Best Practices in Botswana for the Management of Natural … · 2013-09-12 · 4 Best Practices in...

CBNRM Support ProgrammeOccasional Paper No. 17

Best Practices in Botswana for the Management of Natural

Resources by Communities

B. Buzwani, T. Setlhogile, J. Arntzen and F. Potts

1 7

Best Practices in Botswana for the Management of Natural Resources 2

Published by: IUCN CBNRM Support Programme

Funded by: UNDP / GoB Environment Support Programme and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)

Copyright: © 2007 IUCN – The World Conservation Union

This publication may be reproduced in whole or part and in any form foreducation or non-profit uses, without special permission from the copyright holders, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. IUCN, UNDP, Government of Botswana (Ministry of Environment, Wildlife and Tourism) and WWF would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication which uses this publication as a source.

No use of this publication may be made for resale or other commercial purpose without the prior written permission of IUCN, GoB (MEWT), UNDP and WWF.

Citation: B. Buzwani, T. Setlhogile, J. Arntzen and F. Potts, 2007. Best Practices inBotswana for the Management of Natural Resources by Communities

Editor: Brigitte Schuster

ISBN: 978-99912-598-0-2

Cover design by: Herre MethorstLayout by: Bay Publishing (Pty) Ltd, GaboronePrinted by: Printing and Publishing Company Botswana, Gaborone, 2007

Available from: IUCN Botswana/CBNRM Support Programme Private Bag 00300GaboroneBotswana Tel / fax: (267) 3971584E-mail: [email protected]://www.iucnbot.bwE-mail: [email protected]://www.cbnrm.bw

Opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the views of IUCN, Governmentof Botswana, UNDP or WWF.

Foreword 3

Since the introduction of CBNRM in Botswanain 1989 by the USAID-funded NaturalResources Management Project (NRMP) (1989-1999) located within the Department ofWildlife and National Parks (DWNP), there hasbeen a mushrooming of CBNRM projects.According to the 2006 CBNRM Status Report,135,000 people in 94 CBOs spread over almost150 villages and 10 districts are currentlyinvolved in CBNRM. The 2006 CBNRM StatusReport further indicates that CBOs generaterevenues totalling P16.3 million fromcommercial activities and an almost similaramount (P16.2 million) from subsistenceactivities.

Despite the promise that CBNRM gives to theusually contradictory objectives of biodiversityprotection on the one hand and income-generation as a way to achieve rural povertyreduction on the other, the CBNRM approachhas in recent years been criticised by manyanalysts and policy makers. The observationby one of the leading architects of Community-Based Conservation in Southern Africa,Marshall Murphree, captures this well whenhe describes CBNRM thus:

“…one where successes stand as islands in asea of initiatives where performance rarelymatches promise and is sometimes abysmal”.

This publication is mostly based on casestudies of Sankuyo Tshwaragano ManagementTrust (STMT), Kgetsi ya Tsie (KyT) andBORAVAST. STMT is involved in concessionhunting and ecotourism, KyT depends on thegathering and processing of veld products, and

BORAVAST (Bokspits, Rapples Pan, Vaalhoekand Struizendam) on the conservation andutilisation of rangeland resources. The findingsare further augmented with a rapid literaturereview. The publication covers three importantspecific objectives: the identification anddocumentation of CBNRM best practices inBotswana, the development of lessons learnt(assessment of strengths, weaknesses, con-straints and opportunities), and recom-mendations on how to replicate the bestpractices.

This document is the seventeenth in the Seriesof the IUCN CBNRM Support Programme. Thepapers intend to promote CBNRM in Botswanaby providing information and documentingexperiences and lessons learnt during theimplementation of the concept by practitionersin this field. Relevant CBNRM-related informa-tion assists in bringing together all stake-holders, who have an interest in what theconcept stands for: social and economicempowerment of rural communities, andnatural resources conservation. The Series isaimed therefore at all practitioners who workwith CBNRM in Botswana, and is intended toprovide information that assists in successfullyapplying the concept. This paper, as well asprevious issues, is also available on the website of the CBNRM Support Programme:http://www.cbnrm.bw

Unopa SikukuGoB/UNDP Environment Support Programme

(2005-2008)

Foreword


IUCN – The World Conservation Union

Founded in 1948, IUCN brings together States, government agencies and a diverse range of non-governmental organisations in a unique world partnership: over 900 members in all, spread acrosssome 136 countries. As a Union, IUCN seeks to influence, encourage and assist societiesthroughout the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of nature and to ensure that any useof natural resources is equitable and ecologically sustainable. A central secretariat co-ordinates theIUCN Programme and serves the Union membership, representing their views on the world stageand providing them with the strategies, services, scientific knowledge and technical support theyneed to achieve their goals. Through its six commissions, IUCN draws together over 6 000 expertvolunteers in project teams and action groups, focusing in particular on species and biodiversityconservation and the management of habitats and natural resources. IUCN has been operating inBotswana since 1984, when IUCN was invited to assist the Government in the preparation of theBotswana National Conservation Strategy. The IUCN Botswana Office was established in 1991.Since then, the IUCN Botswana Programme has been involved in drafting environmental policies,strategies and legislation; formulating management plans; identifying the environmental interestsand needs of the business sector; as well as providing support and capacity building to NGOs andCBOs in the country. For more information, visit the Internet on http://www.iucnbot.bw.

IUCN/CBNRM Support Programme

The Botswana CBNRM Support Programme was initiated as a joint initiative by SNV-NetherlandsDevelopment Organisation and IUCN - The World Conservation Union in 1999. The CBNRMSupport Programme has entered its second phase beginning of 2004 and is planned up to the endof December 2006. This Phase aims to "to create an enabling environment for sustainable supportto community based natural resources management (CBNRM) activities, undertaken by ruralcommunities in Botswana, while maximizing information sharing between similar initiatives in theSouthern African region". The direct beneficiaries of the project are NGOs, Private Sector andGovernment Departments, which implementation, advisory and facilitation capacity will bestrengthened to provide better services to rural communities involved in CBNRM, the indirectbeneficiaries.

Table of Contents 5

List of Tables 6

List of Figures 6

Abbreviations and Acronyms 7

Acknowledgements 8

1. Introduction 9

2. The State of CBNRM in Botswana 11

3. Some Findings from the Literature 133.1. CBNRM Types and Activities 133.2. Results 133.3. Success Determinants 15

4. CBNRM and Veld Products: The Case of Kgetsi ya Tsie in Tswapong Hills 214.1. Introduction 214.2. Benefits and Benefit Distribution 224.3. Natural Resource Management 234.4. Determinants of Success 244.5. Successful Outcomes 244.6. The Future 254.7. SWOT Analysis 264.8. Lessons from KyT 27

5. Hunting and Tourism: The Case of Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust 295.1. Introduction 295.2. Activities and Best Practices 305.3. Benefits and Benefit Distribution 325.4. Natural Resource Management 365.5. Determinants of Success 375.6. Perceived Successes in Hunting and Ecotourism 395.7. SWOT Analysis 395.8. The Future 425.9. Lessons from STMT 42

6. Range Resources Management: The Case of BORAVAST Trust in SouthwesternKgalagadi 456.1. Introduction 456.2. Activities and Best Practices 466.3. Benefits and Benefit Distribution 476.4. Natural Resource Management 486.5. Determinants of Success 486.6. SWOT Analysis 496.7. The Future 496.8. Analysis and Lessons Learnt from BORAVAST 49

7. Synthesis Towards Best Practices 517.1. Introduction 517.2. Summary of Case Study Findings 527.3. CBNRM Successes in Botswana 537.4. Determinants of Success and Best Practices 547.5. Issues still to be Addressed 58

Table of Contents


References 59

Appendix 1: Summary of Lessons Leant and Best Practices from the Case Studies 61

List of Tables

Table 5.1 STMT’s joint venture agreementsTable 5.2 Main activities of STMT and joint venture partnerTable 5.3 Revenue generated from STMT tourism activities 2002-2005 Table 5.4 Revenue generated from hunting sub-lease 2002-2005Table 5.5 Employment generated through joint venture partnershipTable 5.6 Number of people employed by STMT in 2006Table 5.7 Community development activities and expenditures 1997-2006Table 5.8 Community hunting quotas for NG34Table 6.1 Demographic and socio-economic characteristics of BORAVAST Villages

List of Figures

Figure 4.1 Number of members of KyTFigure 4.2 Revenues of KyT 1999-2005Figure 4.3 Profitability of KyT 1999-2005Figure 5.1 Trend in STMT revenues and recurrent expenditures

Abbreviations and Acronyms 7

ADF African Development FoundationAWF African Wildlife FoundationBOCCIM Botswana Confederation of Commerce, Industry and ManpowerBOCOBONET Botswana Network for Community Based OrganisationsBORAVAST Bokspits Rapplespan Vaalhoek and Struizendam TrustBWPA Botswana Wildlife Producer AssociationCAMPFIRE Communal Area Management Programme for Indigenous ResourcesCBNRM Community Based Natural Resources ManagementCBO Community Based OrganisationCDO Community Development OfficerCEDA Citizen Entrepreneurial Development AgencyCEG Community Escort GuideCHA Community Hunting AreasCLO Community Liaison OfficerCPP Community-Private Sector PartnershipCPR Common Property regimeCSO Central Statistics OfficeDFRR Department of Forestry and Range ResourcesDWNP Department of Wildlife and National ParksESP Environment Support ProgrammeFGD Focus Group DiscussionGIS Geographical Information SystemHATAB Hospitality and Tourism Association of BotswanaHH HouseholdIK Information and knowledgeIRD Integrated Resource DevelopmentIRG Integrated Resource GroupIUCN The World Conservation UnionIVP Indigenous Vegetation ProjectJVA Joint Venture AgreementJVP Joint Venture PartnershipKTP Kgalagadi Transfrontier ParkKyT Kgetsi ya Tsie LUMP Land Use Management PlanM&E Monitoring and EvaluationMOMS Management Oriented Monitoring SystemMTC Moremi Tented CampNGO Non-Governmental OrganisationNG Ngamiland NRM Natural Resources ManagementNRMP Natural Resources Management ProjectO&M Operation and MaintenanceO&MA Organisational and Management Analysis ODMP Okavango Delta Management PlanRALE Representative, Accountable, Legal EntityRD Rural DevelopmentSADC Southern African Development CommunitySTMT Sankuyu Tshwaragano Management TrustSWOT Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities ThreatsTA Technical AssistanceTAC Technical Advisory CommunityUNDP United Nations Development ProgrammeUSAID United States Agency for International DevelopmentVDC Village development CommitteeVPR&D Veld Products, Research and DevelopmentWMA Wildlife Management Area

Abbreviations and Acronyms


The Environmental Support Programme (ESP)of the Government of Botswana and the UnitedNations Development Programme (UNDP),commissioned this study by the Centre forApplied Research. The study was carried outduring November 2006 by the following team:Baleseng Buzwani, Tshepo Setlhogile, FrankPotts and Jaap Arntzen. Unopa Sikukuprovided support from the ESP. The report hasbenefited from comments from variousindividuals and from discussions at theNational CBNRM Conference held from 21-23November in Gaborone.

In order to ensure wide dissemination of thereport the ESP teamed up with the OccasionalPaper Series coordinated by the CBNRMSupport Programme of IUCN Botswana. Theseries editor (Brigitte Schuster) has kindlyprovided her time editing the publication.

Last but most, we acknowledge the contribu-tion and opinions expressed by the communi-ties. They seek to develop the CBOs and needsupport. Hopefully, this report will assistGovernment in the formulation of CBNRMguidelines.

Acknowledgements

Through the Environmental Support Program-me (ESP), the Government of Botswana andthe United Nations Development Programme(UNDP) commissioned the Centre for AppliedResearch (CAR) to identify and document the‘best practices’ for the management of naturalresources by communities. The ESP colla-borated with the CBNRM Occasional PaperSeries of the CBNRM Support Programme ofIUCN Botswana to publish this report anddisseminate it to a wide range of stakeholders.The study has three objectives: to identify anddocument best practices in community basednatural resource management (CBNRM) inBotswana; develop lessons learnt through astrengths, weaknesses, opportunities andthreats (SWOT) analysis; and to recommendmethods to replicate the ‘best practices’. Thisstudy seeks to identify and analyse CBNRMprojects in Botswana from the social,economic, environmental and governancedimensions, focusing on their positive impacts.The study seeks to address the followingquestions:

• What is happening on the ground (‘best practices’)?

• Why did it happen (‘key conditions for successes)?

• What is the characterisation of successful outcomes of CBNRM programmes?

• What additional actions are needed?

The study’s results will feed into the draftingprocess of the CBNRM guidelines that willaccompany the forthcoming CBNRM policy.The CBNRM guidelines are intended to be dis-cussed at the National CBNRM ForumConference (November 2006).

The study is based on fieldwork carried out atthe following CBOs:

• Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust (STMT), covering both hunting and ecotourism;

• Kgetsi ya Tsie (KyT), covering the collection and processing/marketing of veld products;and

• BORAVAST in the south-western Kgalagadi,covering the management of range resources through the Indigenous Vegetation Programme (IVP).

These case studies were selected by the ESP in

consultation with CAR. The findings are alsobased on a brief review of CBNRM literaturefor Botswana and southern Africa.

The study was carried out during the month ofNovember 2006.

It is important to clarify some essential termsand concepts. The key terms for CBNRM are‘best practices’, ‘community empowerment’ and‘devolution of resource rights’. Each will bebriefly discussed below.

Hume and Murphree (2003, p.293) offer auseful description of best practice:

‘Best practice’ in community conservation is notso much about transferring ‘good’ experiencesfrom one programme to another. Rather it isabout strengthening the capacities of conserva-tion agencies, communities and programmemanagers to experiment, learn and take effec-tive decisions within the constraints of thecontext in which they work.’

This broad description rightly rejects the ‘blueprint’ model of a best practice that can becopied by other CBOs. Instead it emphasisesthe need to learn, build capacity and networkin order to strengthen all CBNRM projects intheir individual settings. It recognises thediversity in the physical and socioeconomic aswell as cultural contexts and conditions ofCBNRM projects.

Community empowerment is one of the keyterms of CBNRM.“One of the key principles ofcommunity empowerment, in turn a fundamen-tal precondition of development (Sen, 1999) isthat it ‘empowers communities by giving themunited funds which allows them to choose theirown priorities” (Child not dated, p. 30). Givingpeople choice is essential to empowerment andhuman development (cf. human developmentindex of UNDP).

Devolution of resource rights means thatspecific resource rights are delegated tocommunities or groups within the communi-ties. In Botswana these rights always refer touser and development rights, not to ownershiprights. Moreover, rights refer to specificresources, and exclude others. Finally,resource rights are conditional and their size(and value) is often restricted and variable

Chapter One - Introduction 9

Chapter One - Introduction

Best Practices in Botswana for the Management of Natural Resources

through annual quotas set by government. Thedetails of the devolution of resource rights (i.e.community rights) vary by country in southernAfrica.

The structure of the report is as follows:

Chapter Two briefly discusses the state ofCBNRM in Botswana.

Chapter Three highlights the major findings ofthe literature review in terms of CBNRMactivities and resources (3.1), achievement(3.2) and determinants of success (3.3).

Chapter Four discusses the case study of veldproducts CBNRM (KyT) in terms of benefitsand benefit distribution (4.2), natural resourcemanagement (4.3), determinants of success(4.4), successful outcomes, the future (4.5),SWOT (4.6) and lessons learnt (4.7).

Chapter Five discusses the case study of STMTfor tourism and trophy hunting covering thesame topics as chapter four.

Chapter Six discusses BORAVAST, whichmanages the communal range resources underIVP.

Chapter Seven draws together the mainfindings.

Appendix 1 contains a synthesis of thefindings and recommendations of the 2003CBNRM Review.

Appendix 2 summarises lessons learnt andbest practices related to Kgetsi ya Tsie andSankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust.

10

This section provides an up-date of theCBNRM situation since the CBNRM Reviewand Status Report in 2003. It is mostly basedon the draft 2006 CBNRM Status Report,prepared by IUCN.

The enabling environment for CBNRM hasbeen steadily improving. Initially, CBNRM wasdriven by the NRMP programme, a jointventure of USAID and the Government ofBotswana; the 1986 Wildlife Utilisation Policy,which introduced wildlife management areas(WMAs); and the 1990 Tourism Policy, whichintroduced tourism concessions that could betendered. The Rural Development Strategy(1996), the Revised Rural Development Policy(2002), the Eco-Tourism Strategy and thePoverty Reduction Strategy (2003) also providesupport for community-based natural resourcemanagement and development. More recently,the Tourism Development Framework and theOkavango Delta Management Plan (ODMP)promote community-based development andresource conservation and management. Theseefforts need to be consolidated and coordi-nated by the new CBNRM policy that awaitsdiscussion and approval in Parliament. Thenew CBNRM policy provides for communityuser rights for a broad spectrum of naturalresources (e.g. wildlife, fish and veld products).In order to be granted these rights, com-munities have to form a representative,accountable and legal entity (RALE) anddevelop an approved land use managementplan (LUMP). In addition, communities need tomonitor progress and report on it. Commu-nities can sub-lease their resource rightssubject to approval by the land authority.Resource revenues will be distributeddifferently from hitherto: 35% will accruedirectly to the CBO and 65% will be depositedin a National Environmental Fund for CBNRMand ecotourism use country-wide. This will be

a disadvantage for the rich CBOs, but benefitCBOs with low value resources. The TechnicalAdvisory Committee (TAC) will ultimatelydecide on the joint venture partners (afterconsultations with the CBO involved). Thepolicy is general in nature and the forthcomingCBNRM regulations need to provide moredetailed guidance for CBO operations.

The draft 2006 CBNRM Status Report showscontinued growth of the CBNRM movement:135,000 people in 94 CBOs spread over almost150 villages and 10 districts. Only 35 CBOsare active and generate income. The reportexpresses some concern that only half of thecommunities have been involved in LUMP andthat 70% of the communities have difficultiesunderstanding the LUMP. Moreover, 60% ofthe active CBOs have a benefit distributionplan approved by the communities. Asignificant part of the revenues is spent on theoperations of the CBOs. Household dividendstend to be small but increasing. CBOs appearto increase community expenditures. A finalfinding was that youth are generally wellrepresented in CBO-Boards.

According to the draft 2006 CBNRM StatusReport, CBOs generate P16.3 million revenuesfrom commercial activities and an almostsimilar amount (P16.2 million) fromsubsistence activities. Trophy huntingaccounts for almost three-quarters of thecommercial revenues. Ecotourism generatesP3.1 million, gathering veld products P0.7million and crafts P0.6 million in revenues.Ngamiland and Chobe CBOs earn the highestincomes from CBNRM due to their proximity toParks, and resource abundance and variety.CBNRM-related employment is estimated to beover 8,000 jobs, mostly in craft production andgathering.

