Ali KakaEast African Wildlife Society
Wildlife Conservation in East Africa: A Historical Perspective
State control No community involvement No benefits and limited or nil
compensation for losses
Kenyan Results
Limited Tolerance Impatience Anger Hatred Deliberate destruction (25% loss of
wildlife, Parks included)
Number of CBTs (CCAs) in Kenya Few of these with steady income Distribution of income, governance –
challenging Translation into conservation objectives
– not clear Legal framework – not clear
Important Lessons: People living near and with wildlife
need to be consulted and involved Involvement and active
participation early – crucial Solid stake in tourism – helps
appreciate responsibilities
Still challenging: Govt. understanding of concept Habit of not listening or understanding
peoples needs More talk with conservationists Incentives for Pvt. sector Governance and legal framework Sense of “ownership” lacking
Wildlife Policy & Legislation: 5 attempts Major external influence Uncertain of hunting & utilisation (Hara
kiri syndrome in the industry).Photo tourism too big. Thus used as a threat to discourage gvt.
Very low professional capacity in KWS(on other options, except park mgmt and security)
Conclusion (crucial for wildlife): Incentives for community and goodwill Consultations and consistent involvement Sense of ownership Joint oversight:Pvt sect+comm.+conservationsits+Govt. Clear policies on roles and responsibilities Devolve authority and responsibilities No one ideal formula for CBT approach. But PRINCIPLES
are crucial and Community MUST be the PRIMARY beneficiary for LONG TERM success of models.
If not: Continued loss of wildlife and habitats (neither
guns nor gallows will reverse the decline) No interest in conservation. Other options for
land use will prevail Parks as core areas will be more isolated and
face extinction
THANK YOU !