Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM): a path to ecological and social resilience

Carlton Ward Jr
Publicado: 10 Agosto 2021
Última edición: 03 Diciembre 2021
remove_red_eye 509 Vistas

Resumen

The Mali Elephant Project (MEP) works to protect one of the last remaining elephant populations in West Africa, threatened by human-induced habitat loss, environmental degradation, conflict and poaching. The project applies an integrated approach to a complex situation, working simultaneously at different levels to tackle these interrelated problems.

It supports local communities of the elephant range in the establishment of “elephant-centred” community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) systems that protect natural habitat, reverse environmental degradation, as well as supporting local livelihoods, providing occupations for at-risk youth and revenue-generation opportunities for whole communities (incl. women), building social cohesion and reinforcing local support for elephant conservation. This bottom-up approach is complemented by a top-down approach, which includes working with the Government of Mali to reinforce national legislation, planning and capacity around elephant conservation to support local initiatives.

Classifications

Región
África Occidental y Central
Escala de aplicación
Local
Nacional
Subnacional
Ecosistema
Agro-ecosistema
Desierto caliente
Ecosistemas de agua dulce
Ecosistemas de pastizales
Ecosistemas del desierto
Pasto
Piscina, lago, estanque
Pradera tropical, sabana, matorral
Tema
Acceso y participación en los beneficios
Actores locales
Caza furtiva y delitos ambientales
Ciencia y investigación
Conectividad / conservación transfronteriza
Conocimientos tradicionales
Especies y la extinción
Fragmentación del hábitat y degradación
Gestión de fuego
Gestión de tierras
Gestión y planificación de áreas protegidas y conservadas
Gobernanza de las áreas protegidas y conservadas
Marco legal y normativo
Medios de vida sostenibles
Ordenamiento territorial terrestre
Paz y seguridad humana
Poblaciones indígenas
Prevención de erosión
Restauracion
Salud y bienestar humano
Seguridad alimentaria
Servicios ecosistémicos
Retos
Desertificación
Sequía
Lluvia errática
Calor extremo
Degradación de tierras y bosques
Pérdida de la biodiversidad
Fuegos silvestres
Usos conflictivos / impactos acumulativos
Erosión
Pérdida de ecosistemas
Cacería furtiva
Cosecha insostenible, incluida la sobrepesca
Falta de oportunidades de ingresos alternativos
Extracción de recursos físicos
Falta de conciencia del público y de los responsables de la toma de decisiones
Deficiente vigilancia y aplicación de la ley
Deficiente gobernanza y participación
Conflicto social y disturbios civiles
Falta de seguridad alimentaria
Desempleo / pobreza
Objectivos de Desarrollo Sostenible
ODS 1 - Fin de la pobreza
ODS 2 - Hambre cero
ODS 3 - Salud y bienestar
ODS 5 - Igualidad de género
ODS 6 - Agua limpia y saneamiento
ODS 11 - Ciudades y comunidades sostenibles
ODS 12 - Producción y consumo responsables
ODS 13 - Acción por el clima
ODS 15 - Vida de ecosistemas terrestres
ODS 16 - Paz, justicia e instituciones sólidas
ODS 17 - Alianzas para lograr los objetivos
Metas de Aichi
Meta 1: Aumento de la sensibilization sobre la biodiversidad
Meta 2: Valores de biodiversidad integrados
Meta 3: Incentivos reformados
Meta 4: Producción y consumo sostenibles
Meta 5: Pérdida de hábitat reducida a la mitad o reducida
Meta 10: Ecosistemas vulnerables al cambio
Meta 11: Áreas protegidas y conservadas
Meta 12: Reducir el riesgo de extinción
Meta 14: Los servicios ecosistemicos
Meta 15: Restauración de ecosistemas y resiliencia
Meta 17: Estrategias y planes de acción para la biodiversidad
Meta 18: Conocimiento tradicional
Metas del marco de Sendai
Meta 2: Reducir el número de personas afectadas a nivel global para 2030
Presentación de la (I)NDC

Ubicación

Douentza, Mopti Region, Mali

Retos

  • Lawlessness, conflict and insurgency by extremist groups
  • Communities impotent to prevent habitat loss and ecosystem degradation resulting in impoverished subsistence livelihoods
  • Over-exploitation by burgeoning cattle herds and other commercial interests from distant urban centres
  • Social tensions between clans and ethnicities over access to natural resources resulting in no collectively respected management systems
  • Elephant poaching as the project area lies astride major international trafficking routes
  • Unregulated hunting leading to the disappearance of many wildlife species
  • Increasing human-elephant conflicts as elephants are displaced from their refuges by armed groups occupying dense thickets surrounding waterholes, coupled with the impacts of artisanal gold-mining
  • Youth unemployment and vulnerability to recruitment by armed groups
  • Lack of economic/social empowerment of youths and women
  • Lack of Government capacity with regard to elephant protection and protected area management

Beneficiarios

The main beneficiaries are the local communities of the Gourma and the government of Mali. As a national and international heritage, the conservation of the iconic Gourma elephants also benefits the people of Mali, West Africa and the world.

