PART II

CRITICAL ISSUES IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION IN AFRICA

CHAPTER THREE

VALUES IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

The Issue

People value biological resources in different ways: spiritually, economically, aesthetically, culturally, and scientifically. Values may also be influenced by the different perspectives found at the local, national, or international levels. Collective and individual values in turn, can significantly influence patterns of natural resource use to form the foundation of biodiversity conservation.

The concept of values encompasses a constellation of social norms and individual attitudes, all of which may play a role in the conservation of biodiversity. Planners and policy-makers need to have techniques for clarifying and assessing differences in values as they relate to biodiversity conservation. However, the empirical study of biodiversity conservation values is generally limited at present to microeconomic analysis, as other disciplines have been slow to develop suitable techniques.

Values and Levels of Analysis

Biodiversity values may differ at the local, national and international levels. Conservation of biodiversity is directly relevant to local residents, for whom biological resources often represent their primary source of livelihood, medicine, and spiritual values. Nation-states may also express values related to biological resources, often in relation to economic benefits brought about through biological resource use both consumptive (timber harvesting, hunting) and nonconsumptive (tourism). Biodiversity conservation has become an international issue as well, based on a global concern for maintaining the existing species richness on earth, expressed in terms of the common heritage of humans (Johnson, in prep.). Differences in values can be difficult to reconcile. It is important to be able to clarify different values that underlie positions taken on various sides of a given issue relevant to 47 biodiversity and to understand how these values can affect the willingness to adopt different patterns of resource use or to reach compromises.

Differences in values often depend on the relationship to the resource in question. For local residents, a given biological resource may represent an essential economic activity and may also be important for cultural or religious reasons. Where other options or substitutes are not readily available, too expensive, or unacceptable, local resource users may defend their right of access vigorously (see Box 8).

At the international level, the protection of a given resource may be justified by symbolic associations, or because it plays a role in the global environment, or both. For example, the tropical forest of the Amazon basin plays a global climate function, and for many its deforestation has become a symbol of irresponsible resource destruction. Often, these factors are said to outweigh individual, corporate, or national benefits gained from exploitation. From this perspective, it may be felt that those directly responsible for natural resource exploitation should modify their behavior toward less damaging patterns, a process that is often said to require a change of values, attitudes, or environmental ethics (Nelson 1979).

In general, changes in patterns of local resource utilization are more easily advocated as one moves up from the local level to the national and international levels. While the costs of finding alternatives typically fall on local residents, many of the benefits ("option value," "existence value," and certain environmental services) accrue to all levels.

Methods of Studying Values

In the sociological sense, values are "abstract and often unconscious assumptions of what is right and important" (Rodgers and Burdge 1972). A value system is "a system of established values, norms, or goals existing in a society" (Webster's 1986). Values are social and cultural phenomena, and their influence on biodiversity conservation may be subtle and difficult to ascertain. Environmental and conservation issues are frequently described as conflicts of values (Petulla 1980). Articles on conservation frequently mention a need for changes in values.

Environmental values or attitudes toward nature as well as values concerning wealth, posterity, and development may be reflected in different patterns of resource utilization. They can also point to potential conflicts where values and actions are inconsistent or where the value systems of different groups are not in accord. Three levels of analysis can be used to study values: (1) individual expressions of value commitments, (2) group behavior that reflects underlying values, and (3) cultural expression through art, literature, or other symbolic forms that reveal values (Means 1969).

In principle, the study of these values should be both cross-cultural and interdisciplinary, but in practice the most widely used techniques are those of economists. Economic values associated with biodiversity can be measured by how much people would be willing to pay for various attributes or functions of this diversity or to accept for their loss (Randall 1988). However, tracing a linkage between value systems and economic transactions involving biological resources is not an easy task, and many important values may be lost or obscured in the process.

In part, this is because neoclassical economics makes the assumption that people value the things they do for their own private and rational reasons (Randall 1988). Economic analysis therefore takes at face value individual statements concerning utility and preferences. In this sense, economics is an individualistic discipline, treating society as an arithmetical aggregation of individuals, or "sovereign 49 consumers." Group dynamics and collective or national values are not topics that lend themselves to economic analysis.

