Supporting Communal Conservancies in Namibia: The Present and Future September 2005

Presentation Outline Introduction Conservation Policy and Legislative environment Legal requirements and experiences in implementing communal area conservancies Impacts and Future potentials Lessons learned and Recommendations for the future

Legal Basis of Conservancies Government gazette Of the Republic of Namibia N$1.20 Windhoek - 17 June 1996 No. 1333 contents Government Notice Page No. 151Promulgation of Nature Conservation Amendment Act, 1996 (Act 5 0f 1996), of the Parliament ………………………………………………. 1 Rights granted: * Rights of Ownership over huntable game * Rights to revenues from the Sale of Game or Game Products * Rights to Tourism.

Legal requirements and experiences in implementing communal area conservancies Defined membership and registered members – ok for small, unscattered communities; flexibility of continuous registration for big / scattered ones Defined area with agreed boundaries – boundary disputes, loss of potential investment and revenue generation opportunities; on the other hand, strengthening of group coherence, and eventually positive neighbour relations through boundary negotiations, e.g. Torra and Khoadi //Hôas; or joint management (and revenue sharing) of disputed area, e.g. Nyae Nyae and Nqaćna.

Legal requirements and experiences - continue Legal constitution, providing for game management and utilisation plan & Equitable benefits distribution plan – constitution outlines conservancy purpose and objectives, define membership, management structure, elections, decision-making etc.; Representative management committee – either elect new or adopt and adapt existing one;

Area under Communal Conservancies 31 Registered = 78,708 km² 15 Final Approval 35 Emerging

Conservancy Support Activities Natural Resource Management Institutional Development and Capacity building Business and Enterprise Development

Development of Conservancy NR Management & Monitoring Systems Game use & reintroduction Monitoring Land use planning Diversify beyond wildlife

Programmatic Impacts (Natural Resources Management – cont.) Conservancies 78,708 km2 of land, which is over 23 % of communal land and about 9,5 % of total land area. Added to the 14 % of land covered under protected areas, communal conservancies will soon double amount of land under active resource management regime. 17 of 29 conservancies are adjacent to National Parks – increase buffer zone area, and provide important corridors for wildlife movements

Institutional Development and Capacity Building Getting registered Boundaries Membership Committee Constitution Management and monitoring Managing conservancy assets: Wildlife Natural Resources Tourism Finances Staff & assets Communication Legal HIV & AIDS

Programmatic Impacts (Governance) 31 registered conservancies, close to 100 000 communal area residents; 30 – 40 emerging conservancies, 100 000+ communal area residents; Total of 80+ communities mobilised into recognised governance bodies, 200 000+ communal area residents; Covers close to 11 % of total population of Namibia, and about 20% of total communal area residents; Conservancies represent their members on Regional and Constituency Development Coordinating Committees and Communal Land Boards

Programmatic Impacts (Governance, continue) Conservancies forged positive relationships with Traditional Authorities; Conservancies represent their members on Land Boards – National Land Policy of 1998 and Communal Land Reform Act of 2002 New wave of conservancies emerging in “non- wildlife or tourism” areas, but seen as opportunity for strengthening rights over other resources, as well as ensured representation on key decision-making fora at regional level

Marketing of Trophy Hunting Campsites, crafts, guiding Joint Venture Lodges

Namibia National CBNRM Programme 2004 - Benefits

Campsites/CBTEs Trophy Hunting Joint Venture Tourism 0% Game Donation 7% 1% Crafts 0% Game Meat Dist. 1% 3% 1% 0% 1% Own Use Game 36% 4% 2% Cultural Tourism Interest Earned Miscellaneous Campsite Donation 27% Campsite Mgmt. Training 17% Thatching Grass Live Game Sale

Conservancy Activities and Income

CURRENT PROGRAM OF SUPPORT Strengthen MET, NGO & conservancy capacity Increase economic benefits to households Improve policy environment for integrated NRM Promote good governance within conservancies Expand resources managed to include forests, water, rangeland management, veld products

Opportunities for Programme expansion Growing potential and opportunities for integrated natural resources management – compatibility of conservancy institutional model and requirements with these of other resources, e.g. Forestry Policy (1992; 1999) - Community forests; Water Supply and Sanitation Sector Policy (1993) – Water Point Committees and Water Associations Inland Fisheries Policy (1995) – Community Fisheries Management Units

Lessons learned and Recommendations for the future Community inputs in policy formulation gathered through socio-ecological surveys Pilot activities and policy reform process worked in tandem; thus policy influenced and shaped by local realities Conservancy formation is voluntary; self-defined community; no prescribed boundaries; freedom to choose own conservancy committee or use existing institution; Rights and full benefits directly to communities, not through local government structures; freedom to decide how to use income is empowering.

Lessons and Recommendations (continue) Incentive driven and responsive to community aspirations, rather than regulatory and controlling Policy environment enabling and conducive for multiple stakeholder involvement through partnership arrangements e.g. NGOs, Academic institutions, Private Sector, etc. Serve as entry point for devolution of rights over other natural resources, in addition to wildlife

Lessons and Recommendations (continue) Lack of land and full resource tenure makes it difficult for conservancies to exclude non-members from moving into conservancy for grazing needs etc.; or for conservancies to raise capital loans or to attract tourism investors as joint venture partners. Strengthen links between wildlife policy and legislation, and other natural resource policies and legislation

Lessons and Recommendations (continue) Strengthen cooperation between community resource management institutions and land control bodies, e.g Trad. Authorities and Land Boards Encourage positive relationships between community resource management institutions and regional development structures through clearly defined roles and responsibilities

Lessons and Recommendations (continue) Conservancy institutional model based on common property resource institution design principles, thus useful for management of other resources (forestry, water, fisheries, etc.) Conscious attempts to avoid several resource management committees, but to integrate land and resource use planning and management under one management structure

Lessons and Recommendations (continue) Consider scale when exploring institutional linkages across different resource management and utilisation units Pilot integrated resource management by granting full rights over all natural resource to at least one chosen community – analyse different levels and scales at which resources are managed and identify the level and scale at which decision making should be located – foster formal and informal links between different layers, I.e re. Land use planning and resource management plans.

Conclusions CBNRM and conservancies are an ideal mechanism to promote rural development because they: bring new and potentially large sources of income to poor rural people are excellent entry points for all forms of rural development because of the institutional mechanisms already in place are excellent entry points for integrated land and natural resource management initiatives promote good governance and democracy at local levels offer entry points for capacity-building, empowerment and skills transfer deliver real OUTCOMES to local and national development objectives.

Thank you!