¿ Cómo interactúan los building blocks en la solución?

All the building blocks are intimately linked and derive from the first building block, the project’s “complex-systems” approach. This directly guides both WHAT the project does and HOW the project does it. The essence is to see the problem as part of a wider social-ecological system and seek to shift the dynamics (and outcome) of that system by careful action. It is to adopt an open mind; respect the needs and perspectives of all stakeholders; fill knowledge gaps to better understand the complexity; identify and network “assets” and key intervention points for action. It involves facilitating the co-creation of a common perspective among stakeholders, followed by transparent and just solutions at grassroots level, which then inform further enabling legislation (e.g. the new Gourma Reserve). Ongoing dialogue between stakeholders is central. The ripple effects of this synergistic, multi-sector approach go beyond pure elephant conservation, becoming a driving force for peace and social resilience. Taking a wide-lens view of the problem and recognising the multiplicity of forces at play provides more opportunities for creative trade-offs, as for example, by providing an occupation for at-risk youth in natural resource protection and land restoration.

Impactos positivos

The project’s integrated approach has meant that while the initial focus was on elephant conservation, it has delivered multiple benefits, improved several problems and contributed to several SDGs. The “elephant-centred” CBNRM systems are based on local perceptions of value and encourage different communities, clans and ethnicities to come together and devise transparent and equitable solutions that address these problems by way of consensus.

Communities feel empowered to improve their well-being through taking responsibility for the management of the natural resources that are the basis of local subsistence livelihoods. Other tangible benefits include improved local governance (at commune and village level), social cohesion and peace, opportunities for women and youth, environmental restoration and regeneration, healthy and viable habitats for elephants and other wildlife. All these build environmental and social resilience, reinforcing support for elephant conservation among local communities, and these systems become an integral part of the commune's social and economic development plans.

Working with Government has resulted in an elephant management plan, the creation of a new protected area covering the elephant range, and the creation of Mali’s first anti-poaching unit which, supported by community trust and support, prevented the elephants’ extermination when poaching suddenly skyrocketed in 2015.

Historia

Carlton Ward Jr

When the MEP began in 2003 increasing human pressure had resulted in desertification, habitat loss and degradation, reduced environmental and social resilience and impoverished livelihoods that exacerbated social and human-elephant conflicts.

Attitude surveys revealed that local people did not want elephants to disappear: they understood that elephants were a sign of a healthy ecosystem and that human activities must respect environmental limits. Further studies and consultations revealed more about the underlying drivers: communities’ problems, value systems and relationship with elephants. Anarchic natural resource use was at the core and individual groups were unable to act against it. It meant that Mali’s decentralisation legislation was an appropriate tool to help build consensus among the diverse local groups on resource management systems that enabled the restoration and sustainable use of natural resources for the benefit of people and elephants.

These “elephant-centred” CBNRM systems involved creating community structures: committees of elders supported by young community ecoguards, selected by each community to patrol and enforce community agreements, as well as conduct resource protection and restoration activities.

Community rules protected their resources (water, pasture, forests, wildlife) from overuse and declared protected forests and pasture reserves, protected with firebreaks built by the teams of ecoguards. That year, as the dry season advanced and fires broke out, their pasture survived. They had plenty of pasture for their livestock at the end of the dry season and could sell hay and grazing access at a good price to others. Their cattle were worth 50% more at market, had more young and less disease. The women were able to establish local enterprises based on the availability of natural resources, e.g. the sale of hay, forage and forest products such as Gum Arabic. These activities also promoted harmony within the community and helped heal tensions between ethnicities.

Benefits were shared, reinforcing local support for elephant conservation. As elephant poaching took off with the advent of conflict and lawlessness, community ecoguards monitored elephants, reporting on poaching, HEC and raising awareness. When poaching escalated in 2015, community networks were no longer able to contain poaching on their own and asked for armed support. The MEP worked with the government to create an anti-poaching unit capable of containing poaching in the Gourma.

Contribuido por

Susan Canney WILD Foundation

Contribuído por

WILD Foundation - Mali
WILD Foundation