Abstract
Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) programmes are designed to ensure that rural residents benefit from conservation initiatives. But where human-wildlife conflict threatens life and livelihood, wildlife impacts can undermine the goals of CBNRM. Based on research on women's experiences in Namibia's Kwandu Conservancy, we examine both the visible and hidden impacts of human-wildlife conflict. In Kwandu Conservancy, the effects of human-wildlife conflict are ongoing, reaching beyond direct material losses to include hidden impacts such as persistent worries about food insecurity, fears for physical safety, and lost investments. Existing vulnerabilities related to poverty and marital statuses make some women more susceptible to wildlife impacts, and less able to recover from losses or to access compensation. This process may actually deepen the vulnerability of women whose economic status is already marginal. Because the benefits of wildlife conservation accrue at multiple scales, we recommend that the cost of human-wildlife conflict be better distributed, with additional resources for prevention and compensation made available for conservancy residents.
Highlights
In many economically poorer regions of the world, conservation is increasingly integrated with development on the assumption that conservation programmes can provide benefits to rural residents
Wildlife impacts are not evenly distributed, as some individuals and households are more vulnerable to human-wildlife conflict (HWC) and are less able to recover from crop damage, livestock losses, and human injury
This paper focuses on the particular assumption that financial benefits of wildlife conservation under Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) compensate for increased or ongoing crop or livestock losses and risk to human life
Summary
In many economically poorer regions of the world, conservation is increasingly integrated with development on the assumption that conservation programmes can provide benefits to rural residents. CBNRM seeks to link rural residents with benefits derived of conservation (Adams and Hulme 2001a,b; Hulme and Murphree 2001a,b; Igoe and Brockington 2007; Jones and Weaver 2009). Where cash incomes produced through increased market integration become possible, these are believed to reduce communities’ direct dependence on natural resources (Büscher and Dressler 2012), foster positive attitudes towards conservation (Scanlon and Kull 2009), incentivise sustainable harvest levels (WWF et al 2008), and alleviate poverty (Jones and Weaver 2009; NACSO 2013). Critics have charged that CBNRM assumes conservation goals mesh with the development goals of rural communities
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
