Community Based Conservancies: Prospects for Research and Action

Community based conservancies (CBCs) are promoted as solutions to the large-scale changes that are occurring in rangelands. CBCs represent fundamental transformations in land use across savanna systems, the ultimate goal of... [ view full abstract ]

Community based conservancies (CBCs) are promoted as solutions to the large-scale changes that are occurring in rangelands. CBCs represent fundamental transformations in land use across savanna systems, the ultimate goal of which is to simultaneously enhance human livelihoods and conserve biodiversity through conservation-development initiatives. CBCs gained popularity in the late 1980s and early 1990s due to failures in traditional ‘fortress conservation’ tactics, and are unique in the sense that decision-making is devolved to NGOs representing local communities, the communities themselves or private individuals. However, instances of success in establishing win-win scenarios of development and conservation are rare. Efforts to monitor and evaluate the outcomes of such initiatives are piecemeal. Preliminary results of a meta-synthesis of outcomes of CBCs across Africa, (n=40) we find that the majority of cases (29) look solely at social measures, eight attempt to address both social and ecological measures and three look only at ecological measures. Over half are qualitative measures (23), 11 are quantitative and six use a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. The majority of cases do not discuss long-term monitoring plans. Half of the cases find positive or a mix of positive and neutral effects. This analysis shows that most analyses of community-based initiatives are incomplete, in that they do not address the biophysical and social outcomes of projects. There is a clear need for social-ecological research on both the processes of governance within and between conservancies, and their goals and outcomes. But for change towards biodiversity conservation and human well-being to occur on the ground now there must also be science and other knowledge(s) co-mingled, discussed and learned from. We envision a transparent Knowledge Network (KN) for learning through action for managers, herders, policy makers, academics, and the general public to improve decisions through effective communication from the voices working on and in conservancies. There are multiple knowledges based on age, gender, languages, ethnicity, social networks, economic sectors, government levels that can play important roles within a KN.