2012Unpublished venueRequires access

The performance of CAMPFIRE in Zimbabwe: 1989–2006

Russell Taylor

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

Zimbabwe’s Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) pioneered CBNRM in southern Africa. It was conceived some 30 years ago in the northern Sebungwe region where the environmental impacts of tsetse eradication programmes and associated in-migration of people onto marginal agricultural land threatened the potential comparative economic advantage of wildlife, which was still abundant in the region (Child, G., 1995). Although initially driven by a conservation agenda, it was quickly appreciated by those involved in developing the programme that a people-centred approach was needed, as were devolved governance and rural democratization processes. A number of important principles for community conservation emerged, including economic benefit, devolution and collective proprietorship for a common pool resource, wildlife (Jones and Murphree, 2001), which have been put into practice with varying degrees of success and indeed failure, and the programme continues to evolve adaptively and experimentally, with stakeholders. This chapter summarizes the progress of CAMPFIRE since its formal introduction in 1986, providing as complete an assessment as is possible with incomplete data, using several key variables to measure conservation, social benefit and governance outcomes.1

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Zimbabwe’s Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) pioneered CBNRM in southern Africa. It was conceived some 30 years ago in the northern Sebungwe region where the environmental impacts of tsetse eradication programmes and associated in-migration of people onto marginal agricultural land threatened the potential comparative economic advantage of wildlife, which was still abundant in the region (Child, G., 1995). Although initially driven by a conservation agenda, it was quickly appreciated by those involved in developing the programme that a people-centred approach was needed, as were devolved governance and rural democratization processes. A number of important principles for community conservation emerged, including economic benefit, devolution and collective proprietorship for a common pool resource, wildlife (Jones and Murphree, 2001), which have been put into practice with varying degrees of success and indeed failure, and the programme continues to evolve adaptively and experimentally, with stakeholders. This chapter summarizes the progress of CAMPFIRE since its formal introduction in 1986, providing as complete an assessment as is possible with incomplete data, using several key variables to measure conservation, social benefit and governance outcomes.1

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Zimbabwe’s Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) pioneered CBNRM in southern Africa. It was conceived some 30 years ago in the northern Sebungwe region where the environmental impacts of tsetse eradication programmes and associated in-migration of people onto marginal agricultural land threatened the potential comparative economic advantage of wildlife, which was still abundant in the region (Child, G., 1995). Although initially driven by a conservation agenda, it was quickly appreciated by those involved in developing the programme that a people-centred approach was needed, as were devolved governance and rural democratization processes. A number of important principles for community conservation emerged, including economic benefit, devolution and collective proprietorship for a common pool resource, wildlife (Jones and Murphree, 2001), which have been put into practice with varying degrees of success and indeed failure, and the programme continues to evolve adaptively and experimentally, with stakeholders. This chapter summarizes the progress of CAMPFIRE since its formal introduction in 1986, providing as complete an assessment as is possible with incomplete data, using several key variables to measure conservation, social benefit and governance outcomes.1

Key concepts: Geography

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The performance of CAMPFIRE in Zimbabwe: 1989–2006 — Research Paper | ScholarLens