Property rights and the marginal wildebeest: an economic analysis of wildlife conservation options in Kenya

Norton‐Griffiths, M.

doi:10.1007/bf00052116

Cited by 58 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Expansion of the former is possibly driven by land suitability and economic factors, such as cereal and input prices, accessibility to the market, in this case to Narok, and transportation costs (Brush and Turner, 1987). Since individual landowners can decide how to use their land, Maasai landowners have had the option of maximising the development potential of their land by leasing it to farmers (Norton-Griffiths, 1996). Thus, changes in land tenure may have spurred the conversion of rangelands to agriculture.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Proximate causes of land-use change in Narok District, Kenya: a spatial statistical model

Serneels

Lambin

2001

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

352

226

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study attempts to identify how much understanding of the driving forces of land-use changes can be gained through a spatial, statistical analysis. Hereto, spatial, statistical models of the proximate causes of different processes of land-use change in the Mara Ecosystem (Kenya) were developed, taking into account the spatial variability of the land-use change processes. The descriptive spatial models developed here suggest some important factors driving the land-use changes that can be related to some well-established theoretical frameworks. The explanatory variables of the spatial model of mechanised agriculture suggest a von Thünen-like model, where conversion to agriculture is controlled by the distance to the market, as a proxy for transportation costs, and agro-climatic potential. Expansion of smallholder agriculture and settlements is also controlled by land rent, defined, in this case, by proximity to permanent water, land suitability, location near a tourism market, and vicinity to villages to gain access to social services (e.g. health clinics, schools, local markets). This difference in perception of land rent reflects the widely different social and economic activities and objectives of smallholders versus the large entrepreneurs involved in mechanised farming. Spatial heterogeneity as well as the variability in time of land-use change processes affect our ability to use regression models for wide ranging extrapolations. The models allow evaluating the impact of changes in driving forces that are well represented by proximate causes of land-use change.

show abstract

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Proximate causes of land-use change in Narok District, Kenya: a spatial statistical model

Serneels

Lambin

2001

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment

352

226

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When rangeland ecosystems surrounding protected areas are dominated by conservation-compatible land uses such as herding and small-scale farming, mobility is not inhibited and the biodiversity of the whole landscape benefits (12,63); however, where large-scale land conversion for cultivation (primarily a product of state-driven leasing or selling of land to outside investors) has taken place around protected areas, the impact on wildlife can be devastating (63). For example, in Kenya, privatisation and conversion of formerly communal rangeland around the Maasai Mara National Reserve to commercial monoculture entailed drastic landcover changes resulting in significant wildlife declines (49,64,65,66). A similar pattern is occurring around Tanzania' s Tarangire National Park, where permanent subsistence and large-scale farming is increasingly isolating the park and leading to declines of large mammal species (67,68).…”

Section: The Impact Of Cultivation In Pastoral Communities and Wildlimentioning

confidence: 99%

Pastoralism and wildlife: historical and current perspectives in the East African rangelands of Kenya and Tanzania

Lankester¹,

Davis²

2016

Rev. Sci. Tech. OIE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe relationship between pastoralists, their livestock, wildlife and the rangelands of East Africa is multi-directional, complex and long-standing. The tumultuous events of the past century, however, have rewritten the nature of this relationship, reshaping the landscapes that were created, and relied upon, by both pastoralists and wildlife. Presently, much of the interaction between wildlife and pastoralists takes place in and around protected areas, the most contentious occurring in pastoral lands surrounding national parks. In conservation terminology these areas are called buffer zones. In the past century buffer zones have been shaped by, and contributed to, restrictive conservation policies, expropriation of land, efforts to include communities in conservation, both positive and negative wildlife/livestock interactions, and political tensions. In this review paper, the authors outline the history that shaped the current relationship between pastoralists, livestock and wildlife in buffer zones in East Africa and highlight some of the broader issues that pastoralists (and pastoralism as an effective livelihood strategy) now face. Finally, they consider some of the sustainable and equitable practices that could be implemented to improve livelihoods and benefit wildlife and pastoralism alike.

show abstract

“…Even under conditions where local communities have leased conservation land to tourism business operators, wildlife does not earn enough revenue to offset costs arising from different streams such as the opportunity costs of land that is set aside for wildlife conservation; costs of installation and maintenance of infra-structure, such as fences, roads, offices, houses for wildlife wardens, etc. and maintenance of wildlife; costs arising from destruction to structures, losses of human life, damages to crop and livestock production by wild animals, and the costs incurred to prevent such damages; direct management costs which include recurrent costs from reception of tourists, office work, stationery; and transactions costs arising from the stakeholders' participation (see also Norton-Griffiths, 1996;Emerton, 2001). It therefore seems likely that the partnership projects, whose costs of establishment were mainly subsidized by the state agencies and NGOs, may not continue to operate without assistance from outside.…”

Section: Efficiency Of the Co-management Approach In Kenyamentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildlife Conservation and Management in Kenya: Towards a Co-management Approach

Mburu

2004

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Property rights and the marginal wildebeest: an economic analysis of wildlife conservation options in Kenya

Cited by 58 publications

References 8 publications

Proximate causes of land-use change in Narok District, Kenya: a spatial statistical model

Proximate causes of land-use change in Narok District, Kenya: a spatial statistical model

Pastoralism and wildlife: historical and current perspectives in the East African rangelands of Kenya and Tanzania

Wildlife Conservation and Management in Kenya: Towards a Co-management Approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About