Chapter Two - The State of CBNRM in Botswana 11

Chapter Two - The State of CBNRM in Botswana

This chapter aims to provide a succinct over-view of the types of CBRNM activities (3.1),results (3.2) and determinants of success andexperiences learnt from CBNRM activities invarious countries (3.3). The results and recom-mendations of the 2003 CBNRM Review aresummarised in Appendix 1. As stated in theIntroduction, the emphasis of this study wason the case studies, and therefore thisliterature review is partial.

3.1. CBNRM Types and ActivitiesCBNRM projects are mushrooming throughoutsouthern Africa. The growth in CBNRMdemonstrates the attractiveness of CBNRM aswell as the lack of alternative rural develop-ment models and conservation strategiesoutside protected areas.

The initial CBNRM projects were exploitinghigh value wildlife resources, mostly throughtrophy hunting and to a lesser extent tourism.However, the scope of CBNRM projects hasbroadened considerably and now includes veldproducts, fishing and forestry (e.g. Botswana,Namibia and Zimbabwe). Malawi forms aninteresting departure as non-wildlife resourcesform the cornerstone of CBNRM projects (e.g.forestry). Moreover, it turns out that CBNRMprojects are particularly successful aroundprotected areas, where they compensatevillagers for land and resource losses andpermit villagers to benefit from the richness ofwildlife resources in particular (e.g. Botswana,Namibia and Tanzania; Ashley et al, 2002).

The CBNRM conditions and details differconsiderably from country to country. Keycharacteristics of some countries are:

• Namibia: conservancies with optional membership and boundaries agreed between communities. Often wildlife/ tourism based, but diversifying into rangelands, veld products, etc. A strong enabling support environment with strong NGOs; conservancies have well defined resource rights and some invest in resourcemanagement, including restocking; continued donor support; strong role for theprivate sector;

• Zimbabwe: CBNRM pioneering country. Resource rights decentralised to District Councils; clear revenue distribution formula; macro-economic problems adversely impact on CBNRM; and

• Malawi: mostly forestry and beekeeping; also fishing and tourism. Most recent programme COMPASS; strong donor support.

CBNRM is diversifying and broadening itsresource coverage. Campfire (Zimbabwe) hasdiversified away from mere wildlife hunting, ashas Namibia’s conservancy programme.Malawi’s COMPASS programme only has asmall wildlife/ecotourism component, andconcentrates on forestry, nurseries, beekeepingetc. Conservancies in Namibia also cover rangeresources, as Botswana’s IVP does, and water.Typical CBNRM activities in southern Africainclude trophy hunting (most important inZimbabwe, Botswana and most Namibianconservancies), ecotourism (important for agrowing number of CBOS in the region), andthe gathering of veld products (low value andmodest revenues). Joint ventures betweencommunities and private companies appear towork best from a community revenue perspec-tive. The lease period needs to be sufficientlylong to attract investments and to developmutual understanding and appreciationbetween communities and companies. Thismay require social responsibility commitmentsand programmes from the private company,the sharing and transfer of skills, and betterawareness and a stronger negotiation positionof the CBO (Murphree, 2001). The partnershipis most productive if it becomes a long-termcollaboration. Countries like Zimbabwe,Namibia and South Africa have documentedsuccessful joint ventures between communitiesand companies.

3.2. ResultsCBNRM project tend to benefit rural liveli-hoods, but in almost all countries householddividends are low and CBNRM offers at best asupplementary source of livelihoods.

Only a limited portion of CBNRM revenues isdirected towards households. Other destina-tions include:

Chapter Three - Some Findings from the Literature 13

Chapter Three - Some Findings from theLiterature

• Operation and maintenance of the Trusts orthe implementing agencies (e.g. District Council in Zimbabwe);

• Compensation of households that have been affected by the natural resources (e.g. wildlife predation in Zimbabwe) or that havelost existing rights (e.g. special game licenses in Botswana);

• Community benefits and projects, especiallyin countries such as Malawi and Zimbabwe(e.g. community services); and/or

• Savings and investments.

It is clear that stakeholders in communities,and the private and public sectors, scramblefor the benefits of CBNRM projects, and seekto maximise their share within the stipulatedregulations. Campfire has employed a revenuedistribution formula to guide the distributionprocess. Clear and transparent distributionmechanisms need to be established to ensurethe proper use of revenues and prevent mis-use.

CBNRM plays a positive role in drought-copingstrategies, as household dividends can beincreased during droughts (e.g. Zimbabwbe),and most CBNRM revenues are less drought-susceptible than agriculture.

High CBNRM revenues are usually associatedwith wildlife resources, especially high valuespecies such as elephant, buffalo and lion (e.g.Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe). Thesespecies contribute most to the revenues.CBNRM revenues from other resources varybut are often modest. Most CBOs, includingwildlife based CBOs, try to manage moreresources in order to diversity their revenuesand to reduce their vulnerability to fluctua-tions in single activity markets (e.g. hunting,tourism, veld products).

Other results of CBNRM include:

• A small reduction in urban migration of youth, as CBNRM projects offer new opportunities;

• An impetus for community empowerment, self reliance and reduced government dependency, as CBNRM projects give communities development and conservation choices;

• Accumulation of community and household assets via CBNRM revenues;

• Both complements to and conflicts with rural agriculture;

• Promotion of more diverse land use patterns in rural areas (e.g. more land for wildlife and tourism) and retaining greater biodiversity outside protected areas (e.g. Namibia, Botswana);

• Development of social capital in the form of community networks and institutions; and

• Greater appreciation of the value of natural resources, a decrease in illegal use, and some resource monitoring. However, few (if any) CBOs have adopted integrated natural resource management.

Few CBOs have been successful in diversifyingthe local economy and significantly increasinglivelihood options. Most remain dependent ona single or a few resources, and have hadlimited success in diversifying Trust activities(e.g. resource processing). Therefore Ashley etal (2002) argue in Tanzania that there is aneed to enhance the CBNRM livelihood bene-fits of households and to shift emphasis fromrevenue distribution to the creation of develop-ment, economic diversification and growth,and conservation opportunities.

The material benefits for individual householdsare modest in virtually all countries and CBOs.However, in countries such as Malawi andZimbabwe, CBNRM has led to improvements incommunity facilities that in Botswana areoften considered to be the responsibility ofgovernment. Households benefit throughsupplementary income and greater livelihoodsecurity, as CBNRM revenues are often lessdrought vulnerable, can be realised during theoff-agricultural season and/or revenues aresaved to provide buffers in times of need. CBOemployees and sometimes Board membersprobably receive the largest material benefits.

Asset formation is an important benefit ofCBNRM, as it contributes to livelihood securityand enhances future productive potential(Ellis, 2001). Assets are mostly built at thecommunity level (e.g. schools, clinics, trainingcourses) but also at the household level (e.g.training benefits). This holds promise forfuture livelihood improvements.

Non-material benefits are important in mostcountries. Communities feel empowered, andgain experience with development and naturalresource management issues and in dealingswith extension staff. Other non-material


benefits include retaining more diverse (non-agricultural) land uses, retaining youth inrural areas, and linking development andconservation approaches.

CBNRM is typically aimed at improving orrestoring effective resource management incommunal areas. While most CBOs fall farshort of establishing common propertyregimes, there is general agreement thatCBNRM provides a better basis for sustainableresource management through people adoptingmore positive resource attitudes (Zimbabwe), adegree of resource monitoring, a decrease inillegal resource use (Malawi), and investmentin restocking (Namibia).

Experiences from most countries (e.g.Zimbabwe, Namibia) show that CBOs are ableto handle resource use rights and the benefitsthese generate. Furthermore, they show thatcapacity-building at community level is a slowbut essential process, without which CBNRMis likely to fail. There is therefore a need forlong term capacity-building and a favourablepolitical and socioeconomic climate. Atpresent, many CBNRM programmes continueto rely on donor support.

3.3. Success Determinants It is difficult to identify with certainty thespecific determinants of successful CBNRMprojects. The analysis in and of the literaturegenerates a number of factors that are likely todetermine the success of CBNRM projects.These are discussed in greater detail below.

3.3.1. Environmental FactorsCBNRM revenues are strongly related toresource abundance, variety and values. Thehighest yields are normally realised in wildlife-rich areas close to protected areas. These arethe high potential zones (Barnes, 1999).Revenues are also inversely related to humanpopulation density - the higher the humanpopulation density, the lower the wildliferevenues are (Bond, 2001).

While most veld products have much lowervalues than wildlife, the advantage of veldproducts is that there is a direct link betweenthe efforts put into collection and the receivedbenefits. Given the lower revenues, there is agreater incentive to produce, but obviously,effort becomes a disincentive if there are othermore rewarding alternatives.

3.3.2. Community Participation,Characteristics and RightsCBNRM projects are more successful if com-munities are truly participating in the designand implementation of the projects. Too oftenthere is tension between the need to deliverand make progress and the slow communitypace of doing things.

A Botswana NGO (ACORD) concluded that“ACORD’s interventions were, to a large extent,dependent on the community’s pace. (ACORD,2002, 6)”. The same sentiment and the needfor true participation were echoed in the IVP:“To attract community participation takes a longtime and much effort but to lose participationtakes a short time.” (IVP draft exit strategy,Kgalagadi, July 2006, p. 12). Thakadu (2004)observes that communities have to be readyfor CBNRM projects and willing to committhemselves. Other community factors includepolitics, cultural and ethnic concerns, andlevels of literacy.

If the constitution or management plan of aTrust is not properly understood by thecommunity (as is common in Botswana; cf.Chapter Two), effective power and control islikely to end up with the Board and not withthe community, and conflicts may arisebetween both, for example regarding tenderingprocedures (ACORD. 2001).

Multiple village CBOs need to carefully balancethe interests and benefits of each village. Inmost cases, CBOs have village Trust commit-tees and an overall Trust Board with fairrepresentation of each village.

It is often argued that CBNRM only devolveslimited resource rights to communities.Communities earn user rights to certainresources, but most rights are temporary andconditional. Typical conditions are thesubmission of resource management plansand transparency in organisational andfinancial management. Harvesting quotas areusually determined by government, sometimesin consultation with communities (e.g.Namibia). If communities do not comply withthe conditions, the user rights may bewithdrawn.

3.3.3. Rent Seeking and BenefitDistributionIn Namibia and Botswana, revenues fromsubleases directly accrue to the communities,which have to utilise and distribute theresources after community consultations. In



Zimbabwe, the revenues accrue to the RuralDistrict Councils. Moreover, Board members,Trust staff and CBO-members may attempt tomaximise their benefits. Rent seekingbehaviour and a fair distribution need to beachieved through guidelines for revenuedistribution, ceilings for expenditures onmanagement and administration, and acommunity-based revenue distribution plan(e.g. through annual meetings). In the longerterm, earmarking funds for investments,savings and natural resource management arecritical to the sustainability of the CBO.

Time requirements and development paceCommunity development is time consumingand progress is often slow. Therefore, com-munities need considerable and specialisedsupport for a considerable time period.

While support from governments and NGOs is often implicitly assumed, partnership withthe private sector has been traditionally over-looked as a means of support (a missing linkaccording to Murphree, 2001).

3.3.4 Economic FactorsThe distance to the market, resource values,the use of market-based instruments and theestablishment of a community-private sectorpartnership are all important determinants ofthe revenues.

The distance to the market determines the netprice and the potential of CBOs to earn money.For example, remote areas with limitedresources may be marginal for CBNRM (e.g.western Botswana; Barnes, 1999). Therefore,the distance to the markets determines theviability of CBNRM activities.

The use of tendering and the auctioning ofsub-leases for wildlife user rights has boostedcommunity revenues in Namibia, Zimbabweand Botswana. The use of joint venturepartners has assisted many CBOs to overcomeshort-term skill shortages (e.g., managementand marketing) and a shortage of investmentfunds. JVPs have often assisted CBOS togenerate employment and income; the transferof skills has been more problematic. Strategiesare needed to enhance the negotiation skills ofcommunities and to develop mutual under-standing and trust between communities andcompanies. Communities need to be clearwhether they seek a long-term partnership oraim to use companies until they can run thebusinesses themselves. JVPs will only invest ifthey can expect reasonable returns in the

lease period. Longer leases are required to getthe desired investments and to developsufficient understanding and trust. Kgathi andNgwenya (2005, p. 76) argue that “CBNRMpartnerships have been mainly in the form ofjoint venture agreements rather than JVP, andthe participation of the communities hastherefore been limited, as they do not do muchafter they have signed agreements with safaricompanies”.

3.3.5. External FactorsWhile communities are given resource mana-gement duties and user rights, external factorsbeyond the control of communities may have asignificant impact on local resource conditions.Such external factors could refer to the con-struction of roads and fences or to settlementdevelopments. Taylor (2006) lists the followingmajor external factors that influence CBNRNresults:

• Enabling or disabling government policies;• Markets for natural resources;• Climatic change; and• Macro-economic performance.

Taylor (2006) observes a tendency towardscentralised wildlife management unless explicitlegislative protection such as CBNRM is offeredfor decentralised management. The case ofZimbabwe shows that poor macroeconomicperformance puts pressure on land and otherrural natural resources, and may have a nega-tive impact on resource markets and revenues.

Donor support remains a typical feature ofmost CBNRM projects and programmes, ascommunities need support. While this hascontributed to CBNRM achievements, it alsoposes risks.

3.3.6. Transparent and AdaptiveManagementIt is important that CBOs address the needs oftheir communities. Invariably, this requiresthat community members receive directmaterial benefits (income or assets), and thatmembers are assisted during hardships suchas droughts and bereavements or are insured.Explicit and transparent benefit distributionmechanisms need to be established and agreedupon with the communities.

3.3.7. Information Exchange and Flows Communities can easily loose interest afterBoards are elected and employees have been

16

appointed. This can be successfully preventedby regular communications and flows of infor-mation between the CBO and their members.This needs to be a two-way process: frommembers to the CBO and vice versa.

Information flows can also be used to developjoint marketing strategies (for example amarketing website for CBNRM projects inBotswana through BOCOBONET).

USAID has assisted most CBNRM programmesin southern Africa at one point in time. Itsexperiences have been summarised in achapter on ‘best practices in CBNRM’.

A USAID manual for development assistancelists the following critical factors in theenabling environment, CBNRM programmeand project management:


Areas Factors

Enabling Environment

Resources and Clarified/ improved land tenure; resource management plans setting limits of resource rights acceptable change; environmental monitoring and mitigation

Community Local community commitment and capacity; social cohesion in CBNRM participation communities

Civil society Experienced NGOs and government partners as well as private sector/ JVP; targeted technical assistance

Economic Access to markets; access to credit; genuine economic benefits to the community

Conditions forsuccess

Resources and Tenure security (long enough); clear legal; regulatory and administrative resource rights framework

Community Right of self definition, legal recognition and exclusion; devolution of rights to lowest level; adaptive management; plans for disaster management/adaptation

Civil society Functional government services; absence of corruption; devolution of land use planning; strong NGOs representing rural development and CBNRM interests; strong involvement of tourism industry

Economic Positive economic benefits to communities

Information and Sharing mechanisms; open discussions through mediaknowledge

Projectmanagement

Resources and Focus on ecologically significant areas with potential economic benefitsresource rights

Community Genuine community participation and benefits; ensure legitimate authority for community organisations; recognise importance of women as CBNRM implemen-ters; development of mutual trust between communities and sponsors; ensure functional literacy of community members; focus attention on project M&E

Civil society Ensure long-term support commitment from donors and NGOs

Economic Identify most likely avenues for economic viability of projects; ensure access to credit

Information and Train community to use IK about local conditions and environmental threats; knowledge access and use of local IK


Some experiences of southern African countriesare summarised below.

Zimbabwe’s Campfire programme

Namibia’s conservancy programme

Malawi’s COMPASS programme

18

• With sufficient devolution, communities can manage resources sustainably;

• Sufficient devolution is essential to increase participation, transparency and account-ability;

• Campfire still focuses on wildlife (hunting and tourism) but is now successfully diversifying into other resources;

• Long-term TA is needed, and is more important than short term consultancy support;

• Projects understate the importance of behavioural and institutional processes;

• Product diversification is expensive and takes a long time to materialise; in marginal areas, the economics are questionable;

• Private sector involvement in projects is highly advisable, and benefits CBNRM approaches;

• Communities are capable of a lot, but do need TA;

• Management authority to be devolved to lowest possible level;

• Communities should retain as much as possible from the revenues and need to develop their own IRD plan; and

• Technical advice is important (including continuity in TA).

Source: Mazambani, 2003; Taylor, 2006.

• Policy and legislation should be based on local needs, be practical and offer a flexible framework for implementation;

• Policy and legislation should allow rural communities the broadest NR rights as possible;

• The conservancy model is institutionally sound (based on CPR) and an economically efficient RD model;

• The conservancy model can cover wildlife, tourism and rangeland resources but there is an advantage in high-value species;

• Hunting and tourism can complement each other as income sources;

• CBNRM structures need to be clearly defined and legally accepted;

• Individual community members must choose to join conservancy and register (with fee payment);

• Community participation is essential for stakeholder cooperation and ownership;

• A coordinating body should be responsible for the national CBNRM programme;

• Activities and tourism development should be based on business principles;

• Support for financial management is necessary to avoid/ reduce financial mismanagement;

• Management authority should be devolved to lowest possible level;

• Communities should retain as much as possible from the revenues, and need to develop their own IRD plan; and

• Technical assistance is important (including continuity in TA).

Sources: Terry, 2003 and Jones, 2006.

Programme strongly supported by USAID grant

Types of assistance offered: small grant forcommunities and NGOs, training of CBOs andCBNRM practitioners, M&E and backstopping,documentation and the dissemination ofresults.

Activities/projects: woodlots, nurseries (largestrevenues), fishponds, beekeeping (2nd largest),vegetable production (3rd), fruit processing,charcoal production, ecotourism. Totalrevenues around US$ 100,000 p.a., mostlynon-monetary benefits.

Impacts: some little income generation andemployment, improved health and foodsecurity. More positive attitude towards Parks(less poaching and illegal fishing).Working group responsible for CBNRMcoordination in the country.

Lessons learned:• Communities seek to combine resource

conservation with better livelihoods;• Community needs, priorities and resource

rights are requirements for CBNRM;• Given rampant poverty, NRM activities that

are simple and cheap have the highest chance of success;

• CBNRM operates for diverse, mostly low-value natural resources; revenues are relatively low;

• NRM needs to be based on socio-economic, biophysical and political concerns/issues;

• Weak support (e.g. extension, policy implementation failures), inadequate targeting and insufficient attention for markets have affected CBNRM; and

• M&E should have been decentralised.

Source: Mauambeta, 2006.

