The following options for action offer some ideas on how to provide for local needs in a conservation initiative. They need to be considered in the light of particular circumstances, depending on which they may or may not be appropriate. You will undoubtedly think of other options as well. It is important to remember that the list of options for actions should not be viewed as a step-by-step procedure, although it is subdivided in the order in which options would be logically considered (for instance, you may want to develop a compensation programme only after having completed an assessment of social impact). Also, some of the options below are alternatives to one another and need to be compared in terms of appropriateness to the particular context.
The list of options is subdivided into four groups according to the type of activity. These are:
2.4.1 Review of indigenous/customary systems of access to resources and resource management
2.4.2 Participatory review of customary claims to land and natural resources
2.4.3 Review of national policies and laws affecting resource management
2.4.4 Assessment of local uses of natural resources 2.4.5 Social impact assessment
2.4.6 Open meetings among stakeholders
2.4.7 Special events and 'ideas fairs'
2.4.8 Visits to successful conservation/development initiatives
2.4.9 Building upon local knowledge and skills in resource management
2.4.10 Participatory planning to integrate local needs
2.4.11 Zoning to separate incompatible land uses
2.4.12 Primary environmental care (PEC) projects
2.4.13 Jobs for local people
2.4.14 Local distribution of revenues from the conservation initiative
2.4.15 Compensation and substitution programmes
2.4.16 Feasibility studies
2.4.17 Linking benefits with efforts in conservation
2.4.18 Supportive links with relevant services and programmes
2.4.19 Monitoring land tenure and land values in sensitive areas
2.4.20 Incentives to conservation accountability
2.4.21 Biodiversity monitoring and area surveillance by local people
2.4.22 Integrating the conservation initiative with local empowerment in welfare, health and population dynamics
Carry out a comprehensive review of past and present systems of access to resources and resource management. Pay particular attention to uses of resources for local livelihood; established rights of use; local institutions in charge; demarcation of territories occupied and used by indigenous residents; and mechanisms for negotiating agreements and managing conflicts. Involve local people in the review, and discuss with them ways to integrate the effective components of the indigenous/customary systems with the conservation initiative.
The review may provide both a sensible basis for conservation decisions and a set of baseline data for monitoring the benefits and impacts of the initiative. This type of review is best carried out by people who are trusted by and have a mandate to undertake the work from the relevant communities. Indigenous people may be rightly reluctant to release information about some of their customs and traditions to people whom they do not know or trust. The team should also have a sound understanding of the culture, language and traditions of the local communities, to be able to interpret the information provided.
See Questions 2.2.4 and 2.2.5, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.2 (Indigenous resource management systems) and 4.10 (Local knowledge for conservation), Volume 2; and Examples 21a-c in Section 6, Volume 2.
Organize a participatory mapping session. This exercise can be used to identify land tenure boundaries; areas and resources used by the local people for different purposes; and/or areas where the local people estimate there are environmental problems. (The latter can be focused on afterward to discuss how the problems can be addressed.)
In some cases, the people themselves can draw a map of the intended area and features (see the "Participatory Mapping" tool in Vol. 2). In others, a simple drawing or an aerial photo can be provided by the management of the conservation initiative, to which the people can add as they see fit. Each person present can contribute and identify whatever information is required. It is important that the map contributors include different stakeholders (e.g., women, the elderly, youth, different ethnic and religious groups, land-owners and the landless, business people, local authorities) and that several sessions are held, so that different groups have the time to review and discuss the claims of others.
See Questions 2.2.4 and 2.2.5, Volume 1; Information Gathering and Assessment in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 22a-c in Section 6, Volume 2.
Carry out a review of national and regional laws and policies affecting national resource management (e.g., laws regulating ownership and access to resources; codes establishing what types of local institutions can have access to credit or enter into partnerships with the government; market regulations, etc.). Assess the stability, compatibility and degree of enforcement of these laws and policies. Involve local stakeholders in the review and, as necessary, in identifying policy changes that would favour both them and the conservation initiative. Make the results of the review available to all stakeholders.
The review will provide key information on the capacity of current policies and laws to integrate local needs with conservation objectives. It will also highlight areas where changes are needed, and whether contradictions exist.
Involving the community in the review process - even if mostly through dissemination of the resulting information - will increase the level of knowledge and awareness among local people of relevant policies and laws, how they are affected by them, and how they can use them.
Too often, policy and legislation concerning natural resource management are both vague and poorly known. On crucial matters, it may be advisable to seek legal interpretation and advice.
See Questions 1.2.7, 1.2.8 and 1.2.9, Volume 1; Concept File 4.17 (Governance and the rule of law), Volume 2; and Examples 23a-d in Section 6, Volume 2.
Prior to setting up the conservation initiative, undertake an assessment of the local uses of natural resources in the area and estimate their ecological impacts. Assess whether the area can absorb these impacts, or whether they are actually or potentially damaging. The assessment should be done in a transparent manner, involving both local users and independent experts. Wherever possible, use research techniques in which local people can actively participate. This will help to build knowledge and awareness about the environment and increase local skills. It will also increase the local community's sense of ownership of the study's findings and recommendations.
The study will help to identify the true causes of environmental damage; the local activities which help to retain/enhance biodiversity; the activities that are compatible with conservation objectives; and the activities that are not compatible and therefore need modifications/ alternatives.
The study described in this option can be technically complicated, especially if several local uses of a resource have combined or contradictory effects. In such cases, singling out the effect of any one such use - and thus assessing its impact - may be quite difficult.
See Questions 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.9 (Biodiversity and rural livelihood) and 4.14 (Common property, communal property and open access regimes), Volume 2; and Examples 24a-f in Section 6, Volume 2.
Prior to implementing the conservation initiative, undertake a social impact assessment (SIA) involving the various local actors potentially affected. The assessment should provide a basis for integrating the initiative with the resource use practices and values of the local community; build on traditional systems of resource management and decision-making; identify expected costs and benefits and their recipient groups; and design effective information and consultation processes.
Include an analysis of local resource users; local knowledge and practices in relation to resources; scope and capacity of decision-making structures; and local wealth distribution, health status and literacy levels. Specifically include an analysis of the initiative's potential impacts on local health, nutrition and population dynamics. Consider gender/age/ethnic/class matters and vulnerable groups (e.g., refugees).
The assessment should help clarify the initiative's objectives and the means of achieving them. It should also form a strategy for ongoing participation of stakeholders, for developing commitment and capacity at appropriate levels, and for mitigation plans where adverse social impacts are expected. Recommendations should be discussed with the affected groups to ensure that they are appropriate and acceptable. The SIA should include details on implementing and monitoring the recommended measures to reduce the adverse impacts on local groups.
By anticipating the potential effects, measures can be planned to reduce or avoid the negative impacts while creating opportunities to realize the potential benefits. Benefits can take a variety of forms in addition to income-generating activities. Enhanced biomass, improved water supply, recognized and secure access to some wild resources, cultural respect and protection, social rewards and returns for traditional knowledge used by the wider community should all be explored as potential positive effects associated with the conservation initiative.
A possible constraint to undertaking an SIA is that it requires a relatively high degree of skill in social analysis and community consultation; it can also be time-consuming and costly. A potential problem is raising community expectations which cannot be met by making recommendations that are unrealistic (e.g., for political or economic reasons). This problem can be reduced by involving decision-makers in the SIA.
See Questions 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.8, and 2.2.10, Volume 1; Concept File 4.8 (Applied ethics in conservation), Volume 2; Information Gathering and Assessment in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 25a-c in Section 6, Volume 2.
Organize a series of open meetings to identify the expected or current costs and benefits (financial and otherwise) of the conservation initiative. Discuss them and find ways to distribute them as equitably as possible among the various stakeholders. For instance, a meeting could be called to examine in detail a zoning system envisaged by the initiative, as well as the limitations and rules regarding access to resources. Promote the active participation of stakeholders by facilitating, rather than controlling, the meetings. Intervene in discussions only if arguments continue for too long, if some parties dominate the discussion, or when the stakeholders run out of ideas or request further information. If the discussion is going well, let it flow.
This process makes the costs and benefits of the initiative explicit; it identifies potential and existing conflicts and gathers ideas on how they can be resolved through alternative activities. Care must be taken not to raise unrealistic expectations. People will usually place high hopes on the benefits they perceive as 'promised' by the initiative.
