The potentials of traditional African cultural practices in mitigating overexploitation of wildlife species and habitat loss: experience of Tanzania

Abstract

Both colonial and post-colonial conservation policies ignored the potential role of traditional African cultural practices in contributing to conservation goals. Recently, there has been a growing global interest in these practices, although recognition in official conservation policies is still minimal in many countries. This global interest is enthused by the reality that although the use of wild species and their habitats remains the foundation for human survival all over the world, there is a huge risk of losing these species. Factors such as rapid human population increase, inadequate local support for conservation policies, limited strategies for survival among local communities and inadequate capacity of the government to fund law enforcement operations against illegal activities subject the species and habitats to unsustainable use. Traditional cultural practices, among other strategies, have promising potential to enhance sustainable resource use and conservation and, therefore, realize the desire for ecological and social sustainability. Using examples and data drawn from different parts of Tanzania, this paper attempts to uncover some of these potentials on which policy-makers and conservationists can capitalize to augment conservation work. The paper begins by reviewing the ecological impacts of two major conservation problems facing Tanzania -species overexploitation and habitat loss. Then the possible advantages of traditional cultural practices (compared to conventional conservation strategies) are outlined. The traditional practices are presented as more cost-effective, more socially acceptable and having minimal risk of failure. Furthermore, the idea of reviving these practices coincides with the philosophy of co-management approaches, which advocate sharing of power, rights and responsibilities between the state and local resource users. This is based on the idea that local communities constitute voices 'from the ground' that should be heard.In showing the efficacy of traditional African cultural practices, the paper specifically focuses on four elements: traditional institutions, taboos, sacred sites and totemic species.

Integrating traditional knowledge when it appears to conflict with conservation: lessons from the discovery and protection of sitatunga in Ghana

“…Shrines and rituals involving bones exist on all inhabited continents (McNiven and Feldman 2003, Äikäs et al 2009, Kideghesho 2009) and can provide valuable information about species' current or historical distributions (Ferguson and Messier 1997, Turvey et al 2014 and trends in abundance (Brown andEmery 2008, Turvey et al 2013). Similarly, traditionally protected areas akin to Kleve, which remain relatively undisturbed and may harbor rare or endangered species, are widespread throughout the world (Bhagwat 2012).…”

Patterns and extent of threats to the protected areas of Bangladesh: the need for a relook at conservation strategies

“…Habitat loss and over -exploitation of wildlife, and other forest resources, are universally acknowledged as the leading causes of biodiversity loss (Baldus, 2008;Brooks et al, 2002), the situation is most severe in the tropical regions (Leuschner et al, 2013). Human population growth, particularly in developing countries, has profound effects on consumption patterns of land and wild resources, and is an indirect driver of biodiversity loss (Kideghesho, 2009;Michel, 2008). The role played by humans, both in Bangladesh and around the globe, in the extinction or reduction of many species of plants and animals is commonly recognized (Grignolio et al, 2011).…”

Wildlife Threats and Their Relative Severity of Eastern Ethiopia Protected Areas

“…The situation is most severe in the tropical regions [10]. Human population growth, particularly in developing countries, has intense effects on consumption patterns of land and wild resources, which is considered as an indirect driver of biodiversity loss [11,12].…”