Impacts of Armed Conflict on Biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa and Their Mechanisms
Responses to the impacts of armed conflict on biodiversity
Authors: José Kalpers
Publication Services: Grammarians, Inc.
Publication Manager: Kate Sullivan
Copyediting/Production Editing: Grammarians, Inc.
Cover Photo: Martin Leuders
Cover Design: Steve Hall
BSP Armed Conflict and the Environmental Project Director: James Shambaugh
BSP Director of Communications: Sheila Donoghue
Director of BSP’s Africa and Madagascar Program and BSP Executive Director: Judy Oglethorpe
Please cite this publication as: José Kalpers. 2001. Armed Conflict and Biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, D.C.: Biodiversity Support Program.
This is one of seven BSP case studies undertaken as research for BSP's Armed Conflict and the Environment (ACE) Project. The other six case studies can be viewed on BSP's website at www.BSPonline.org
This publication was made possible through support provided to BSP by USAID's Bureau for Africa, Office of Sustainable Development, under the terms of Cooperative Agreement Number AOT-A-00-99-00228-00. The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID.
©2001 by World Wildlife Fund, Inc. Washington, D.C. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this publication for eductional and other noncommercial purposes is authorized without prior permission of the copyright holder. However, WWF, Inc. does request advance written notification and appropriate acknowledgment. WWF, Inc. does not require payment for the noncommercial use of its published works and in no way intends to diminish use of WWF research and findings by means of copyright.
This study contributes to an overview of the impacts of armed conflict on the environment that has been prepared by the Biodiversity Support Program's Armed Conflict and the Environment project. To make the issues more readily understandable, the author first describes the various impacts and the mechanisms behind them, and then outlines a variety of responses to reduce or prevent these impacts. The first section begins by listing the "actors" and their "activities." The real or potential impacts of their activities are then described in detail. The second section focuses on responses that may address these impacts, based on actual observations or pertinent recommendations.
Categories of actors
The actors are groups of individuals, organizations, or institutions that have an impact on biodiversity in times of armed conflict. The impacts may be negative, positive, or both.
Armed groups comprise a very important group of actors because they are responsible for starting and maintaining military operations when armed conflict occurs. Apart from issues of security and humanitarian consequences, armed groups may have a significant effect, either directly or indirectly, on the natural environment. By enforcing martial law in occupied areas, these actors also tend to control other groups, most often composed of civilians. In times of war, they frequently are the supreme authority in areas under their control.
As a direct result of combat and a lack of security, civilian populations tend to flee from strife and seek refuge in calmer regions. If they cross one or more borders and arrive in a host country, fleeing populations become "refugees" (Schneider, 1999); if they remain in their home country, they become "internally displaced persons" (IDPs). Depending on their numbers and the local context, this group of actors may have a significant impact on the natural environment. Their impact may be noticeable during one or all of the phases that characterize the movements of refugees and displaced persons: during transit from their point of origin, while settling in camps, during the time they spend in the camps, or during repatriation and resettlement.
Local populations in areas where combat or a breakdown of security occurs are potential refugees or potential internally displaced persons. When the situation becomes difficult, they may flee. Generally speaking, these newly mobile populations face very unstable and uncertain socio-economic conditions. Because they very likely will be forced to become self-sufficient, their movements may have a harmful impact on the environment. One very frequent result, for instance, is that, as agriculture becomes less viable, the displaced begin tapping natural resources. Protected lands may also come under tremendous pressure when they are used by people on the move as a sanctuary. Hostile armed groups may used these areas as a base, launching attacks on civilians, then retreating to safety—so that the civilians come to perceive the protected areas as a threat. Conversely, these vast stretches of natural lands may become safe havens, a place of shelter for civilians when combat breaks out.
Resident populations harboring refugees or displaced persons make up another important category of local populations. They typically do not suffer the direct effects of combat or lack of security but, by sheltering sometimes very large numbers of immigrant populations, they may experience a major impact in terms of natural resources utilization and management. After such massive population shifts, a region's natural resources may remain impoverished for many years after the refugees or displaced persons have departed—creating a situation of diminishing returns, in which resident populations utilize their environment in a non-sustainable manner.
During the emergency phase of an armed conflict, humanitarian organizations may intervene, sometimes on a massive scale. Their overriding concern is to ensure the immediate survival of human populations affected by the conflict, but in striving for this goal these organizations may sometimes have a negative impact on the natural environment. Two examples taken from the Virungas case study illustrate this problem. First, during the worst part of the severe medical emergency, a prominent medical organization disposed of massive amounts of solid human wastes and used needles right in the middle of the national park. In a very different case, an NGO started an income-generating program that taught refugees to build bamboo furniture. The bamboo, it was suddenly realized, was being taken from the nearby protected park. Importantly, a number of organizations have begun to develop environmental guidelines for each and every stage of such humanitarian operations, whether emergency, rehabilitation, or resettlement. The existence of these guidelines, however, does not mean organizational staff necessarily is aware of them. For example, UNHCR has not sufficiently disseminated its guidelines to field personnel. These guidelines are excellent. But UNHCR has an enormous number of workers, at sites all over the world, with a high rate of turnover. Under such circumstances, it becomes easier to understand the difficulty of keeping UNHCR staff aware of the environmental guidelines
Conservation organizations
The basic principle of conservation organizations during wartime is to prevent or alleviate the negative impacts of armed conflict on the environment. Conservation organizations may play a leading role by taking direct action in the field or by putting pressure on other groups in order to minimize harm. In times of armed conflict, they may also perform another important function: mobilizing other aid groups and raising awareness about environmental issues. One warning, however: at times, conservation NGOs find themselves competing for the same limited funding—an unfortunate event that may result in jealous rivalry and Byzantine intrigue rather than positive action. The intrigue may become so distracting that the overall goal of positive environmental intervention may even be set aside. It is essential to recognize the wastefulness of such competition among conservation NGOs.
Donors
External aid is usually financed by major bilateral or multilateral donors, who may fund a broad range of organizations, institutions and individuals. These may include humanitarian organizations, conservation organizations, local institutions, local populations, and technical cooperation agencies. At times, the aid these groups provide may be quite generous. Thus, the donor group has the potential to significantly influence field operations at various levels. Simultaneously, however, donor aid poses certain serious problems. Often, donors decide to hand out--or withdraw--their aid based on political factors rather than on concern for the environment. Donor-supported programs may start out with broad scope and noble intent. But the volume of these programs may be counterbalanced by the sometimes complicated constraints that must be addressed to satisfy the donor. When a donor withdraws its support or decides to freeze its involvement in a given sector, this may have a serious impact in the field.. The best way to handle such a situation is to encourage NGOs, aid groups that are far less susceptible to political influence, to maintain a presence in the field so that donor aid may be transmitted to environmental programs, directly or indirectly, through the NGOs.
Development organizations
For several years now, development organizations, both governmental and non-governmental, have begun to include environmental components in their development programs. Some examples are GTZ (German Cooperation), which has worked in many countries, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, formerly Zaïre; CARE International, which has worked in Uganda, Rwanda, and Tanzania; and the European Union, which has provided aid to many countries. On many occasions, these development organizations have also cultivated a close relationship with the humanitarian aid sector. For example, during the refugee crisis in Zaïre, the two sectors built quite good working relationships on the ground. The development community plays a key role bringing together the humanitarian sector, the conservation sector, and the donor community. Within the context of armed conflict and the environment, development organizations are often very specifically involved in such critical phases as rehabilitation and resettlement.
Local institutions
The institutions of many Sub-Saharan African countries have been undermined by an unfavorable socioeconomic context. Environmental institutions such as the entities in charge of protected areas and their supervisory ministries are no exception to this rule. Even in normal times, environmental issues are often placed on the back burner, and this is truer still in times of war. Institutions that are weak in peacetime cannot play the role expected of them in crises. Unable to fulfill the function of coordination and leadership, they instead create a vacuum—one that often impedes rather than speeds relief and rehabilitation actions. In an emergency, local institutions should be able to, first, define their own most urgent needs, and, second, coordinate the initiatives to address those needs. Unfortunately, very often there is no such coordination. If the external partners cannot then coordinate their activities on their own, very often much of their work is wasted—for instance, some services may be needlessly duplicated, while other urgent needs are never addressed.
Conversely, strong national or local institutions may greatly facilitate relief and rehabilitation actions during a crisis. Strong national institutions channel external support and coordinate programs. They are able to identify the gaps in what is being offered and approach relevant and potential partners to stop up those gaps. Overall efficiency is greatly improved by such confident handling. Furthermore, strong institutions also educate their staffs. A well-trained field staff that has been adequately prepared well in advance to handle specific tasks before a crisis occurs can play a critical role when crisis strikes.
Categories of Activities That Have an Impact on Biodiversity
Deforestation
When armed conflict occurs, this is the most common environmental threat by far. . Deforestation may be directly caused by armed groups, by refugees or displaced persons, or by local populations. At times, the process is actually worsened by humanitarian organizations.
Armed groups engage in deforestation for various reasons:
During armed conflict, refugees and IDPs may have an impact on several different levels, for example social and physical infrastructure, security, and the environment (Schneider, 1999). Deforestation is probably the greatest threat that refugees pose to the environment. The deforesting activities of the displaced have been amply documented by numerous authors (Accion contra el Hambre, 1999; Biswas & Tortajada-Quiroz, 1996; Fuelwood Crisis Consortium, 1994; Henquin & Blondel, 1996; Lodhi et al., 1998). Refugees engage in deforestation for two main reasons: first, to meet their own survival needs, whether for lumber to build shelters (Blondel, 1997) or for firewood (Leusch, 1995); and second, to earn money, selling wood and charcoal in local markets (Languy, 1995).
Poaching
After deforestation, poaching is the activity that has the most strikingly negative impact on the environment during armed conflicts. Various groups of actors may engage in poaching for a number of reasons, which are sometimes mutually exclusive.
Armed groups engage in poaching for three main reasons. First of all, rebel units and disorganized regular armies do not always receive adequate wages and rations. Such soldiers must resort to subsistence activities to survive. These activities run the full gamut from systematically pillaging the civilian population's food resources to hunting wild animals for food (Westing, 1992). Armed groups may also poach wildlife because they want to enhance their food intake. This is often the case in societies that value high volumes of meat consumption. A third motive for poaching by armed groups is commerce. The latter motive, which may even evolve into an industry of sorts, is the one that is likely to have the strongest impact on wildlife (Direction du Tourisme des Parcs Nationaux et Réserves de Faune, 1991; Nyilimanzi et al., 1997). Commercially organized poaching may benefit a few isolated individuals or, occasionally, may benefit large, well-organized groups. In either case, civilians are often also involved in the illicit activity. In some cases, entrepreneurial poaching may be planned and coordinated by military leaders in order to finance their military operations. In Mozambique and Angola, for example, rebel groups have exploited elephant populations for commercial purposes, just as they have exploited other natural resources including wood, gold, and diamonds (Ham & Oglethorpe, 2000).
Refugees and displaced persons may also resort to poaching for the same reasons that they engage in deforestation: self-sufficiency and commerce. Commercial considerations sometimes induce refugees to sell bush meat or hunt for precious resources such as ivory and rhinoceros horn. In the DRC, poachers killed a number of mountain gorillas in 1995 (Cooper & Cooper, 1996); these killings coincided with the presence of large refugee camps directly adjacent to Virunga National Park. The poachers were never identified, but these repeated incidents may have been related, at least in part, to the presence of refugees.
Local populations exert considerable pressure on the environment in the most ordinary times. In times of civil war, or during refugee crises, this pressure considerably rises. Local people may find ways to take advantage of the period of instability that always accompanies armed conflict. They may even act as accomplices of armed groups or refugees/displaced persons who are running large-scale poaching operations.
Pollution
Pollution caused by warfare could potentially have major environmental consequences if the methods employed in armed conflict in Africa were to become more sophisticated. Today, the wars that occur on the African continent typically involve conventional weaponry. Soldiers in Africa do not yet resort to chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons (Smith, 1997). But this tendency could well change in the coming years, and the threat remains real.
Some activities carried out by the military and other armed groups may, however, result in acts of pollution that are harmful not only to the environment but also to the health of entire communities (Westing, 1991). These activities include storing and abandoning ammunition in natural settings and contaminating waterways and groundwater with liquid or solid waste.
Because they often find themselves in very crowded and precarious circumstances, refugees and displaced persons represent a very real threat in terms of pollution. In their need to subsist, they may pollute surface water; in their flight, they may bring infectious diseases. The latter concern poses a threat not just to the public health of human populations but also to the indigenous wildlife. For instance, when latrines are put up in a natural habitat, whether these are planned or improvised the resulting waste is an enormous risk factor—and one that may only become apparent long after the actual contamination has occurred. Some infectious germs found in human waste remain virulent even after many years in the soil (Homsy, 1999). The threat of spreading disease to wildlife in this manner is particularly critical in the case of great apes such as chimpanzees and gorillas.
Acts of pollution may also be caused or intensified by humanitarian agencies that operate in the field during a refugee crisis. Since the primary objective of their operations is to improve the welfare of refugee or displaced populations, environmental considerations are sometimes evaded for the sake of emergency action. Thus, the facilities and infrastructure found in some refugee camps may not meet long-term requirements for protecting the environment. Poor placement or inappropriate design of latrines or medical facilities, for example, may contaminate water or soil. Sometimes the harmful effects will not become apparent until well after the camps are dismantled. In other cases, it is solid waste management that poses a direct threat to the environment. During the refugee crisis in the Goma region, for example, some agencies used Virunga National Park as a garbage dump, a place to discard used syringes and materials contaminated with human blood and waste (Biswas & Tortajada-Quiroz, 1996).
Movements and presence of armed groups
The repeated movements and long-term presence of large armed groups may clearly have a significant impact on the environment and, in particular, on protected areas. As noted above, the presence of armed units may produce various environmental impacts (including deforestation and poaching). But the presence of an armed group, moving at will through a protected habitat, also has its own intrinsic impact. The concentrated presence of human interlopers profoundly disturbs many animal species, especially large mammals.
Human rights violations and assassinations
The most negative impact observed in any armed conflict is the toll of casualties among the civilians. When armed units range across the countryside, they often attack innocent civilians—locals, refugees, displaced persons--and the field agents responsible for conservation are very often targets as well. It is perhaps understandable how hostile armed groups may perceive guards, guides, and wardens as a threat: most of these field workers carry firearms, and they are organized in what may appear to be a paramilitary fashion. Many park guards and rangers have lost their lives during armed conflicts in Africa (Kalpers, 1993; Mushenzi Lusenge, 1996). Such losses have a direct, immediate impact on the effectiveness of the conservation agencies that look after protected areas and the environment.
Land Mines
Antipersonnel and antitank land mines, the great majority of which are laid by armed groups, represent an enormous threat to human populations and also to domestic and wild animals. More than one hundred million land mines have been laid worldwide. Angola and Mozambique are the African countries most affected by this problem (Peck, 2000). The greatest difficulty lies in the devices' durability. In some cases, minefields laid decades ago remain viable today. Their design and placement is at times so bewildering that it may be impossible to ever remove them all (Zimbabwe Wildlife, 1987).
The presence of land mines in many natural habitats represents a direct threat to wildlife. Mines also have an indirect impact on field staff when they curtail access to specific sites. The species most affected by land mines are ungulates, elephants, and, in some cases, primates, among them gorillas (Peck, 2000).
Some authors view the presence of land mines as beneficial—first, because they make the affected natural habitats quite inaccessible to humans; and second because they make such harmful activities as poaching and deforestation impossible. These authors go so far as to suggest that clearing the land mines poses a potential danger for these habitats because they could then be reopened to human activity (Frojan & Volger, 1999).
Destruction of infrastructure and pillaging
This type of activity is primarily and potentially carried out by three categories of actors: armed groups, local populations, and refugees/displaced persons. Their respective motives may vary. Armed groups may engage in destruction and pillaging—for instance, by destroying patrol stations at the edge of the forest—because it is part of their strategic objectives. When local populations or refugees commit the same acts, their motivation may be to obtain materials and equipment for subsistence or for commercial purposes. In some cases, this very traditional motivation may be accompanied by vengefulness regarding protected areas: local populations may take advantage of the situation to "settle scores" with the institutions responsible for protecting the environment if a relationship of conflict already existed before the crisis arose.
In times of armed conflict, buildings, vehicles and equipment belonging to anyone at all may become the targets of both armed units and local populations, and facilities belonging to conservation institutions are not exempt from this tendency (Gombe, 1995; Mushenzi Lusenge, 1996; UWA, 1997; Werikhe et al., 1997). Park headquarters buildings, patrol outposts, field equipment, ranger vehicles may all be pillaged or systematically destroyed. This destruction contributes to a general weakening of the institutions, as well as vastly impeding caretaking and surveillance programs in protected areas.
Presence of livestock and grazing
Even in times of peace, the presence of domestic livestock and grazing within the boundaries of natural habitats constitutes a serious ecological threat. During times of armed conflict, local populations may try to take advantage of unstable conditions to invade natural areas with their herds. Such invasions—often carried out with the full complicity of armed groups, and even under their supervision, may cause substantial damage to ecosystems. In Rwanda's Akagera National Park, as soon as the 1994 genocide ended, local people drove hundreds of thousands of head of cattle into the northern part of the park. They also invaded the Mutara hunting preserve. The damage they caused to the grassy savannas of the region was enormous—some think irreparable (Gildemeister et al., 1999; Rukerankiko, 1997).
Local inhabitants are not alone in allowing their livestock to damage protected environments. Under certain circumstances, refugees living in camps may also lead their livestock into natural habitats and cause negative impacts (UNHCR, 1997).
Farming and the introduction of exotic species
Agricultural activities in natural habitats may be carried out at various levels by different groups of actors. Refugees and displaced persons who have not settled into organized camps may find refuge in natural habitats such as protected areas (African Rights, 1998), and may then plant various crops, including potatoes, wheat, cassava, and tobacco (PICG-Rwanda, 2000; Rutagarama, 1999). But these are all species that are exotic to these habitats. By introducing these plants, the refugees pose yet another threat to natural areas.
Similarly, armed groups that use natural habitats as their base of operations or that regularly travel through such areas may also decide to grow subsistence crops (even including illegal crops, such as cannabis). Such exotic crops have a similar negative impact, whether they are planted by refugees, displaced persons, or soldiers.
There is another way to look at the wartime movement of farmers into natural habitats. We already know that local populations may take advantage of the unstable context of a period of warfare to clear adjacent natural areas for agricultural purposes. But we cannot consider this situation as a purely bad one. In times of armed conflict, when people often lose access to traditional sources of food, such as markets or stores, and when they may have been driven off their land, natural habitats become a safety valve. They offer a way for populations to survive when other resources have been denied to them. In a few exceptional cases, the staff of local institutions, including park wardens, may be similarly obliged to adopt this sort of survival strategy.
Aspects Subject to Impact
The first two sections of this chapter summarized the actors and activities that have the greatest impact on biodiversity in emergency situations. This section will examine specific aspects of these impacts, whether they are direct or indirect. Many such aspects interact with each other, and some are even caused by others. In practice, one finds that specific situations are often very complex.
Loss of human life (field staff and local populations)
Combat, bombing campaigns, assassinations, and antipersonnel land mines are some of the factors that place the lives of local populations in danger. Among local populations, one group plays a direct role in protecting natural resources--the agents of conservation institutions and projects. Loss of human life at this level has an inherent negative impact on the effectiveness of surveillance activities. It also severely undermines the morale of such institutions and projects.
Biodiversity
Loss and degradation of ecosystems pose the most serious direct threat to biodiversity. Entire communities of plants and animals may become impoverished, or vanish. This type of impact generally occurs in instances of intensive deforestation, particularly in mountainous regions where erosion leads to loss of organic matter in the soil and prevents any regeneration of new growth. Pollution, fires caused by bombs or set for strategic reasons, and land cleared for agricultural purposes are some of the other factors that may imperil the integrity of natural ecosystems.