Care must also be taken to ensure that the more powerful stakeholders do not dominate the meetings, seeking to protect their interests at the expense of others. Stakeholders who are vulnerable and/or discriminated against may be much less capable or willing to stand up so that their needs are appropriately considered.
See Social Communication, and Information Gathering and Assessment in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 26a-d in Section 6, Volume 2.
Organize special events to elicit new ideas for initiatives to link local livelihood with conservation. Establish prizes for the best ideas ('ideas fair') and activities, and link the event with sports matches, market occasions, religious celebrations, etc. to give visibility and spirit to the occasion. Local newspapers and radio stations could promote the event and support conservation awareness. Video shows on conservation issues could be used as a stimulus to generating ideas. Competitions and prizes - not only for ideas but also for concrete achievements (e.g., largest variety of seeds of a given food crop, most efficient irrigation system, largest area reforested by a community) - would link the event with a general promotion of conservation awareness and capacity.
Special events tend to attract a large number of people, especially in isolated areas where gatherings are relatively rare. A special event which incorporates fun, entertainment and competition is likely to receive great visibility. Such an event would provide an opportunity to inform and educate, and to gather and discuss local perspectives and concrete options for action.
See Questions 1.2.9, 2.2.9 and 2.2.10, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.10 (Local knowledge in conservation) and 4.29 (Cross-cultural communication and local media), Volume 2; Social Communication in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 27a-e in Section 6, Volume 2.
Organize visits for local people to areas with successful examples of conservation initiatives that manage to meet local needs. The visits are not to promote the initiatives but to help people come up with ideas on how they could generate benefits from their own local conservation efforts. It is therefore important to let the people control the discussions and the focus of the visits.
Organize follow-up sessions so that those who took part in the visits can tell others what they have seen and learned. Encourage discussion (possibly with the help of audio-visual aids) about ways to adapt the ideas in practice in the visited community to their own situation. Encourage planning sessions to follow.
Seeing the successes of others is an excellent way to stimulate ideas and action. Discussing the pitfalls that can occur with other communities can also avoid costly and disheartening mistakes. However, care must be taken to avoid people getting carried away with enthusiasm about the success of others and buying into models inappropriate for their particular area.
In addition to stimulating options for generating benefits and meeting their own needs, the visits can also provide the spark to establish local or regional networking groups that pool resources and technical knowledge to solve common problems. These networks, which are geared to field-based experiences, can also get involved in advocacy and providing key inputs for policy-making.
See Question 2.2.10, Volume 1; and Examples 28a-e in Section 6, Volume 2.
Organize retreats, information exchange sessions and development and demonstration programmes to help local people build upon and improve their current management of natural resources. Themes could include enhanced sustainability and efficiency of use, enhanced productivity, more effective marketing, improved control of marketing procedures, product substitution, alternatives to destructive practices, agro-forestry and agro-ecology practices, etc. Value local knowledge and skills, and follow the inclinations and advice of the local people.
This approach increases the local community's sense of confidence in, and willingness to cooperate with, the conservation initiative. It builds upon the pride and self-respect of local people and is effective in mobilizing local support for conservation. Most importantly, it may provide some crucial added skills and capabilities that will result in concrete local benefits.
A problem sometimes encountered with retreats is that they require a considerable investment of time. This can limit the number of staff from the initiative and the local people who can afford to participate.
Care needs to be taken not to follow local advice uncritically - not all local practices are environmentally sound. Where local requests cannot be met by the professional team (e.g., about allocation of budget resources), a proper exchange of views and discussion should be held and decisions should be made in a transparent way.
See Questions 2.2.4 and 2.2.9, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.2 (Indigenous resource management systems), 4.3 (Local institutions for resource management), 4.9 (Biodiversity and rural livelihood) and 4.10 (Local knowledge in conservation), Volume 2; and Examples 29a-e in Section 6, Volume 2.
Carry out a series of participatory planning exercises with various stakeholders, to identify ways by which local livelihood options can be made compatible with and mutually supportive of conservation objectives. Assist by offering facilities for the meetings, facilitation, examples of options, literature, links with groups and institutions that can provide various kinds of support (legal, financial, technical, etc.) and so on.
