The CBNRM Bill was passed by the Botswana Parliament two weeks ago. However, I believe it overlooks several critical issues that are essential to achieving the goals and objectives of the CBNRM programme. As such, I feel it is important to provide some background on the evolution of the CBNRM initiative. This week, I will focus on its development across Africa, and next week, I will explore its progression within Botswana.
Developing countries endowed with a rich natural resource base such as Botswana have since the late 1980s become associated with the CBNRM programmes. This is because these countries are facing a constant decline in their natural resource base, especially wildlife. Central to the CBNRM is the assumptions underlying the decentralization of natural resources.
Decentralization of natural resource management implies a process of redistribution of power and the transfer of responsibilities from the central government to rural communities in resource management. This is a shift from the top-down to a bottom-up approach in natural resource management. CBNRM thus reforms the conventional “protectionist conservation philosophy” and “top-down” approaches to development.
The decentralization of resources to local communities is assumed to have the potential to promote conservation and rural development. Conservationists perceive the decentralization of natural resources as a remedy for the chronic wildlife decline resulting from the central government’s failure in resource management. Local institutions where local people have a role to play in resource management and derive benefits from such resources around them are essential for CBNRM to achieve its goals.
The CBNRM programme is based on the premise that local populations have a greater interest in the sustainable use of natural resources around them than a centralized or distant government or private management institutions. CBNRM credits local institutions and people with having a greater understanding of, as well as a vested interest in their local environment and hence can effectively manage natural resources through local or traditional practices.
The underlying assumption of CBNRM is that once rural communities participate in natural resource utilization and derives economic benefits, this will cultivate the spirit of ownership and the development of positive attitudes towards resource use and ultimately lead communities to the use of natural resources found around them sustainably. CBNRM is built on three conceptual foundations, namely: Economic value, devolution and collective proprietorship.
The CBNRM programme is known by different names in various Eastern and Southern African countries. Its success rate also differs from country to country and from project to project. For example, in Zimbabwe, it is called the Communal Area Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE). In Namibia, it is called Living in a Finite Environment (LIFE). In Mozambique, it is known as Tchuma Tchato ‘Our Wealth’, in Kenya it is known as the Conservation of Biodiversity Resource Areas Programme (COBRA), in Tanzania it is known as the Ujirani Mwena ‘Good Neighbourliness’. In Botswana, the program is known as the Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) programme. In these countries where CBNRM is implemented, natural resource management approaches are designed to reconcile biodiversity conservation and socio-economic needs. Now that the CBNRM Bill has been passed, which areas can we subject the bill for improvement.