Intensive poaching and the destruction of natural habitats may result in the decline, or even the disappearance, of entire populations of animals. If poachers target a small population of a very threatened subspecies, the result could be swift, total extinction (see later). In the mountainous section of DRC's Kahuzi-Biega National Park, for example, the population of eastern plain gorillas (Gorilla graueri graueri) declined dramatically due to poaching activities linked, whether directly or indirectly, to armed conflict in the region (Kasereka Bishikwabo, 2000; Yamagiwa, 2000). In Akagera National Park in Rwanda, resettlement of former refugees and their livestock, plus the loss of two-thirds of the original parkland, led to the virtual local extinction of some species of ungulates, including the roan antelope (Hippotragus equinus) and the eland (Taurotragus oryx) (Williams & Ntayombya, 1999).
Complete extinction of a species or subspecies is the greatest risk in an emergency or acute crisis. Many protected areas in Africa were established for the purpose of protecting certain animal or plant species deemed vulnerable or endangered (see IUCN classification). Any imbalance caused by a natural or man-made disaster may easily lead to irreversible decline and a major loss of biological diversity. This loss may then exacerbate the negative effects of the fragmentation of protected areas (Pimm et al., 1988; Simberloff & Abele, 1976; Simberloff & Abele, 1984). The mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei), a subspecies that was already vulnerable before 1990, has been subjected over the past decade to various other pressures stemming from repeated conflicts in the Great Lakes region (CBSG, 1991; Lanjouw, 1999). In Garamba National Park, located in northeastern DRC, the last viable population of northern white rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum cottoni) has been greatly endangered by armed conflicts in DRC and Sudan and the resulting waves of refugees (Martin & Hillman Smith, 1999; Smith, 1997).
Institutions
In the event of armed conflict or a sudden crisis, the institutions responsible for environmental protection and conservation, which are often weak to begin with on the African continent, are faced with an enormous array of disastrous consequences. Loss of human life, loss of equipment and infrastructure, loss of financial resources, and loss of security are all factors that contribute to a further weakening of government agencies and ministries. This type of impact must be seen as a potential time bomb—a disaster whose most devastating effects may strike years after the original crisis has been resolved. Because post-crisis rehabilitation programs rarely focus on environmental concerns, and because. biodiversity conservation is almost never a priority for donors attempting to bolster a country afflicted by war, in many places these lingering after-effects are almost guaranteed.
It is essential, when looking at an emergency situation, to understand that the weakening of conservation institutions is potentially the most serious and insidious threat resulting from the crisis. This threat may seem rather unspectacular. But it is a disaster waiting to happen—and, because it manifests itself over a very long period of time and fundamentally affects the sustainability of conservation actions, one that is of enormous consequence. Examples from Angola (Anstey, 1993), Rwanda, and the DRC (Lanjouw, 2000) illustrate this type of impact particularly well and underscore the need to strengthen the operational capacities of such institutions.
Tourism (international market)
Tourism, particularly international tourism, is extremely sensitive to fluctuations in the level of security within a given region. There are innumerable examples of sites that tourists once flocked to, which have essentially been abandoned almost overnight. In Bwindi Impenetrable National Park in Uganda, for example, an attack by armed rebels in March 1999 resulted in the death of eight people. The shock of this incident reverberated for more than a year, decimating visitor rates throughout the country (Stanford, 1999). When tourists are the victims of incidents, the immediate, inevitable result is a drastic reduction in tourism revenues; and that, in turn, affects the funding and continuity of surveillance and conservation activities. The Kahuzi Biega and Virunga parks, for example, suffered a tremendous loss of financial resources during the 1990s, which only worsened their difficult situations, already marked by loss of human life and systematic destruction and pillaging (Kalpers & Lanjouw, 1999).
Lack of coordination
A humanitarian crisis such as an armed conflict or a massive relocation of people typically elicits a reaction from the international community. The crisis may be targeted by governmental and non-governmental organizations, by United Nations agencies, and by numerous humanitarian groups. During the highly critical emergency phase, it is not unusual to witness a duplication of efforts among various groups, as well as great gaps in the services they try to provide. Because natural habitats do not receive priority attention during emergencies, this lack of coordination may have disastrous consequences for the environment. It is essential, in the early stage of crisis intervention, that relevant national institutions strongly defend the importance of the environment and biodiversity. These same institutions should take the lead in coordinating the actions of humanitarian agencies when a region's natural resources are threatened. Note also that another problem posed by weak conservation institutions with limited capacities is that they may be unable to assert leadership in an acute crisis.
General level of security
One significant impact that persists throughout a crisis such as an armed conflict is a general lack of security. This causes disruptions that affect not only local populations but also government institutions and partner agencies that provide foreign aid. A lack of security limits the movements of conservation agencies and thus their effectiveness, and often induces donors to suspend or withdraw project funding. A lack of security, or even the impression of a lack of security, may thus result in fewer resources for conservation programs, paradoxically at the very moment when the need for financial and human resources is greatest.
Local communities' level of perception
When the socio-economic environment is modified by a crisis situation, communities may change their perception of a protected area, and this is a key factor in intensifying the risks that weigh upon the protected area. When a region is hit by an acute crisis, local populations tend to focus on their survival and typically increase the pressure on natural resources, including those that fall within protected areas.
At times natural and, more specifically, protected areas become a refuge or corridor for various armed groups. When this happens, the adjacent human populations find themselves seated in the front row of a theater of potential violence, greatly exposed to possible attack. Their precarious situation may spark a certain hostility toward such a protected area.
In contrast, however, when an inhabited region finds itself threatened by military activities, a natural habitat may also become a refuge for local populations. In Rwanda, for example, thousands of people took refuge in the Virunga Mountains while extremist militias scoured the northwestern portion of the country (African Rights, 1998). In this instance, Volcanoes National Park filled a clearly positive function for local populations.
Poverty and socioeconomic conditions
Armed conflict and the numerous related problems it brings always have a harmful effect on the living conditions of human populations. In addition to threats to individual security, local socio-economic conditions are likely to suffer a serious blow. War limits human movements. Importantly, it limits access to agricultural resources and to normal commerce. Such circumstances force populations to involuntary self-sufficiency. This places even greater pressure on local resources, as populations search for additional, safe farmland and directly tap natural resources. . Natural habitats--if any still exist--then become lifeboats for populations placed in a precarious situation. An impact of this sort may, of course, be viewed as something negative, since it further increases human pressure on natural resources, but it may also be viewed in a positive light because it utilizes natural resources to save human life. In Angola, for example, many rural regions were able to escape famine by subsisting on local wildlife. Bush meat reportedly satisfied about 70 percent of the protein requirements of populations in these regions at the height of the war. Some authors believe there are long-term benefits to these lifeboat situations, because local people come to appreciate the true value of natural resources (Anstey, 1993).
Proliferation of firearms
The outbreak and persistence of armed conflict in a region, particularly when a civil war with several armed groups is involved, often means that a large number of firearms, most of them automatic weapons, will be placed in circulation. Weapons become far more commonplace and, as a direct result, far cheaper. In Rwanda in 1994, according to some estimates, there was one Kalashnikov for every bicycle. A Kalashnikov cost about US $60. A hand grenade cost less than a kilo of sugar. In Burundi in 1995, a grenade could be purchased for anywhere between $3 and $7, less than the price of a pineapple (Adam, 1997). Feeding the arms sales was an enormous illegal trade, arising from various sources, including political activists, commercial poachers, and outright bandits.
In many regions of Africa, the wide availability of automatic weapons has led to a huge eruption of poaching by armed and organized groups. Some species, including the elephant and the rhinoceros, have suffered heavy losses. This type of poaching is directly related to outbreaks of armed conflict on the continent (Douglas-Hamilton, 1983; Martin & Hillman Smith, 1999).
Before 1990, poachers in the Virunga Volcanoes region relied on traditional or semi-traditional techniques, for instance nets, spears, bows, and particularly snares. But the onset of war in the region has put enormous numbers of automatic weapons into unrestricted circulation. In the space of ten years, poaching methods have increasingly come to rely on such weapons, particularly in the Congolese portion of the Virungas (Wathaut, 1996).
Spread of disease
The risk of transmitting disease from domesticated animals or humans to wildlife was addressed above in the discussion of polluting activities carried out by the various categories of actors.
The presence of domestic livestock in natural habitats, often associated with mass movements of populations in emergency situations, has a potential impact that goes beyond the effects of overgrazing, trampling vegetation, and ecological competition with wild ungulates. Domestic livestock and their human owners also bring with them the significant risk that they may infect wild animals with their diseases. Ailments such as anthrax, distemper, and bovine tuberculosis may be transmitted to wild animals, often with disproportionate damage (AWF, 1999; Bergeron, 1996; Kock, 1996).
Changes in land use and human habitation
Changes in land use and human habitation are related to security constraints and to the overall socio-economic context and, under certain circumstances, may assume particular importance. Local populations attempt to adapt to such constraints, sometimes by grouping themselves together if the original pattern of habitation is dispersed, and sometimes by dispersing themselves if clusters of homes or populations represent an extra risk for security and survival. In Rwanda, when the genocide ended, a true "villagization" process took place. In certain locations this imidugudu policy was a planned initiative with some positive results But some authors have identified other locations where preparation for this process was relatively poor, with potential harmful impacts on sociological, economic, and environmental factors (Hilhorst & van Leeuwen, 1999).
Positive impacts of armed conflict on biodiversity
The effect of armed conflict on the environment is not necessarily always negative. In certain cases, warfare has had positive impacts. One of the best-known examples took place in the demilitarized zone between the two Koreas. The zone, measuring 240 kilometers long by 4 kilometers wide, began as a no-man's-land but has turned into a veritable natural sanctuary—a habitat that has clearly benefited from the region's military tensions (McNeeley, 2000).
In Sub-Saharan Africa, land mines appear to play the greatest role of inadvertent protector. That is especially the case in such countries as Angola and Mozambique. According to Frojan and Volger (Frojan & Volger, 1999), operations to clear minefields there actually have been far more harmful to biodiversity than leaving the mines in place, because the clearing operations open access to vast areas that were previously untouched. Similarly, some authors insist that, to a certain extent, war itself serves to impede unbridled exploitation of natural resources by creating economic paralysis (Anstey, 1993).
Fairhead and Leach (1995, in McNeeley, 2000) point out that some parts of the Ziama region in Guinea, which encompasses a major biosphere reserve, underwent spontaneous reforestation due to a series of wars that affected the region between 1870 and 1910. In those conflicts, ethnic warfare, followed by fighting against the French colonial armies, led to out-migration and economic decline, thus allowing the forest to recolonize abandoned fields.
While it should be recognized that armed conflict may indeed have the effect of placing a number of ecologically vulnerable natural areas off limits, it should also be emphasized that, in the great majority of cases, the negative impacts of this type of circumstance far outweigh the positive ones.
The preceding section described the various types of impact likely to affect biodiversity during armed conflict. What rejoinders or responses can be given to minimize or prevent these impacts? One thing is certain: because armed factions, particularly in civil wars, tend to ignore the rules of war when combat breaks out, any potential attempt to conserve natural habitats will necessarily be of limited scope. Civilians' lives are rarely given much thought when war breaks out, even less so in the case of civil war, and environmental concerns have little chance of receiving greater attention than human life. This does not mean that it is acceptable to take a pessimistic, defeatist attitude when wars break out. We must recognize the complexity of the issues we face. We should not imagine that such precarious, chaotic situations may be cured by one simple, universal panacea.
To simplify matters, several categories of potential measures can be distinguished. Measures that fall under the category of "prevention and preparedness" entail a proactive approach, either in terms of legislation or pre-crisis preparation. The category of "mitigation," in comparison, encompasses measures designed to limit the impacts or alleviate the consequences once a conflict or crisis has erupted. The final category consists of "post-crisis" measures that focus on rehabilitation once an emergency ends.
Prevention/preparedness
Legal aspects
There are numerous legal tools that are potentially useful for minimizing or preventing negative impacts. Some bear directly upon the military activities of warring factions and their limitations, while others focus instead on issues related to the conservation of natural resources and biodiversity.
Instruments of international law pertaining to armed conflict and the environment
The Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons bans the development or possession of these biological weapons. Signed in London, Moscow, and Washington on April 10, 1972, it also bears a disarmament obligation--signatories must destroy dangerous agents or divert them to peaceful purposes (Westing, 1991).
Conventions specifically related to conservation and environmental protection
World Heritage Convention
Cultural and natural heritage represents part of the incalculable and irreplaceable assets of not just one nation, but of all humanity. The loss, due to degradation or extinction, of any one of these many intrinsically valuable assets diminishes the entire world's heritage. They are surrounded by growing dangers, and they deserve special protection. To address this critical situation and to identify, appreciate, protect, and conserve our irreplaceable world heritage, in 1972 the member states of UNESCO adopted in general conference the World Heritage Convention on protection of the world's cultural and natural heritage. This convention rounds out national programs for protecting a country's heritage and provides for both a World Heritage Committee and a World Heritage Fund. The fund and the committee were established in 1976 (UNESCO, 1996). In principle, the very concept of world heritage creates a link between the countries where these sites are located (many of them in Africa) and all other countries that have signed the convention.
The committee has also set up a mechanism for spotlighting sites that face particularly serious threats, called the World Heritage List in Danger. Classification on this list brings a number of mechanisms into play, including the fact that the member state where the site is located must submit to the committee a program of remedial activities to address the threats (Thorsell, 1992). This mechanism, designed in part to provide an early warning in the event of a crisis, sometimes collides with the slow and cumbersome nature of U.N. procedures.
Curiously, a study conducted by IUCN in 1991 for UNESCO identified no World Heritage sites that were threatened by military activity or by massive displacements of the population (Paine, 1992). Since then, the situation has evolved rapidly. The first site to be red-listed due to armed conflict and a refugee crisis was Virunga National Park (Democratic Republic of Congo) in 1994 (UNESCO, 1995). Several other sites have since joined the Virungas on this list, including the four other World Heritage sites located in the DRC, as each of them has been affected by the strife and crises afflicting this region.
It must be recognized that the World Heritage Convention has not always fulfilled the role expected of it at the international level. Even though the financial resources available to UNESCO have not been adequate to safeguard threatened sites from a material and technical standpoint, this institution often could have played a less timid role, both politically and diplomatically. Importantly, however, the situation has recently changed. . UNESCO has now succeeded, in collaboration with a variety of locally active stakeholders (conservation NGOs, technical cooperation agencies, and national institutions), in mobilizing the private United Nations Foundation in a massive intervention in the five World Heritage sites located in the DRC. Planned as a four-year program, the intervention should provide a lifeline to these five, seriously threatened protected areas (UNESCO, 2000b). The intervention will start by providing emergency aid on numerous levels, including staff salaries, equipment purchases, capacity-building, and community relations. --The program will also have a diplomatic component, striving to raise all warring factions' awareness about the importance of conservation in the region (UNESCO, 1999).
UNESCO as a whole has not always been able to provide consistent and reliable support to World Heritage sites, especially the ones in danger. But it is important not to underestimate the authority of the term "World Heritage Site"—a prestigious label that is a very useful tool for those seeking aid from donors.
Specific legislation pertaining to environmental protection in situations of armed conflict
In 1991, IUCN consulted a panel of experts in international law for advice on legal provisions related to environmental protection in times of war. The panel's recommendations focused on two areas: first, improving the effectiveness of existing instruments of international law; and, second, establishing mechanisms and statutes for environmental protection during armed conflicts. To achieve these goals, the panel defined a series of measures it regarded as desirable and realistic. These included establishing a system of emergency preparedness; creating and updating databases on protected areas, areas rich in biodiversity, and the real and potential threats to them during wartime; and delineating international responsibilities toward the environment (IUCN, 1991).
One outcome of this effort was the development, in 1995, of the Draft Convention on the Prohibition of Hostile Military Activities in Internationally Protected Areas (IUCN, 1995). This document, drafted by IUCN's International Council of Environmental Law, was accepted by the World Conservation Congress in 1997. Because this document is still in draft form, it remains open to discussion, and consultations on the draft convention are still taking place (Shine, 1997). The document formalizes the role of the United Nations in protecting important natural and cultural sites by establishing procedures that should enable the U.N. Security Council to determine, on a case-by-case basis, sites where specific protective measures are warranted. Although some situations of armed conflict do not require U.N. intervention, this draft convention would make it possible to designate certain sites as demilitarized zones. Another interesting feature is that the draft convention identifies "internationally significant" sites, but it applies to both international and domestic conflicts. The criteria for identifying these internationally significant areas will rely on existing instruments, such as the World Heritage Convention, the Ramsar Convention, the network of Biosphere Reserves, and the United Nations list of protected areas (IUCN, 1995).
Another potentially useful tool is the Draft Code for Transboundary Protected Areas in Times of Peace and Armed Conflict. An agreement of this sort was originally proposed in September 1997 at the International Conference on Transboundary Protected Areas as a Vehicle for International Cooperation in Cape Town, South Africa (IUCN, 1997). A year later, IUCN had already developed the concept into a draft code (IUCN, 1998). The draft code is offered to contiguous nations in its current form or as a basis of discussion for developing a comparable internal code that reflects their specific needs. In addition to provisions related to the development of entire complexes of transboundary protected areas, certain portions of the code address situations of armed conflict. Part V ("Measures related to military activities") includes a series of relevant articles. For example, guidelines are provided to governments and armed forces in order to limit the impacts of armed conflict on transboundary protected areas. The draft code also calls for granting demilitarized zone status to high-priority protected areas, as defined and catalogued by instruments of international law such as the World Heritage Convention, the Ramsar Convention and the Man and the Biosphere program (IUCN, 1998). Although the draft code addresses many aspects of the threat of armed conflict to protected areas, it is not a binding agreement. It is simply a series of guidelines which are subject to the discretion of each signatory party. Still, this tool provides a coherent framework for the development of transboundary protected areas and, as such, fills a very significant function.
Regional cooperation
Regional cooperation may not be a total panacea in diplomatic terms but nevertheless represents a potential instrument of peace among nations (Blake, 1997). While transboundary protected areas have existed since the early 1930s, since 1990 the concept of transboundary protected areas has substantially evolved. Cooperation and collaboration between adjacent nations deserves particular attention, not only to ensure effective management and conservation of these protected areas, but also to promote dialogue and peace (Thorsell, 1990). Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, established in 1999 between South Africa and Botswana, is not only the first African transboundary park , but is the first in a series of protected areas projected for southern Africa (Department of Wildlife and National Parks of Botswana, 1999; Getaway, 1999).
In addition, transboundary natural resources management is the subject of a separate project of the Biodiversity Support Program.
Institutional development
A recurring theme in Sub-Saharan Africa is the weakness of most institutions responsible for biodiversity conservation and protected areas. African governments all too frequently marginalize the conservation sector, starving it of financial and human resources and weakening its institutions. But this tendency is not limited to the African continent; it is, in fact, a worldwide constant (Margules & Pressey, 2000). There has been meaningful progress in Africa in recent years (Bensted-Smith & Cobb, 1995), yet major efforts still must be made in the area of institutional development.
As indicated in the section on impacts, emergency situations strongly affect institutional capacities, particularly by reducing the financial proceeds of tourism. Emergency situations also wreak financial damage because foreign aid is often withdrawn during times of security concerns. Then, when a crisis finally strikes, the agents of national institutions find themselves deprived of essential resources, and the effectiveness of their work suffers accordingly. This is even more the case when their own capacities may have been limited from the outset. The best approach to dealing with such crises, that is, is to strive for preparedness during times of stability, specifically by improving the capacities of such agents through training programs and human resources development. Mid-level and junior agents of these institutions deserve especially great efforts in this regard, since it is this category of personnel that must directly confront the effects of war and other environmental crises (Plumptre, 2000).
Emergency preparedness
In recent years, a number of seminars and international meetings have addressed the matter of emergency preparedness (Green Cross UK, 1999), and a few concrete suggestions have even been made at the global level, such as the establishment of an early warning system (IUCN, 1997). But, to date, no such worldwide system has been implemented.
Existing systems that are designed to provide early warning in the event of armed conflict or a humanitarian disaster do not always address actual needs. Much remains to be done in terms of implementing reliable and rapid mechanisms (Doom & Vlassenroot, 1997).
But emergency preparedness may be achieved through avenues other than early detection mechanisms, as suggested in the following paragraphs.