These exercises are sure to enrich the planning of the conservation initiative by increasing access to local knowledge, information and skills and by ensuring the initiative does not neglect the perspectives and interests of those people most likely to pay the costs of the conservation initiative. In fact, participatory planning provides a powerful mechanism to work out an equitable share of such costs and benefits.
The outcome of these meetings could vary from plans for primary environmental care projects to recommendations for activities and modifications of the conservation initiative to better harmonize it with the requirements of local livelihood.
See Questions 1.2.6, 2.2.3, 2.2.8 and 2.2.10, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.19 (Primary environmental care), 4.20 (Sustainable use of wildlife), 4.21 (Sustainable farming, forestry and fishing practices) and 4.22 (Ecotourism), Volume 2; Planning, and Conflict Management in Section 5; Volume 2; and Examples 30a-e in Section 6, Volume 2.
Introduce a zoning system to provide flexibility in the land uses allowed in different parts of the area covered by the conservation initiative. For instance, different zones can define areas where certain species can be hunted or harvested, and other areas where the same species are strictly protected. Involve stakeholders in defining the boundaries of the zones, the uses allowed in each zone and the conditions which will apply to specific uses. Usually, a zoning plan is a crucial component of a Collaborative Management Agreement among different stakeholders.
Combine this exercise with a review of customary resource management systems and resource-use patterns. At best, the new system will reinforce the customary system and minimize the detrimental effects of resource protection on the livelihood of user groups. Stakeholders can be granted different rights at different times even within the same zoning system. For instance, indigenous peoples may be granted special access to some resources in recognition of their customary rights and sound use practices.
See Options 2.4.1, 2.4.4, 2.4.10 and 1.4.17, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.2 (Indigenous resource management systems) and 4.16 (Collaborative management regimes), Volume 2; Planning in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 31a-d in Section 6, Volume 2.
Help local people develop their own primary environmental care (PEC) projects. PEC projects combine local environmental care with meeting local needs. The projects would be run by local organized groups and could be assisted by or linked with the conservation initiative in several ways. For instance, some staff of the conservation initiative can act as 'matchmakers' to assist local groups in obtaining the inputs which they themselves identify as being crucial for projects to succeed. Such inputs may include credit, specific technologies, political support, training courses, networking with similar projects or study visits, as well as specific information and advice.
In some cases a rotating fund can be established to support the best community-generated projects that meet PEC criteria. This is particularly appropriate when capital is available (e.g., through a trust fund) to support both environmental conservation and people's welfare.
PEC projects build local confidence and strengthen the capacity and skills of local organizations. When they are closely associated with the conservation initiative, they effectively enhance the local support and thus the sustainability of the initiative itself.
See Questions 1.2.5, 2.2.3 and 2.2.10 and Options 1.4.15 and 2.4.10, Volume 1; Concept File 4.19 (Primary environmental care), Volume 2; and Examples 32a-f in Section 6, Volume 2.
Provide jobs within the conservation initiative for local people, especially for those disadvantaged by it. If necessary, establish training programmes for people to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills. If not enough jobs are available in the conservation initiative, explore whether they can be provided elsewhere, and facilitate the hiring of local residents (e.g., by assisting them in obtaining information, transportation, training, etc.). It may also be possible to create new jobs, such as recycling waste or producing materials locally rather than importing them.
As well as providing a means to replace income lost through restrictions imposed by the initiative, creating jobs for local people can be good for the long-term sustainability and work-force stability of the initiative. Local people are usually more committed than outsiders to staying in the area. Also, employment in work which is dependent on the success of the initiative increases the sense of ownership of and commitment to the initiative within the local community. Employing local people can also increase local control of the initiative and promote the use of local knowledge.
In areas where there is a shortage of employment opportunities, there may be intense lobbying and competition for jobs among various local groups. If not carefully handled, this may damage the relationship between the initiative and the local communities. Managers should avoid employing relatives and friends. Salaries should be compatible with local pay scales to avoid creating major economic disparities in the community and thus promoting envy and conflict.
