In this chapter: |
|
| Resilience of Projects Following the Collapse of Socialism | |
| Post-Conflict Projects and Support | |
| Emergency Assistance |
The impacts just described would have been greater if the Ethiopian government had not been successful in obtaining various types of international support from the inception of its conservation- and protected-area program. It was able to do so because the battle for Eritrea was being fought in the north and there was little threat of it moving south (Table 3). Initially, Ethiopia's supporters contributed a provision of expatriates to act as advisors, wardens, and, to a limited extent, researchers. Other help took the form of funds for development, equipment, in-situ training, education, and enforcement (Blower, 1966, 1968; Bolton, 1969, 1972; Brown, 1969; Beur, 1969; Fujioka, 1976; Hurni, 1975; Huxley et al., 1963; Lilyestrom, 1972 a, b; Mizuno, 1977; Petrides, 1961; Robertson, 1970; Stephenson, 1975). As time passed, however, the donors found themselves in the position of providing funds, almost exclusively, for maintenance, equipment renewals, improvements, ex-situ training, and the development of management plans (Hillman, 1986 a, b, 1993a; Hurni, 1986; Jacobs and Schloeder, 1993). Hillman (1993a) estimated that the cost of these later contributions averaged approximately U.S. $750,000 per annum between 1983 and 1990.
| IUCN | The World Conservation Union |
| WCS | The Wildlife Conservation Society |
| ODA | British Overseas Development Agency |
| United States Peace Corps | |
| WWF | World Wide Fund for Nature-UK |
| AWF | African Wildlife Foundation |
| ZSL | Zoological Society of London |
| University of Missouri/Earthwatch | |
| University of Oslo, Norway | |
| UNESCO | World Heritage Commission |
| Swiss Federal Institute | |
| EU | The European Union (EU) |
| University of Japa | |
While the achievements of the EWCO and its supporters were evident by the war's end , it was clear that more could have been accomplished had there been mitigation or flexibility when enforcing the exclusionary protected-area policy, particularly during times of famine. More, too, could have been done if the EWCO and other organizations had managed donations better. These factors contributed to concerns about instability and led to donor frustration and fatigue as the war progressed, and to the steady withdrawal of foreign support. Many conservation opportunities were lost as well, including the offer to purchase a new aerial survey plane (Frankfurt Zoological Society) and the loss of GTZ (German Technical Assistance Service) funds for infrastructure improvements in Awash National Park and other protected areas. Additionally, some conservation organizations decided to limit their support to ex-situ assistance (e.g., provision of training opportunities at Mweka College in Tanzania).
Resilience of Projects Following the Collapse of Socialism
Towards the end of the civil war, the World Wide Fund for Nature (UK) (WWF), Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), Zoological Society of London (ZSL), European Union (EU), and the University of Oslo were the only remaining institutions with EWCO-related projects in Ethiopia. In addition, the WCS was the only one with ongoing field projects and foreign principal investigators. When it became clear to these investigators that the government was about to collapse, some chose to leave, others to remain. All were able to resume their work within a short period of time, however, because the transition period after the civil war was so brief. Unfortunately, not all projects survived this particular transition period unchanged.
WCS's Ethiopian Wolf Project in the Bale Mountains National Park experienced a setback when several wolves were shot and the researchers' hut was looted and destroyed (Gottelli and Sillero-Zubiri, 1992; Hillman, 1992). WCS and WWF's conservation-education project was not affected, however, because it was near completion and involved training in the public schools. The WCS Awash National Park Project was not badly affected by lawlessness, either. It survived this period because several measures were in place prior to the completion of a management plan that changed the local community's attitude toward the protected area (see Text Box 1).
Text
Box 1.
|
The Awash National
Park (NP) Project (1990 - 1993), undertaken at the request of the EWCO,
involved research and the development of a new park-management plan (Jacobs
and Schloeder, 1993). The EWCO's request for this project came following
acknowledgment that its exclusionary protected-area form of park management
had been ineffective to date, and that data and ideas were lacking on how
this protected area should be managed in the future. In the course of conducting
research to develop the management plan, it became apparent that immediate
intervention measures must be taken if this park were to survive until the
project completion date -- and to avoid further human injuries and loss
of life. These concerns came about as a result of the park authorities regular
engagement in armed conflict with the Kereyu and Ittu while attempting to
enforce Ethiopia's exclusionary protected-area policy. The measures implemented
prior to the completion of the management plan included:
and The discussions led to a temporary cease-fire agreement to reduce immediate tensions. This was followed by such important concessions as allowing the Kereyu and Ittu access to the park's grasslands during times of drought, under the condition that they were responsible for self-policing. The recruiting of several government organizations and NGO's (Water Resources Development Institute; OXFAM, GOAL-Ireland, CARE) early on to provide various services (health, veterinary, technical) also was key in that it served to illustrate a commitment to resolving the problems of the Kereyu and Ittu. Of critical import, however, was the general manager's endorsement of these intervention measures from their inception. His endorsement signified that the EWCO was willing to acknowledge that Ethiopia's protected areas would survive only after adopting a long-term community-based approach to conservation. This endorsement is what led the Kereyu and Ittu to believe that their needs would have as much priority as the park's, and to agree to a cease-fire and self-policing. |
Post-Conflict Projects and Support
Because of the quick return to stability, Ethiopia's remaining donors found themselves in the unique position of being able to begin new projects while resuming unfinished ones. The Awash National Park Project (WCS) was one of those, as it was able to continue as before and completed a five-year management plan for the EWCO. Funds and assistance with this plan were difficult to obtain, however, because of concerns over the Oromo Liberation Front's activities in the Awash area. There also was doubt about working with the latest general manager of the EWCO because he was unwilling to consider a community-based approach to conservation -- despite his predecessor's approval of this approach.