Internal guidelines of organizations
An excellent way to prepare for emergency situations is to develop guidelines that are specific to each organization. This is especially true for humanitarian organizations. Agencies that develop such mechanisms on environmental issues have a better chance of limiting the negative impact of their interventions on biodiversity. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), for example, has developed guidelines to encourage respect for the environment during refugee operations (UNHCR, 1996). But the simple fact that such a document exists is not enough, especially in large organizations such as UNHCR. In order to reach as many agents and partners as possible, aid agencies need to broadcast the guidelines via a massive campaign of awareness-raising and training (Kalpers & Lanjouw, 1999; UNHCR, 1998a). It is also of fundamental importance to develop and strengthen such mechanisms on a continuous basis before emergency situations break out.
Geographic information systems and remote sensing
Modern techniques based on digitalization of geographic data and the use of satellite imagery give today's managers two useful tools: GIS and remote sensing.
Geographic information systems (GIS) based on specialized computer programs are used to prepare actual catalogues of maps, specifically including data on the environment and biodiversity (Aspinall, 1995). With GIS technology, it is now possible to predict which natural areas will be most vulnerable in the event of an emergency situation. In a refugee crisis, for example, GIS may be used to provide guidance to officials responsible for humanitarian operations concerning the location and functioning of refugee camps. UNHCR has established an internal department in charge of cataloguing and analyzing geographic data, and these data are then used to plan activities and logistical arrangements and to manage the environment (Bouchardy, 1995). A system of this sort is valuable not only to prevent the damage that could potentially be caused by refugee operations, but also to monitor the impact of such operations once they are put into effect. GIS may also be used to catalogue natural resources such as timber supply, water, and wildlife, and to monitor trends related to pressures exerted by refugee populations (Blondel, 1998).
Another type of tool, related to the use of GIS, is remote sensing. This technology is primarily based on satellite imagery. Although ground-truthing visits and calibration are required, remote sensing allows long-distance monitoring of the impact of emergency situations and, in particular, of refugee operations. The parameters most often studied with this method are the scope, intensity, and rate of deforestation caused by refugees and displaced populations (Henquin & Blondel, 1996). Remote sensing is a method that is quick and easy to use. But it is relatively expensive, and it does not permit users to monitor other impacts, such as the effects of poaching and the presence of land mines.
Mitigation of impacts during armed conflict
It is important that a number of mitigating measures be in place, ready for use whenever a crisis erupts. Such measures are largely dependent upon the phase of prevention and preparedness.
Fuel supply
As noted above, in times of crisis the energy requirements of refugees and displaced persons increase dramatically and the risk of a negative impact is substantially higher. The most logical, and traditional, step is to ensure a supply of fuelwood. Humanitarian agencies in the field usually organize such efforts; the fuel most often comes from plantations of exotic species such as eucalyptus, pine and cypress. Emergency supplies may also include indigenous species, from forests that may or may not have been logged before the crisis (Blondel, 1996).
Supplying fuelwood is a very expensive undertaking. Some environmental programs have spent astronomical amounts on this activity. During the Rwandan refugee crisis, for example, the budget for firewood supply in the DRC came to US $7 per refugee per year—that is, a total annual package of roughly US $5,000,000 for the entire refugee population. And this budget covered just one third of total firewood requirements (Leusch, 1995)!
Apart from the financial cost of such operations, the very principle of supplying fuelwood to refugee camps is a controversial matter. Many experts believe that providing refugees with their total energy requirements will inevitably result in negative effects. Paradoxically, it has often happened that as firewood becomes more readily available, the demand for it increases (UNHCR et al., 1996). Moreover, when firewood deliveries are rationed, the resulting relative shortage actually encourages energy-saving measures within of target populations (Owen, 1996). A parallel strategy that has emerged from this realization is to avoid making firewood a free commodity. Instead, the wood is assigned a symbolic value; refugees obtain the wood by paying for it, at times with cash, but most often by providing labor that is in some way linked to obtaining the resource. For instance, in some situations, refugees cut and transport the wood themselves. In others, they work on collective projects such as tree nursery maintenance or reforestation (UNHCR, 1998c).
Energy-saving techniques
This topic encompasses a variety of measures that are particularly important because they underlie the success of other measures, such as firewood supply and controlled management of woodcutting. However, a distinction should be drawn between technological devices, andenergy-saving practices.
The distribution of improved cookstoves in refugee and IDP camps is a hotly debated subject within the community of humanitarian and environmental agencies. In too many cases, the benefits of this sort of device have been overestimated and energy savings have not always been convincing (UNHCR, 1998b). Experience suggests that, to achieve significant results, efforts to introduce improved cookstoves must be accompanied by a number of conditions. First, before people become willing to adopt energy-saving techniques, people must be motivated by a shortage of fuel (in this case, a shortage of firewood). The principle here is the same mentioned above—that is, it may be inadvisable to provide refugee camps with 100 percent of their energy requirements. Second, the improved cookstoves should not be distributed free of charge. Rather, they should be "sold" to refugees in exchange for the only thing they have to offer, their labor (Accion contra el Hambre, 1999; Hoerz, 1999). Ideally, training programs should be organized to teach refugee groups how to manufacture the cookstoves themselves. Third, in order to reduce production costs and make the devices affordable to all, it is important to use local materials, or materials that are locally available. Thus, from the outset, the methods for making and distributing the devices will be adapted to local conditions. Finally, the populations that will use the improved cookstoves should, of course, receive appropriate supervision concerning their use.
When all these conditions have been met, it may be possible to achieve energy savings on the order of 20 to 30 percent in comparison to open-fire cooking techniques.
However, it is important to avoid focusing solely on such technological solutions. A true energy-savings program will examine not just heating devices but the full range of measures available to refugees and displaced persons. Many authors believe that energy-saving practices have a much more substantial impact than the use of improved cookstoves alone (Owen, 1996; UNHCR, 1998b). The energy-saving practices most frequently encouraged are the following: drying and chopping the wood; carefully controlling the fire and the air intake; cooking over a low fire instead of heavy boiling; putting out the fire as soon as the cooking is done; presoaking hard or tough food ingredients; and using lids on pots.
Another measure that can generate substantial energy savings is to set up collective kitchens in camps inhabited by refugees or displaced persons. However, this approach often runs into major cultural barriers. In practical terms, it actually can only be applied to very specific situations, for instance such as transit camps, hospitals, or schools. Still, cooking in collective kitchens may achieve energy savings as high as 80 percent in per capita firewood consumption (UNHCR, 1998c).
Alternatives to fuelwood exist, but most of them are either too expensive (for example, providing kerosene and appropriate cookers) or too difficult and cumbersome to set up (for example, producing peat-based briquettes or biogas). Solar cooking has been tested as an alternative energy source in certain situations and in semi-arid regions. The results of these experiments are, however, quite mixed. Solar cooking should not be considered the key to solving all problems (Umlas, 1996). Where it is feasible, this technique should only be viewed as a complement to other measures discussed above.
Controlled management of woodcutting
Controlled management of logging activities (that is, the cutting of standing trees) is sometimes contemplated in connection with the issue of firewood supply, particularly when resources as precious as protected areas are seriously threatened by deforestation. This step is generally taken in agreement with official forestry services, who identify the areas, the species, and the individual trees to be cut.
Such measures were proposed during the severe refugee crisis that affected Virunga National Park in the DRC. At one point, a program of controlled cutting of certain trees within the park boundaries was even suggested (Delvingt, 1994), but this recommendation was never implemented. Another study focused on the possibility of "sacrificing" natural forests located some sixty miles from the park in order to supply the camps with firewood (Blondel, 1996), but the demand to cut those forests vanished when the refugees, fleeing a new outbreak of warfare, abandoned the camps in haste.
When large numbers of Rwandan refugees arrived in the Ngara region of Tanzania in 1994, many protective measures were taken, such as marking certain trees to place them formally off limits to logging. To support this initiative, it was also necessary to train specialized staff and mount an awareness-raising campaign targeting refugee populations (Owen & Ruzicka, 1997).
Reforestation
Well before the end of a crisis that causes major deforestation and the beginning of the rehabilitation phase, it is of critical importance to initiate reforestation programs in tandem with all other measures designed to mitigate the impact of the crisis. One aspect of such crises is their uncertain duration. No one can predict how long the refugees or displaced persons will remain in the area; and, because the refugees are making increased demands, often the resident populations are also likely to experience shortages of such natural resources as firewood and lumber. Reforestation programs should be conducted on a coordinated basis and involve all relevant actors. Particular attention should be paid to developing accountability on the part of official bodies (for instance, forestry services and local chiefs) in order to ensure the sustainability of such initiatives. Humanitarian agencies are often mobilized to provide technical and logistical support, as was the case in the reforestation programs developed in Tanzania (UNHCR, 1998d).
Elsewhere, as was the case in Malawi, compensatory reforestation programs may be organized with the objective of re-establishing on behalf of local populations the forestry resources consumed by refugees or displaced persons (UNHCR, 1998f).
Direct support to agencies in charge of protected areas and to the forestry sector
In Tanzania, UNHCR directly recruited and employed forest wardens in and around the refugee camps. Their job was to prevent the cutting of live trees and to direct refugee groups to areas containing deadwood. Local communities cooperated fully in this program (UNHCR, 1998d). The local forestry services also received institutional support from UNHCR in the form of equipment, means of transportation, and operatingfunds.
Direct support to institutions may also involve financial and material support for agencies responsible for the protected areas affected by the presence of refugee camps. During the refugee crisis in the Goma region, for example, several refugee camps sprang up on the borders of the transboundary protected areas. Various activities carried out by refugees seriously threatened the environment of Virunga National Park. A number of international organizations, among them UNHCR, GTZ (the German technical cooperation agency), and the European Union, provided direct support to the Congolese Institute for the Conservation of Nature in the park (Languy, 1995).
Direct support is particularly important because it provides necessary tools to institutions that, in many cases, were already weak before the crisis erupted in areas such as surveillance, protection, and awareness raising.
Training
Training is an essential component of any and all mitigating measures. It may be conducted before a crisis or during it, either to promote preparedness or to address shortcomings observed along the way. In schematic terms, there are two types of targets for training initiatives: managers and officials of humanitarian agencies; and populations that directly affect the environment (i.e., resident, refugee, or displaced populations).