ACORD’s CBNRM support in Botswana(ACORD, 2002)

CBNRM in Zambia


• Need for community participation in the establishment of the Trust and Constitution;

• Need to collaborate with all stakeholders;• CBNRM is a dynamic and lengthy process

that needs patience and dedication. Conflict between community pace and fixed time-frame from extension staff;

• Community needs and priorities are not necessarily synonymous (e.g. ethnicity, youth, welfare, religion);

• Draw a clear line between voluntary work and personal incentives;

• Need to monitor JVAs and skills transfer. The current assumption of communities seems to be that the private company will phase out;

• No clear strategy for the distribution of benefits;

• Multiple village CBOs have special problems regarding the fair treatment of each village; and

• High staff turn-over is problematic.

• CBNRM works for wildlife management in some game management areas;

• Revenues are shared among communities, NRM agencies and the national government;

• Benefits are often small, and benefit distribution is a disadvantage for communities;

• Most benefits are invested in social infrastructure; the low individual returns have perpetuated illegal harvesting;

• Community mobilisation offers opportunities for other forms of local development and governance;

• CBNRM mobilised political, financial and technical support for communities;

• CBNRM has led to policy changes in wildlife and other areas to support CBNRM;

• Political interference and lack of transparency adversely affect CBNRM; and

• The sustainability of CBNRM depends on political, socioeconomic and environmental constraints and opportunities.

Source: Mbewe et al, 2005.

4.1. IntroductionKgetsi ya Tsie (KyT; www.kgetsiyatsie.org)started in 1997 with the formation of smallnatural resource user groups in nine villagessituated in the Tswapong Hills. The groupsthen formed village centres and formallyregistered as a community Trust in 1999. TheKyT Trust differs from most CBNRM projectsin Botswana in several respects. It is notdependent on wildlife resource as it specialisesin the collection and processing of veldproducts. Furthermore, KyT operates withoutexclusive resource use rights; other resourceusers are free to collect in the same area andmay compete with the Trust. KyT is amembership organisation, with a direct linkbetween the efforts put in and the benefitsreceived; members also pay a modest annualmembership fee of P20. Finally, KyT’sconstitution stipulates that women shouldconstitute at least 80% of the membership,making it the only CBO in Botswana thatspecifically targets women.

KyT seeks to strengthen the local economy,based on traditional livelihood activities, byprocessing and marketing plant-based naturalresource products (veld products). Further-more, KyT seeks to assist rural women in theTswapong Hills area to empower themselves,both socially and economically. This is donethrough the effective organisation of entre-preneurial activities centred on the sustainablemanagement and utilisation of veld products.The organisation has the following long-termaims:

1. Skills development of KyT’s members to runthe Trust themselves;

2. Attain long-term financial sustainability of the Trust;

3. Improve the income generating potential of KyT members;

4. Enhance the ability of members to play an active role in their communities; and

5. Manage and use the local natural resourcesin a sustainable manner.

KyT operates in the Tswapong Hills area ofeastern Botswana. The Trust has close to

seven hundred members1 who collect veldproducts, do some processing and have theopportunity to sell veld products to head-quarters for processing (morula oil and soap)or marketing. KyT operates in three regions,twenty-six villages and thirty-two centres.Groups of five members are the lowest level oforganisation.

The major activities include the following:

• Food products (jam, phane and dicherufor cattle);

• Cosmestic products (morula oil and soap);• Herbal products (e.g. monepenepe);• Pottery; and• The provision of micro loans for members.

The Trust has operated with considerableassistance from international donors and theGovernment of Botswana.

During our fieldwork, it became obvious thatKyT is going through a difficult period. Finan-cial problems have emerged due to the dryingup of donor funds and arrears in the repay-ment of micro loans. These problems haveaffected the capacity and activities of theorganisation in the following ways:

• Activities: suspension of micro lending and postponement of the introduction of new products (morogo and mosata atchar, and mophane canning); and

• Capacity: staff reductions, the late payment of wages and a decline in membership (Figure 4.1).

However, the majority of the members, Boardand staff remain optimistic that the problemscan be overcome, and feel that KyT will have abright future afterwards. There seems to be avery strong sense of ownership of the organisa-tion, which can be attributed to the detailedorganisational set-up and institutional demo-cracy and transparency.

The decline in donor revenues is shown inFigure 4.2. Own revenues increased signi-ficantly until 2004, but dipped in 2005 due to

4. CBNRM and Veld Products: The Case of Kgetseya Tsie in the Tswapong HIlls 21

Chapter Four - CBNRM and Veld Products: TheCase of Kgetsi ya Tsie in the Tswapong Hills

___1. Membership has declined from a peak of over one thousand due to the current problems of the Trust and thesubsequent decline in benefits for members. Especially younger members have left KyT.


the financial problems. The major earners forKyT are morula oil and soap (around half ofthe revenues), followed by gala la tswhene andmorogo (just over 9% each), pottery (almost6%) and monepenepe (almost 4%). Figure 4.3shows that KyT makes a loss, even in terms ofown revenues and recurrent expenditures, andneeds to be turned around in order to survive.KyT is not economically sustainable at present.It only covers part of its recurrent expendi-tures, and had to drastically cut wages andstaff and other recurrent costs to survive. Thishas restricted its essential productive andmarketing capabilities, which are needed toincrease future (non-donor) revenues.

4.2. Benefits and Benefit DistributionThe Focus Group Discussion (FGD) showedwidespread consensus about the benefits of

KyT to members. KyT has generated four typesof material benefits for its members:

1. Income from the sales of veld products (some products are sold directly to the market for a better price while others are sold to KyT headquarters for processing or sale). This income is reportedly used for food, school fees, clothing, insurance and for savings and the construction of houses. The cash income is modest and below the amounts claimed by KyT, but valuable given the lack of cash income-earning opportunities and low income levels;

2. Income from the small businesses which have been started through micro lending;

3. Improved food security. Part of the cash income is used to purchase food. In

Note: no figures available for 2000 and 2002. Source: KyT records.

Figure 4.1. Trend in the number of members of Kgelsi ya Tsie since 1996.

Figure 4.2. Trend in revenues of of Kgelsi ya Tsie (1999-2005) in Pula.

Source: KyT records.

addition, members also collect veld food products for own consumption (e.g. jams) and have gained better knowledge as to how to utilise veld products for food production; and

4. Some members have insurance cover through KyT. However some members have stopped their monthly contribution due to the financial problems of KyT.

There is widespread consensus that KyT hasyielded vital non-material benefits, foremostamong them being the empowerment ofwomen. All stakeholders argue that womenhave become more independent and self-reliant, and that their position vis-à-vis men/husbands has strengthened. Membership ofKyT is prestigious, and often leads to electioninto other positions such as positions on theVillage Development Committees. Lastly,members mention the sharing of ideas andviews as a major non-material benefit. Mem-bers have learnt about the use and value ofnew veld products, new production techniques(e.g. jam production) and have become morebusiness-minded. This may generate signifi-cant benefits outside the KyT sphere.

The benefits are distributed according to theefforts put in by individual members. The moremembers sell to the Trust, the higher theirbenefits are. Competition among groups isencouraged by offering an annual premium of5% of revenues to the best performing group.Individual members have the possibility to sell

directly to the market if they are unhappyabout the prices offered by the Trust. Thedecline in donor support has forced the Trustto retain a higher portion of the benefits forthe operations of the Trust, leading to com-plaints of low prices from some members.

Centres also embark on activities, whichgenerate income for themselves such ascatering services, the rental of houses, andcellphone and battery charging. Ideally, theincome is saved at the post office. However,most centres leave the money with theirtreasurers. There have been no reports of mis-use of funds, demonstrating the treasurers’commitment to their trust. Trust funds areused for different activities benefiting themembers.

4.3. Natural Resource Management KyT does not hold exclusive resource rights,and therefore may face competition from otherpossible resource collectors in the area. Thegeneral perception is that the harvested veldproducts are not scarce or in decline. None-theless, KyT has taken several steps to avoidresource degradation. Firstly, it issued 1,500morula and monepene seedlings2 among itsmembers for planting in yards and fields. Thereported survival rate is around 60%. Second-ly, members are trained in sustainable har-vesting techniques, such as digging up only afew roots and recovering the remaining rootsafterwards to avoid damage to the trees.Finally, cases of unsustainable harvesting


Source: KyT records.

Figure 4.3. Financial performance in terms of revenues versus expenditure (1999-2005).

___2. Donated by Palapye Forestry Department.

Totalrevenuesless totalexpenditure

Ownrevenues less recordedexpenditure

practices are reported to the Chief, who takesthe required action. While KyT does not have aresource monitoring system in place, somemonitoring is done through members whenthey collect veld products or are otherwisebusy in rural areas. There is a need to developa systematic monitoring system to alert theTrust and members when certain veldproducts are becoming scarce or whenunsustainable harvesting practices occur.

KyT does not reinvest revenues in resourcemanagement. The tree seedlings were donated,and no other resource investments have beenmade to date. The Trust needs to designate aportion of its revenues for resource monitoring,management and development.

4.4. Determinants of SuccessCBNRM for low value natural resources isoften considered an arduous effort withuncertain results. The KyT experiences alsoshow that in principle CBNRM can work forlower value natural resources subject to anumber of factors that must favour success. Inthe case of KyT, the following key factors wereraised during the FGD: members’ dedicationand commitment, training and education,external financial support, and the organi-sational structure.

KyT has a unique and elaborate organisationalstructure, which has ensured full memberparticipation and could well be the reason forKyT’s proven resilience. The structure ofgroups, centres, regions and Board withheadquarters has ensured a good two-way flowof information, i.e. from the Board/head-quarters down to members and from membergroups up to regions and headquarters.Members feel that they really participate and“own” the organisation. Another advantage ofthe organisational structure is that smallgroups (five members) are effective andproductive, and promote the Trust. Finally, thestructure promotes cooperation and genuineteamwork, which are important components ofsuccess. Members feel they are fullyrepresented up to the highest level of KyT andall have responsibilities. Each group andcentre elects its own officers.

The organisational structure has probablyenhanced the dedication and commitment ofthe members (apart from the fact that benefitsare proportional to efforts), which was men-tioned as another success factor. The fact thatKyT has recently lost around thirty percent ofits membership could be interpreted as a lack

of dedication, but one could also argue thatthe remaining 70% of members are the mostcommitted and dedicated ones. If the latterinterpretation is right, KyT would emergestronger from its current problems.

Asked about the importance of externalassistance, members, Board and staff alikesingle our external assistance as the mostimportant success factor. In the past, KyT hasreceived support from NRMP, the Women’sFinance House, Skillshare, the US Embassyand the Government. This support providedtechnical assistance (e.g. NRMP andSkillshare), equipment, training, and theconstruction of offices and the factory as wellas for purchases of equipment. The technicalassistance and support for capital investmentshave been most important. Technicalassistance has contributed to the developmentof the transparent and democratic organisa-tional structure and for the development of themorula market niche. Most assets have beendeveloped with external support.

KyT appears to adopt a market-orientedapproach towards its operations. It movedfrom early dependency on phane to productsthat have better markets and fewer competi-tors, in particular morula oil and soap, andherbal remedies. Moreover, it promotes com-petition among groups by offering a financialincentive for the best performing group.Finally, it has adjusted its operations to lowerrevenues (but at high costs!). It is hoped thatKyT can escape the current downward cycle oflower revenues and lower expenditures(especially on capital and Research andDevelopment).

The current problems and perceived depen-dency on external support show that KyT hasnot yet reached the stage of sustainableoperation after ten years since its conception.This has adversely affected the management ofthe Trust affairs (fewer employees), productioncapacity (despite substantial export orders toSouth Africa and the USA) and benefits tomembers (reduced purchasing capacity).

4.5. Successful OutcomesThe FGD showed clearly that CBNRM successis not merely measured in material terms.Success is measured as a mixture of bothmaterial and non-material benefits for house-holds.

The components of material success include:


• Higher prices for veld products;• A reduction in poverty, even though the

cash income is modest (P200-300/member per annum);

• Employment creation. In 2003, KyT employed 14 staff members, yet this number has decreased to only three in 2006 (a full-time coordinator and night watchman, and a temporary staff member);

• Income and employment opportunities from veld products. Annual payments to members vary depending on the amount sold to the Trust. Payments more than doubled from P35,148 in 2001/02 to P84,935 in 2002/03, but dropped to P47,000 in 2003/04. Such paymentsbenefit individual families and members;

• Income from small businesses. According to the CBNRM Review, small enterprises weremostly semausas and the selling of clothes, vegetables, cooked food, home-made floor polish, etc. In 2002/03, a total of P278,090in new loans3 had been committed, and the average monthly member’s income from micro-enterprise activities was P200/ month4 (2002/03 annual report);

• Improved knowledge about the beneficial use of veld products; and

• Greater business orientation and improvedknowledge about production technologies and processes.

The empowerment of women and prestige arethe most important non-material results ofKyT. The CBNRM Review found that non-material benefits accrue to households as wellas to the region at large. According to theReview, when asked what would happen if KyTshould stop operating, members in Chadibesimply responded that their ‘hopes would bedashed’. They claimed that it would not makea big impact on their current livelihoods astheir groups were only just starting (vol. 2).

Knowledge about the uses and values ofnatural resources has improved, leading toenvironmental and livelihood benefits.

Gaining business experience can also beviewed as an important outcome. The Boardand staff have belatedly diagnosed what wentwrong, and are now trying to remedy this withexternal assistance. For example, theyacknowledge that the departure of the admini-

strator has weakened bookkeeping andadministration, which are now hamperingrecovery. The positions of Community Develop-ment Officers (CDO) have been phased out,and their role has been taken over by KyT

members. Furthermore, there is a clearer idearegarding which type of external support isneeded: funding, legal advice, financialmanagement, organisational management,marketing and product development.

4.6. The Future KyT’s future is generally viewed with seriousconcern should additional external financialand technical assistance remain unavailable.5However as pointed out above, members andstaff are optimistic that KyT will pull throughthis difficult period and emerge stronger andwiser. KyT is worried that it cannot reliablysupply good markets for morula oil and herbalremedies. According to the coordinator, ordersin excess of one ton of morula oil exist, butthey cannot be met at present. The risk existsthat trusts from Swaziland and Zimbabwe willtake over the export market previously servedby KyT.

KyT is eager to expand its range of productswith atchar and canned mophane worms.

While the KyT organisation has proven to befairly resilient despite the problems, trustbetween the Board, the regions and membershas eroded. There is a need to revive this trustas it is much needed and has been charac-teristic for KyT operations.

The FGD generates two main messages forother CBOs. Firstly, make sure that informa-tion within the Trust flows freely and thatcommunication is two-way and completelyopen. Secondly, the commitment and dedica-tion of members is essential for success.Without committed and dedicated members,projects are not owned by the communities ormembers and are less likely to succeed orsurvive in hard times.

The Trust plans to embark on other socialresponsibilities such as the fight against HIV/AIDS. So far it has done nothing in thisregard. Individual members have played a rolein the fight against HIV/AIDS, and support


___3. Repayment remains a problem, with 12.9% of loans either in arreas or default totalling P123,631 (annual report2002/03). 4. This figure applies to one month only (October). It is important that net income figures are collected on a regularbasis to validate the KyT impacts. 5. Non-members believe that KyT has actually collapsed.

poor and vulnerable groups in their individual capacities or through other committees likeHealth, VDC, etc.

KyT also plans to improve its marketingstrategy in the local market. The Trust used tocarry out direct marketing of their products,

but that has not been done lately due to finan-cial problems. There was a general consensusthat most of its products are not well knownlocally, making it difficult to tap into the localmarket (e.g. KyT jam for junior secondaryschools).


4.7. SWOT Analysis

WEAKNESSES

Loss of staff and experience (e.g. coordinator istrained as production manager). Only oneprofessional staff member is left and it isobviously impossible to maintain previousproduction levels and member benefits.

Cash flow problems and lack of operationalfunds.

Repayment of micro loans is poor.

Limited monitoring and management of othernatural resources may threaten sustainability,especially the one root-based herbal remedy,monepenepe.

Remain largely dependent on donors for capitalsupport and core funding.

THREATS

Market saturation (nationally) and growinginternational competition.

The registration of a new CBO in the Tswapongarea with several duplicate objectives maycreate competition for the same naturalresources and lead to tensions within theTswapong communities.

Reduction in external assistance (both technicalassistance and finances).

STRENGTHS

Organisational structure allows for a high degree of representation and accountabilityin decision-making; good flow of informationand communication.

Adaptability and creativity led to positivechanges in the governing and representativestructures.

Hardworking, dedicated staff and members.

Range of products, including valuable morulaoil and soap and herbal remedies, with goodmarkets.

Micro lending to promote members’ businessesventures.

Unique system of using sales agents within large organisations, several of whom take nocommission on their sales.

Solid assets funded mainly through donors: office and factory building; one staff house; cold oil press machine; scanning; printing andlamination equipment; vehicles and trailers.

OPPORTUNITIES

The production and marketing processes allow for flexibility and assure that members getthe best possible price for their products.

A new CBO could create extra market opportunities.

Further product development: mophane canning and atchar production.

Have created links with people willing to volunteer their time to support the project (e.g. development of website, analysis of micro-lending programme, technical businesssupport and training).

Sources: fieldwork and CBNRM Review.

4.8. Lessons from KyTAll CBOs should ultimately become econo-mically, environmentally and socially sustain-able. KyT has made significant progress in allthree respects, but is now in danger ofregression with respect to economic sustaina-bility (making losses and losing capacity). The first step towards economic sustainabilityis to cover recurrent expenditures from ownrevenues (KyT currently covers just over 60%of its recurrent expenditures). The second stepwould be to pay for capital/investment costs.KyT has basically suspended all capitalexpenditure out of financial necessity. Duringthe interim, capital assets need to be devel-oped and the organisation’s capacity needs tobe expanded to sustain development andfacilitate future growth.

KyT has retrenched heavily to the extent thatits productive capacity and capacity topurchase from members have been eroded.Retrenching has been done to make endsmeet, but it would have probably been betterto maintain essential productive staff andpurchases from members in order to serve themarkets for morula and herbal products. Itmight have been better to apply for a bridgingloan to allow restructuring while retainingproduction and income generating potential.

KyT could become a model for the veld productactivities of other Trusts. Wildlife-based CBOscould form internal groups that specialise inveld products (or tourism activities) and reapthe benefits themselves (paying a service fee tothe CBO trust). Revenues from wildlife resour-ces could be used to invest in processing andmarketing facilities for veld products, etc.

CBNRM can work for relatively low valuenatural resources such as veld products.CBNRM can also work without exclusive userrights, but there are extra uncertainties andrisks involved in such cases.

CBNRM projects can successfully engage inresource processing activities. However, KyT iscurrently the only CBO in Botswana to do so.There is a need to expand CBO resourceprocessing activities to increase the benefits.