Jobs established on the expectation they will be permanent (because they are replacing other sources of income lost as a result of the initiative) should be financially solid. Failure to sustain such jobs could leave the local people worse off than they were before, and result in ill feeling towards the initiative. Economic feasibility studies of any job-creation projects should be undertaken before they are implemented and it should be clear from the outset which jobs are expected to be only temporary and/or seasonal.
See Questions 2.2.1, 2.2.6, 2.2.9, 2.2.10 and Option 2.4.16 , Volume 1; Concept Files 4.19 (Primary environmental care), 4.22 (Ecotourism) and 4.24 (Jobs in conservation), Volume 2; and Examples 33a-d in Section 6, Volume 2.
If the conservation initiative is capable of generating an income flow (e.g., via ecotourism or culling of wildlife), then identify, together with the interested parties, a way to distribute a part of such revenues locally. The distribution could be carried out in different ways. Revenues could be shared equally among all the households in a village; they could be shared proportionally to needs, or to damages suffered because of the conservation initiative; or they could be used to build a local "livelihood fund". The fund would finance local projects, in particular, projects to benefit the social groups disadvantaged by the initiative. Whichever system is used must be transparent and accountable and agreed to by all the stakeholders.
An advantage of this approach is that it directly links specific benefits with the existence of the conservation initiative. The option should, however, be approached realistically. Very few conservation initiatives have the potential to generate large sums of money. Where revenues are small, they may not be a sufficient incentive for people to participate (i.e., to spend time and resources) in developing communal initiatives. It also may not be feasible to share them equally among households. In such a situation, investing the revenues for some community development project may be an interesting option, especially if the project can serve the interests of local people in an equitable way. Alternatively, when revenues are substantial, it may be difficult to convince government authorities that the local people are entitled to a sizeable share.
The management of the revenues should be carried out in a competent and transparent way, following established rules. A written record of how the funds are distributed should be kept, and made available to the public.
See Questions 2.2.7, 2.2.8 and 2.2.10, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.23 (Compensation and substitution programmes), 4.25 (Economic valuation in conservation) and 4.26 (Incentives and disincentives to conservation), Volume 2; Planning in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 34a-f in Section 6, Volume 2.
Carry out an economic evaluation of the resources to which some people will lose access, or which could suffer damage as a result of the conservation initiative (e.g., serious damage to crops and livestock can be caused by wild animals protected by the initiative). Carry out an assessment of potential compensation and substitution programmes (e.g., rotating funds for local development projects, systems to compensate for actual damage, systems to replace a protected resource with another local or non-local product). If the programmes are deemed feasible and effective, implement them. The programmes should aim at increasing self-reliance, compensating for damages and maintaining quality of life, but should strive to not create a dependency on outside resources.
Compensating for losses experienced by individuals or a community as a result of a conservation initiative reinforces the initiative itself. Unfortunately, the mechanisms to provide monetary compensation to individuals who have suffered specific losses (e.g., crop damage by wild animals) can be cumbersome and difficult to keep transparent and honest.
Substitution programmes can also provide a means of compensation. Often, however, local people whose livelihoods or basic needs are dependent on the resources to be protected will stop using those resources only if and when an alternative is provided.
Initiating and establishing compensation and substitution programmes can consume both time and energy and are demanding in terms of staff time and skills. Ingenuity, social sensitivity and economic skills are needed to design adequate provisions to balance major changes in life-style and production systems consequent to a conservation initiative.
See Questions 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.7, 2.2.8 and 2.2.10, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.23 (Compensation and substitution programmes) and 4.26 (Incentives and disincentives to conservation), Volume 2; and Examples 35a-e in Section 6, Volume 2.
Carry out studies of the practicality and economic viability of the activities that have been proposed to provide for local needs within the conservation initiative. Undertake thorough market research on the demand for products, the likely income and the establishment costs. Organize meetings to discuss and expand on the results of the studies with all potentially affected groups. Make sure that the people who start commercial activities associated with the conservation initiative are supported by appropriate business training. Financial feasibility studies backed up by appropriate training will ensure that all concerned have realistic expectations.
Feasibility studies generally require a variety of skills and knowledge. Depending on the venture to be examined, these may include market and consumer analysis, business management, accounting, processing, etc. Involving local people who have knowledge relevant to the proposed production and tapping into voluntary expertise in the wider region may lessen the need for expensive professional advice. Nevertheless, relevant expertise is often needed; the conservation initiative may find it appropriate to offer this type of support. The cost of failure for both the local people and the initiative may be too high to warrant unnecessary risks.