The extent of the EWCO's plan implementation was the completion of an in-situ graduate student's research project. This involved the investigation of herbivore-plant species dynamics in Awash National Park (conducted by Almaz Tadessa, a biologist in Awash National Park) and the provision of management recommendations. The Awash Conservation and Development Project, however, came about as a result of CARE's interest in the conservation-community development aspect of the management plan (CARE, 1994). At its inception, CARE's project aimed at increasing the household security of 45,000 pastoralists through improved and sustainable natural-resource management and community-created developments (CARE, 1994). The project experienced a variety of difficulties (e.g., unreasonable demands and the EWCO's unwillingness to work with local communities), however. The focus of the project eventually shifted as a result, from a sustainable natural-resource management/community-oriented project to a community-development project solely.
Two other projects begun in the years after the socialism's collapse were the EU's National Parks Rehabilitation in Southern Ethiopia Project and WCS's Omo National Park Project. The EU project (1993-1998), which aimed at strengthening the EWCO and assisting in the development of all protected areas within the southern regions (e.g., North and South Omo regions; Nechisar, Omo, and the Mago National Park, and associated Wildlife Reserves and Controlled Hunting Areas), however, had limited success (EU Feasibility Study for Wildlife Conservation in southern Ethiopia, Final Report, 1993). Government decentralization of Ethiopia's conservation- and protected-area program in 1995 (see Text Box 2), in addition to logistical constraints, unreasonable expectations, the failure to collaborate with other conservation nongovernment organizations (NGO) and sectors, and the mismanagement of funds, all were factors that limited the success of this particular project (EU National Parks Rehabilitation in Southern Ethiopia Project, Final Report, 1998).
The Omo National Park project (1993-1996) was able to achieve its objectives, however, despite having to face some of the same challenges as the EU project (Jacobs, 1999; Schloeder, 1999). This success was attributed to having a goal perceived by the local community as improving relations with the conservation authority, and one more realistic and attainable in light of the government's institutional limitations. Collaboration between the conservation NGO and various sectors also was a key factor for success: It facilitated a better understanding of the problems and issues. It also helped in the sharing of important data, which went a long way toward preventing redundancy and freeing up funds for other efforts (MoA, 1993; CARE, 1994; MoNRDEP, 1995).
Text
Box 2.
|
|
There were no significant differences in how the EWCO operated between 1991 and 1995, with the exception that it briefly was placed under the authority of the newly created Ministry of Natural Resources Development and Environmental Protection (MoNRDEP). In 1995, Ethiopia's new democratic-oriented government elected to create several new administrative regions and to re-draw the boundaries of others (Figure 2b). The government then decentralized some of its authority and assets in 1996. The effect of these changes was that, thereafter, all protected-area assets and management responsibilities were transferred to the regions in which they were located, with the exception of the Awash National Park. The responsibility for the Awash was retained by the EWCO because this park was divided between two regions and it was felt that regional politics would not bode well for its management. The transfer of responsibility was mostly ineffective as of 1999, however, because there never was significant allocation of funds to the regions for their newly-acquired responsibilities, and because there was some debate as to their exact responsibilities (EU, 1998). |
Emergency assistance from the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) became available to Ethiopia because of the quick return to stability. The UNDP-Emergency Support to Conservation plan included the repair of infrastructures in the Abijata-Shalla National Park, the Bale Mountains National Park, the Simien National Park, and the Senkelle Wildlife Sanctuary. It also involved the provision of an advisor within the EWCO and the contracting of a "National Fund for Conservation" mechanism, at a cost of close to U.S. $1million. The UNDP advisor overseeing these activities experienced nearly identical problems, and for the same reasons, as Ethiopia's previous donors, however, when attempting to deliver this emergency assistance.