Final report : assessment of community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) in Southern Africa

The program is achieving very good results in organizing communities to work together to solve NRM problems on their common lands and in helping them establish the linkages for accessing TA, markets, and information and communication networks. Specific findings are as follows. (1) Through the project, the CBNRM process has contributed significantly to achieving the intended results of the Regional Center for Southern Africa"s (RCSA) Strategic Objective Three (SO3): "Accelerated regional adoption of sustainable agriculture and NRM approaches." (2) USAID"s initial pilot-program focus on wildlife resources was correct. (3) The evolution and development of new policy and legislation in project countries has been slow over the past 10 years, but changes have emerged rapidly since 1996. The evidence strongly suggests that policymakers consider the approaches being taken by their neighbors in solving internal problems. (4) The regional coordinating unit in Malawi has very successfully demonstrated that a focused effort of extension information and communication activities, supported by a regional newsletter and well organized regional workshops and seminars, can have significant impact on raising and maintaining awareness and creating motivation to act. This unit"s initial focus on the wildlife sector is now influencing other productive natural resource sectors such as forestry, fisheries, and veld products. (5) CBNRM is an evolving and viable process for the long-term rational management and use of natural resources on marginal lands; it is successful where participants perceive that total social and financial benefits exceed individual total input costs. All of the elements necessary for sustainability are in place in Botswana, Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. (6) Wildlife- focused CBNRM is effectively reaching the traditionally disadvantaged rural poor because their marginal communal lands (in terms of agriculture) are becoming profitable in terms of wildlife production systems; CBNRM is making a meaningful contribution to many local economies that have previously depended upon subsistence farming and remittances. With this functioning base, CBNRM programs are capable of addressing other natural resources products and services as market linkages are established. (7) There is evidence of an increase in some wildlife populations and an improvement of habitat in specific locations, although the evidence is insufficient to link CBNRM activities to broad biophysical trends within and beyond management areas. (8) The distinct sociopolitical and policy structures of individual nations show that CBNRM is widely adaptable; ideas, experiences, and results are shared across the region and each country continues to test nuances, resulting in an adaptation of CBNRM activities to local opportunities and needs. (9) Implementing organizations (government agencies, community-based organizations, and NGOs) still lack the absorptive capacity to efficiently, effectively, and rapidly use donor support; the magnitude of donor funding and the short (4-5 year) implementing cycles are not well synchronized to internal conditions and constraints. (10) Incomplete and non-structured economic and financial data about incomes, costs, numbers of jobs, and market supply and demand dynamics for products and services make it impossible to produce a meaningful economic assessment of the CBNRM program. Indicators in many of the documents, however, show that the CBNRM process is providing a broadened range of financial and economic alternatives for rural people, and specific examples look promising for the future. Lessons learned include the following: (1) CBNRM is a collaborative process for involving communities in NRM, not a means for establishing community self-sufficiency. It is also a slow process that in most cases can require 5 or more years of technical intervention just to motivate participants beyond the initial stage. (2) Long-term commitment and interaction between government and local participants is needed to fully enable the CBNRM process. (3) Many details of the CBNRM process must be addressed in the specific contexts of place, time, budget, and political reality. (Author abstract, modified)