Issues of poisoning are sometimes sensitive and people might be reluctant to share much-needed information. To gain their trust, the implementer approached the local government authority and signed a Memorandum of Understanding which enables us to work in the area. Another engagement meeting was done with the local leadership (chiefs, headman) to discuss our intention in the area as a conservation organization. These steps increased our transparency as an honest organization. Building on these strong relations and trust with local communities is essential to ensure that they share such information.

Working with local authorities (City Hall, Military and National Police) required prior strategic meetings and training of their personnel. Training prepared the military personnel for assistance in night patrols throughout the season, providing security to our employees whilst also sensitising them to conservation practices. It is common to receive job applications from military personnel after they have finished their service due to this experience and sensitisation. Meetings with the city hall and national police allow the conservation strategy to be shared, allowing for more effective response to infractions during the season. Whilst this was an uncommon event, even those infrequent encounters allowed for engagement and sensitisation of police officers and technicians of the council. Community engagement through initiatives such as the partnership with the local fishermen’s associations, was successful in sensitisation of a key community in conservation practices. This was achieved through giving incentives to the association (e.g. donation of material) in return for volunteer patrols of a beach neighbouring the MPA of Costa Fragata.

Blue Parks relies heavily on collaborations with other conservation NGOs, communications and marketing professionals, government leaders, MPA managers, scientists, and local ocean champions. Growing the network of Blue Parks and amplifying the Blue Park standard for conservation effectiveness requires many partners.

Instead of top-down approaches, the project piloted mangrove conservation through a co-management agreement between local communities and authorities. Under the partnership agreement, resource user groups have the right to use natural resources sustainably on a defined area of state-owned land (protection forest) and the responsibility for sustainably managing and protecting those resources.

The project focused on getting the marginalised local population on board with the process and enabling to participate actively (recognition justice). For this, it was important to obtain acceptance of all stakeholders to pilot the co-management process. The other two major aspects of climate justice the project focused on were: (1) how to organise the process with different stakeholders (procedural justice) and (2) how to distribute the benefits and burdens or restrictions of co-management and find a balance between the protective function of the mangroves and production benefits (distributive justice). These resulted in a better collaboration between the local people and authorities. It also led to an increase in the area of mangrove forest which, in turn, protected protects the coast more effectively from erosion, flooding and storms, whilst increasing income from sustainable use of mangrove forest resources and from fishery.

Integrating FMNR with livelihood activities is strongly recommended. For example, alternative livelihood development activities can support FMNR uptake by reducing household dependence on unsustainable timber harvesting for subsistence and/or sale. Complementary livelihood activities to support FMNR outcomes include: 

1. Agricultural development activities that promote sustainable intensification and/or diversification of smallholder agricultural production. Combining trees on cropland and pasture with conservation agriculture practices has proved to increase crop yields and improve livestock productivity.
2. Market development activities that support more profitable marketing of products produced by smallholder farmers. They enhance the adoption and sustainability of FMNR by increasing smallholder incomes, thereby reducing the need for households to adopt coping strategies that can further damage the natural environment and reduce biodiversity.
3. Energy-saving solutions (e.g. clean cookstoves) that support FMNR by reducing household demand for wood, thus increasing the likelihood that trees that can regenerate will not cut down or felled for their wood in unsustainable ways.

FMNR represents a community development practice. In this sense, FMNR directly aims at participatory, inclusive and community-based and -owned analyses, plans, knowledge sharing and adoption. The following three components  are critical in understanding and implementing FMNR as a community development process:

1. Connect: Community member come together to participatory analyse, discuss and connect the root causes and consequences of deforestation and landscape degradation in their community. Once the connection has been made, FMNR is introduced as a potential solution.
2. Plan: Community members engage in a participatory visioning process to identify common goals and agree on tangible actions to drive and enable the scale-up of FMNR on communal and privately owned/managed land. These plans can vary in formality and may be developed and refined over the years.
3. Enable: Community member are trained in the technical knowledge and skills to adopt and promote the practice of FMNR on landscapes. This component also includes the identification, training and follow up of FMNR Champions who actively work to enhance the spread and adoption of FMNR in their communities.

In the longer term, interventions to counter wildlife crime can only be effective if they are based on a combination of strategic planning and innovative action. Practical strategies with clearly defined aims are vital to enable coordinated interventions. All interventions must seek to achieve required outcomes that work towards priority goals. To be successful, strategic planning – as well as the resultant interventions – must involve all key role players to ensure a sense of joint ownership. Similarly, strategic interventions must embrace the contributions of all relevant stakeholders to ensure coordinated action. Yet action must remain innovative so that activities can be adapted as unforeseen circumstances are encountered, new needs arise, or parameters shift. In addition, strategies need to be revisited and refined at regular intervals to ensure they remain relevant in a changing environment. This combination of working toward clear aims with effective strategies, while always being willing and able to adapt through innovative changes in approach and action, is an essential building block to effectively counter wildlife crime.

Criminals constantly adapt their activities to changing circumstances. It is therefore vital that activities to counter crime also adapt. A great variety of modern technologies exist that can significantly enhance initiatives to counter wildlife crime. These can be combined with a range of traditional and novel conservation and law-enforcement tools to provide an operational edge over criminal activities. Constant innovation in the development of technologies and tools requires regular updating to keeping abreast of changes. It is also possible to modify both technologies and tools at a local level to suit unique requirements and applications as these arise.

In the law-enforcement sphere related to wildlife crime, vital technology categories include surveillance, forensics (DNA, ballistics, digital), data capture/management/analysis, and more. Tools include information networks, investigative techniques, prosecution techniques, court-case monitoring, legislative options, and more.

The effective application of these technologies and tools requires capacity building within government, as well as the empowerment of individual staff to apply the technologies and tools as needed.

A large portion of international funding support to counter wildlife crime is used for workshops and conferences, awareness creation and community mobilisation, general equipment and infrastructure, and implementing-NGO overheads. The terms of use for such funding are often dictated by the funding agency and the implementing NGO, rather than the government of the target country. While these interventions play an important role, they generally do not directly address the core challenge of countering wildlife crime. Government agencies often operate on limited budgets with restrictive procurement and approval procedures. This can inhibit rapid action, particularly in unforeseen crisis scenarios. Fast and flexible external funding support that is channelled directly into government operations can remove many of these constraints and unlock the full potential of government staff. In the context of countering wildlife crime, this enables government law-enforcement and conservation personnel to respond rapidly to incidents of any nature and effectively carry out their mandated duties. Importantly, funds must be channelled directly into operational activities, ideally via a local support NGO with minimal overheads, rather than becoming part of broader budgets that are prone to bureaucratic pitfalls.

Government agencies often work in isolation from other government agencies, as well as from non-governmental organisations, private-sector entities, local communities and other potential partners. Interagency cooperation ensures that separate agencies with overlapping mandates or interests liaise and collaborate with each other to address common goals. The Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism is the custodian of wildlife and other terrestrial resources in Namibia, mandated with their conservation and protection. The Namibian Police Force is mandated with maintaining law and order, including laws related to wildlife. The Namibian Defence Force is tasked with defending the state and its resources against threats. The Office of the Prosecutor General is responsible for prosecuting suspects in the name of the state in criminal proceedings. Other government agencies with some overlapping mandate include the Directorate of Customs and Excise, the Financial Intelligence Centre and the Anti-Corruption Commission. Government actions can be considerably strengthened through partnerships with NGOs, the private sector, local communities and international funding agencies. Active collaboration between government agencies, and between government and other stakeholders, facilitates effective countering of wildlife crime in Namibia.