See Question 2.2.10 and Options 2.4.12 , 2.4.13 , 2.4.14 and 2.4.15, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.19 (Primary environmental care) and 4.25 (Economic valuation in conservation), Volume 2; Information Gathering and Assessment in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 36a-c in Section 6, Volume 2.
Identify mechanisms that proportionally reward the efforts of individuals or groups in the conservation initiative. Efforts include all contributions: labour, land, equipment, expertise, as well as costs borne, etc. The mechanisms could be ongoing (such as assurance of tenure, or payments for conservation tasks on the basis of the obtained conservation results), or time-specific (such as a prize or reward for particular achievements). Explore culturally relevant mechanisms of rewarding merit (e.g., ceremonies and public recognition may be part of the benefit expected and desired). Consider linking benefits with zoning arrangements.
This approach reinforces the message that the contribution of local stakeholders to the initiative is important, noticed and valued. It also creates a built-in positive reinforcement of good practices.
There are, however, two potential problems that need to be considered before proceeding with this option. First, the contributions people make towards the initiative need to be seen in proportion to what they are able to give. For instance, while wealthy people may contribute a great deal of money, this may only be a small sacrifice for them. A mother who offers some of her time after working in the fields and looking after a house and family contributes much more in relative terms.
The second potential problem is identifying who contributes what. This is especially difficult in cultures where people work mostly in groups. In such cases it may be more appropriate to reward a group or an entire community rather than individuals.
See Question 2.2.9 and Options 2.4.11, 2.4.12, 2.4.13, 2.4.14, and 2.4.15, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.19 (Primary environmental care) and 4.23 (Compensation and substitution programmes) , Volume 2; and Examples 37a-c in Section 6, Volume 2.
Identify and pursue potential supportive links between the conservation initiative and programmes of various governmental sectors (e.g., health, education, agriculture, etc.) as well as NGO- and community-based programmes operating in the area. For instance, link participatory planning exercises for the management of natural resources to participatory planning for primary health care, to projects promoting women's and children's education and training, and to agro-forestry training schemes, rural credit schemes, family planning services, etc.
The first purpose of forming these links is improving local livelihood by all available means and methods; conservation of natural resources cannot be sustained in the face of deteriorating living conditions. The second purpose is to gain maximum benefits from the services and resources available. Links will also ensure that other programmes and services operating in the region are aware of the initiative and its objectives.
The benefits of linking may be as direct and simple as sharing facilities and means of transportation. They may also be major and forward-looking, such as the conservation benefits of stabilizing local populations when appropriate health and family planning services are widely available.
The crucial importance of this option should not be underestimated. There is little logic in trying to provide local people with incentives to conservation when their most important concerns (health, education, the local economy) are being neglected.
See Option 2.4.12, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.4 (Population dynamics and conservation) and 4.26 (Incentives and disincentives to conservation), Volume 2; and Examples 38a-f in Section 6, Volume 2.
Establish a system to monitor land ownership and land values in sensitive areas, such as buffer zones around protected areas. In territories undergoing rapid land-use changes, such as agricultural frontier regions, land markets can be volatile and unpredictable. Speculative forces often operate a step ahead of legislation, and can undermine efforts at establishing protected areas, special management zones, and community-based conservation. This is particularly important when indigenous peoples are involved. Ongoing monitoring can provide the conservation initiative with key information about the forces at work in and around the natural resources at stake.
The principal aims of the monitoring system would be to establish a baseline situation and ground rules in terms of access to and tenure of natural resources. The system would be useful for highlighting existing contradictions and conflicts when trying to reach mutually agreeable solutions. Once solutions are found, the monitoring would help detect violations of agreements.
The monitoring system can be run either by a local committee comprised of key figures of the region or community, or by an independent technical entity. If available, a geographic information system (GIS) or computer-based mapping technology may be used to store and analyze information. The system may combine a review of public registries with extensive field work, including workshops and participatory surveys. It should be noted that a land tenure monitoring system can be relatively expensive and time-consuming and is usually applied on a limited scale, specifically in very sensitive areas for conservation, or in areas of rapid land-use change.
