Biodiversity Conservation Network Community-Based Conservation Enterprises in Melanesia What Have We Learned?

Source : Measures of Success Artist : Anna Balla

Principles Developed During a Practitioner Workshop

10 - 14 January 1999, Port Moresby, PNG

Agenda

9:00	Introduction and Overview
9:45	Project Overviews Lakekamu Basin, PNG Verata, Fiji East New Britain, PNG Crater Mountain, PNG
10:45	Coffee Break
11:00	Principles That We Have Developed Introduction to "General and Yet Non-Trivial Principles" How Monitoring Data are Collected Enterprise Principles Benefits Principles Stakeholder Principles Management Principles Principles Gained Across the Network
12:00	General Discussion
13:00	End of Session

Participating Organizations

• Biodiversity Conservation Network (BCN)
• Conservation International (CI)
• Foundation for People & Community Development (FPCD)
• Pacific Heritage Foundation (PHF)
• Research & Conservation Foundation of PNG (RCF-PNG)
• South Pacific Action Committee for Human Ecology and the Environment (SPACHEE)
• University of the South Pacific (USP)

For additional information about the materials presented in this workshop or about these projects, please contact any of the participating groups. Additional information is also available on the internet at www.BCNet.org.

BCN is administered by the Biodiversity Support Program (BSP) which is implemented by a consortium of World Wildlife Fund (WWF), The Nature Conservancy (TNC), and World Resources Institute (WRI). BCN is funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The opinions and views presented in this workshop are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of BSP, its implementing organizations, or USAID.

 

Box 1: What are "General and Yet Non-Trivial" Principles? In navigating the conservation and development landscape, there is no single path - a magic formula - that will lead a group to success. There are no guarantees that an intervention that works at one site in Indonesia will work equally well at another site in Brazil - or even at the same site the next year. On the other hand, however, it also seems likely that there are not an infinite number of paths leading to success. To be sure, the exact path that any group needs to follow depends on their starting point, their goals, the changing conditions at the site, and conditions in the broader social, political, and economic context in which they are operating. But to say that there are no common aspects - that everything is site specific - implies that there is no need for any kind of systematic science. Between the endpoints of this spectrum is a vast middle ground in which there are some finite number of paths through the landscape. It is impossible to advise a project team exactly when and where it will encounter a given obstacle or catalyst or what it should do upon encountering them. But is it possible to provide advice about commonly occurring catalysts and obstacles? Can we develop general knowledge about the obstacles that groups are likely to run into - how to avoid them if possible and how to deal with them if they must? And can we discover catalysts that tend to move things forward? If this middle ground exists, it is most likely to take the form of general and yet non-trivial principles. As shown in the right side of the diagram below, at any given site there are specific principles that are of great use to people working at that site. Unfortunately, these site specific principles donŐt really help a person working at the next site over - let alone halfway around the world. On the far left side of the diagram are general principles that apply to most or all sites. Unfortunately, most of these principles tend to be also trivial - they are true, but not very helpful to practitioners. The question thus becomes are there general and yet non-trivial principles as shown in the center of the diagram? It is most likely that if these general and yet non-trivial principles exist, that the will take the form of conditional probability statements. For example, we might say "In Melanesian type social systems, it is generally better to work with the big man to solve conflicts unless he is corrupt." The key features here are that the principle applies more than one place (in Melanesia) but not everywhere. Furthermore, it is not guaranteed to work in all instances - the user has to be smart enough to apply it to his or her own situation - for example, to determine if the big man is corrupt or not.

PRINCIPLES FOR ENTERPRISE-BASED CONSERVATION IN MELANESIA

Results from an Analysis of Biodiversity Conservation Network Projects

P = Principle H = Hypothesis

At the BCN Results Workshop in Papua New Guinea held in January, participants developed priniciples based on their experience of managing their enterprise-based conservation projects throughout Melanesia. Below are their findings in outline form.