Aware of the negative impact their own operations may have on the environment, some humanitarian organizations have developed training programs and manuals for their field agents. These tools put field agents in a much better position to understand the mechanisms that generate an environmental impact, and thus to take appropriate measures to prevent or limit the impact. UNHCR, for example, launched a massive program in this area in 1995 by organizing training seminars not only for its own field agents but also for representatives of partner organizations (UNHCR, 1998a). It is interesting to note that the primary motivation leading to this type of initiative is not environmental protection or biodiversity conservation, but rather the threat to a humanitarian principle. When refugees destroy the natural resources of their host country, they run the risk of being rejected by the host population, seriously jeopardizing the right of asylum (UNHCR, 1999).
Populations that produce an impact on the environment constitute another target of training programs. In this case, training may address a great number of topics, among them energy-saving techniques, tree-nursery development and reforestation, and rational natural resources management (Accion contra el Hambre, 1999).
Coordination and support for other organizations
The section on the impacts of a crisis emphasized that a lack of coordination among agencies in the field is a negative factor that may exacerbate the direct effects of the crisis on the environment. Indeed, under such circumstances, there is often duplication, lack of complementarity, and even contradiction among activities.
In a number of situations, efforts to ensure coordination have been undertaken as a way to address this problem. During the acute crisis that first struck the Goma region in 1994, for example, UNHCR and GTZ created an environmental information bureau for the purpose of exchanging environmental data among the various organizations working in this sector (Delvingt, 1994). This initiative was then rapidly expanded to form an actual coordinating body, with an environmental coordinator supported by UNHCR (Leusch, 1995).
Faced with the same type of problem in Malawi, several environmental organizations joined together to set up the Coordination Unit for the Rehabilitation of the Environment (CURE). This body, which was established as an entity of the Wildlife Society of Malawi, was particularly active while Mozambican refugees were present in the country, but then continued to coordinate rehabilitation activities after they left (UNHCR, 1998f). Its membership included representatives of government agencies, NGOs, and donors.
Another way to ensure consistency among initiatives during a crisis or in the subsequent rehabilitation phase is to arrange for major funding and then to entrust program implementation to third-party agencies, as was done in Goma from 1995 to 1997. UNHCR funded and coordinated a large number of local and international organizations and was thus able to guarantee complementarity among the actions developed in the field. For example, the International Gorilla Conservation Program received funding from UNHCR for the purpose of rebuilding the capacities of the Congolese Institute for the Conservation of Nature, the official agency responsible for Virunga National Park (Kalpers, 1998).
Education and awareness-raising
When camps inhabited by refugees or displaced persons are located in close proximity to fragile resources such as natural forests or protected areas, the most basic awareness-raising measure is to inform these populations, by organizing meetings or by posting warning signs to clearly identify the areas in question. Signs of this sort were posted in Tanzania, for example, in the vicinity of several camps (UNHCR, 1998d), as well as in the DRC during the Rwandan refugee crisis that affected the Goma region (Wathaut, 1996).
In refugee camps in northern Kenya, complex educational programs were set up, with the primary objective of involving refugees in the resolution of their environmental problems. The program enhanced the curricula at schools inside the camps, through such means as new manuals and specialized courses. Adults in the Kenyan camps were reached with a broad spectrum of awareness-raising measures, such as outreach sessions and posters and other visual aids. This program also promoted collaboration with other locally active humanitarian agencies, thereby coordinating activities within the environmental sector (UNHCR, 1998e).
Because armed forces and the police are the primary actors in situations of armed conflict, especially intensive awareness-raising programs need to be created to reach them. These forces play a key role as entities likely to cause a direct negative impact on biodiversity. They are also frequently involved in numerous activities that consume or destroy natural resources—for instance, often in complicity with civilian offenders, they are involved in large-scale commercial poaching and deforestation schemes (Pido, 1992). It is a top priority, therefore, to create awareness-raising and educational programs for armed forces. This category of actors may well become the best ally of conservation agencies. In certain countries, among them Venezuela, the protection of natural resources and biodiversity is one of the basic tasks assigned to the armed forces (Guardia Nacional de Venezuela, 1992).
Rehabilitation
The first step of the rehabilitation process should be a damage assessment. This may be accomplished as soon as the crisis ends or whenever a lull occurs. However, several constraints may weigh heavily on this activity, among them lack of security, difficulty of access, and presence of land mines.
By definition, rehabilitation programs take place after a crisis occurs. They are a true intermediary stage between the emergency phase and the development phase. Such programs approach local populations who have been most directly affected by the recent events--either in terms of their social and economic fabric or with respect to their natural resources and their environment. The rehabilitation phase is the most favorable time to secure their involvement. A well-designed rehabilitation program, moreover, can build a solid foundation for subsequent development programs. That is why it is critical to involve as many stakeholders as possible at this stage, including government ministries, representatives of populations, technical cooperation agencies, and non-governmental organizations. In Malawi, when the Mozambican refugees returned to their native land, mechanisms for consultation and cooperation were instituted in order to ensure coordinated and orderly rehabilitation of the environment (Kafakoma, 1996).
A project developed in Mozambique after the peace accord was signed in 1992 concluded that any rehabilitation program should take into account the future needs of local populations and then attempt to satisfy them, rather than focusing exclusively on actions designed to restore the habitat. From this perspective, it is of particular importance to introduce improved management systems for forest and pasture resources in order to encourage new growth (Fuelwood Crisis Consortium:, 1994). UNHCR bases its rehabilitation strategy on two key principles. First, recognizing that restoration of the habitat as it existed before the crisis is not necessarily the most effective strategy, it strives to rehabilitate the environment while benefiting local communities. The second principle of UNHCR's rehabilitation strategy holds that natural regrowth may be the most cost-effective form of rehabilitation (UNHCR, 1998c).
Reforestation
Very often, rehabilitation programs developed in the wake of a refugee crisis place a major emphasis on restoring forest resources. This is a fairly traditional matter in terms of implementation, and the specific techniques vary only slightly from one situation to the next: selecting species (indigenous or exotic), establishing nurseries, creating training and outreach programs, planting affected areas or future productive areas. When reforestation is organized in connection with rehabilitation, it must follow a number of guiding principles and, in particular, it must take into consideration such factors as the resources consumed during the crisis and the future needs of resident populations. It is absolutely critical that this type of program be based on thorough planning that reflects the full complexity of all relevant factors.
One important issue to be analyzed is the prospect for funding such initiatives. A reforestation program requires large investments of time and money. Depending on the program objectives, various mechanisms may be contemplated to carry through the program. For example, a reforestation program may go forward with assistance from emergency organizations, such as the World Food Program, that support this type of initiative through a food-for-work system--that is, personnel employed for specific tasks are paid with food assistance instead of cash (Hansch & Jacobsen, 1996). For large-scale reforestation programs, activities should be planned in several phases, beginning with the most urgent actions and then continuing with programs of a more structural nature that will culminate in true development projects. For example, reforestation schemes in the Goma region were initiated by various local organizations, most of which were supported financially and coordinated by UNHCR; IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development, a United Nations agency) then launched a multi-year program to address the region's longer-term objectives (Kalpers, 1996).
Institutional development and direct support to national conservation agencies
If a crisis involving armed conflict does not completely obliterate the capacities of national conservation agencies, it will, at the very least, expose the shortcomings and weaknesses of such institutions. The rehabilitation phase presents a good opportunity to reinvigorate and restructure these agencies, all the more so because the period directly following a conflict often attracts donors and potential funding. Efforts to restore the capacities of an institution may follow various paths, all of which lead to the same objectives: autonomy and effectiveness. The operational component that can be implemented most quickly is direct support to national agencies. Typically, this support attends to the most urgent matters first with financial or material aid. Components that are also fundamental, but that require a longer-term commitment, may concern such issues as training an organization's staff, both in the field and at headquarters, or developing effective strategies for recovery. After the genocide in Rwanda, for example, several partners provided support to the Rwandan Office of Tourism and National Parks by developing an action program to rehabilitate the national parks and other protected areas of the country (ORTPN, 1995).
In the DRC, it was UNHCR funding that made it possible to start rehabilitating Virunga National Park in 1997. The funding created a program of direct support that was accompanied by a number of structural initiatives, such as training wardens and managers and formulating policies on ecotourism and community-based conservation (Kalpers, 1998). By 2000, with funding from the United Nations Foundation, a massive UNESCO program was assisting five World Heritage sites in the DRC and furthering the rehabilitation efforts already under way in certain national parks (UNESCO, 2000a).
Resettlement of refugees
Repatriation of refugees or displaced persons is an operation that is usually planned and organized in advance and that is part of the rehabilitation process. Resettlement programs have become more and more likely to take environmental issues into account, including agricultural activities; proper waste disposal; livestock management; consumption of such forest resources as firewood and lumber; and the availability and usage of water resources. It should be noted however, that while environmental attitudes have improved, there is still a long way to go before these attitudes become realities.
Species management
In many regions, animal populations, especially populations of wild ungulates, may decline markedly because of intense pressure from hunting and poaching during periods of armed conflict. In general, once the crisis is over and protective measures have been introduced, such populations may display spontaneous regeneration. This improvement has been observed in a number of countries, among them Uganda (Forse, 1987; Monck-Mason, 1996; Spencer, 1996).
On the other hand, when dealing with small populations or with species that are already endangered or vulnerable, more rigorous management methods may be necessary, for example translocation and reintroduction. In Angola, small groups of elephants have been reintroduced several times at Quiçama National Park in order to repopulate the region (African Wildlife Update, 1996; Wildnet Africa News, 2000). And in Uganda, there is a project to reintroduce the two species of African rhinoceros that were exterminated as a result of that country's long civil war (New Vision, 2000).
Demobilization of military forces
Often, when a situation of armed conflict draws to an end, large parts of the armed forces are demobilized. This may pose an added threat to biodiversity, particularly in the form of poaching. Demobilization does, however, provide an excellent opportunity to redirect military resources toward conservation operations by converting soldiers into field agents charged with surveillance of protected areas (Steiner, 1993).
In Mozambique, for example, some of the soldiers demobilized at the end of the war were integrated into the national park system to serve as wardens and trackers (Chande, 1996). In Angola, more than a thousand soldiers received appropriate training before being demobilized; they were then integrated into the system of national parks and forest reserves (IUCN, 1992).