KyT still requires external financial andtechnical support after ten years of operation.Clearly, government, NGOs and the privatesector need to offer long-term programmaticsupport instead of project-based support. Keysupport areas are marketing, financial andorganisational management, legal advice, andresearch and development.Members joint in order to receive the indivi-dual benefits, which are measured in cashincome as well as acquired skills (e.g. businessacumen, production technology). The microcredit scheme has proven to be important, butit requires good management to ensure repay-ment. The current repayment arrears are overP100,000, and repayment is critical to KyT.

The organisational structure is elaborate buthas become the backbone of KyT. It givesownership to the members, and ensures a freeflow of information and communication.

Members have a choice of selling through theTrust or directly to the market. This keeps theTrust on its competitive toes, and mayincrease the appreciation of members for thework of the Trust (as they can experience thedifficulties of directly accessing the market).

KyT could benefit from the National Environ-mental Fund, but also requires technicalassistance. CBOs should develop skills or beassisted to access financial support schemessuch as CEDA.

The empowerment of women has offered anextra incentive for KyT, and this incentivecould be introduced into other CBOs as well.

Wildlife-based CBOs mostly reap collectiverevenues and incomes. There is need toconsider combining these with individual orgroup-based natural resource activities andmicro lending schemes.

Micro lending schemes based on revolvingfunds are much appreciated by members andshould be considered by most CBOs. Microlending schemes require regulation and closemonitoring, especially for repayments.

CBOs should consider collective marketingefforts to minimise costs and maximiserevenues.


5.1. IntroductionThe CBNRM project in Sankuyo village isconsidered to be one of the best performingCBNRM projects in Botswana. The SankuyoTshwaragano Management Trust (STMT) wasformed in 1995 and is the second eldest CBOin Botswana. The first tender for hunting andphotographic safaris was awarded in 1996.

Prior to 1995, the predominantly Bayei peopleof Sankuyo (372 inhabitants in 2001; CSO,2002) lived in poverty and depended mostly onagriculture. Villagers eked out a living forthemselves through herding cattle, farmingand fishing.

Sankuyo is located in the Controlled HuntingArea (CHA) Ngamiland Area 34 (or NG 34) inthe Kwando/Okavango Wildlife ManagementArea (WMA) - an area that abuts Moremi GameReserve and is rich in wildlife and forestresources. When the area became part of awildlife management area, and the veterinaryfence was constructed to limit the spread offoot and mouth disease from wildlife to cattle,the village became a stock-free zone forcingresidents to stop raising cattle. As a result,villagers could only grow crops. However,planting crops in a semi-arid, sandy andwildlife-infested area is a very risky andhazardous activity.

Relief came when government zoned someCHAs for community management, allowingcommunities living within WMAs to apply forleasehold over these areas, and to acquirefrom the Department of Wildlife and NationalParks (DWNP) the right to use and manage aquota of wild animals. A combination of thesenew policies and the collaboration of peopleenabled the Sankuyo community to becomeinvolved in managing and benefiting from theirown natural resources. The Natural ResourcesManagement Project (NRMP), a regionalconservation and rural development projectfunded by the United States Agency for Inter-national Development (USAID), also helped toadvise the community and to facilitate theprocesses for involving them in the sustainableuse of their natural resources. Other keyplayers like the DWNP, NGO’s such as thePeople and Nature Trust, and other CBNRMpractitioners also assisted to advise and

facilitate the efforts of the Sankuyo com-munity. People and Nature Trust assisted theSTMT with the design and development ofKaziikini campsite and Shandereka CulturalVillage. The design of the campsite has beenvery successful. The cultural village was alsowell designed but has since collapsed (seelater).

After considerable mobilisation of the com-munity and consultation, the Sankuyocommunity drafted a constitution and wasregistered as a legal entity, i.e. SankuyoTshwaragano Management Trust. The Trust’smain objectives as outlined in the Deed ofTrust are as follows:

• Realising economic benefits to increase household wealth and reduce poverty. This can be achieved through the consumptive (hunting safari) and non-consumptive (photographic safari) use of the area’s natural resources; and

• Undertaking conservation and managementof the area’s natural resources.

Villagers and key stakeholders then sketchedout a strategic plan for NG34 that describedways in which to govern the Trust, develop thearea, develop its CBNRM enterprises and con-serve its natural resources. By the end of 1995STMT had obtained a lease from the TawanaLand Board and was then allocated CHAsNG33 (photo safari) and NG34 (hunting). Acommunity wildlife quota was issued to STMTby DWNP, enabling the community to usewildlife for consumptive purposes and permit-ting sub-leases.

Hunting rights have been sub-leased to fourjoint venture partners since 1996: GameSafaris (1996), Crocodile Camp (1997-1999),HCH (2000-2003/4) and Johan Calitz HuntingSafaris (2004 until 2011; Table 5.1).

Tourism rights have been part of the sub-leasefor hunting, but STMT has become moredirectly involved in tourism since it acquiredSantawani Lodge in 2001 and decided tooperate it through STMT. In the past, huntingcompanies tended to under-utilise the tourismpotential, as they lacked the expertise todevelop it themselves (and possibly because of

5. Hunting and Tourism: The Case of Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust 29

Chapter Five - Hunting and Tourism: The Case ofSankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust


the short duration of the leases). The STMTmaintains an agreement in which one photo-graphic lodge is managed by the JVP. The JVP,however, does not have the required photo-graphic safari operational experience and sub-leases this to another private company, i.e.Squacco Heron (Pty Ltd.).

The idea of the community was to get the JVPto run both the hunting and photographicoperations initially, and in the process totransfer the necessary knowledge and practicalskills to community members so that they inturn would be able to manage this type ofbusiness themselves in the foreseeable future.

The tendering process has had its problems forthe STMT. In 1997, STMT preferred to con-tinue with Game Safaris but the company wasnot short-listed in the tendering process. In2000, the community preferred another com-pany over HCH, but was overruled by theTechnical Advisory Committee. Since 2002, therelationship with HCH has been seriouslystrained, and according to the STMT, HCH stillowes them a considerable amount of money.

STMT itself manages two of its own ecotourismenterprises, i.e. Santawani Lodge and KaziikiniCampsite. Planned new activities include the

extension and renovation of Santawani Lodgethrough a Phase II development programmewith donor support from the African Develop-ment Fund (ADF), which is to be completed by20086. A market research study, 5-yearbusiness plan and project design consultancyfor Santawani Lodge has already been com-missioned through ADF and will be completedby December 2006.

5.2. Activities and Best PracticesSTMT has a ten-member Board of Trusteesthat is elected for two years at a time. Thepresent Board was elected in August 2005 andmeets up to four times a month, with aGeneral Meeting held once a month and anAnnual General Meeting once a year. Wagesand sitting allowances are the major costcomponents of the running costs of theTrusts7. Four very important guiding docu-ments for STMT include the Deed of Trust andthe recently completed Policies and Proceduresfor Trust Activities, Policies and Procedures forEnterprises, and Santawani Lodge OperationsManual.

The main activities of STMT and the JVP arelisted below:

30

Starting Partner Length of Benefits (land and JVP employment date sub-lease wildlife quota)

1996 Game Safari (hunting) 1 year P285,000 30 through the year

1997 Crocodile Camp 3 years P385,000 climbing to 50 jobs(hunting and ecotourism) P595,000 in year 3

2000 HCH (mostly hunting) 5 years P1.3 million 56 jobs

2006 Johan Calitz 5 years Around P1.5 million 56 jobs

Table 5.1. The STMT’s joint venture agreements.

Note: only major material cash benefits listed. Sources: Arntzen et al, 2003, vol. 2; fieldwork for this study.

___6. AWF supported the first phase of the renovation of Santawani Lodge. ADF supports the development of variousmanagement plans and the second phase of the renovations of the Lodge. 7. Annual Trust expenditures were an average of almost P 90,000 in the period 1999-2005. The average annual wagebill was more than double that (almost P 190,000). Trust expenditures and wages have increased significantly duringthe period 1999-2005.

The STMT ran a cultural village (Shandareka)next to Kaziikini campsite, but this was closedin 2004, and most of its structures have nowcollapsed.

Since 1995, the STMT has accumulatedconsiderable assets and savings. Apart fromSantawani Lodge and Kaziikini campsite, theSTMT has a modern and well equipped salesand reservations office near Maun airport; aTrust Community Hall with TV and decoder forcommunity entertainment; a Trust administra-tion office block at Sankuyo village; and hastwo well-maintained Land Cruisers. The STMTputs annual surpluses in a savings account,that draws interest.

Interestingly, a research camp has beenestablished in NG 34 (Dibatana Research

Monitoring Camp) as part of the joint ventureagreement with Johan Calitz Hunting Safaris.This is currently developing into a majorresearch facility, wholly funded and supportedby the owner of Squacco Heron (Pty) Ltd., whoalso has some accommodation in the camp.Research includes predator research studies,and wild dog, lion and herbivore researchstudies. Community members will benefitthrough training and development. STMT mayalso benefit through improved monitoring ofwildlife and other natural resources in NG 33and 34. While the community permitted theestablishment of the research camp under theJVA, it is not really involved and views theactivities with some suspicion. They have notyet seen benefits from the research activities.

There has been an increase in activities since


Table 5.2: Main activities of STMT and the joint venture partner.

Hunting Photo safaris

JVP Joint venture partnership with Johan Calitz Moremi Tented Camp (MTC), operated with a sub- Hunting Safaris for NG34. This is an lease held by Squacco Heron (Pty) Ltd. MTC is a 16- arrangement in which the private company bed upmarket tented camp that is marketed and sub-leases the hunting area from the Trust managed by Okavango Wilderness Safaris through a and pays them quota fees for the game contractual arrangement with Squacco Heron. MTC animals they hunt, and provides contributions employs 18 community members. to the community development fund.

Two hunting safari camps are owned and operated by the JVP and staffed with 30 community members, 15 at each camp.

STMT Santawani Lodge in NG 33 is a community enterprise (owned, operated and completely staffed by 17 STMTcommunity members). Facilities include six newly completed brick and thatch chalets. Other facilities are a bar and restaurant with an outside fireplace and social area office, storerooms, kitchen, laundry facility and staff village.

Activities include game drives and night drives conducted by a licensed professional guide from the community. A small artificial waterhole in front of the lodge offers sedentary game viewing and bird watching opportunities. Optional full-day mokoro and powerboat excursions into the Delta can be arranged from Santawani Lodge.

Kaziikini Campsite is a community enterprise (owned, operated and completely staffed by 9 STMT community members). It has attractive, serviced campsites with water standpipes, braai stands and dustbins, and shared ablution facilities (hot and cold running water,flush toilets, laundry basins and clothes lines). Rustic traditional hut chalets with bedding/linen are also available, as is a well-stocked bar and restaurant (destroyed by an accidental fire), a reception office and staff village.


the Trust began operating in 1996, notablythrough Santawani Lodge (2002) and theresearch station (2005). However, the culturalvillage was closed and has never re-opened.According to the Operations Manager of STMT,Shandareka Cultural Village closed for threereasons:

1. Lack of proper management structures. At the time, it operated on a “hand to mouth” basis without working capital to run the business properly; and revenues were spent on an ad-hoc basis;

2. Community in-fighting and jealousy emerged over this project as only a few individuals from one family were benefiting;and

3. A lack of marketing of the village.

STMT and Santawani Lodge(www.santawani.com)

5.3. Benefits and Benefit DistributionThe STMT generated significant material andnon-material benefits for both the communityand individual households. Furthermore,vulnerable groups in the village and elsewherewere supported.

Most revenues are earned by the STMT itself,and donations are small and rare (except forthe AWF involvement in Santawani Lodge).Revenues and recurrent expenditure (includingcommunity contributions etc.) are summarisedin Figure 5.1. The figures demonstrate thatSTMT is currently financially sustainable, asits revenues are much higher than recurrentexpenditures, leaving surpluses for savingsand investments such as in Santawani Lodge.

The STMT has experienced a dramatic increasein revenues since 1998 to over Pula 2 millionper annum. It is difficult to separate huntingand photo safari income as some photo safarirights are sub-sub-leased under the huntingJVP. Comparing the revenues from STMTtourism (Table 5.3) and hunting income (Table5.4) shows that tourism has generated 15% ofthe STMT income in the period 2002-2005.Perhaps more importantly, the figures showthat the income from hunting is much morestable than that of tourism. The regionalliterature also shows that the market fortrophy hunting is more stable than theecotourism market. While the annual incomeof tourism ranges in the period 20002-2005from P58,000 to almost P600,000, huntingrevenues ranged from P1.3 to P1.6 million.

Both Kaziikini and Santawani Lodge arecurrently financially supported by huntingrevenues and donor contributions (AWF). Thenet revenues (revenues minus recurrentexpenditure) for Kaziikini campsite andSantawani Lodge for the period 2002-2005were P437,643 and P319,460 respectively.While STMT as a whole is currently financiallysustainable, both tourism operations are notyet self-sustaining.

32

STMT took over and began running Santawaniin 2002 after the lease for the Lodge held byGame Trackers (Pty) Ltd. expired and the LandBoard donated the Lodge to STMT. The Lodgeis built as a permanent facility. Some of theexisting structures are in a state of disrepair.This is because of a lack of maintenance overan extended period of time after Game Trackersvacated the Lodge and when their lease onCHA NG 33 expired. When the Lodge washanded over to STMT they entered into a part-nership with the African Wildlife Founda-tion(AWF) to rehabilitate it. Renovation includes aswimming pool and rehabilitation of the airstrip. This was a 50/50 arrangement whereeach party contributed P250,000.

Presently only the six new chalets are beingused to accommodate guests, but the carryingcapacity of the Lodge (a maximum of 24 bedsand 3 game viewing vehicles) will be main-tained as per stipulations made in the Photo-graphic Areas Management Plan for CHAs(EcoSurv, 1996).

Table 5.3. Revenue generated from STMT tourism activities (2002-2005).

Year Santawani Kaziikini Total

2002 26,623 59,897 86,520

2003 188,536 159,746 348,282

2004 -8,333 66,671 58,338

2005 530,731 62,478 593,209

Total 737,557 348,192 1,086,349

5.3.1. Material BenefitsThe material benefits that villagers receive arederived from employment, household dividendsand game meat.

Employment creation is the major benefit forhouseholds. A total of 105 jobs have beencreated. STMT employs 49 staff members (45from Sankuyo) and the JVP is committed toproviding 56 jobs for Sankuyo communitymembers. If employment is evenly distributedamong the households, this means that

households have on average 1.5 jobs from theCBNRM project. While hunting brings in mostrevenues, tourism activities create more thanhalf of the employment opportunities.

In addition to the formal employment outlinedabove, the Trust and JVP sometimes hirecasual employees for various projects in thearea.

Cash dividends to households have significant-ly increased in size and amount to P25,000 in


Year Rental Quota fee Meat Sales Total

2002 492,000 872,550 5,929 1,370,479

2003 466,509 965,770 4,473 1,436,752

2004 549,545 1,096,377 4,641 1,650,563

2005 455,000 1,035,400 2,936 1,493,336

2006 477,750 1,045,400 * 1,523,150

Total 2,440,804 5,015,497 17,979 7,474,280

Table 5.4. Revenue generated from hunting sub-lease 2002-2006.

* Not available.

Figure 5.1. Trend in STMT revenues and recurrent expenditures.

Activity No of employees Details

Hunting activities JVP

Sankuyo Hunting Camp 15 Seasonal employment

“New” Camp 15 Seasonal employment

Photo safaris

Moremi Tented Camp 18 1 trainee manager undergoing training

Dibatana Monitoring Camp 8 4 members presently undergoing training

Total 56 30 hunting related; 26 photosafari

Table 5.5. Employment generated through JVP.

2005 (or P500/household), but they remainmodest given the STMT revenues. Other majormaterial benefits that the Sankuyo peoplereceive are in the form of community develop-ment, which appears to have increased quitesignificantly over the years. Table 5.7 showsthe various community development activitiesand expenditures from 1997 to 2006.8

STMT does not have a formal benefit distribu-tion policy, although it is stated in theconstitution that people should get equalbenefits each year. Benefit disbursements forthe year are discussed and decided at kgotlameetings, and consider the income availableand the needs of the community at the time.

Some of the budgeted community developmentactivities for 2006 are: an old age pension fund(P75,000), football team sponsorship(P50,000), Sankuyo Primary School (P15,000),standpipes for each household (P49,000;P37,000 paid to date), and scholarship fund(undisclosed amount).

The other significant benefit worth mentioningis the community loan scheme, through whichthe Trust loaned P400,000 to members in2005. This loan scheme allows members toborrow up to P20,000 at a time for personaluse. A form has to be completed - stating thereasons for wanting to borrow the money - andsubmitted to a special committee comprisingTAC members, Village Headman and the HeadTeacher of Sankuyo Primary School, forapproval. The loan must be paid within a year.Monthly salary deductions are made fromemployees, and unemployed individuals haveto prove beyond doubt that they have themeans to repay the loan. The maximumamount (P20,000) appears quite high, and it isvital that clear procedures are established foraward, repayment terms and compliancemonitoring. Otherwise the loan scheme caneasily degenerate into a soft loan system withlarge arrears. Moreover, it could be morebeneficial in the long term to emphasise amicro-credit scheme for productive activitiesrather than personal loans.


Table 5.6. Number of people employed by STMT in 2006.

Activity No of employees Details/comments

Reservations & Booking Office 7 3 employees are non-community members

STMT office 16 Including 9 CES

Santawani Lodge 16 1 employee is a non-community member

Kaziikini Campsite 10

Total 49 26 in tourism; 10 directly related to hunting but

also involved in tourism (CEG)

___8. There may be some degree of inaccuracy, as in some cases expenditures appear to be lumped together and internalSTMT records differ. For example, the JVP in accordance with their terms of agreement gives STMT P110,000 forcommunity development every year. From the STMT figures shown in Table 5, it is not clear whether this amount isreflected in the expenditure or is lumped together with funds used from the Trust account.


Table 5.7. Community development activities and expenditure from 1997-2006.

Year Activity Expenditure Details/comments

1997 Household dividends 6,600 Disbursed to ea. household – social upliftment

1997 Built community tuck shop 13,429 Community amenity (collapsed in 1999!)

1998 Built community hall & Trust offices 30,000 Community development

1998 Purchased TV, solar panels & batteries 3,500 Community entertainment

1998 Purchased 4.2l Land Cruiser 124,295 Trust business & operations

1999 Grant to football team 14,700 Sports upliftment

1999 Household dividends 9,250 Disbursed to ea. household

1999 Built 41 Enviro Loo toilets 260,000 Community development (toilets never, ever

worked!)