The study of values reflects the arbitrary boundaries of various disciplines within the social sciences. The anthropologist Cyril Belshaw described how this problem inhibits application of social science analysis to public policy making:

Many of the issues impinging on the life of the household can and should be thought of in terms of the structure of social relations (sociology and anthropology), the formation of values (anthropology and education), small group analysis (social psychology), power interactions (political science), choice of ends and means (economics), prior influences (history), jural status (sociology and law), the influence and relevance of space in social relations (geography), and the application of mathematical models such as systems analysis, linear programming, and the like scattered through all the disciplines (Belshaw 1976).

Most of the techniques discussed below have been developed by economists and are used for appraisal of publicly financed projects (for example, a new dam or airport or the creation of a national park). These techniques, which can be quite complex and time-consuming, and therefore costly, provide a "snapshot" of values and preferences captured at the time of the analysis. Few techniques exist as yet for monitoring or assessing values over time, and for applying these in broader policy-making or administrative situations, even though the latter may be more relevant to the conservation of biodiversity in Africa.

Furthermore, in practice these techniques are often applied in rather simplistic ways that ignore important social and other factors that are not readily quantified. As a result, project decisions have often been based on faulty assumptions, and the track record of microeconomic tools for public policy decisions has been, at best, mixed.

Economic Valuation of Biodiversity

Actions that produce changes in aggregate welfare can be analyzed with cost-benefit analysis (CBA), to determine their effect on economic efficiency (Hyman and Stiftel 1988). This is done by comparing streams of costs and benefits over time, adjusted by a discount rate often defined as the opportunity cost of capital. Market prices may be adjusted to compensate for market imperfections or to reflect policy or social objectives. Thus, shadow prices and social discount rates extend financial analysis, by including nonmarket benefits and highlighting consequences for society as a whole rather than for individuals or firms (Hufschmidt, et al. 1983). For example, benefits from watershed protection may be estimated, incorporating ecological services into the analysis. A social rate of time preference different from the opportunity cost of capital may also be selected to capture society's concern for the welfare of future generations (Pearce, Barbier, and Markondya 1990).

An extended CBA on Korup National Park in Cameroon demonstrated that the loss of environmental services, such as watershed protection, can provide an economic justification for halting deforestation (WWF-UK 1989). An analysis of the Hadejia-Jama' area floodplain in northern Nigeria similarly showed that returns from agriculture, fishing, and fuelwood collection exceeded those from proposed 50 development upstream (Aylward and Barbier 1992). Aylward and Barbier have also proposed that the attribute of biological diversity should be given more emphasis in economic analysis of ecological services (Aylward and Barbier 1992).

Where benefits are not quantifiable, cost-effectiveness analysis may be used to select the least costly of a range of choices accomplishing the same goal (Dixon and Sherman 1990). If a given level of biodiversity could be selected for conservation in a given case, cost-effectiveness analysis might indicate the most economic means of achieving that level of conservation, without needing to identify and quantify all relevant benefits in terms of option value, existence value, and so forth. In situations in which a "safe minimum standard" approach to biodiversity conservation is selected (Randall 1988), cost-effectiveness analysis might be an appropriate technique for studying options. Also, where quantification is difficult and analysts disagree about precise measures, lower-bound values often can provide sufficient basis for decision making (Hyman and Stiftel 1988).

Various indirect techniques are also available for analysis of nonmarket environmental values. Some of these involve surveys, bidding games, or other participant-observer procedures for studying the preferences of those who would be affected by proposed developments (Hyman and Stiftel 1988; Hufschmidt, et al. 1983). Many of these techniques have been developed in connection with environmental impact assessments in industrialized countries, and most are based on microeconomic theory, although some also claim origins in information or decision theory, social psychology, or other disciplines (Hyman and Stiftel 1988). Using these techniques, environmental options can be empirically analyzed even in the presence of value conflicts (Nelson 1979). However, such methodologies may be subject to several sources of bias (Hyman 1981), and it is not clear how well they might apply to biodiversity conservation problems in sub-Saharan Africa.

