LE agents to act as
effectiveLE partners w/
communities
e.g. Support / reinvigorate
traditionalvalues around
wild plants & animals
Reduced poaching / trafficking for IWT by outsiders
e.g. Support land use
planning that reduces
the human-wildlife
interface
e.g. Generate / support
paid jobs for local
people as community
scouts

6. DECREASED PRESSURE ON SPECIES FROM
ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE
.
Four Primary Pathways
A.
Increase
costs of
participating
in IWT
C.
Decrease
costs of
living with
wildlife
D.
Increase
non-wildlife-
based
livelihoods
B.
Increase
incentives
for
stewardship

7. FOR EACH PATHWAY
ENABLING ACTIONS
INTERVENTIONS
OUTPUTS
PRIMARY OUTCOMES
ASSUMPTIONS
ASSUMPTIONS
ASSUMPTIONS
INTERIM OUTCOMES
ASSUMPTIONS

8. DECREASED PRESSURE ON SPECIES FROM
ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE
.
Four Primary Pathways
A.
Increase
costs of
participating
in IWT
C.
Decrease
costs of
living with
wildlife
D.
Increase
non-wildlife-
based
livelihoods
B.
Increase
incentives
for
stewardship

9. PATHWAY C - DECREASING COSTS OF
LIVING WITH WILDLIFE
Decrease human-wildlife conflict
Costs to communities
imposed by presence
of wildlife are
reduced
Communities can
mitigate conflict
better
Decreased antagonism toward wildlife
e.g. There is a functioning and equitable distribution mechanism
for compensation payments for wildlife damage, e.g. money is
not subject to elite capture and corruption.
Communities who experience a decreased cost of living with
wildlife have a decreased incentive to actively or tacitly support
IWT and are more willing to stand up to it.
Communities who are better able to mitigate wildlife conflict feel
decreased antagonism towards wildlife.
Reduced active or tacit
support for poaching
Reduced poaching
Stronger action against
poachers from within and
outside the community

10. PATHWAY C - DECREASING COSTS OF
LIVING WITH WILDLIFE
Reduce the human-wildlife interface
Costs to
communities
imposed by
presence of wildlife
are reduced
Competition for
land between
wildlife and
livestock reduced
Decreased antagonism toward
wildlife
e.g. Competition for land (grazing) is the major factor
affecting the co-existence of wildlife and livestock
Communities who experience a decreased cost of living
with wildlife have a decreased incentive to actively or
tacitly support IWT and are more willing to stand up to it.
Communities who are physically separated from wildlife
feel no need to eliminate it in order to reduce
competition with livestock
Wildlife becomes an economically
viable land use option
Reduced poaching
Reduced conflict
killing
Reduced physical
demarcation of
land
Reduced
immigration
Reduced grazing

11. Costs to communities
imposed by presence of
wildlife are reduced
Communities can
mitigate conflict better
Decreased antagonism toward
wildlife
Reduced active or tacit
support for poaching
Reduced poaching
Stronger action against
poachers from within and
outside the community
Decrease human-wildlife conflict Reduce the human-wildlife interface
Costs to communities
imposed by presence
of wildlife are
reduced
Decreased antagonism toward
wildlife
Wildlife becomes an economically
viable land use option
Reduced
poaching
Reduced
conflict
killing
Reduced
physical
demarcation of
land
Reduced
immigration
Reduced
grazing
Competition for
land between
wildlife and livestock
reduced

12. T
O
O
L
S

14. 1. Many projects to date have failed to stem HWC or IWT
Resulting in flawed assumptions
Leading to sometimes deeply flawed Theories of Change underpinning project design
No engagement with communities from the start

15. DECREASED PRESSURE ON SPECIES FROM
ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE
.
Four Primary Pathways
A.
Increase
costs of
participating
in IWT
C.
Decrease
costs of
living with
wildlife
D.
Increase
non-wildlife-
based
livelihoods
B.
Increase
incentives
for
stewardship

16. DECREASED PRESSURE ON SPECIES FROM
ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE
.
Four Primary Pathways
A.
Increase
costs of
participating
in IWT
C.
Decrease
costs of
living with
wildlife
D.
Increase
non-wildlife-
based
livelihoods
B.
Increase
incentives
for
stewardship

17. DECREASED PRESSURE ON SPECIES FROM
ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE
.
Four Primary Pathways
A.
Increase
costs of
participating
in IWT
C.
Decrease
costs of
living with
wildlife
D.
Increase
non-wildlife-
based
livelihoods
B.
Increase
incentives
for
stewardship

18. Pathways B and C – increase incentives for stewardship and decrease costs of
living with wildlife –> increases the net benefits of conservation
NET BENEFITS OF POACHINGNET BENEFITS OF CONSERVING
(including the costs of HWC) >
2. “Solving the Basic Equation” is fundamental

