Wildlife wars in an age of changing climate and social change: Assessing the social and ecological dimensions of Human Wildlife Conflict and Conservation Initiatives in the Rangelands of Kenya

Human wildlife conflict is an on-going global problem that is threatening the existence of iconic species of wildlife like Elephants and the big cats. It is also a human rights issue as it threatens the livelihoods of the many people who in most cases have been structurally marginalized and vulnerable. It is not wise to think that human wildlife conflict will disappear by itself. A lot of work has gone into trying to understand the problem and how to solve it. However, most of the efforts target local area challenges with short-term solutions that are not based on an understanding of landscape level processes and global issues like climate change. Driven by our long-term experience of working community based natural resources management and knowledge of the global issues, we sought to understand the human dimension of human-wildlife dynamics and particularly the conflict affecting pastoralists that is occasioned by predation of their livestock by lions and other big cats. We used mixed methods to examine theoretical assumptions that have been put forward on human wildlife conflict and link human wildlife conflict (predation events) to climate change dynamics. Using focus group discussions, we collected both qualitative and quantitative data, which we analysed qualitatively and statistically. The quantitative findings were validated and explained better by use of qualitative data collected from three communities living in the larger southern Kenya rangelands landscape. The aim of this thesis was to (1) Establish the link between human wildlife conflicts and climate (rainfall) over seasons within a year and annual time scales. (2) Establish what motivates the pastoralists to kill lions (3) Assess how perceptions of people living with the big cats change over time and (4) Review the role of communities and multi-level governance biodiversity conservation. The findings from this research show that community members value the ecosystem services and goods they receive from nature. While the challenges associated with climate change (drought) are likely to increase the prevalence of human wildlife conflict, the pastoralists are more tolerant to the wildlife when there is proper compensation or consolation. The results also show that the Maasai only kill lions when they are certain the lion is the culprit animal that caused the loss of their livestock, not indiscriminately. Our comparison of the results over a period of ten years show that the community members' attitudes, behaviour, and perceptions of wildlife changed over time and across regions as a result of a change in the climate factors and the attitude of the conservation authorities. Compensation programs and other forms of incentives to the pastoralists or local people for living with wildlife would go a long way in ensuring tolerance and co-existence with wildlife. With co-existence, any negative interactions between people and wildlife is overshadowed by the benefits and therefore less and less of human wildlife conflict. Our results also show that governance of natural resources and local institutions, rules and norms on wildlife and natural resources conservation are important pillars in mitigating human wildlife conflict. This research also shows that while people are affected as individuals, actions to minimize the challenges are better decided on and actioned at a community level. Community conservancies with a functional governance system may be the basis for sustainable rangelands, wildlife, and livelihoods. Actions at a wider landscape are likely to have better results than local level, short-term, and poorly resourced interventions

Comparative Analysis of CBRM Cases in Kenya, Ethiopia and Tunisia

In various countries, development and conservation organizations and national policymakers have been experimenting with ways of applying the community-based natural resource management approach to the unique social and biophysical characteristics of pastoralist rangeland settings, with mixed results. We carried out comparative case study research on community-based rangeland management (CBRM) in a variety of settings in Ethiopia, Kenya and Tunisia with the objective of identifying what kinds of strategies and methods work in which social and ecological contexts. We used an “options by context” approach guided by a research protocol that includes key variables and descriptors for characterizing the implementing organization’s approach to CBRM and important contextual factors that may vary from place to place and affect the implementation and success of the approach. The commonalities among our cases include: i) community governance and management structures for rangeland management; ii) the geographic rangeland unit which those structures are managing, and iii) a development agent that is supporting the community. We found that differences among the cases in the challenges faced and their degree of success depended at least as much on certain aspects of social and biophysical context as it did on the exact nature of the approach being implemented by the development agent. For example, the extent to which there are effective natural or social borders that provide the rangeland community with some degree of separation from neighbours is crucial; without such landscape features, the design principle of clearly defined rights to a clearly defined piece of land belonging to a clearly defined community is difficult to implement in any straightforward way. In some pastoral rangeland contexts, conventional community-based approaches need substantial modification to be effective in contexts with the highest levels of spatio-temporal variability, mobility and openness of the landscape