Value Change and Biodiversity

Values and value systems can affect how natural resources are used or abused, conserved or wasted. These patterns may change over time and other trends may also affect the relationship between values and resource use. In many traditional societies, natural resource use tended to cause little damage to biodiversity, in part because of low population density. In addition, these societies fostered belief systems as well as social norms that encouraged or even enforced limits to exploitation. Some of the mechanisms by which these values were expressed included seasonal bans on hunting or setting aside certain areas for the exclusive use by a king or other leaders (Musonda 1987).

Economic change, population growth, and other factors have brought far-reaching shifts in traditional patterns. Urbanization is especially identified with changes in lifestyles and value systems and with a distancing from customary relationships between humans and nature. Even in rural areas, the expanding role of national governments has displaced traditional responsibilities for resource allocation and management (Little and Brokensha 1987).

In the area that is now Zambia, the chitemene, or shifting cultivation system, represented a stable and sustainable production system for centuries, if not longer (see Box 3, Chapter 1). Relying on forest biomass for natural fertilizer, the chitemene system was ecologically sustainable at low population densities. However, at densities higher than approximately three persons per square kilometer, deforestation can occur as forest biomass becomes overexploited and fallow periods become too short for natural regeneration (Chidumayo, in prep.).

Such production methods, and the values that underlie and reinforce them, were well adapted to local conditions in the past, but, in some cases at least, they are now becoming obsolete and perhaps counterproductive. How to retain the best attributes of traditional societies under conditions of rapid modernization and urbanization must be considered one of the most pressing issues for African nations. As difficult as this challenge may be, it is necessary because modern values and methods have proven in many cases to be highly damaging to biodiversity and incapable of providing acceptable standards of living for many African people.

Because of the rich and varied ethnic composition of sub-Saharan African societies, it can be misleading to generalize about "African" values and value systems. Such generalizations often are little more than simplistic stereotypes that shed little light on important distinctions and subtleties. Thus, as a basis for policy recommendations, the search for traditional values that can reinforce biodiversity conservation should avoid comparing African societies against one another or against non-African societies. Instead, there is a need to assess various ways in which cultural practices and value systems have fostered conservation in specific settings and to investigate how such cases can be encouraged, strengthened, and replicated in appropriate ways.

The sacred groves of Ghana offer one example of tangible conservation benefits that result from the continued observance of traditional beliefs. Also in Ghana, taboos have exerted a restraining influence on the harvesting of certain species of fish and mollusks in sacred lagoons. These and other cases are discussed in Chapter 4, along with suggestions for better understanding indigenous ideas and applying them to biodiversity conservation (see Box 9). Although considerable anthropological work has been done on belief systems and agricultural practices in sub-Saharan Africa, more work that explicitly focuses on the role of biodiversity within traditional systems is needed.

Changes in values may also depend, to a certain extent, on increasing the knowledge and understanding of the uses of biological resources and the ecological systems in which the resources are obtained. As knowledge of an important new use of a resource is recognized, the value is often increased. For example, the value of certain plants to the development of medicines or as genetic sources for new crop varieties has increased their value in all levels of society. Similarly, the value of certain ecological functions increases as the level of understanding increases, such as the value of intact forests to watershed management for local agriculture and climate stabilization for entire regions. This linkage between changes in values and education or increased awareness is further developed in Chapter 8.

Values and Sustainable Development

For development to become sustainable in Africa, the present rate of biodiversity loss must be brought under control. Adapting certain aspects of traditional African production systems to present-day conditions may offer a practical means of accomplishing this. In this sense, it is important to emphasize traditional African value systems and the specialized roles of producers and providers of knowledge about the surviving systems of biodiversity. Indeed, these traditional systems and roles may be as important as specific conservation techniques in helping to reverse present trends of destruction of biodiversity. Yet these value systems must also be able to function in rapidly changing and 52 industrializing societies. Modifying or combining aspects of traditional and modern value systems is no easy, however, nor is it clear who bears the responsibility for doing so. Moreover, it is evident that better tools are needed for empirically analyzing values and their relationship to the conservation of biodiversity.