2000 Football team sponsorship 23,000 Sports upliftment

2000 Built Shandareka Cultural 193,791 Community development

Village & Kaziikini Campsite

2001 Football team sponsorship 56,740 Sports upliftment

2001 Funeral assistance 11,000 P3,000 given (to family of deceased) for

adults >16yrs. P1000 for child <16yrs

2002 Funeral assistance 14,000 As above

2002 Household dividends 12,600 Social upliftment

2002 TV subscription & DSTV installation 3,483 Community entertainment

2002 Football team sponsorship 61,965 Continued support - team now in 2nd Division

2002 Destitutes allowances 1,960 Monthly allowances for destitute community

members

2003 DSTV subs 2,695 Community entertainment

2003 Granted scholarships 56,461 Community education upliftment

2003 Santawani Lodge renovations 354,060 Re-investment into enterprise development

2003 Kaziikini Campsite renovations 320,691 Re-investment into enterprise development

2004 Santawani Lodge 145,316 Staff capacity building & training

2004 Kaziikini campsite renovations 300,074 Upgrade facilities

2004 Masiela Trust Fund & HIV/AIDS

donation 50,000 National disaster fund donation

2005 Football team sponsorship 39,246 Sports

2005 Sankuyo Primary School 6,712 Sports & traditional attire

2005 Funeral assistance 9,000 Social support

2005 Old age pension fund 105,000 36 old age (over 60yrs) & disabled people

given P300 monthly

2005 Destitute housing 70,000 7 x 1-roomed houses built for destitute people

2005 Community micro-credit scheme 400,000 Loaned to community members for various

reasons

2005 Household dividends 25,000 Disbursed P500 to ea. household

2006 Community development fund 650,000 Budgeted for 2006 development activities

Total expenditure 3,374,568

Sources: adapted from STMT internal memo (June, 2006) and Trust records.


Other material benefits, as articulated in theJVP agreement, include:

• Visit to Sankuyo village and to the different camps by a medical doctor three or four times a year;

• Provision of game meat to STMT, which sells some of the meat and distributes meatamong vulnerable groups;

• Ploughing of all fields in Sankuyo in preparation for the planting season;

• Transport as and when the need arises and when there is a vehicle available;

• At the beginning of 2005, the airstrip at Santawani was handed over to the JVP for repairs and registering. The JVP apparently spent P200,000 on this project; and

• Purchase by Trust of handicrafts such as baskets, etc. manufactured by individuals.

5.3.2. Non-material BenefitsVillagers, from the leadership right through tothe ordinary resident, displayed a generalsense of pride of ownership of their two com-munity-managed business enterprises.Santawani Lodge is the flagship of the twoenterprises and villagers would be reluctant torelinquish full control of this business toanother party, or even to close it down if itbecame a permanent liability. People also feelempowered by having some degree of control oftheir own area and full control of their ownenterprises.

It is clear that CBNRM has improved people’slives in Sankuyo and poverty has beenreduced, largely due to the positive impacts ofthe CBNRM programme. People without themeans to support themselves, like orphansand destitutes, have been aided throughrevenues earned from wildlife; and in spite ofsome of the shortcomings and tribulations inCBNRM implementation, some “real” socialbenefits are being realised in Sankuyo.

5.4. Natural Resource Management STMT is involved in the following environmen-tal management practices:

• One of the nine Community Escort Guides (CEGs) accompany both hunting and photographic safaris;

• Monitor and conserve the natural resourcesof CHAs NG 33 and NG 34;

• Environmental research through the JVP; and

• Monitor resources in NG 33 and 34, and STMT activities.

The CEGs are required by law to accompanyall hunting safaris to ensure that rules andregulations are followed, that the right animalson quota (with the valid/appropriate licenses)are hunted, and that the animals are shot inthe correct land-use zones. Additionally, it istheir job to monitor natural resources in thearea while accompanying hunters.

The JVP has initiated a small monitoringcomponent and have started gathering datathis year for the first time on wildlife sightings,mortalities, etc. The data will be submitted forinclusion in a locally managed GIS system,although the effort appears unsystematic anduncoordinated at present.

CEGs also accompany all photographic safaristo ensure that rules and regulations are notbreached, and that professional guides operatein their respective zones, stay on the desig-nated game viewing tracks, etc.

The community is not directly involved inenvironmental research and view the researchstation’s development with suspicion,especially since its entire funding comes froma philanthropic source and unknown entity.The spin-offs for the community from thisfacility could be significant (e.g. training in allspheres of resource monitoring and manage-ment, general maintenance/mechanicsinstruction, first aid courses, etc). as well as asource for “real-time” data on predators,herbivores and other wildlife populations andmovements.

In addition to accompanying both hunting andphotographic safaris, CEGs are required toconduct routine patrols, anti-poaching patrolsand general wildlife/resource - monitoringpatrols. CEGs have been taught to use theMOMS (Management Oriented MonitoringSystem) and this has been in practice sincelast year. Wildlife sightings have been recordedand summarised on pre-designed charts andthe information submitted to DWNP. There isinsufficient data collected to forecast wildlifepopulation trends or make valid scientificinferences, most importantly to manage theresource from an informed point of view.Considering that STMT has been in existencefor over ten years and has had substantialnatural resource monitoring training from thedays of NRMP, their efforts are poor in thisregard.

When interviewed the Chief CEG, Trustmembers and Headman mentioned that theydo litter-picking patrols, anti-poaching patrols

36

5. Hunting and Tourism: The Case of Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust

(“sometimes twice a month”) and generalvehicle patrols (“whenever there is transportavailable”) to remove trees pushed over byelephants along the roads. Many of theseactivities appear to be irregular, unsystematic,uncoordinated and incidental.

The consensus view of Sankuyo residents isthat environmental management hasstrengthened considerably. Extension workersand professional scientists interviewed contestthis and argue that resource monitoring andactual conservation management appear to beweak and haphazard. This was also foundduring the 2003 CBNRM review, whichconcluded that STMT did not practisecomprehensive and integrated resourcemanagement. Furthermore, STMT does notinvest in resource management other than inthe required CEGs. One of the past JVP hadapproached the Trust to jointly drill someboreholes to retain more wildlife in the area.There is, however, general agreement thatpoaching has gone down (last internal casereported in 1999) and that people’s attitudetowards wildlife is now more positive, as they(especially the younger members of thecommunity) see the benefits of wildlifeutilisation and conservation.

The community wildlife quotas have increasedslightly in numbers, but the total value hasdecreased by some P 200,000 (Thakadu,

2006). The value of the quotas is largelydetermined by buffalo and elephant, whosequotas have remained constant since 2001.The area has lost one lion hunt since 2001.

5.5. Determinants of SuccessThe following key conditions for successemerged from this brief case study. Note thatconditions apply to both the hunting andecotourism sectors and are not easilyseparated.

The STMT areas (NG 33 and 34) are strate-gically located between Maun and the MoremiGame Reserve, and they are scenic and rich inwildlife resources. The area can be consideredas a high potential zone for tourism andhunting. The resource endowments have madeit easy to find (and change) JVPs and to earnsignificant revenues from hunting and to alesser extent tourism.

The STMT has operated since 1995, and isrelatively well managed. The current prepara-tion of various management manuals andplans shows that the STMT recognises theimportance of good and professional manage-ment and operations.

The STMT provides direct benefits to thecommunity through household dividends,support for orphans and the soccer team, and

37

Source: DWNP data.

NG34 2001 2002 2003 2004

Baboon 10 10 10 10

Buffalo 7 7 7 7

Elephant 12 12 12 12

Spotted hyena 10 3 2 1

Impala 20 40 78 74

Kudu 15 10 9 9

Lechwe 40 40 23 23

Lion 1 0 0 0

Leopard 3 2 1

Ostrich 5 5 5 5

Steenbok 5 5 14 14

Tsessebe 20 18 36 34

Warthog 15 10 7 10

Zebra 2 2 2 2

Sable 1 0 0 0

Wildebeest 9 9 7 7

Total number 175 173 213 208

Table 5.8. Community hunting quotas for NG 34.


scholarships. Although the amounts arerelatively small, these community andhousehold contributions aid the sense ofcommunity ownership. In addition, virtually allhouseholds benefit from employment throughthe STMT and/or JVP.

The STMT seems to adopt a more business-oriented approach (even though the tourismactivities do not yet yield net returns).Separate financial records are kept for theKaziikine campsite and Santawani Lodge.

Marketing is critical for success. The marke-ting of hunting is taken care of through theJVP, while the STMT does the marketing forSantawani Lodge itself through its Maun office(with partial success). It has positioned itselfon the low- and middle-cost tourism market(cf. high cost for the JVP), but prices forSantawani are considered too high (betweenPula 450 to 1200/person/night depending onthe arrangement).

STMT has practised adaptive management asshown by the closure of Shandareka CulturalVillage and the decision to manage SantawaniLodge itself. Conflict resolution must takeplace immediately whenever there are issuesneeding to be discussed and resolved. STMThas had the courage to invest huntingrevenues in community-managed tourismactivities. This form of cross-subsidisation iswise provided that the tourism activities willgenerate their own income in the near future.

The STMT and villagers seem to have a senseof ownership and pride that is visible in thechoices they make regarding the distribution ofrevenues and investments. The Trust hassupported social programmes even outside thevillage, and STMT decided to run Santawaniitself even though higher economic returnscould probably have been reaped through aJVP partner. In a way, this can be viewed asan investment in community skills ascompared to financial gains.

Why did STMT decide to operate SantawaniLodge itself?

The CBNRM programme is not only about themoney derived from the sale of wild animals orlease rentals paid by JVPs, or about socialupliftment and community development; therehas to be responsible management of thenatural resources for any CBO engaged inCBNRM to be deemed successful. Success ispossible if very specific and real changes aremade to improve the current natural resourcesmanagement status quo.

High standards of management and servicehave to be maintained in order to be compe-

38

The following is an excerpt from a briefsurvey on Santawani Lodge in the recentlycompleted Organisation and ManagementAnalysis; “In response to the question aboutwhy the community took over the running ofSantawani Camp, most people understoodthat it was given to them by theGovernment. One older lady said that it wasfound deserted so the community just tookit” (Sainsbury, 2006).

The general response received from theformal and informal interviews conductedduring this study revealed that STMTdecided to run Santawani Lodge itself simplyto gain industry experience.

Previously, camping for small or large groupsusing the grounds, dilapidated old chaletsand communal ablution facilities atSantawani generated insignificant amountsof revenue. The six new chalets werecommissioned and Santawani Lodge beganoperating properly in mid-2003. The lodgehas been in a negative profit situation sincethen and has had to be subsidized from thegeneral STMT account. The last quarter of2005 saw the Lodge enter into a profit-making scenario. This was largely due tolarge groups of Overseas AdventureTravellers (OATs) supplied to the Lodgethrough Okavango Wilderness Safaris whileMoremi Tented Camp was being constructed.

The above calls into question STMT’smarketing and promotion strategy. Why werethey not able to market the Lodge satis-factorily before this event? The answer issimple according to other tour operators/lodges that earlier approached the STMT todo business with them. The rates are toohigh for the quality of the product they offer.

titive in the tourism industry. Communitytourism enterprises or ventures must bemanaged and operated as competitivebusinesses in order to succeed in the “realworld”. Strong business ethics need to beinculcated in community members in order forthem to meaningfully and profitably participatein the tourism industry.

STMT has successfully dealt with and changedJVPs. STMT kept the JVP to their proposal andterminated the agreement when the agreeddeliveries were not fully made. STMT was in astrong position given the high potential of itsarea. STMT has had three JVPs and seriousconflicts in a period of ten years. In the earlydays when CBNRM was being establishedleases were theoretically for fifteen years, butwere broken down into short contracts of one,one, three, five, and five years (with proba-tionary reviews between these discreteperiods). This was done to protect inexpe-rienced communities from a long-termrelationship with an unsuitable operator, or toprovide an opportunity for change pendingunforeseen conflicts (Boggs, 2004). Funda-mentally, this scenario enabled STMT toterminate contracts with JVPs they viewed asunsuitable. Asked why STMT had changedJVPs so often, the community had a simpleanswer: the people of Sankuyo adhere toagreements and expect JVPs to do likewise. Ifthey do not honour the terms of their agree-ments they will be taken to task or theiragreements terminated. The 2003 CBRMReview pointed out that there is a considerabledegree of mistrust between CBOs and JVPs,including in NG 33 and 34. Such mistrustlimits the potential benefits of joint ventureagreements and adversely affects communities,companies and the country at large.

5.6. Perceived Successes in Hunting andEcotourismThe following views emerged from interviewsand discussions about what the perceivedsuccesses of the CBNRM project are. Huntingis perceived as successful, because:

• Elephants being hunted in the vicinity of the village are disturbed, thereby causing the accidental but important benefit of reduced crop damage for farmers;

• Hunting supplies meat to the community;• It represents a huge income source for very

little effort on the part of the community; and

• It provides employment and training opportunities.

Ecotourism is perceived to be successfulbecause:

• Santawani Lodge and Kaziikini Campsite are wholly owned and managed by STMT as fully operational community businesses;

• It is an all-year round activity and employs staff on a permanent basis;

• It provides human resource development and training opportunities; and

• It has the potential for growth and diversification.

5.7. SWOT AnalysisAnother Enterprise undertook the Organisa-tional and Management Analysis (O&MA) ofSTMT and Santawani Lodge for the AfricanDevelopment Foundation (ADF). STMT wasgranted a P533,000 capacity-building grant bythe ADF in September 2005, which ends inMarch 2007. This is intended to achieve thefollowing objectives:

• Thorough market analysis and strategy development;

• Extensive management and organisational analysis and restructuring;

• Installation of proper accounting system, financial and operations procedures;

• Compilation of a comprehensive Business Plan; and

• Identification of appropriate technical assistance consistent with the nature and level of the Project Design.

The O&MA study was conducted betweenMarch and June 2006, and outputs of theconsultancy included:

• Report on the operations of the Maun office, Board of Trustees, Santawani Lodge; andKaziikini Campsite;

• Human Resources Plan, including a Training Plan;

• Policy and Procedures for Trust Activities;• Policy and Procedures for Enterprises;• Operations Manual for Santawani Lodge;

and• Final report, which includes an analysis of

the current skills base.

The O&MA is a detailed and thorough studythat has very good practical applications. Anynew manager assigned or posted to SantawaniLodge could pick up the Operations Manualfor Santawani Lodge and ‘get off to a runningstart’. The same applies for other Trustactivities and enterprises. Similarly, newlyelected Board members need not have to


‘fumble around in the dark’ when taking overoffice from outgoing members. Some of therecommendations of the consultancy, like thenew organisational structures, are beingimplemented, and according STMT managersthis is beginning to have a positive outcome onthe Trust’s operations as a whole.

The Business Planning, as well the Marketingstudy and Project Design for Santawani Lodgeexercise under the same ADF grant, is on-going and will be completed next monthKolobe Botswana.


Strengths

Weak-nesses

Photosafaris

NG 33 & 34 have abundant wildlife/ forest resources and are close to Moremi Game Reserve.

Santawani Lodge and Kazikini Campsite are reasonable tourism products with good future potential.

Both sites are located en route from Maun to Moremi Game Reserve.

Good facilities and standard of cleanliness at Kaziikini.

The STMT tourism products are among the few medium- to low-cost facilities in the Okavango Delta.

Centrally located sales and booking/ reservations system in Maun.

Registered airstrip located at Santawani (maintained by JVP).

Good supplies of potable water at both facilities.

Proximity to Moremi Game Reserve.A few employees have relevant tourism

experience from working in other camps, etc.

NG 33 & NG 34 are relatively dry areas that do not offer the true Delta experience.

Rates for Santawani Lodge are too high. Santawani Lodge still under renovation/

expansion.Maintenance is generally poor at

Kaziikini.No business plans for tourism

enterprises.Unqualified Lodge Manager at

Santawani as well as peripherally qualified/experienced staff. Some positions are beyond the capabilities of staff.

Only 12 beds (six chalets) out of the allocated 24 beds are being utilised.

Tourism enterprises not well marketed.Inadequate staff training and

development.No self-catering facilities at Santawani.

Hunting

NG 33 & 34 have abundant wildlife resources with their proximity to Moremi Game Reserve.

Current JVP is internationally recognised and has a well establishedand growing client base.

JVP has other hunting areas from which it can complement hunting packages.

Good hunting facilities and standards.Reasonable to good trophy quality.Hunting camps strategically locatedbetween Maun and Sankuyo village for

logistical reasons.Registered airstrip located at Santawani

(recently overhauled and maintained by JVP).

Good supplies of water for domestic usein the area.

Hunting does reduce the elephant/ human conflict element through disturbance of elephant populations near Sankuyo village.

Hunting area is relatively small.Inadequate staff training and

development, especially for community professional hunters and camp managers.

Seasonal employment and fewer jobs compared to photographic safaris.

Generally poor resource management.Interference of community in hunting

operations.

SWOT analysis summary


Oppor-tunities

Threats

Potential for STMT community members employed through JVP to acquire hunting safari operational skills and knowledge.

The development of high quality, world class hunting safaris.

Well-established hunting camp infrastructure, road and firebreak networks.

Depreciation of the Pula increases the revenues of the JVP as most tourists pay in US dollars.

General quota reduction and/or the likelihood of another ban on key hunting species like lion.

The possibility of complete wildlife quotawithdrawal by DWNP.

Termination/suspension of JVP agree-ment by community or government.

Negative publicity from anti-hunting lobbyists forcing government to suspend or terminate hunting in Botswana.

Competition from other hunting safari areas that have better game and largerareas.

Poor resource management and monitoring resulting in the loss of habitats, species, etc.

Possibility that only part of the current revenues will directly benefit the STMT.

Should the Pula strenghten the revenuesof the JVP will fall as tourists pay in US dollars.

The potential of STMT community members employed through JVP to acquire hunting safari operational skills and knowledge.

The development of high quality, world class hunting safaris.

Well-established hunting camp infra-structure, road and firebreak networks.

Depreciation of the Pula increases the revenues of the JVP as most tourists pay in US$ External support available to develop Santawani and to train employees and Board members.

Adoption of the Marketing Consultancy recommendations and advice should result in better marketing and higher occupancy rates.

Adoption of proposed new organisationalstructure for the tourism enterprises should result in better management and streamlined operation of enterprises.

A full-time accountant will help to improve financial management, record- keeping and reporting.

The development of Policy and Procedures Manuals for enterprises and an Operations Manual for Santawani Lodge will ensure better all-round management of these facilities.

The potential for diversification of eco-tourism related business and other income-generating activities based on natural resources.

Upcoming 2010 world cup soccer event.Depreciation of the Pula increases the

revenues of the JVP as most tourists pay in US dollars.

The pending decision by Government to take 65% of overall Trust earnings will drastically diminish STMT revenues.