List of Meetings and Workshops Dealing with Biodiversity and Armed Conflict
« Accion contra el Hambre. Evaluation de la situation des réfugiés et des populations locales dans la préfecture de Guekedou. » Rapport de mission réalisée du 09/01/99 au 16/02/99. 1999. Anonymous.
Adam, B., « Les transferts d'armes vers les pays africains. ». GRIP, Bruxelles, 1997.
African Rights, Rwanda. The Insurgency in the North-West. London: African Rights. 1998.
African Wildlife Update, "Park rehabilitation in Angola," Oryx 30:239. 1996.
Anstey, S., "Angola: Conflict and Conservation." Discussion paper presented to IUCN ROSA. IUCN - The World Conservation Union Regional Office for Southern Africa, 1993. 5 pp.
Aspinall, R. J., " Geographical Information Systems: their use for environmental management and nature conservation," Parks 5:20-31. 1995.
AWF, "Tuberculosis imperils lions in Kruger Park," African Wildlife News 34:1. 1999.
Bensted-Smith, R. and Cobb, S., "Reform of Protected Area Institutions in East Africa," Parks 5:3-19. 1995.
Bergeron, L., "Mara Lions Weather Distemper Virus," Swara 19:22. 1996.
Biswas, A. K. and Tortajada-Quiroz, H. C., "Environmental Impacts on the Rwandan Refugees in Zaïre," Ambio 25:403-408.1996.
Blake, G. H., "The Geopolitics of Transboundary Cooperation: An Overview." Paper presented to the International Conference on Transboundary Protected Areas as a Vehicle for International Co-operation, Cape Town, South Africa, September 16-18, 1997.
Blondel, N., « Résultat d'inventaires forestiers réalisés dans et autour du secteur sud du Parc National des Virunga: analyse et conclusions sur l'avenir de la forêt du Parc, » Programme Spécial de Réhabilitation des pays voisins du Rwanda (PSRR) / Union Européenne. 1996.
Blondel, N., « L'impact des camps de réfugiés sur l'environnement local: étude de cas sur Goma (Nord-Kivu), » in Journée d'étude L'information satellitaire au service de l'aide humanitair,e," May 28, 1997. Contribution du bureau I-Mage Consult. Non publié.
Blondel, N., "Development of a Geographic Information System (GIS) for Kagera and Kigoma Regions, Tanzania. Environmental aspects." Mission report to the Unit of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs, UNHCR- Geneva and the European Union. 1998.
Bouchardy, J. Y., "Development of a GIS System in UNHCR for Environmental, Emergency, Logistic and Planning Purposes," Office of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs, Program Policy Unit, DPOS. UNHCR, Geneva, 1995.
Bräutigam, A., "Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)," Parks 5:46-51. 1995.
CBSG [Captive Breeding Specialist Group], " Rebel Fighting Endangers Mountain Gorillas," CBSG News 2:8-9. Chande, B., "People and Parks: Rehabilitation in Mozambique -- The Case of The Gorongosa/Marromeu Region." Proceedings of a seminar tour, Africa Resources Trust, Rural Development and Conservation in Africa, Studies in Community Resource Management, 1996
CICR, « Interdiction des mines antipersonnel : Le Traité d'Ottawa expliqué aux non-spécialistes. » Comité International de la Croix Rouge, 1998.
Cooper, J. and Cooper, M., " Mountain Gorillas--A 1995 Update." African Primates 2:30-31. 1996.
Delvingt, W., « Etude préparatoire du programme spécial de réhabilitation pour les pays voisins du Rwanda (PSSR), volet environnement. » Rapport d'une mission effectuée au Zaïre, November 24-December 5, 1994. Faculté des Sciences Agronomiques de Gembloux, U.E.R. Sylviculture, 1994.
Department of Wildlife and National Parks of Botswana, Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park. 1. Development of the Agreement. 2. The present system of management. 1-5. Department of Wildlife and National Parks of Botswana Report. Gaborone, Botswana. 1999.
Direction du Tourisme des Parcs Nationaux et Réserves de Faune, « Plan de Conservation de l'Elephant au Tchad, » Ministère du Tourisme et de l'Environnement, Direction du Tourisme, des Parcs Nationaux et Réserves de Faune, 1991.
Doom, R. and Vlassenroot, K., "Early warning and conflict prevention: Minerva's Wisdom?" Discussion paper. University of Ghent. and Research Study Group of the Third World. http://www-jha.sps.cam.ac.uk/a/a008.htm.
Douglas-Hamilton, I., " Elephants Hit by African Arms Race," Pachyderm 2. 1983.
Forse, B. , "Uganda Mobilises to Restore Its National Parks," New Scientist 115:21. 1987.
Frojan, C. R. S. and Volger, A. P., "Landmine clearance -- its probable effect on Angolan biodiversity," Oryx 33:89-97. 1999.
Fuelwood Crisis Consortium, " An Assessment of the Environmental Damage in The Areas Surrounding the Mozambican Refugee Camps in Zimbabwe." Report by the Fuelwood Crisis Consortium on behalf of the Agricultural Sub-Committee of the Mozambican Refugee Program, 1994.
Getaway. " Frontiers Fall in The Name of Conservation". Getaway 11:40-41. 1999.
Gildemeister, M., Ngendahayo, J., Pietrowicz, P., and Williams, S., " Rapport d'étude de la zone périphérique de l'Akagera et de la réhabilitation de la zone du nouveau PNA. » A report to the Projet Protection des Ressources Naturelles (PRORENA), Ministère des Terres, de la Réinstallation et de la Protection de l'Environnement, and GTZ. Kigali, Rwanda, 1999.
Glowka, L., Burhenne-Guilmin, F., and Synge, H., « A Guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity," IUCN Environmental Law Center, IUCN Biodiversity Program, 1994.
Gombe, A. « Rapport de mission au Rwanda du 5 février au 13 mars 1995. » A report to the Programme des Nations Unies pour l'Environnement. Nairobi, Kenya, March 1995.
Green Cross UK, "Environmental Issues in Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Response." Conference proceedings. Green Cross UK, March 18, 1999. London.
Guardia Nacional de Venezuela, , « La Guardia Nacional de Venezuela presente en los parques nacionales y areas protegidas y en la defensa de la calidad de vida del venezolano. » Workshop on Protected Areas, War and Civil Strife, IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, Caracas, Venezuela, 1992..
Ham, R. and Oglethorpe, J., " Conservation and armed conflict in Africa," Innovation 7:38-41. 2000.
Hansch, S. and Jacobsen, K. , "The Environmental Effects of Mass Forced Migrations." International Symposium on Environmentally-Induced Population Displacements and Environmental ImpactsResulting from Mass Migrations, UNHCR, IOM, and RPG, Geneva, April 21-24, 1996.
Henquin, B. and Blondel, N. , « Etude par télédétection sur l'évolution récente de la couverture boisée du Parc National des Virunga ». : A report to Projet PSRR/PNVi, UE-ADG-UNHCR-IZCN, 1996. Hilhorst, D. and van Leeuwen, M., Imidugudu, Villagisation in Rwanda: a case of emergency development? Discussion paper. Wageningen, Disaster Studies. Rural Development Sociology Group, Wageningen University. Disaster Sites. Hoerz, T., "Integration of Household Energy Interventions into Crisis Management." In: Fighting in the Forest. Biodiversity Conservation amidst Violent Conflict., Naughton-Treves, L. (ed.). (Conservation Development Forum, 1999,).
Homsy, J., " Ape Tourism and Human Diseases: How Close Should We Get? A Critical Review of Rules and Regulations Governing Park Management and Tourism for The Wild Mountain gorilla, Gorilla gorilla beringei." Consultancy for the International Gorilla Conservation Program, 1999.
IUCN, " Recommendations. Consultation on the Law Concerning the Protection of the Environment in Times of Armed Conflict." A report to the International Council of Environmental Law. IUCN-Commission on Environmental Law, December 13-15, 1991.
IUCN, " Peace in Angola," IUCN Bulletin 23. 1992.
IUCN, "Draft Convention on The Prohibition of Hostile Military Activities in Internationally Protected Areas." International Council of Environmental Law, 1995.
IUCN, "Parks for Peace." A report to the International Conference on Transboundary Protected Areas As A Vehicle for International Cooperation. Somerset West, South Africa, September 16-18,1997.
IUCN, Draft proceedings, International Symposium on Parks for Peace. World Commission on Protected Areas, Bormio, Stelvio National Park, Italy, May 18-21, 1998. Kafakoma, R., "Environmental Rehabilitation of The Refugee Impacted Areas, Malawi." Report to the World Bank/UNEP Africa Forestry Policy forum, Nairobi, Kenya, August 29-30, 1996.
Kalpers, J., « La conservation du gorille de montagne. Le point de la situation en 1993, » Cahiers d'Ethologie 12:467-490.
Kalpers, J., « Suivi systématique de deux sites du patrimoine mondial: PN des Virunga et PN de Kahuzi-Biega. » A mission report adressé à l'attention du Comité du patrimoine mondial et de son Bureau, April 22-May 9, 1996. UNESCO, Paris.
Kalpers, J., « Projet de réhabilitation des capacités de gestion de l'ICCN au Parc National des Virunga, secteur sud. » Report of activity financed by UNHCR and WWF-Hollande to the Programme International de Conservation des Gorilles.. UNHCR. WWF-Holland, 1996. Kalpers, J. and Lanjouw, A., "Protection of Ecologically Sensitive Areas and Community Mobilisation." Environmental Management Training Workshop, UNHCR, November 1999, Nairobi, Kenya.
Kasereka, Bishikwabo, « La situation du Parc National de Kahuzi-Biega au 20 mars 2000. Briefing report. Kock, M. D., "Wildlife, People and Development: Veterinary Contributions to Wildlife Health and Resource Management in Africa," Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 28:68-80. 1996.
Languy, M., « Problèmes environnementaux liés à la présence des réfugiés rwandais. Identification des interventions réalisées. Coordination entre les organismes et propositions d'interventions complémentaires. » Mission report, PNUD, 1995. N.p.
Lanjouw, A., "Wildlife in Crisis: The Forgotten Victims of War." Lecture delivered at the Royal Geographic Society, September 1999, London.
Lanjouw, A., "Building Partnerships in The Face of Political And Armed Crisis: The International Gorilla Conservation Program." Paper presented to the Conference on War and Tropical Forests: New Perspectives on Conservation in Areas of Armed Conflict. Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, March 30-April 1, 2000, New Haven. Conneticut.