It is important to remember that African values are not static. Modern or contemporary, as well as traditional, values exist in Africa today, and it should not be assumed that all change will be in one direction, from "traditional" to "modern." Value systems compatible with sustainable development cannot be prescribed. They must emerge through local participation and with respect for traditional beliefs and practices that have effectively conserved biodiversity for centuries. In this respect, Africa's great ethnic diversity constitutes one of its greatest assets. Each distinct culture represents a unique human "solution" to the challenges of living in a particular ecological zone, yet this knowledge-and the values that underlie it has barely begun to be recognized in the process of development. These factors will be discussed in Chapter 4.

CHAPTER FOUR

INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE AND BIODIVERSITY

The Issue

Environmental degradation and the loss of biodiversity in Africa results from a variety of factors, including, and perhaps most importantly, the lack of recognition, understanding, and use of Africa's indigenous knowledge, technology, and practices. The knowledge and skills developed by Africans over many millennia to adapt to and manipulate their land, flora, and fauna constitute an invaluable resource. Indigenous knowledge and skills are key resources that should be used in conjunction with their Northern counterparts in the effort to craft sustainable biodiversity conservation programs.

Many aspects of biodiversity and its conservation may be found embedded in Africa's indigenous taxonomies, food production practices, and religions. Attention to species diversity is reflected in highly detailed classifications of plant and animal species. Concern for maintaining and developing cultivar and herdstock diversity is well documented for numerous populations. Finally, concepts affirming an ecological balance or interdependency between human, plant, and animal life can be identified in many indigenous religions.

Respecting Indigenous Knowledge

Recognition of indigenous knowledge is the first step in the evaluation and selective use of such knowledge in biodiversity conversation programs. Indigenous knowledge has been available to outsiders for some time, but until recently much of this information was largely ignored for a variety of reasons:

• It was assumed during the colonial era that Africans had little knowledge to impart and that African land-use practices were primitive and destructive relative to European and Asian techniques. Widespread practices such as slash and burn agriculture, for example, were cited as destructive of forests and of soil fertility, and as responsible for environmental degradation.
• Over time an image evolved of African societies as timeless, unreflective, tradition-bound, and as passive adaptors to their environment rather than as analysts and manipulators of it. Top-down development projects which ignored the existence of local expertise were a logical consequence.
• Post-colonial educated Africans were supportive of Northern models of development. Only recently has there been substantial interest among African elites in indigenous knowledge and skills.

Indigenous Knowledge of Flora

Cultivated Species

Diversity of cultivars is highly prized by African cultivators. In the Zaire River basin, cultivators have been recorded as planting as many as 60 different cultivars in their fields, and fields containing over 30 cultivars were common (Miracle 1967). In West Africa, individual rice farmers may plant 8-10 different varieties per farm, carefully matching types of rice to specific soil moisture conditions (see Box 10). At any given time, 25-50 varieties of rice might be in use in a single village (Richards 1985). In East Africa, Bukusu diets include over a hundred different fruits and vegetables drawn from at least 70 genera (Juma 1989).

African cultivators stress food diversity and security over high productivity in their resource management. Their techniques include carefully managed crop species and cultivar diversity, staggered planting and harvesting dates, mixed cropping, relay cropping, cultivar mixtures within plots, and the planting of scattered crops in a variety of microenvironments. They also have numerous insect-control techniques. Cultivators use techniques such as intercropping to stabilize yield fluctuations, facilitate pest, weed, and disease control, provide soil cover far longer than single culture crops, and optimize available soil moisture for crop production.

The Dogon in Mali create elaborate compost piles and carefully tend and modify the structure and quality of their soils. They also plant and tend groves of a variety of the soil-enriching Acacia whose leaves they use for fodder and whose shade shelters their crops. These techniques have enabled them to remain in certain areas of Mali for centuries.