See Options 2.4.2 and 2.4.3, Volume 1; Monitoring and Evaluation in Section 5, Volume 2; and Example 39a in Section 6, Volume 2.
A number of mechanisms can be devised and established to link a benefit or return to appropriate management practices. For instance, tenure of a given piece of land and permission to use a certain resource can be made conditional on the quality of resources on that land or on the quality of the management of the resources. Obviously, reference standards and guidelines should be well known to all the parties.
Care needs to be taken in adopting this option. In general, it works best when the wish to manage resources in a sustainable way is internalized (i.e., accepted wholeheartedly) by the users of resources. Incentives which rely on project funds should be avoided.
See Questions 2.2.7 and 2.2.9, Volume 1; Concept File 4.26 (Incentives and disincentives to conservation), Volume 2; and Examples 40a-d in Section 6, Volume 2.
Discuss with local people whether they wish to take on the task of monitoring local biodiversity in the territory covered by the initiative. If they do, agree on procedures and responsibilities to ensure that, when problems are identified, they are acted on quickly.
Monitoring biodiversity is one of the most interesting contributions that local people can provide to a conservation initiative. Usually they have both an interest and a comparative advantage in doing the work, because of their easy and frequent access to resources, and because of their detailed knowledge of places and local ecology. Many local residents, for instance, recognize signs of change that are not obvious to non-local observers.
Indicators for the monitoring exercises would be agreed to by the local people and the initiative's staff, as would the reporting schedule and any compensation. In some cases, maintaining local biodiversity would be sufficient reward; in others (especially in very poor communities), explicit compensation may be needed; this can take a variety of forms. In some cases, a community may be assured of access to harvesting a given quantity of resources in exchange for monitoring biodiversity. In others, an economic return may be given (for the whole community or for a salaried individual). In general, it would be advisable to include this option in a general discussion of roles, rights and responsibilities of stakeholders regarding the conservation initiative (see option 1.4.17).
Local people can also effectively carry out surveillance of an area or set of resources. For instance, they can watch for outsiders who try to exploit resources in illegal ways (see example 41d). Surveillance may also refer to phenomena such as fire, floods and landslides. Local residents do have a comparative advantage (and often a direct interest) in recognizing risk factors and early warnings of disastrous events such as fire and floods. If properly supported by relevant social services they can carry out valuable and effective work in disaster prevention.
In surveillance work, local residents should not try to apprehend the violators (which in most countries would be illegal), but instead communicate quickly (e.g., by radio) with the relevant authorities. Specific rewards may be agreed upon as an incentive.
See Question 2.2.9, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.20 (Sustainable use of wildlife), 4.21 (Sustainable farming, forestry and fishing practices) and 4.22 (Ecotourism), Volume 2; and Examples 41a-d in Section 6, Volume 2.
Promote participatory assessment and planning exercises in which initiatives in natural resource management and local welfare and population dynamics are dealt with in an integrated fashion. Lobby authorities to enhance local capabilities for income generation, job training, basic education (especially for women), reproductive health and family planning, and to facilitate a good measure of local awareness and control of local migration phenomena.
Poverty, disease and rapid changes in local population (growth and decline) have a powerful affect on the management of resources. If the conservation initiative is not concerned with local welfare, health and population dynamics, it may become incapable of dealing with phenomena such as deteriorating quality of life and inequitable distribution of resources. These are often at the root of the opposition and conflicts that undermine the sustainability of conservation initiatives.
This option does not at all imply that the initiative become directly involved with providing family planning services, health care or income-generating opportunities. It does, however, suggest that the initiative help local stakeholders (including government authorities) to consider and discuss resource management issues together with issues of local welfare and population dynamics. Once the relevant actors (e.g., government agencies or NGOs working with local people) have decided what they wish to do about these issues, the initiative may support them (in direct or indirect ways) to take appropriate action.
See Questions 2.2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.3, Volume 1; Concept Files 4.4 (Population dynamics and conservation) and 4.19 (Primary environmental care), Volume 2; Information Gathering and Assessment, and Planning in Section 5, Volume 2; and Examples 42a-b in Section 6, Volume 2.