I.	ENTERPRISE PRINCIPLES Working with Community Enterprises P - Do not assume that communities are capable or willing to take management responsibility for an enterprise at the outset of a project. They need to see benefits coming in before they will commit themselves to being fully involved. They need to develop technical and financial skills. P - If establishing community managed enterprises, focus on those that are not complex and that have low start-up costs. Biodiversity prospecting vs. artifact production   Markets and Competition P - Develop enterprises for local markets first, and only then build up to national and international markets. This is contrary to many current expectations. PHF timber after volcano, Solomon Islands oil. P - Develop enterprises for established markets rather then creating products where no market exists. Ngali nut oil for which there is no market. Timber.   Ownership and Equity H - The higher the amount of financial buy-in from community, the more likely it will succeed. H - If you can't get high financial equity investment from community members, at a minimum you need to get "sweat equity."
II.	BENEFITS PRINCIPLES Distribution of Benefits P - Conservation success seems to improve with wider distribution of benefits. However, some distribution mechanisms seem better than others: Equal to all people - Does not work (no incentives). To shareholders - Does not work (gives money to wrong people). Through leaders - Usually does not work (requires leader who is very honest). To employees as wages - Can work (provides incentives, but hard to make equal - e.g. tourism) Communal trust funds and projects - Can work (but leads to infighting - e.g, Catholics vs SDAs)   Why Generating Cash is Important P - Cash benefits are important, but mainly so that we can get people's attention so they will respond to our conservation education and awareness. Examples: Sepik and Fiji. The danger is if the enterprise fails, you may lose credibility. H - It may thus be important to do enterprises even if they are not ecologically linked. But these enterprises must be sustainable. Churches set up stores, but not gambling and liquor businesses. Analogous for conservation NGOs?   Cash Needed Relative to Threat P - If there is a lot of cash generated by the threats, then the threshold amount of cash that we need to generate is higher. Logging and mining vs. overhunting. Principle implies that if there is a high threshold, you may not be able to use an enterprise-based approach so you should either use another strategy or try to work in another location.   The Value of Non-Cash Benefits P - Non-cash benefits can be as important as cash benefits for conservation success. They can be used to substitute for periods where there is no cash flow. The are easier to distribute equally. P - Pride and self-esteem are especially important non-cash benefits. They can be developed through simple techniques. Uniforms, badges, I.D. Cards. Other groups coming to learn. Media exposure.   Timing of Benefits P - Benefits or the guarantee of some future benefits have to arrive within 6 to 12 months of project start date. Since most enterprises require at least 2 - 3 years before they can generate substantial benefits, some initial investment will be required. H - Large infrequent payments are better than smaller, more frequent payment. Example: Coffee vs. artifacts at Crater Mountain The period can't be too long. Women may prefer smaller but frequent payments.
III.	STAKEHOLDER PRINCIPLES The Importance of Stakeholder Groups P - Conservation is more likely to succeed where there is a traditional stakeholder group managing resources. Group must have a long history of taking strong and prompt action. Group must have the respect of the community such as in Fiji. P - Conservation is more likely to succeed where traditional rules system exists. Example: Setting up a park, need traditional rules.   Control Over Resources P - Resource ownership and control is a "necessary but not sufficient" condition for conservation to occur. This is different then what people in India and the Philippines think - if they can just get local people control over the resources, conservation will happen. Example: WMA.
IV.	BROADER PRINCIPLES Conservation as a Social Process P - Biodiversity conservation depends on people and therefore must include people from all walks of life. We need more than just biologists. We need bankers, lawyers, politicians, community members and others to be actively involved.   Managing Conservation Organizations P - Project staff must be compensated with the same packages as members of the private sector. Encourages professionalism. Dedication is not enough. We need to provide a future. Example: Hard to keep accountants P - We need to work with professional organizations and training institutions to develop staff training packages. Example: Accountant training.   Funding for Conservation P - Donors must provide 5-7 years of funding in a spirit of partnership. Three years too short for enterprises. Grants need more security. P - Grants need to be part of an adaptive learning process. Create thematic portfolios of projects. Test principles and hypotheses. Share information. Adapt and learn based on the results. Develop new hypotheses.   Funding for Conservation P - Donors must provide 5-7 years of funding in a spirit of partnership. Three years too short for enterprises. Grants need more security. P - Grants need to be part of an adaptive learning process. Create thematic portfolios of projects. Test principles and hypotheses. Share information. Adapt and learn based on the results. Develop new hypotheses.
V.	BCN OVERALL LESSONS Summary of Technical Lessons 1. Community-based enterprises face many challenges 2. Management is a critical limiting resource 3. Marketing is a key to enterprise success 4. Enterprise-based approaches are at best part of the solution to conservation problems 5. Solutions need to be developed on a site-specific basis using adaptive management   Summary of Process Lessons Learned 1. Use adaptive management at a programmatic level to find general but non-trivial principles 2. Seek approximate answers to exact questions 3. Know your audiences and what they want 4. Consider Analysis & Communications as part of an overall process

WHY BIODIVERSITY   FIELD STORIES   PARTICIPATE   RESULTS   MARKETSPACE ABOUT THE NETWORK   WHAT'S NEW   LEARNING MATERIALS   SEARCH   LINKS   SITE MAP   HOME