Many techniques once labelled "primitive" have been vindicated by modern soil science, particularly those associated with shifting cultivation. Incomplete clearing of fields, leaving stumps and some large trees, keeps root systems intact to help bind the soil when the rains come, thus reducing the potential for erosion. Another example of appropriate traditional practices, the ancient technique of shallow plowing, has more recently become known as "minimum tillage" (Lal 1979). It is a superior technique particularly in low-quality rain-intensive soils. After 30 years of testing alternatives, Belgian agronomists eventually embraced "slash and burn" as the optimum clearing and cultivation method. Burning proved, in forest zones, to be more effective in soil enrichment than burial of green compost.

Other Flora

Wild plants are valued as sources of food, medications, and numerous other uses. Studies of !Kung hunter-gatherers in southern Africa have documented a rich and detailed knowledge of local flora. Individuals queried by a plant taxonomist supplied names for 206 out of 211 plant varieties collected. !Kung often made finer distinctions between plants than did the taxonomist. In one recent survey among Kenya's Bukusu, 47% of households reported gathering fruits and vegetables from the wild. Some 12% reported tending plants in the wild and 32% brought wild plants into the homestead for purposes of domestication (Juma 1991a).

Cultivators' knowledge of the characteristics and habits of medicinal trees and herbs, is extensive. Frequently, this knowledge is the domain of women. In West Africa, the non-recognition by most men of women's knowledge of medicinal plants, has been documented (Marilyn Hoskins, cited in Norem, et al. 1989). And in east Africa, an elaborate inventory of such plants has been compiled with indexing both by Northern and African botanical terms.

Groups such as Kenya's Mbeere classify trees using the criteria of size, flowers, shade, general appearance, and, most notably, usefulness. Trees are classified as sources of: the hard slow-burning charcoal essential for the local blacksmithing industry, house-construction poles, sapwood for a honey collector's barrel-hive, fodder for livestock, edible leaves and fruits, termite-resistant heartwood for implement handles, and the virtually indestructible black heartwood used for ritual objects and furniture. The Mbeere even germinate and plant seeds of the Mukau tree in order to profit from its valuable wood. While agricultural deforestation is admittedly a growing problem, indigenous models of resource use that promote biodiversity can be identified.

Indigenous Knowledge of Fauna

Domesticated Livestock

African herders, like African cultivators, maintain genetically diverse stock and vary the composition of their herds to match local environmental characteristics. Such knowledge among pastoralists helps them adapt to their environment in ways that advance long-term conservation. Seasonal and frequent daily movements of herds between pasturages help prevent overuse of a single area's biomass. Herd diversification (cattle, camels, sheep, goats, and donkeys) ensures the presence of both browsers and grazers and reduces the probability that a single disease will wipe out an entire herd.

Herders search for scarce pasturage by monitoring environmental elements such as changes in temperature, the appearance of fog or clouds, air movement, or sky colors and conditions. Numerous groups of herders have specific terms for diverse kinds of pasturage. Southern Sudanese herders, for example, classify cattle by criteria of color, skin patch patterns, horns, sex, and age.

In the Sahel, symbiotic relationships between herders and agriculturalists (meat, milk, and manure exchanged for cereals and for grazing and stock-watering rights) effectively exploit the rainfall-dependent resource base. With "modern" resource-use strategies in the area (cash-crop monoculture and nomad sedentarization) proving environmentally devastating, sedentary and destitute pastoralists are successfully employing indigenous strategies and practices to reestablish herds. In Niger, mimicking the local practice of stock sharing, the "animal of friendship" or Habbanaje, (a nongovernmental organization) purchased livestock locally, then loaned it to destitute pastoralists. After three calvings, each borrower would return the original animal or its equivalent value in kind or cash, while retaining the three offspring (Scott and Gormley 1980).

African pastoralists have also developed sophisticated techniques to maintain stock health. Ethnoveterinary studies have documented elaborate classifications of cattle diseases and their remedies among East African pastoralists (Mathias-Mundy 1980). In Nigeria, one survey identified some 92 herbs and plants used in ethnoveterinary medicine. Fulani, WoDaabe and Maasai all vaccinate against bovine pleuropneumonia, and the Maasai vaccinate against rinderpest as well. These pastoralists' indigenous technique of vaccinating through the nose proved superior to early Northern commercial vaccines administered in the tails; as the latter vaccinations often resulted in necrosis and the loss of the tail (Mathias-Mundy 1980).