Reliance on JVPs for annual income thatmay be used to bolster failing enterprises.

Tendency by Trust to subsidise enterprises that are not doing well.

STMT dependent on donor funds for the planned phase 2 development of Santawani.

Competition from nearby lodges/camps.Enterprises managed by communities are

often perceived to be substandard.

5.8. The Future The Trust has no long-term development plan,but it appears that key people within STMTand community leaders want to pay moreattention to ecotourism enterprises and othersectors. For example, they wish to re-open theold Savanna campsite in NG34 and replicatethe Kaziikini model; resuscitate ShandarekaCultural Village; and purchase land in Maunto build an office and warehouse complex andlet out the space to the private sector.

The Organisational and Management AnalysisConsultancy drafted a new (albeit interim)organisational structure that is yet to beproperly effected. Previously, governance waspoor as there was no separation of powers,which resulted in conflicts between the Boardof Trustees and management. Business prac-tices were also poor (for example, R. Muskwe,the STMT Operations Manager, reported thatall accounts were lumped together for theenter-prises, with no individual cost centres).The organisational structure has changed thisscenario with each enterprise featuring as astand-alone entity, and it has the potential tostreamline both business and Trust activities.

Additionally, a detailed Policies and Proceduresmanual for Trust Activities was developed toprovide guidelines to the Board, employees andSTMT membership in their day-to-dayadministration of the Trust (Sainsbury, 2006).

Once the market research study, 5-yearbusiness plan and the project designconsultancy for Santawani Lodge is completed,STMT will have a clearer idea about the futureof this enterprise. Preliminary findings haveidentified some options, and essentially it isrecommended that the market focus for theLodge (which is self-drive tourists) shouldremain as it is, and the Lodge be refurbished,restructured and re-organised to cater for thismarket.

Further donor support or external support isrequired for human resource development andcapacity-building, in addition to the plannedPhase 2 development of Santawani Lodge.

5.9. Lessons from the STMT Hunting and tourism• Hunting in high potential zones generates

higher and more stable revenues;• Tourism creates more employment;• Tourism can be sub-leased to a commercial

partner and operated by the CBO at the same time; and

• Hunting and tourism activities require different commercial partners and skills. To exploit the full value of tourism, it is better to advertise both separately.

Natural resource managementSTMT is benefiting hugely from wildliferesources, and yet ploughs little revenue backinto resource management. Resource attitudeshave improved and some resource monitoringoccurs, but the establishment of a comprehen-sive resource management system requiresmore than the formation of a Trust and aResource Management Plan. There is a needfor regulations guiding the communities tomonitor their resource base and to invest inresource monitoring, management anddevelopment. The results could inform thecommunity’s position and contribute towardsthe annual quota assessments.

Trust operationsDecision-making must rest with the generalmembership; the Board should be responsiblefor the implementation of broad communitydecisions.

Adherence to the Deed of Trust and Policiesand Procedures is the backbone of STMT’ssuccess. It is important to formulate detailedoperational Policies and Procedures and followthese “to the letter” in order to succeed inbusiness.

The Board holds regular meetings, consultswith the community and keeps them informed.The Board role in implementation and consul-tations/meetings is quite heavy, and may beunsustainable should the CBO expand itsactivities. An increase in Trust managementstaff, such as a coordinator/manager, could berequired.

The Trust is transparent and deals withdefaulters. Similarly, the community usuallytakes such people to task. Working togetherworks! Good teamwork and cooperation resultsin productivity.

Proper financial management is essential andshould be done by qualified people.

Adaptive managementIt is important that communities dare to makemistakes and learn lessons from them. It isequally important that communities areflexible as market conditions and othercontextual factors change, which requireadjustments in manage-ment by the Trust andin dealings with the JVP.


Benefit distributionSTMT ensures that at least one person fromeach household is employed. STMT has shiftedits emphasis towards increased communityand household expenditure, giving a greatersense of community ownership of the project.

The joint venture agreementIt is important that the Board and communitymaintain close cooperation with the JVP, treatit as a business agreement, and tackleemerging problems timely, openly and trans-parently. The main lessons are summarisedbelow.


Hunting operations

The community should keep open lines ofcommunication with their JVP, maintaingood relations and try not to interfere in therunning and management of huntingoperations.

The community should be more sensitivetowards changing market, global or localconditions that may affect huntingoperations and bottom line revenues, and notbe totally inflexible on contractualagreements. Communities should act asgenuine business partners and be willing totake risks as well.

It is essential to monitor the JVP’s huntingactivities closely through CEGs andCommunity Liaison Officers (CLOs) to ensurethat rules and regulations are not breachedand environmental management is beingundertaken as agreed.

It is important to be aware of corruptpractices by some professional hunters andthe possibility of some CEGs being bribed.

CBOs should encourage, initiate and follow-through the community human resourcetraining and development aspect for all staffemployed by the JVP, from managementpositions down to Camp Attendants.

Communities need to realise that the huntingindustry is a 24-hour business and does notshut down at lunchtime. Communitymembers must adopt business-likeapproaches to their jobs.

Photo safaris

As with hunting, the community shouldkeep lines of communication open with theirJVP, maintain good relations and try not tointerfere in the running and management ofhunting operations.

The community should contract top-notch,professional safari operators in order toelevate the Concession Area’s image andthereby attract more clientele.

Monitor photo safari operations/activitiesvery closely through CEGs and CommunityLiaison Officers (CLOs) to ensure that rulesand regulations are not breached andenvironmental management is beingpractised as agreed.

Encourage, initiate and follow-throughcommunity human resource training anddevelopment aspects for all staff employedby the JVP, from management down toCamp Attendants.

As with hunting, the hospitality and tourismindustry is a 24-hour business and does notshut down at lunchtime. Communitymembers employed in tourism-relatedenterprises need to realise this and mustadopt business-like approaches to their jobs.

Employees need to achieve and maintainhigh service standards in order to survive inthe industry.


Link with support organisationsThe Trust and general membership need totake and accept advice from the government’sTechnical Advisory Committee (TAC) and otherexternal advisors. The provision in the newCBNRM policy that the TAC selects the JVP,disempowers the community, but may haveshort-term economic benefits. The experienceof STMT with HCH, selected by the TAC, showsthat this may also result in failure.

CBO-investments and expenditures The STMT has invested in tourism activitiesand STMT and community assets. It isconsidering further diversification of itsrevenue base by acquiring property in Maun.Any Trust should balance current expendi-

tures to meet current community andhousehold needs with long-term considera-tions that will enhance and diversify the CBO’srevenue base.

External factorsIf most revenues would be deposited into anational environmental fund as proposed byGovernment’s new CBNRM policy (one of thekey threats to STMT), the Trust’s operationsand financial sustainability would changecompletely. This possible policy requirementwould adversely affect the high revenue CBOssuch as STMT, but benefit the low- andmiddle-revenue CBOs.

44

6.1. IntroductionBORAVAST Trust is made up of four villages insouthern Kgalagadi, namely BOkspits, RApplesPan, VAalhoek and STruizendam (hence thename BORAVAST). The area is located right inthe southwestern corner of Botswana. It isremote (over 700 km from Gaborone) and haspoor infrastructure. There is a poor gravel roadto Tsabong (250 km) and there is no mobiletelephone network. There is close interactionwith the South African side of the border.

The Trust is new (established in February2006). The project is a pilot site for theIndigenous Vegetation Project (IVP) inBotswana. The IVP is a five year project whichcommenced in 2003 and ends in 2007, andruns in Botswana, Mali and Kenya. The mainaim of the project is to develop models for

community-driven management andrehabilitation of degraded rangelands.

The Trust was established through the IVP asa mechanism which will drive communities inmanaging indigenous vegetation and rangeresources in their areas. The activities of thetrust are different from other CBNRM projectsin that the main focus is the management ofrange resources. BORAVAST has not yetacquired exclusive resource use rights; thishowever will assist them in implementingresource management activities.

As the Trust is new the organisation dependsentirely on IVP for technical and financialassistance in implementing projects. The Trustis comprised of general community member-ship from the four villages and is run by a

6. Range Resources Management: The Case of BORAVAST Trust 45

Chapter Six - Range Resources Management: TheCase of BORAVAST Trust in SouthwesternKgalagadi

Bokspits Rapples Pan Vaalhoek Struizendam

2001 % 2001 % 2001 % 2001 %

Total population 499 278 346 313

Households 105 53 51 58

HH owning livestock:Cattle 32 30.5 14 26.4 12 23.5 19 32.8Goats 22 21 27 50.9 18 35.3 18 31Sheep 24 22.9 16 30.2 5 9.8 14 24.2None 37 5 16 11

HH using fuel wood for:Heating space 86 81.9 49 92.5 47 92.2 53 91.4Cooking 105 100 53 100 51 100 58 100Lighting 104 99 53 100 50 98 58 100

HH with thatch roof 0 0 9 17 3 5.9 13 22.4Other 105 100 44 83 48 94 45 77.6

HH with access to land for ploughingOwn land 3 2.9 - 1 2 1 1.7Have access 16 15.2 -None 86 81.9 53 100 50 98 57 98.3

Type of employmentNo. of people in cash employment 106 61 71 20.5 56 17.9Self-employed with no employees 8 1 1 0.29Self-employed with employees 3 -Work in own lands/cattle post 5 2 0.58 4 1.3Other 2

Table 6.1. Demographic and socioeconomic characteristics of the BORAVAST villages.

Source: CSO, 2001.


Board of Trustees of twelve members (threefrom each village). The Board aims to ensureimplementation of projects in all the villages.

The area is one of the hardest hit in terms ofenvironmental degradation. It is arid withrainfall ranging from 225mm to 250mm perannum. The environment is harsh withextreme temperatures: hot during summer andvery cold during the winter season. A fewspecies are found in the area, comprising ofshort thorny bushes, grass savanna andacacia (IVP, 2003).

The population is mostly engaged in pastoralfarming for both commercial and subsistencepurposes. During the years of the FinancialAssistance Policy (FAP), people purchasedsmall stock and participated in the karakul(wool) industry. Unfortunately this industrycollapsed. A few farmers are engaged incommercial cattle farming on TGLP ranches.

6.2. Activities and Best PracticesAt the inception of the IVP, community actionplans were produced, and these identifiedmajor environmental issues in each village andproposed some projects which could help inaddressing the problems. The proposedprojects are as follows: sand dune stabilisa-tion; erection of drift fences; livestockmarketing; control of an encroaching alien treespecies (prosopis); reticulation of water to thegrazing areas; rain water harvesting tech-niques; fodder production; and horticultureproduction. The Trust has started to imple-ment a few of the activities. These arediscussed below.

Sand dune stabilisationThis project started in Struizendam before IVPthrough the assistance of the Ministry ofAgriculture. Two sand dune stabilisation siteswere established in Vaalhoek and Rapples Panin 2004 through IVP. Indigenous as well asexotic tree species were planted to rehabilitatethe areas. The vegetation regeneratesundisturbed because of the fence, thuscreating ground cover and stabilising the soil.The Trust now waters and monitors the threesites.

Hoodia communal cultivationThe activity involves the collection of wildhoodia seeds and planting them in trays at the‘green houses’ (the hoodia plant is harvestedand processed for use in weight-loss products).Three villages have a green house, eachsituated inside the sand dune stabilisation

site; in Struizendam, the seed-lings are grownat the agro-forestry plot (IVP, 2006). Each trayaccommodates over two hundred seedlings.Altogether there are about one thousandseedlings, which are watered at least once aweek by the Trust. The plan is to develop aplantation and research centre where thehoodia seedlings will be transplanted. Theobjective is to commercialise hoodia produc-tion and export the product. At present, theproject is at developmental stage as consul-tations are still being undertaken by theDepartment of Forestry and Range Resources(DFRR), Veld Products Research and Develop-ment (CVPRD), UNDP-ESP and the Trust.Funding will be provided by ADF and theproject will be implemented with DFRR andVPR.

Horticulture productionThis project is located in Struizendam and hasbeen transformed to an agro-forestry project.The project was developed in collaborationwith the Village Development Committee. Acouncil borehole for watering the crops wasacquired by the community through IVP andsubsequently equipped. The project growsspinach and tomatoes. A group of individualsin the community have been trained inhorticulture production and work on theproject on a voluntary basis. The harvest issold in the entire BORAVAST area at reason-able prices (cf. prices in Tsabong and SouthAfrica). A portion goes to the Trust while therest accrues to the involved group.

Beekeeping projectThis project is also undertaken in Struizendamand is carried out by a group of young peoplecalled the ‘Active Five’ who have volunteered totake part. They capture the bees from the wild,keep them in an enclosed place and sell thehoney that is produced locally.

Wool spinning and weavingThe spinning and weaving project operates in asmall factory in Bokspits. Six women and menhave been trained in wool spinning andweaving at Oodi Weavers Group. Currentlyonly two people are actively involved in theproject. The others are not interested as theydo not perceive immediate benefits.

To-date, a few mats have been produced butthey have not been sold as there is no marketfor the products. Although the project isdeveloping slowly and is not yet fully opera-tional, the Trust is hopeful that it will succeedonce they secure the necessary inputs fromSouth Africa.

46

Planned projectsThe Trust is very keen on most of the projectswhich are still in the pipeline. One of these isthe control and management of the prosopistree. This tree has invaded the area and out-competes local plants. It has long tap rootswhich may drain the water table and alsocompetes with indigenous plants for water andsoil nutrients. The project will be done incollaboration with the University of Botswanato assist in research on how best to control thespecies.

During the FGDs, the community mentionedthat there are plans to establish a micro creditrevolving fund. This will enable the communityto access funds to start small business initia-tives and help sustain their livelihoods andconsequently contribute to poverty alleviation.The fund would be accessible to all themembers of the community who have or areable to come up with feasible income-gene-rating activities and who will also adhere tothe regulations of the micro credit scheme.

BORAVAST Trust is currently consulting withthe Department of Wildlife and National Parksabout the possibility to tender for land anddevelop a campsite or a lodge in the KgalagadiTransfrontier Park (KTP). The KTP is aroundtwenty-three kilometres from Struizendam andoffers development opportunities for theBORAVAST Trust. Wildlife is one of the maintourist attractions in the country and cansignificantly contribute to the livelihoods of thelocal people. Tourists in the Park could alsopurchase products from the weaving factoryand other locally produced crafts.

Through IVP, the Trust has produced a LandUse and Range Resources Management Plan,which currently awaits finalisation and LandBoard approval. After its approval, the Trusthas the option to apply for resource use rights(e.g. hoodia).

Organisational structureThe Trust is comprised of both female andmale adults who reside in the four villages:most are middle-aged persons but the youth’srepresentation is quite significant. Thereseems to be a good gender balance. The Boardhas representatives from the four villages andelections are done democratically at the kgotla.Board members from each village form sub-committees with other village members andare responsible for ensuring implementation ofprojects at village level. The chief and hisdeputy are ex-officio members of the Board

and thus they are always involved in the Trustactivities and decision-making.

The structure allows for an easy flow ofinformation and updating of the communityabout trust activities. This allows for parti-cipation of the whole community in that theirideas can be taken into consideration whenmaking decisions that may affect them.

6.3. Benefits and Benefit DistributionBORAVAST is a newly formed trust throughthe help of IVP. The material benefits are stillminimal:

1. Sales of vegetables: revenues to date are less than P500, which has been divided between the volunteers and the Trust. The community of BORAVAST benefits, however, as the prices are lower than in Tsabong.

2. Beekeeping. According to the chairperson, the project has been slow and has made less than P200.

3. The community acquired a borehole from Council, which is now used to support the horticultural project.

Two planned initiatives could boost materialbenefits to members in future:

• The micro-lending scheme is expected to start soon. The community members will beloaned money to start small businesses. Some community members have been trained in running small businesses like brick moulding, wool spinning and weaving,etc. During the FGD, the participants raised concerns that the lack of a market for the products (similar to the products of the weaving factory) would be a big problem and it would be difficult to pay back the loans. Micro-lending will not be a significant source of revenues for the Trust; and

• The Board is in the process of being allocated an area in the KTP to operate a lodge. This could provide benefits like employment opportunities and markets for products.

During the FGD, some participants mentionedthat they did not know much aboutBORAVAST but were aware of the IVP. Somecommunity members are still confused aboutthe difference between the two. They referredto the activities as being planned andimplemented by IVP. This could negatively



impact on the ownership and efforts put in bycommunity members.

6.4. Natural Resource ManagementEven though the Trust is new, some environ-mental management activities have beenimplemented. The government-initiated sanddune stabilising project has been extended totwo other villages by the Trust. The sites arefenced and a variety of trees and grasses areplanted. During the field visit, the plants inthe fenced portions had grown well. This couldbe used as a pilot project for other areas. Sanddune formation and movements continueunabated outside the fenced areas.

The Trust is also engaged in the collection ofwild hoodia seeds which are then planted intrays in the green houses, as mentioned above.Each village has a green house and the totalnumber of seedlings so far is about 1000. Thisis a way of increasing the dwindling number ofhoodia plants in the area. The seedlings willlater be transplanted to a planned plantation.More seeds are expected once the Trustinvolves the whole community in seed collec-tion. Community members will be paid for thewild seeds they collect.

There are some planned activities that areaimed at environmental protection. The Trustintends to reticulate water from degradedrangelands to make several water points toreduce grazing pressure. It is believed that therangelands were degraded because livestock iscrowded around few watering points. Waterreticulation is expensive and the Trust cur-rently does not have the funds to implementthe project.

During the FGD, the participants alsomentioned that there are plans to identify rareand endangered grass and tree species in thearea and find a way to protect them. One ofthe activities mentioned in the CommunityAction Plan is the management of the invasiveprosopis. The community was still awaitingfurther research before implementing thisproject. One participant mentioned that someboreholes on the other side of the border inSouth Africa have dried up due to the invasionof the area by prosopis. This tree has long

roots, which suck a lot of ground water. Theparticipants pointed out that prosopis providessweet browsing for livestock and this helps itto spread. The seeds are spread into differentareas in livestock dung. During this field visit,the researcher noticed some difference in treecover as compared to eight years back whenhe was in the area for a tree planting activityto stabilise sand dunes in Struizendam. Thearea is more dominated by the prosopis treeand hence the communities’ fear of totalinvasion.

6.5. Determinants of SuccessThe participants in different FGDs commonlyagreed that it was too early to know thesuccess of the BORAVAST as it is still in theinfancy stage. The feeling was that a lot of timewas spent on the planning stage while imple-mentation came at a time when the IVP wasabout to end. This has left the community inuncertainty as to whether the planned activi-ties will commence without the financial andtechnical support from IVP.

The community felt it had achieved somethingpositive in registering a trust, mainly throughthe help of IVP. Benefits included the trainingof community members in different smallbusiness management, education on naturalresource management, etc.

