Community perceptions of wildlife management strategies and subsistence poaching in the Okavango Delta, Botswana

ABSTRACT

This paper assessed household perceptions of the effects of wildlife management strategies on subsistence poaching in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. A total of 226 households in the Okavango Delta villages of Ditshiping, Khwai, Tubu, and Habu were interviewed about their views regarding wildlife legislation, policies, strategies, and possible impacts on subsistence poaching. Informed by the Routine Activities Theory, this study revealed that households perceived Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) as an effective strategy to reduce subsistence poaching. However, following the 2014 government moratorium on wildlife hunting, CBNRM became ineffective in reducing poaching. The hunting ban was perceived by households to have resulted in loss of trophy hunting income, joblessness, lack of game meat, and increases in subsistence poaching. CBNRM and the hunting ban were conflicting strategies, the simultaneous implementation of which led to the alienation of local communities in wildlife management and the perceived upsurge in subsistence poaching.

KEYWORDS:

• CBNRM
• wildlife management policies
• Okavango Delta
• subsistence poaching
• hunting ban

Acknowledgments

We thank the German Government Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) for funding the study under the Southern Africa Science Service Centre for Climate Change and Adaptive Land Management (SASSCAL) Task 314 project. We also thank the Botswana Ministry of Environment Natural Resources Conservation and Tourism, Department of Wildlife and National Parks, the study communities, and all the organizations and individuals who contributed to this work in various ways.

Notes

1. Ethics There were no risks associated with participating in this study. The village leadership and all study participants in the selected villages were consulted before the start of the project. The consultation aimed at explaining to them the project purpose, the data collection process, and the likely distresses and solutions to such challenges. Ethical clearance (REF:UBR/RES/IRB/GRAD/243) was sourced from the University of Botswana’s Office of Research and Development (ORD). Additionally, a research permit (EWT/8/36/4 XXIII (50)) was obtained from the Ministry of Environment Wildlife and Tourism.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the German Government Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF).