Community involvement in wildlife conservation and management - A case study of Namunyak Wildlife Conservation Trust (NWCT)
Mary Njeri Macharia
Abstract
Mary Njeri Macharia
Abstract
This project study was carried out in six selected villages living at the perimeter of 15-25KM from Namunyak Wildlife Conservation Trust. It focuses mainly on the involvement of the local communities in the conservation and management of wildlife which coexists freely with them in the unprotected area. These community areas were: Nkangororeki, Loigama, Ntaparani, Lerug, Reteti, and Tintil all located in Samburu East. \nFrom a development perspective, conservation ventures should only be considered ‘successful’ if local communities have some measure of control over them and if they share equitably in the benefits emerging from conservancy activities. \n An empowerment framework is proposed as a suitable mechanism for aiding analysis of the social, economic, psychological and political impacts of wildlife conservation on local communities. Community wildlife service is a strategy recognized by the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act CAP 376. The Act calls for active community participation in wildlife conservation outside protected areas. \n \nThe Primary data collection was done from four main sources: questionnaire surveys, group discussion, interviewing key informants and researcher’s observations. Data collected was analyzed quantitively and descriptive statistics used with tables and graphs being the means of data presentation. \nThe results showed that NWCT has largely involved the local community in various activities and benefit sharing to enhance ease of management of wildlife resources both within and outside conservation area as discussed in the context below. \nThe findings of the study showed that NWCT has contributed to an increase in economic standards of the local community through various benefits that improve their livelihoods
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This project study was carried out in six selected villages living at the perimeter of 15-25KM from Namunyak Wildlife Conservation Trust. It focuses mainly on the involvement of the local communities in the conservation and management of wildlife which coexists freely with them in the unprotected area. These community areas were: Nkangororeki, Loigama, Ntaparani, Lerug, Reteti, and Tintil all located in Samburu East. \nFrom a development perspective, conservation ventures should only be considered ‘successful’ if local communities have some measure of control over them and if they share equitably in the benefits emerging from conservancy activities. \n An empowerment framework is proposed as a suitable mechanism for aiding analysis of the social, economic, psychological and political impacts of wildlife conservation on local communities. Community wildlife service is a strategy recognized by the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act CAP 376. The Act calls for active community participation in wildlife conservation outside protected areas. \n \nThe Primary data collection was done from four main sources: questionnaire surveys, group discussion, interviewing key informants and researcher’s observations. Data collected was analyzed quantitively and descriptive statistics used with tables and graphs being the means of data presentation. \nThe results showed that NWCT has largely involved the local community in various activities and benefit sharing to enhance ease of management of wildlife resources both within and outside conservation area as discussed in the context below. \nThe findings of the study showed that NWCT has contributed to an increase in economic standards of the local community through various benefits that improve their livelihoods
Key concepts: Wildlife, Livelihood, Wildlife conservation, Community-based conservation, Environmental resource management, Geography, Context (archaeology), Wildlife management