It was also agreed that, despite the fewrevenues generated from the beekeeping andvegetable projects, it was a success for these totake off.

The organisational structure of BORAVASTensures that each community is representedon the Board (by its three nominated represen-tatives). Each village also has a sub-committeewhich increases communication to and fromthe board. The sub-committees are responsiblefor the implementation of projects at villagelevel. Since all the activities are done throughcommunity voluntarism at the moment, it iseasier for the sub-committee members to getvolunteers as they know the community verywell. BORAVASTs success so far was attri-buted to the spirit of voluntarism, cooperationand good leadership.

48

6.6. SWOT Analysis

6.7. The FutureWithout the external support from IVP andother organisations, BORAVAST’s future isuncertain. Asked what will happen when IVPcomes to an end, the participants in the FGDmentioned that there will be no Trust becausethe project is still new and most of the projectsproposed are still to be implemented. Theplanned projects need money and the Trustdoes not have any money at the moment. Onehopeful participant differed with the rest: sheargued that, with the foundation laid by theIVP, the Trust should be able to go on providedthere is dedication, ownership and cooperationamong the members. She agreed that it will behard work and a difficult task for thecommunities.

The Trust has not yet joined in the fightagainst HIV/AIDS and other social andeconomic issues, but it intends to do so infuture. People feel that this is still premature

as the Trust is still new and battling to getgoing.

6.8. Analysis and Lessons Learnt fromBORAVASTThis case study is an example of a CBNRMproject at inception in an arid, resource poorarea. Proximity to the KTP and the sand dunesare the main natural resource assets that arecurrently inadequately exploited by the Trust.Crop production is not feasible, and cattlerearing is difficult although small stock aremore common. Therefore, agriculture offersvery limited potential for livelihoods.

Introduction of the project to the communitiesand the planning stage seemed to have takenlonger than necessary. This has left little timefor the implementation stage. The Trust is notyet ready to implement the activities on itsown, yet IVP is left with only a few months


Strengths

The spirit of voluntarism that the Trust carriesso as to benefit the community at large.

IVP support is the pillar of BORAVAST.

Resource abundance (wildlife and hoodia)which if exploited could significantly benefitBORAVAST.

Organisational structure which allows all thevillages to be represented and paves way fortransparency in the running of BORAVASTactivities.

Environmental management that the Trustemphasises and is instilling in the communityat large (e.g. the community is involved in treeplanting initiatives to rehabilitate theirdegraded areas).

Opportunities

Possibility of a lodge or campsite in the KTP.

Proximity to South Africa could pave way formarket opportunities.

Tourism opportunities through the utilisationof the sand dunes.

The main road that is still under constructioncould enable and ease accessibility into thearea.

Weaknesses

The Trust is reliant upon external assistance(financial and technical).

Ownership - community sees the project asbelonging to IVP.

Many of the projects have been in the pipelinefor some time and therefore implementation islagging behind.

Lack of market for their products, such as themats from the wool spinning project andlivestock.

Threats

IVP support coming to an end in 2007.

Invasion of the area by prosopis could lead todepletion of underground water and thedisappearance of some local plant species.


before coming to an end after its five years inoperation.

The FGD revealed that Trust activities areassociated with or attributed to the externalIVP project rather than BORAVAST Trust.Participants knew about the IVP but not theTrust. It is very important for the communityto realise that the projects belong to the Trustand not IVP. Ownership by the Trust is veryimportant for BORAVAST, especially at thisstage where most of the activities are donethrough community voluntarism. The volun-tarism spirit in the community has keptBORAVAST activities going.

During a FGD with the Board members, itbecame clear that they did not know muchabout the costs of the project activities. TheTrust is not in a good position to manage itsfinances since IVP has been doing it for themwith little input from them. The Board stillneeds considerable strengthening to run thetrust themselves.

The communities advocate for activities thatwill improve their livelihoods through materialbenefits. The weaving factory has lost trainedpeople as they did not see the benefits.According to the FGD, a revolving fund wasabout to be started and the community wasvery enthusiastic about its anticipatedbenefits.

The sand dune stabilisation project issuccessful in Struizendam and has beenreplicated in the other three villages. Theimpact is, however, limited to small fencedareas. These areas looked rehabilitated with animproved tree and grass cover. Sand dunesare, however, found right outside the fencedarea. Therefore, the project will only have asignificant impact if it is replicated on a largescale. This requires substantial funding.

Project development appears to have paid toolittle attention to economic factors such asmarketing. The long-term viability of theweaving factory is questionable (unless theTrust manages to tap into the tourismmarket), water reticulation for livestock isexpensive and will require payments fromlivestock producers, and attempts to benefitfrom the nearby Park are only just starting.The Park and the sand dunes appear to offer apotential for tourism and a market for otherTrust activities (honey, vegetables and mats)as well as a market for small businessessupported by the micro-lending scheme. TheTrust would do well to investigate the market

for hoodia with the support of DFRR andVPR&D.

The micro-lending initiative is a good initiativeas it will help individual Trust members toimprove their livelihoods. It will have limitedbenefits to the Trust itself, and exposes theTrust to the risk of non-repayment.

The formation of a Trust, Action Plans and aLand Use and Resource Management Plan hasbeen a slow process. There is ‘tension’ betweenthe urgent need to improve livelihoods andgenerate short-term benefits on the one handand the need to build community ownership ofthe Trust and its activities on the other hand.This tension is difficult to resolve. The imple-mentation of general projects such as themicro-lending scheme early on in the projectcould have generated tangible, short-termbenefits to people, and strengthened interest inthe Trust.

Most Trust activities existed in one way or theother prior to the Trust formation. This showsthat the CBNRM approach provides a generalframework for integrating development andconservation projects. Thus CBNRM can beused as a framework for implementing therevised Rural Development Policy.

The Trust has established strong formal andinformal linkages with other local institutionssuch as the Chiefs and Village DevelopmentCommittees. This has helped the Trust toidentify and implement projects, and toacquire assets such as the borehole.

The Trust has established strong formal andinformal linkages with other local institutionssuch as the Chiefs and Village DevelopmentCommittees. This has helped the Trust toidentify and implement projects, and toacquire assets such as the borehole.

BORAVAST will need considerable externalassistance for at least five to ten years - mostlyon-site technical advice, capacity building, andtraining and financial support for capitaldevelopment. Projects should only be initiatedif they are economically, socially and environ-mentally sustainable.

It is important that the IVP CBNRM projectsare integrated into the CBNRM Forum so as toexchange views and to learn lessons from olderCBOs. For example, the proposed campsitedesign could be inspired by the Kaziikinicampsite from STMT.

50

7.1. IntroductionThe case studies demonstrate the diversitywithin the CBNRM programme in terms ofhistory, stage of development, activities andperformance. BORAVAST is a young CBOestablished in 2006; KyT and STMT have beenoperating for ten years. STMT is mostlyinvolved in hunting, but has recently expandedits own tourism activities and has a tourismjoint venture partner (sub-sub lease). KyTengages in the collection and processing ofveld products, and BORAVAST is involved in avariety of development and conservationprojects under the umbrella of improverangeland management. Historically, KyT andSTMT are linked to the NRMP project whileBORAVAST is part of the IndigenousVegetation Programme in Botswana.

The growth of CBNRM projects in Botswanaand other countries clearly demonstrates thatthe approach addresses needs and aspirationsof communities. It may also explain the factthat there are not many development alter-natives, as CBNRM projects often operate inremote, sparsely populated, usually marginalareas.

While CBNRM aims to boost rural developmentand livelihoods and to conserve and managenatural resources, there appears to be adifference in strategic emphasis amongst itsparties. Communities focus on the generationand distribution of benefits, and their interestis closely related to the realisation of shortterm, tangible benefits. Government andsupport agencies mostly emphasise resourceconservation and management. It is importantto reconcile these different emphases in theimplementation of CBNRM on the ground.

The private sector is important to the CBNRMprogrammes, and yet the private sector is oftenneglected or seen as a temporary necessityuntil the capacity of communities is sufficient-

ly developed. While the choice should be leftup to communities, it must be noted that theprivate sector could play a much stronger andconstructive role if genuine long-term com-munity-private sector partnerships (CPP) couldbe developed. CPP should involve medium- tolong-term agreements permitting the poolingand sharing of resources based on respectivecomparative advantages, creating clarity aboutthe expected inputs from and outputs forcommunities and the private company, andestablishing a common and mutuallyunderstood vision.

CBNRM requires an enabling environment.While the CBNRM environment has improvedsignificantly, further improvements arerequired. For example, the CBNRM policyneeds to be approved and implemented. Areasof concern emerging from this study are theproposed distribution of benefits (which wouldbenefit BORAVAST and KyT but would affectthe financial sustainability of STMT, and maydiscourage some communities from engagingin CBNRM as direct benefits are reduced), andthe fact that the TAC would ultimately selectthe joint venture partner (restricting theresponsibilities of communities).

The literature review and case studies clearlyshow that significant successes have beenachieved, but that successes cannot always besustained (e.g. KyT has become less successfulin recent years; Zimbabwe’s Campfire pro-gramme has been set back by the country’seconomic and governance problems). Theperception of successes may differ, andtherefore it is important to develop a commonunderstanding regarding what successes are.Based on the aims of the CBNRM approach,successes are here taken as contributionstowards rural development and livelihoods,and contributions toward improved naturalresource management.

7. Synthesis Towards Best Practices 51

Chapter Seven - Synthesis Towards Best Practices


7.2. Summary of Case Study FindingsA brief synopsis of the main issues emerging from the case studies is provided below.

52

BORAVAST

New Four villagesRange resource

management, mostly rehabilitation and combating tree encroachers

No resource rights as yet

Largely too early too tell

Dependency on IVP/ external support

Based on voluntarism and commitment at the moment

Success will be measured by tangible, short-term benefits to people and communities

Trust registrationAction Plan and Land

use and resource management plan

Acquisition of borehole

Weaning of IVP dependency

Implementing projectsProject diversification

towards tourism (sand dunes and Park)

Trust capacity building

KyT

Ten years oldThree regions, many

villagesGathering and processing

of veld productsNo community resource

rightsRecent staff retrench-

ments and a decrease in activities

Transparent and partici-patory organisational structure

Focus on relatively high value veld product (morula)

Micro lending activitiesMarket-based approach

(morula and herbal medicines)

Gender focus

Proximity to markets in South Africa and eastern Botswana

Committed members and hard work

Women empowermentImproved livelihoods and

skillsImproved environmental

management

Financial survival without donors

Growing competition Development of new

products

STMT

Ten years oldOne villageHunting and ecotourism; Expanding activities (Lodge,

ideas for new campsite)Exclusive community

tourism and hunting rights in NG 33 and 34

Benefits of tenderingExperiences with JVPCombination of hunting

and tourism adds value/revenues

Use of revenues for community, households, vulnerable groups, investments and savings

Wildlife resource richness and value

Location between Maun and Moremi Game Reserve

Committed and community-driven

Restricted livelihood alternatives (no cattle)

Benefits to community and individual households

Employment creationOrganisational developmentGrowing activities

Several threats: 1.New benefit

distribution formula of CBNRM policy;

2.TAC selects JVP; 3.Anti-hunting lobbies

Diversification of revenue sources

Ensuring financial sustainability of tourism activities

Implementation of organisational and management plans

Topics

Base line

CBNRM bestpractices

Conditions forsuccess

Characteristicsof success

Future issues

Below, the successes and their determinantsand lessons will be discussed.

7.3. CBNRM Successes in BotswanaHere the general successes of CBNRM projectsin Botswana are discussed. First however it isimportant to recognise key achievements ormarks made by the case study CBOs. KyT hasbeen successful in developing a participatory,transparent and democratic organisationalstructure that bridges the gap betweenmembers and Board and Trust staff. WhileKyT has lost members because of the organi-sation’s financial difficulties, the organisationalstructure has increased the resilience of theTrust. KyT focuses on veld products with a lowor modest value. It has shown that CBNRMcan handle such resources and improvepeople’s livelihoods and status, especiallywomen’s. STMT has diversified from wildlifehunting into tourism (both by the Trust and acommercial company). Tourism development issupported by wildlife revenues and donors.STMT further shows that revenues can benefitcommunities, individual households andvulnerable groups in the village. They havehad problems with JVPs9 to adopt more of apartnership approach (rather than the JVPworking against the CBO). They have shownconfidence in dealing with JVPs and are nowworking on organisational, management andbusiness plans to improve the CBO’s opera-tions. BORAVAST is new and has as yet fewsuccesses. The most promising project is thehoodia propagation and cultivation project thatpromotes better and sustainable local naturalresource use. Building stronger linkages withthe nearby National Park also holds promisefor the future (community zone and tourismmarkets). BORAVAST shows that all CBOsneed to link up with the CBO network as soonas possible, especially those CBOs that areinitiated and supported by projects such asIVP. BORAVAST established such links inNovember 2006 at the National CBNRMConference.

CBNRM projects have generated materialbenefits to communities and households in thefollowing forms:

• Revenues and income;• Employment opportunities;• Improved food security and drought

resilience;• Provision of meat and in-kind products;• Training and skills development;

• Improved assets (e.g. community facilities, toilets, yard connections for water);

• Retention of some youth in rural areas; and• Social welfare contributions to the elderly,

orphans and other vulnerable groups.

In some cases, material benefits were sharedwith people outside the CBNRM area (e.g.STMT).

CBNRM projects have generated importantnon-material benefits, including:

• The empowerment of women and local communities;

• The development of social and institutional networks supporting other local networks (e.g. VDC, traditional authorities);

• A decrease in government dependency and a growing spirit of self reliance; and

• The dedication and commitment of communities to development and resource conservation.

In terms of natural resource management,significant achievements have been made butthe results often fall short of the expectation ofgovernment and other stakeholders. It is truethat community natural resource managementis not fully integrated and comprehensive, andoften falls short of an effective commonproperty resource regime. However, it is in ourview more important to recognise the achieve-ments and to ensure that community resourcemanagement will further evolve towards com-prehensive common property management.The achievements include the following:

• The development of a positive attitude towards natural resources, mostly based ontheir use value and potential benefits;

• Different levels of resource monitoring and evaluation (good results in Namibia);

• Skills development in resource managementand monitoring through community escort guides;

• A decrease in illegal resource use and poaching;

• Training in sustainable harvesting techniques;

• Research in resource conditions (e.g. STMT through JVP); and

• Resource rehabilitation and restocking (planting of morula trees, sand dune stabilisation, control of invasive species and(in Namibia) game purchases).

In order to strengthen community natural


___9 The TAC’s intervention in favour of HCH has been unsuccessful as the relationship between STMT and HCH wastense, and the JVP was terminated.


resource management, it will be important thatcommunities actively participate in theestablishment of user quotas based on theirresource monitoring efforts, and to havestrong, exclusive and transferable resourcerights.

The CBNRM Review and other studiesconcluded that older CBOs tend to performbetter than young ones. In other words, CBOsare learning over time and making progress. Itbecomes a challenge to make sure that newCBOs can benefit from the experiences of

older, established CBOs through networking,tutoring etc.

7.4. Determinants of Success and BestPracticesSeven groups of determinants of CBNRMsuccess have been identified from this study:natural resources, communities, economicfactors, external factors and assistance,management strategies, benefit generation anddistribution, joint venture agreements, andinformation sharing and networking.

54

7.4.1. Natural Resources

Best practice

Identify and value the resource base for each CBO.

Identify the resource base country-wide (wildlife, tourism and vegetation resources) in terms of high, medium and low potential CBNRM zones.

Earmark a percentage of revenues for NRM.Regular community-based monitoring and

evaluation of the natural resources (e.g. based on a common monitoring system).

Develop incentives for community activities in wildlife hunting.

Develop joint venture partnerships with active community participation and incentives.

Ensure that communities fully benefit from good market access (e.g. proximity to National Parks).

Ensure that communities know the marketvalues of their resources through informa-tion exchange and JVP.

Determinant

The CBNRM activities and benefits are determined by the resource base:

1. Type of resources; 2. The amount of resources; and 3. The use value of the resources

Veld products and tourism resources usually offer an incentive for community and individual activities.

Wildlife resources and joint venture activities do not offer such incentives.

The value of natural resource is mostly determined by markets and market access.

7. Synthesis Towards Best Practices

7.4.2. Communities

55

Best practice

Provide incentives and benefits for communities and individuals.

Develop participatory, transparent and democratic organisational structures for the CBO, preferably with member groups responsible for designated activities.

Develop and implement good documents (e.g. business plan, management and organisational plan) that balance development and conservation, including long-term development plans.

Regularly check activities against plans and constitution.

Build the capacity of communities to work faster.Establish transparent and effective information sharing and

decision-making channels.

Consider establishing resource user groups or centres within the communities that meet regularly and ensure information flow between Board and members.

Establish clear and transparent administrative, decision-making and implementation procedures that specify the role of members, the Board and employees.

The appointment of a CBO coordinator would be advantageous in those CBOs that can afford it.

Adhere to and implement agreed procedures. Produce and hold community discussions about annual

audited accounts. Monitor and regularly evaluate the performance of the Trust

(e.g. report back to community at least every quarter).

Establish community CBO committees.Establish an overall CBO Board with representatives from

each village.

Train staff, Board and members in key areas such as organisational management, financial management, business skills, marketing, and conflict resolution.

Establish and use conflict resolution procedures.Duty of CBO to report the mis-use of funds. Early identification of conflicts.Conflict resolution and reporting back/information sharing.

Establish and provide exclusive, secure and transferable community user rights for the relevant resources.

Community participation in decision-making regarding annual user quotas.

Clarify community rights and responsibilities to all stakeholders.

Determinant

Community and member commitment.

Good constitution and plans.

Pace of development.

Avoid gaps between Board andTrust and the members.

Good and efficient relations between the Board, communities and CBO employees.

Handling the interests of different villages.

Capacity of the Trust.

Handling of conflicts and mis-use.

Community resource rights.


7.4.3. Economic Factors

Best practice

Use of auctioning or tendering for sub-leased resource rights.Separate sub-leases for hunting and tourism.

All revenues accrue to the community.Put ceilings for Trust and management expenditures.

Only develop projects with a reasonable or good market that can become financially sustainable.

Develop or access marketing expertise through JVPs.Consider a joint marketing strategy for ‘Botswana CBNRM

projects’.

Assess comparative advantages in land use and resource management plans, and develop projects based on these advantages.

Delegate specific productive activities to groups within the community.

Consider joint ventures or outsourcing of activities for which the community lack the required skills.

Develop community business skills, especially among the youth.

Determinant

Benefits accruing to local com-munities from sub-leases.

The degree of revenues accruing to communities from sub-leases.

Markets

Activities must be based on the comparative advantages of the area.

Mobilisation of business skills.

