2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0305-750x(01)00134-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Economic Efficiency and Incentives for Change within Namibia's Community Wildlife Use Initiatives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
46
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 69 publications
(50 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
2
46
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Evidence from all the studies cited previously suggests that international willingness to pay for elephant conservation in African countries exists, which implies that South Africa has a range of options to choose from. Barnes et al (2002) supports this view and maintains that much of the hitherto substantial international NGO and donor support for CBNRM is a form of nonuse values. Additionally, contingent valuation studies among wildlife viewing tourists in Botswana and Namibia (Barnes, 1996b;Barnes et al, 1999) revealed a significant willingness to pay for wildlife conservation.…”
Section: Elephant Crop Damage Cost Levelmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Evidence from all the studies cited previously suggests that international willingness to pay for elephant conservation in African countries exists, which implies that South Africa has a range of options to choose from. Barnes et al (2002) supports this view and maintains that much of the hitherto substantial international NGO and donor support for CBNRM is a form of nonuse values. Additionally, contingent valuation studies among wildlife viewing tourists in Botswana and Namibia (Barnes, 1996b;Barnes et al, 1999) revealed a significant willingness to pay for wildlife conservation.…”
Section: Elephant Crop Damage Cost Levelmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Michael Bollig reports in his contribution that the hopes and aspirations of the Namibian government in the establishment of new commons corresponded to changing concerns about natural resource management on the international level: the state was meant to devolve the day to day management of natural resources to rural communities, provide conditions that locals benefitted economically from resources in the best possible way and that co-management of resources would result in management plans geared towards sustainability (Barnes et al 2002;Bollig and Menestrey-Schwieger 2014). There was a general consensus that a heightened sense of ownership, economic incentives and stable local social institutions were the key to sustainable resource use in the poverty-stricken, post-civil war communal areas of Namibia's north.…”
Section: Top-down: Co-managed Pastoral Commonsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Beginning in the 1990s the implementation of CBNRM led to a drastic reconfiguration of the organizational and institutional landscapes around rural water points (Barnes et al 2002;Davis 2008;Falk et al 2009;Silva and Mosimane 2013;Bollig and Menestrey Schwieger 2014;Menestrey Schwieger 2015;Schnegg 2016a). A shift toward self-governance meant turning ownership and responsibility of the borehole infrastructure over to local user groups.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%