Leusch, M., "HCR Goma - Unité Environnement. » Intermediate report for February 15 to August 11, 1995. HCR, in collaboration with its partners of the Bureau d'information de l'Environnement (Union Européenne; GTZ Goma; PNUD Goma). 1995.
Lodhi, M. A., Echavarria, F. R., and Keithley, C., "Using remote sensing data to monitor land cover changes near Afghan refugee camps in Northern Pakistan," Geocarto International 13:33-39. 1998.
Margules, C. R. and Pressey, R. L. "Systematic Conservation Planning," Nature 243-253. 2000.
Martin, E. and Hillman Smith, K., "Entrepots for Rhino Horn in Karthoum and Cairo Threaten Garamba's White Rhino Population," Pachyderm 27:76-85. 1999.
McNeeley, J., "Biodiversity, War and Tropical Forests." Paper presented to the Conference on War and Tropical Forests: New Perspectives on Conservation in Areas of Armed Conflict. Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, March 30 –April 1,2000. New Haven, Connecticut.
Monck-Mason, F., "A Visit to Kidepo Valley National Park," Swara 19:24-25. 1996.
Mubalama, L. , "A View from Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo." In: Fighting in the Forest. Biodiversity Conservation amidst Violent Conflict., Naughton-Treves, L. (ed.). Conservation Development Forum, 1999.
Mushenzi Lusenge, N. »Etat actuel du Parc National des Virunga dans les Secteurs Centre et Sud. Infrastructures, administration et surveillance.» Mission report. République Démocratique du Congo, Direction Régionale des Parcs Nationaux. Région du Nord-Kivu, 1996.
New Vision, "Uganda: Rhinos To Cost US$ 100,000," New Vision, May 17, 2000.
Nyilimanzi, V., Rusagara, P., Nyamacumu, A., Sabel-Koschella, U., Hartmanshenn, T., and Vande weghe, J. P., "Rapport de la mission de clarification de la reprise du soutien au Parc National de l'Akagera (PNA). » Projet Protection des Ressources Naturelles (PRORENA), GTZ, Kigali, 1997. .
ORTPN [Office Rwandais du Tourisme et des Parcs Nationaux], « Programme d'action pour la restauration des capacités de gestion, » International Gorilla Cosnervation Programme.. ORTPN, 1995.
Owen, M. , "Energy Consumption in The Refugee-Hosting Areas of Kagera Region, Tanzania. Status and trends." A report for the Joint UNHCR-EU Energy Strategy Development, 1996.
Owen, M. and Ruzicka, I., "Energy Strategy for Refugee-Affected Areas of Kagera and Kigoma Regions, Tanzania." Report. Environment Unit, Division of Operational Support, UNHCR-Geneva and the European Commission. 1997. Paine, J. R., "World Heritage under Threat," Parks 3:23-28. 1992.
Peck, G., "Land Mines Exacting Heavy Toll on Animals," Press release. Associated Press, 7 May 2000
PICG-Rwanda, « Rapport d'activités 2è trimestre. » PICG-Rwanda, April-June 2000.
Pido, M. D., "Exploratory Notes on The Role of The Military and Police Forces in Protected Area Management with Emphasis on Some Coastal Parks in the Philippines."Paper for the Workshop on Protected Areas, War and Civil Strife, IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, Caracas, Venezuela, 1992.
Pimm, S. L., Jones, H. L., and Diamond, J. M., "On the risk of extinction," Am.Nat. 132:757-785. 1988.
Plumptre, A. J., « Lessons Learned from On-The-Ground Conservation in Rwanda and The Democratic Republic of Congo." Paper presented to the Conference on War and Tropical Forests: New Perspectives on Conservation in Areas of Armed Conflict. Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, March 30-April 1, 2000. New Haven, Connecticut.
Rukerankiko, L., « Afflux de bétail et le retour des réfugiés dans la région du Mutara. » Report. FAO, 1997. 2 pp.
Rutagarama, E., « Initiatives d'implication des populations dans des micro-projets de gestion du Parc National des Volcans. » Rapport préliminaire d'exécution des projets. IGCP-Rwanda. 1999.
Schneider, J., "The refugee Crisis in Southern and Central Africa," Global Dialogue 4.
Shine, C., « Legal Mechanisms To Strengthen and Safeguard Transboundary Protected Areas." Paper presented to the International Conference on Transboundary Protected Areas As A Vehicle for International Co-operation, Cape Town, South Africa, September 16-18, 1997.
Simberloff, D. and Abele, L. G., "Island Biogeography Theory And Conservation Practice," Science 191:285-286. 1976.
Simberloff, D. and Abele, L. G., "Conservation and Obfuscation: Subdivision of Reserves," Oikos 42:401. 1984.
Smith, D., State of War and Peace Atlas. London: Penguin Books, 1997.
Smith, K. , « Rapport sommaire préliminaire des résultats du recensement aérien, juin 97 et évaluation de l'état du Parc National de la Garamba. » Projet Parc National de la Garamba, WWF/ICCN, RDC, 1997. Spencer, M., "Much Ado about Murchison." Swara 19:26-27. 1996.
Stanford, C., "Gorilla Warfare," The Sciences, July/August 1999.
Steiner, A. M., "The Peace Dividend in Southern Africa: Prospects and Potential for Redirecting Military Resources towards Natural Resource Management." Report prepared for the UNDP Conference on Military and the Environment, "Past Mistakes and Future Options," New York City. February 22-23, 1993.
Thorsell, J., "Parks on the Borderline: Experience in Transfrontier Conservation." IUCN Protected Area Program Series N 1. 1990. 98 pp.Thorsell, J., "From Strength to Strength: World Heritage in its 20th Year." In: World Heritage, Twenty Years Later, ed., Anon. Proceedings of the IVth World Congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, Caracas, Venezuela, 1992
Umlas, E., "The Experience of UNHCR And Its Partners with Solar Cookers in Refugee Camps." Office of the Senior Coordinator on Environmental Affairs. UNHCR-Geneva, 1996.
UNESCO, « Convention concernant la protection du patrimoine mondial, culturel et naturel. » A report to the 19th session of theWorld Heritage Committee, Berlin, December 4-9, 1995.
UNESCO, « Orientations devant guider la mise en oeuvre de la Convention du patrimoine mondial. » UNESCO Comité intergouvernemental pour la protection du patrimoine mondial culturel et naturel. 1996. UNESCO, "Biodiversity Conservation in Regions of Armed Conflict: Protecting World Heritage in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)." Project review form. UNESCO World Heritage Center, Paris, 1999.
UNESCO, « Conservation de la biodiversité dans les régions de conflits armés. La protection du patrimoine mondial en République Démocratique du Congo. » A project of document FNU/CPM/ICCN/Partenaires. UNESCO, ICCN, UNFIP, 2000.
UNESCO, "Multi-Million Dollar Project To Protect World Heritage Sites in Democratic Republic of Congo." Press release. UNESCO, 2000. UNHCR, "Environmental Guidelines," United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Geneva, 1996.
UNHCR, "Environmental Guidelines - Livestock in Refugee Situations." UNHCR, Geneva, 1997.
UNHCR, "Environmental Management within Refugee Operations." Draft training module. Environment Unit, UNHCR, Geneva, 1998.
UNHCR, "Refugee Operations and Environmental Management: Key Principles for Decision-Making." Environment Unit, UNHCR, Geneva, 1998
UNHCR, "Refugee Operations and Environmental Management: Selected Lessons Learned." Environment Unit, UNHCR, Geneva, 1998.
UNHCR, "Towards Sustainable Environmental Management Practices in Refugee-Affected Areas (TSEMPRAA). Country report: Tanzania and Democratic Republic of Congo." Environment Unit, UNHCR, Geneva, 1998. UNHCR, "Towards Sustainable Environmental Management Practices in Refugee-Affected Areas (TSEMPRAA). Country reports: Kenya and Nepal." Environment Unit, UNHCR, Geneva, 1998.
UNHCR, "Towards Sustainable Environmental Management Practices in Refugee-Affected Areas (TSEMPRAA). Country reports: Malawi, Mozambique and Zimbabwe." Environment Unit, UNHCR, Geneva, 1998.
UNHCR, Environmental Management Training Workshop. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, November 1999, Nairobi, Kenya..
UNHCR, IOM, & RPG, "Environmentally-Induced Population Displacements and Environmental Impacts Resulting from Mass Migrations." International Symposium, UNHCR; IOM; Refugee Policy Group , Geneva, April 21-24, 1996.
UWA, "When War Breaks Out," The Link 1:1-2. 1997.
Wathaut, A., "Etat du lieu du PNV-sud, une année et demi après l'installation des réfugiés rwandais dans et en bordure du parc. » Institut Zaïrois pour la Conservation de la Nature, Parc National des Virunga, Station de Rumangabo, Zaïre, 1996.
Werikhe, S., Mushenzi Lusenge, N., and Bizimana, J., "The Impact of War on Protected Areas in Central Africa." Case study of the Virunga Volcanoes Region, delivered at the International Conference on Transboundary Protected Areas As A Vehicle for International Co-operation, Cape Town, South Africa, September 16-18, 1997.
Westing, A. H., "Environmental Security And Its Relation To Ethiopia And Sudan," Ambio 20:168-171. 1991.
Westing, A. H. , "Protected Natural Areas and the Military," Environmental Conservation 19:343-348. 1992.
Wildnet Africa News, "First Airlifted Elephants Arrive in Angola," Press release. Wildnet Africa News, 11 September 2000. Williams, S. and Ntayombya, P., "Akagera: An Assessment of The Biodiversity And Conservation Needs. Akagera Biodiversity Project." Final report to the.Zoological Society of London and Darwin Initiative, 1999. London.Yamagiwa, J., "Slaughter of Gorillas And The Crisis of Conservation in The Kahuzi-Biega National Park, Democratic Republic of Congo." Paper presented to the Conference on War and Tropical Forests: New Perspectives on Conservation in Areas of Armed Conflict. Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies. March 30-April 1, 2000, New Haven, Connecticut.
Zimbabwe Wildlife, "Minefields in The Parks," Oryx 21:52. 1987.