19. 3. Basics characteristics of benefits
• Must accrue where costs are
incurred
• Revenues earned from exercising
rights should be as close to 100%
as possible
• Must be equitably shared
• Corruption and elite capture must
be minimized
• Must be linked to accountability
for demonstrated stewardship of
wildlife

20. 3. It is not just about benefits but also about reducing costs
• Even where benefits are
accrued communities do not
tolerate continued conflict well
• In some cases communities
may rely on local mitigation
effort, which may not be
adequate
• In other cases communities
may prefer physical separation
but this can cause other
ecological impacts

21. 4. Empowering communities and reducing the
cost of living with wildlife can have much
broader conservation benefits
Habitat loss and degradation remains primary threat even for
many species threatened by HWC and IWT…
…reducing retaliatory killing for human-
wildlife conflict also important

22. 5. Community-based approaches can build support for
wildlife as a land use and tolerance for the negative impacts
of living with wildlife more broadly

23. Biodiversity
Keywords:
Wildlife trade, wildlife crime, community
conservation
Briefing
Policy
pointers
Fighting wildlife crime,
including illegal trade in
wildlife commodities,
is high on the political
agenda and has attracted
hundreds of millions of
dollars of investment
because of its implications
for conservation, local
economic development
and national security.
The role of local
communities that live
alongside wildlife has
largely been overlooked or
neglected in international
efforts to combat illegal
wildlife trade.
Law enforcement has
intensified and militarised
in response to poaching
and illegal trade. The
unintended side effects
include negative social
impacts on communities
and proliferation of
small arms.
Neither law enforcement
nor community
conservation is likely to be
a sufficient solution on its
own. Respectful
partnerships between
both groups are key to
halting the unsustainable
and illegal trade in wildlife
saving species while
securing human
livelihoods into the future.
Beyondenforcement:
engagingcommunities
in tacklingwildlifecrime
Alarming rises in illegal wildlife trade over the last decade show that
tougher law enforcement is not enough to stop poachers from devastating
populations of iconic or endangered species.However,the trend towards
increasingly militarised law enforcement can harm communities who live
alongside wildlife and have real power to protect it.A recent symposium
led by IUCN’s Sustainable Use and Livelihoods (SULi) Specialist Group,
along with IIED and other partners,discussed the incentives and
governance structures needed to effectively engage local people in
wildlife conservation.Local people must be allowed to benefit from
conservation efforts and be supported by responsive,efficient law
enforcement agencies as equal partners in the fight against wildlife crime.
Illegal wildlife trade is at the top of the
international conservation agenda.A surge in
poaching is now ravaging populations of iconic
animals such as rhinos and elephants —
for example,poaching of rhinos in South Africa
increased from 13 in 2007 to over 1,200
in 2014.1
A host of lesser-known species
of wildlife2
are also being hard hit,such as
pangolins,turtles,fish,birds,reptiles,primates,
medicinal plants and timber species.The global
policy response has emphasised three broad
strategies: increase law enforcement,reduce
demand and engage local communities.3
Governments and international agencies have
increasinglyrecognised the role of indigenous
peoples and local communities4
in the
governance of natural resources,including
illegallytraded species.Yet this role has largely
been overlooked in discussions of how to
respond urgentlyto the current spate of poaching
and illegal wildlife trade.Interventions in countries
where wildlife is poached have,to date,placed far
greater emphasis on intensified law enforcement
than on community-based approaches.5
Even where community-based programmes have
attracted support,theyhave often focused on
developing alternative livelihoods and in some
cases reducing the cost of living with wildlife.
Rarelyhave initiatives engaged directlyand
effectivelywith communities to address wildlife
crime,or increased the incentives for local people
to steward and sustainablymanage wildlife.
What’swrongwith enforcement?
Law enforcement6
is a critical ingredient of
successful conservation.Indeed,beyond formal
legal systems,local people themselves have a
wide range of social and cultural norms and
values by which they regulate their own natural
resource use.Current enforcement approaches
Issue date
April 2015
Download the pdf at http:// pubs.iied.org/ 17293IIED
Discussion Paper
August 2015
Biodiversity;
Natural resource management
Keywords:
Wildlife crime, illegal wildlife trade, community-based
approaches, livelihoods, theory of change
Engaginglocal
communitiesin
tacklingillegal
wildlifetrade
Can a‘Theoryof Change’help?
Duan Biggs, Rosie Cooney, Dilys Roe,
Holly Dublin, James Allan, Dan Challender
and Diane Skinner
www.iucn.org/flod

24. THANK YOU!
www.iucn.org/flod
Photo Credit: Lions Guardians