Integrating Conservation and Development

Abstract

Integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs) are increasingly being critiqued for having failed to meet their objectives. Designed with the goal of combining biodiversity conservation with the promotion of local economic development to create a win-win situation for both endangered species and marginalized peoples, numerous recent studies have questioned the effectiveness of the ICDP approach. This research, based on more than 200 interviews at Caohai Nature Reserve in China provides support both positive and negative assessments of ICDPs. The community development and conservation programs at Caohai, cosponsored by the Guizhou Environmental Protection Bureau, Caohai Nature Reserve, the International Crane Foundation, and the Trickle Up Program, were developed in response to violent confrontations between local people and nature reserve managers when managers attempted to enforce reserve regulations. Although the programs at Caohai have met with both failures and successes, these programs have been successful in transforming what was once a violent relationship between local people and nature reserve managers into a much more cooperative one.

A participatory approach for modeling alternative future land use scenarios around Nairobi National Park using Bayesian Belief Networks

“…Furthermore, households earning the most from wildlife often invest in land use practices (e.g., cultivation) that may undermine wildlife or pastoral livelihoods [22]. This is consistent with other studies that dispute the widespread assumption that by providing alternative income opportunities, ICDPs can reduce the use of natural resources by local people [1,17]. A cement plant in the north-central portion of the top photo borders the eastern edge of Nairobi National Park, shown to the west.…”

“…These same studies show, however, that many false assumptions could have been discovered at the design phase of the project through in-depth discussion with a diverse set of participants [2,11,12]. Case study evaluations have consistently called for improved collaborative decision-making between planners and communities [1,3,4,12,17,18].…”

Exploring relationships between conservation and poverty reduction in wetland ecosystems: lessons from 10 integrated wetland conservation and poverty reduction initiatives

“…Nevertheless, rather than lose interest in the wetland, the community agreed to participate with the nature reserve staff in developing and enforcing a zoning scheme that provided habitat for biodiversity but also provided the community access to wetland resources. This counterintuitive willingness was attributed not only to the provision of alternate livelihood avenues but also, importantly, to the attitudinal changes that made people more receptive to conservation or sustainable use messages (Herrold-Menzies 2006). In Caohai, the ability to induce positive thinking was considered by project staff to be central to processes of change that require adoption of new ideas and skills and trade-offs between conservation and poverty reduction objectives (Guizhou Environmental Protection Bureau and the International Crane Foundation 2000).…”

Are alternative livelihood projects effective at reducing local threats to specified elements of biodiversity and/or improving or maintaining the conservation status of those elements?

“…Blomley et al [59] studied a range of interventions around Bwindi Impenetrable and Mgahinga Gorilla National Parks in Uganda designed to reduce illegal and unsustainable use of forest resources such as hunting. And Herrold-Menzies [60] studied the impact of micro-enterprise development as a way to reduced dependence on wetland resources in the Caohai Nature Reserve, China.…”