Best practice

Develop a CBNRM support policy.Integrate community-based resource management in resource

policies.Fully utilise CBNRM opportunities in existing policies and

legislation (e.g. tourism, rural development). Promote the development of specialised CBNRM support capacity incivil society.

Consider implications for CBNRM of exchange rate changes.Provide a transparent, stable and reliable framework forcommunities and JVPs.

Provide long-term technical assistance, taking into account the age and evolution of CBOs.

Support the development of specialised government and NGO support for CBOs.

Avoid the development of new CBOs that are run on a project basis. Draw up timely exit strategies for donor/project driven CBO

projects.Promote long-term support commitments from government,

donors and NGOs (minimum of 5-10 years).

Provide accessible financial support for CBOs during infancy and growing phases.

Provide an emergency bridging.Support fund for sudden financial/cash flow problems. Draw up a timely exit strategy for donor/project driven CBO-

projects.Provide a CEDA window for CBOs.

Determinant

An enabling CBNRM environment.

Stable macroeconomic conditions and good governance.

Technical assistance remains essential for manyCBOs.

Financial assistance is important during the infancy and growing phases of the CBOs, and during emergencies.

7.4.4. External Factors


7.4.5. Benefit Generation and Distribution

Best practice

Prioritise income-earning activities.

Agree benefit distribution mechanisms or formula, taking into account vulnerable groups and the need for compensation of those adversely affected by living with natural resources.

Make special provisions for benefit distribution during droughts.

Reserve a percentage for natural resource management.

Agree on a distribution formula for Trust revenue surpluses.

Put ceilings on administrative and organisational expenditures (e.g. 15-25% of income generated).

Determinant

Focus on benefit-generating activities.

Ensure community and household benefits.

Community investments.

Administrative and organisation expenditures.

7.4.6. Joint Venture Partnerships.

Determinant

Benefit from JVP resources and strengths.

Positive understanding and working relationships.

Stronger role for the private sector in CBNRM.

Best practice

Longer (sub-) leases. Invest in the development of genuine partnerships

with inputs and benefits from both sides.Separate JVPs for tourism and hunting.

Regular contacts between CBO and JVP Stronger role for private sector in CBNRM.

Increased interest and participation of HATAB, BWPA and BOCCIM in CBNRM.

7.4.7. Information-sharing and Networking

Determinant

Information provision and sharing.

Performance assessment.

CBNRM research.

Best practice

Strengthening of CBNRM forum and BOCOBONET.Enhancement of CBNRM website.Integration of project-based CBOs (e.g. IVP) into the

mainstream CBNRM network.

Establishment and implementation of a shared performance monitoring system.

Annual analysis of CBO performance and lessons learnt.

Promote CBNRM research among students, lecturers, the private sector and civil society.

Disseminate research findings through websites and networks.


7.5. Issues still to be AddressedThe full integration of wildlife-dependentCBNRM and other CBNRM projects needs tobe done.

Resource management and developmentobjectives and results need to be balanced andenhanced. There is a need to strengthenresource management in line with commonproperty resource management and to increaselivelihood benefits.

The development of environmental anddevelop-ment performance monitoring systemsis required.

There is need for organisational developmentin terms of strengthening CBO staff capacity,and possibly in the formation of membergroups to carry out specific CBO activities.Com-ponents of the KyT model, particularlythe group and centres, are useful for otherCBOs too, and could bridge the gap betweenBoards and members.

The development of opportunities for CBOs todirectly benefit from Parks and Reservesthrough community zones and selling totourists (e.g. crafts, accommodation andpetrol) should be addressed.

It remains to be seen how many businessskills CBOs can develop themselves, andwhere they need to link up with individualsand groups within the community or withoutsiders (e.g. companies). KyT shows somebusiness skill development within the Trust tothe extent that members began selling moredirectly to the market when the Trustencountered difficulties.

The distribution of benefits is critical to thefuture of CBNRM. Households and membersneed to benefit more from CBNRM projects;Trust expenditures need to be brought undercontrol; and communities need to earmarkfunds for natural resource management. Inaddition, CBOs need to balance currentconsumption with long-term investments(including non-natural resource basedactivities) and savings. It is unclear how theNational Environmental Fund will influencethe revenues of individual CBOs and theirmotivation to participate in CBNRM activities.It would be interesting to investigate the meritsof a CBNRM bank. Using the examples of thecase studies, STMT with a financial surpluscould offer a loan to KyT which experiencesserious cash flow problems. This could assistboth CBOs.

References 59

ACCORD, 2002. Through our eyes: ACORD’sexperiences in CBNRM.

Arntzen, J.W., 2006. Case studies onsuccessful southern African NRM initiativesand their impacts on poverty and governance:country study Botswana. IRG and USAID.

Ashley, C., N. Mdoe and L. Reynolds, 2002.Rethinking wildlife for livelihoods anddiversification in rural Tanzania; a case studyfrom northern Selous. LADDER Working PaperNo. 15.

Boggs, L., 2004. Community Based NaturalResources Management in the OkavangoDelta. In: Fabricus, C., E. Koch, H. Magome, S.Turner, (Eds). Rights and Resources and RuralDevelopment; Community Based NaturalResources Management in southern Africa. Ch9. London: Earthscan.

Bwalya, S.M., 2003. UnderstandingCommunity-based wildlife governance insouthern Africa: a case study from Zambia.AJEAM-RAGEE, 7, 41-60.

Central Statistics Office, 2002. 2001Population and Housing Census. Population ofTowns, Villages and Associated Localities.Gaborone.

Ecosurv, 1996. Photographic AreasManagement Plan. Tawana and Chobe LandBoards. Ecosurv, Gaborone.

ENCAP, 2005. Environmental guidelines forsmall-scale activities in Africa; chapter 2CBNRM. USAID-Africa Bureau, Office forSustainable Development.(www.encapafrica.org)

Fortmann, L., E.Roe and M. van Eeten, 2001.At the threshold between governance andmanagement: CBNRM in southern Africa.Public Administration and Development, 21,171-185.

Hume, D. and M. Murphree, 2003. Communityconservation as policy; promise andperformance. In: pp. 280-297.

Indigenous Vegetation Project, 2006. Handingover notes - Kgalagadi support unit.Government of Botwsana, Gaborone.

Indigenous Vegetation Project, 2003.Situational analyses of IVP Botswana projectsites. Governement of Botswana/UnitedNations Development Programme.

Jones, B., 2004. CBNRM, poverty reductionand sustainable livelihoods: developing criteriafor evaluating the contribution of CBNRM topoverty reduction and alleviation in southernAfrica. CASS/PLAAS Occasional Paper Series7.

Jones, B. et al, 2006. Case studies onsuccessful southern African NRM initiativesand their impacts on poverty and governance:synthesis report. IRG and USAID.

Kgathi, D.l. and B.N. Ngwenya, 2005. CBNRMand social sustainability in Ngamiland,Botswana. Botswana Notes & Records, Vol. 37,pp 61-79.

Mauambeta, D.D.C., 2006. Case studies onsuccessful southern African NRM initiativesand their impacts on poverty and governance:Malawi case study. IRG and USAID.

Mbewe, B., C. Makota, E. Hachileka, J.Mwitwa, M. Chundama and M. Nanchengwa,2005. CBNRM in Zambia: Status Report 2005.WWF.

Potts, F.C. 2003. Santawani Lodge.Environmental Impact Assessment. AfricanWildlife Foundation “Four” Corners Project.Publication made possible with supportprovided by the United States Agency forInternational Development.

Sainsbury, S. 2006. Organisational andManagement Analysis. Sankuyo TshwaraganoManagement Trust and Santawani Lodge.Anther Enterprises. Maun.

Sorensen, F.L., 2003. CB-Tourism andprospects for sustainable livelihoods; the caseof the Okavango Poler Trust in Botswana.University of Copenhagen.

Swatuk, L.A., 2005. From ‘project’ to ‘context’CBNRM in Botswana. Global EnvironmentalPolitics, 5, 3, 95-124.

References


Taylor, R.D., 2006. Case studies on successfulsouthern African NRM initiatives and theirimpacts on poverty and governance:CAMPFIRE case study.

Thakadu, O.T., 2005. Success factors inCBNRM in northern Botswana: lessons frompractice. Natural Resources Forum, 29, 3, pp199-212.

Thakadu, O.T., K.T. Mangadi, F.E. Bernardand J.E. Mbaiwa, 2005. The economiccontribution of safari hunting to rurallivelihoods in the Okavango; The case ofSankuyo village. Botswana Notes & Records,Vol. 37, pp 22-39.

Appendix 1: Summary of Lessons Learnt and Best Practices from the Case Study 61

Case study: Kgetsi ya Tsie (KyT)

Appendix 1: Summary of Lessons Learnt and BestPractices from the Case Studies

Lessons and best practice

1. KyT has an organisational structure that is unique for Botswana CBOs. The organisational structure with groups, centres, region and headquarters allows for better representation and a two-way flow of information between members and management.

2. Full participation of members has ensured ownership and appreciation of the organisation.

3. Effective and productive five-member group and centre strategy promotes cooperation and team work. Members have the liberty to choose people they want to form a group with; this ensures maximum cooperation.

4. The organisational structure of KyT is such that there is a direct link between the benefits derived and the efforts made in the project. This provides incentives for members to be active.

5. Group members are represented at centre level. Centres form a region, which is governed by a committee. The Board is democratically elected from the three regions. This organisational set-up enhances transparency, accounta-bility and communication between the Board and the members.

6. Each group, centre and region has a chairperson, secretary and treasurer. Conflicts are resolved at each level, and are only passed to the next level if they cannot be resolved.

7. Members (mostly elderly women) emphasise that the project has empowered them. This shows that CBOs have non-material benefits too, which can benefit other village institutions and projects (e.g. VDCs).

8. Individuals have a large influence on project results. This fact needs to be recognised by looking for strong individuals or champions in communities, but at the same time the project should make sure that it does not become dependent on individuals.

9. CBOs need at all times to have an exit strategy for reduced donor or govern-ment support. KyT has problems as a result of the absence of such a strategy.

1. The Trust has adopted an economic, market-oriented approach towards the running of its operations as shown by the fact that it largely dropped its role in the mophane trade and successfully focused on morula products. KyT is an example of a CBO that manages to process products and even export them.

2. The benefits derived are equivalent to the efforts made by the members. A financial incentive is given to groups that perform well. Each group and centre is supposed to keep its own accounts. The money obtained is used to run the group or centre.

3. The micro-lending scheme promotes entrepreneurial opportunities for the members and helps finance their small businesses. Group members must agree and sign for another member who wants to borrow money from the micro-lending scheme. The advantages are that the group members would encourage the borrower to repay. Failure to repay disadvantages the whole group in arranging loans. Members who have started successful businesses through the micro-lending scheme are the main beneficiaries of the project (and they have also become less dependent on the Trust).

4. The use of widespread sales agents from different organisations has proved to be very effective.

Aspect

Social issues andgovernance

Economic


5. Good use of the website as a marketing strategy as well as good linkages that the Trust has developed with some organisations through time.

6. Product diversification has ensured success of the project, i.e. exploiting other products like morogo and medicinal plants instead of mophane worms only.

7. The project has employed five people but used to employ thirteen. In this case, CBO employment proved to be insecure.

8. Insurance cover for members is highly appreciated by them.

1. KyT membership has been trained in sustainable harvesting methods, e.g. cutting of small roots of monepenepe and replacing the removed soil to protect the plant.

2. The Trust has also planted 1,500 trees and trained some members in grafting techniques.

3. There is still a need for resource monitoring strategies to ensure the sustainability of the resources; this requires a budgetary allocation for resource management and education.

4. Due to the absence of exclusive resource rights, KyT has not used its option to make environmental bye-laws and actively manage the resources. Explicit and secure resource rights for communities is a prerogative for community based natural resource management.

Resourcemanagement

Lessons and best practice

1. STMT Board of Trustees is elected democratically by the general membership at a traditionally accepted area (Kgotla). This ensures the members’ full participation in the selection of their leaders.

2. There is a sense of ownership of the project by the community in that they are responsible for the overall decision-making, and the Board ensures that these decisions are implemented. The members feel that they are able to remove Board members if they wish to do so.

3. The Board has too many meetings, which are costly and can easily lead to intrusion in the day-to-day management of the Trust office. Boards need to guide and supervise the Trust office.

4. The Trust is guided by the Deed of Trust as well as the recently developed Policies and Procedures for Trust activities.

5. The preparation and adoption of policies and plans (e.g. management manuals for the lodge, etc.) shows the need for professional management in the running of the Trust to ensure that sustainability has been realised.

6. The Trust has practised adaptive management - for instance, the decision to close the Shandereka cultural village as well as owning and managing the Santawani lodge. They have learned from their mistakes and are able to plan for the future.

7. STMT has benefited from joint venture agreements, but needs to develop a positive working relationship with the JVP and establish mutual trust. CBOs need to appreciate that a JVA needs to generate benefits to both parties.

8. STMT has already had three joint venture partners and several conflicts with both the JVP and the TAC. Trusts need to consider enterprises as partners, with which they can pool resources, and the JVA as a method for deriving additional benefits for both parties.

9. Sub-leases need to be sufficiently long to be attractive for JVPs and to build trust and good working relations.

10. CBOs and TACs need to carefully scrutinise bids and not necessarily select the highest bidder (cf. the HCH bid).

11. Social responsibility can be pursued by donations to the poor and to vulnerable members of the community and elsewhere (e.g. STMT contributed about P50,000 in 2004 to the Masiela Trust Fund).

Aspect

Social issuesandgovernance

Case Study Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust (STMT)

Appendix 1: Summary of Lessons Learnt and Best Practices from the Case Study 63

12. The Trust has invested considerably in community development activities, such as by building houses for the poor, constructing pit latrines for most of the households and giving out allowances so as to help improve the livelihoods of the members.

13. There is improved food security in that the money derived from CBNRM is partly used to buy food, and the meat rations given out during the hunting season also contribute to poverty reduction in the area.

14. JVAs have paved the way for improved communication (for instance transport facilities, road links, telephones, etc.).

15. The Trust supports some individuals who have engaged in manufacturing handicrafts by purchasing these products.

16. The members have been empowered through the CBNRM initiative to gain full control of their own area.

1. STMT is located in a wildlife-rich area with scenic beauty and high potential for tourism and hunting activities. Hunting and tourism are the main revenue earners for the Trust. These are done in partnership with a private company.

2. The community has acquired and manages business enterprises such as the Santawani Lodge and Kaziikini campsite. This is expected to reduce dependency on JVPs. This also shows that there is potential for growth and diversification.

3. Cash dividends are distributed annually to each household. However, a benefit distribution strategy has not been adopted.

4. The Trust employs at least one member per household so as to curb unemployment in the area.

5. The establishment of a micro-credit scheme may support deserving individuals who want to engage in productive ventures. The STMT scheme commenced in 2005 and the results cannot yet be judged. Micro-lending schemes need to be carefully designed, monitored and enforced (e.g. repayment).

6. The use of the tendering approach in the selection of JVPs attracts serious bidders and is useful to increase CBO revenues. However, the selection of the JVP should be done with great care as the highest bidder does not necessarily offer the best deal.

7. The Trust engages skilled personnel in marketing and financial operations to avoid the misuse of resources.

8. An investment in community assets yields both short- and long-term bene-fits (e.g. the development of skilled manpower, small scale businesses, etc.).

1. Community escort guides have been employed to monitor compliance during hunting, and also to monitor resource conditions and the illegal use of resources.

2. Community participates against illegal hunting and the misuse of resources. Incidents are reported to the relevant authorities.

3. Activities such as litter picking and anti-poaching patrols are carried out.4. The development of an environmental research camp with the JVP is a way

of instilling knowledge and sensitising people about the species in their area, and helps to ensure management of the resource.

5. The MOMS system is in place as one of the three pilots in Botswana. The CBO should take this very seriously; should it prove to be successful, the (improved) system should be rolled out to other communities. MOMS results should be used to assist in quota establishment to provide an incentive for STMT to invest in monitoring.

6. The Trust has not yet adopted a resource utilisation and management strategy to guide them in the use of natural resources, but is on the road towards comprehensive management.

7. STMT has not made a separate budgetary provision for resource management. Such a provision would help to found a comprehensive NRM system.

Economic

Resourcemanagement


Publications under the CBNRM Occasional Papers

1. T. Gujadhur 2000. Organisations and their approaches in Community Based Natural Resources Management in Botswana, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe.

2. C.J. Van der Jagt., T. Gujadhur and F. van Bussel 2000. Community Benefits through Community Based Natural Resource Management in Botswana.

3. T. Gujadhur 2000. “It’s good to feel like we own the land…” The people’s view of community land rights under CBNRM in Botswana. (Out of print)

4. L. Cassidy 2000. CBNRM and Legal Rights to Resources in Botswana.

5. L. Cassidy 2001. Improving Women’s Participation in CBNRM in Botswana.

6. T. Gujadhur 2001. Joint venture options for communities and safari operations in Botswana.

7. B.G.B. Jones 2002. Chobe Enclave, Botswana – lessons learnt from a CBNRM project 1993-2002.

8. C.J. Van der Jagt and N. Rozemeijer 2002. Practical guide for facilitating CBNRM in Botswana.

9. P. Hancock and F. Potts 2002. A guide to start a tourism business in Botswana.

J.W. Arntzen 2003. An economic view on Wildlife Management Areas in Botswana.

10. N. Rozemeijer 2003 CBNRM in Botswana 1989-2002, a select and annotated bibliography and other stories.

11. C. Van der Post 2003. Community Natural Resources of Bugakhwe and || Anikhwe in the Okavango Panhandle in Botswana.

12. K. Modiakgotla and S. Sainsbury 2003. Labour laws and Community Based Organsations in Botswana.

13. J.W. Arntzen, D.L. Molokomme, E.M. Terry, N. Moleele, O. Thshosa and D. Mazambani 2003. Main findings of the Review of CBNRM in Botswana.

14. B. Schuster and O.T. Thakadu 2007. NRM and People in Botswana.

15. B.N. Ngwenya, F.C. Potts and O.T. Thakadu 2007. The impact of HIV/Aids on CBNRM in Botswana – The case of Ngamiland

16. B. Buzwani, T. Setlhogile, J. Arntzen and F. Potts 2007. Best practices in Botswana for themanagement of natural resources by communities

Publications under the CBNRM Support Programme are available from:

IUCN Botswana/CBNRM Support Programme Private Bag 00300, Gaborone, Botswana Tel / fax: (267) 3971584E-mail: [email protected]://www.iucnbot.bwE-mail: [email protected]://www.cbnrm.bw

Best Practices in Botswana for the Management of Natural … · 2013-09-12 · 4 Best Practices in...

Documents

Transcript of Best Practices in Botswana for the Management of Natural … · 2013-09-12 · 4 Best Practices in...