Livestock reproduction is manipulated by some groups. In the Sahel, Tuareg knowledge of the timing of the sheep reproductive cycle and its relationship to that of the seasonal cycle gives them considerable control over stock breeding. The Tuareg are able to selectively use penile sheaths on rams to ensure that lambs are not born at the end of the dry season when the nutritional status of the ewes is very poor.

Other Fauna

South Africa's !Kung knowledge of animal species and their behavior is extensive, particularly prey species. Hunters clearly distinguish, for example, between newborn caching and following behaviors after births among ungulates. Accounts of carnivores' stalking, killing, eating, and meat burying or hiding behaviors were, with only one exception, consistent with ethologists' field observations elsewhere in Africa. In tracking game, !Kung weigh environmental elements time of year, time of day, heat, wind direction, terrain, depth, shape and displacement of tracks, condition of feces, condition and displacement of grass, twigs and shrubs along the spoor, amount, position, and color of blood on the ground, grass, and bushes as well as a store of knowledge concerning behavior and habitat (Blurton-Jones and Konner 1976).

Among hunter/farmers of north central Zaire, the forest environment is highly differentiated. The Apagibeti distinguish between three different kinds of forest namely white, black, and vine forest depending on the prevalence of specific species of trees in each. And within this overarching division, Apagibeti distinguish a multiplicity of other domains. There is forest with or without kongo (a leaf crucial to shelter roofing), with or without water (meaning not only an absence of streams but also lacking in any of the half-dozen species of water-bearing vines or trees on which hunters depend), with or without woke (shallow forest lakes, stream-fed and emptied, whose banks serve as a habitat for specific species sought by hunters), with or without wume (grassy clearings favored by buffalo and other game), and so on.

Game resource use with clear biodiversity conservation implications can be identified in these various forest zones. Some hunter/farmers in Zaire conserve forest resources by forbidding hunting during the dry season to "let the animals rest" until the next rainy season. They also rotate the sections of forest in which they trap game during the hunting season, again explicitly so as to "let the animals rest" or to "let the animals give birth" (Almquist 1991).

Understanding of Indigenous Knowledge

Baseline research on indigenous knowledge, technologies, and practices is a priority for sustainable biodiversity conservation programs. It is crucial that the contents of a con-imunity s environmental knowledge be compiled. Methods are needed to effectively elicit, analyze, and elucidate what local inhabitants know and the process by which they obtain knowledge.

Research Methodologies and Design

Research methodologies should respect the complexity of human environments. Only after the conventions governing communication in a group under study have been given at least rudimentary examination should information-gathering techniques be selected. Like farming and hunting, speaking and question-asking are culturally-based activities that have their own rules. These rules can become clear to researchers through ethnographic studies of speaking and linguistics. If such long-term studies are not possible, it can be appropriate to consider methods that allow indigenous structuring of information flow, such as open-ended questionnaires or the presentation of "what-if" scenarios. Ideally, any such research method selected should in some way be analogous to local communicative conventions.

Research designs should consider the ways in which knowledge is distributed within a social group. Among the Mbeere, for example, older women know the most about small annual herbs; herd boys, the range of wild edible fruit; and honey collectors, the local environments" flowering sequences. Gender, age, and occupation can all affect the distribution of knowledge. It is particularly important for researchers to remember that, historically, their counterparts have overlooked indigenous women's knowledge of plant species and their uses (Norem, Yoder and Martin 1989). Researchers should make full use of existing data bases on indigenous knowledge systems, such as those maintained by the Center for Indigenous Knowledge for Agriculture and Rural Development (CIKARD) at Iowa State University. Some nine such centers currently exist worldwide, with 18 others in the process of being established (Warren 1992).

Ownership of Knowledge

Knowledge may be owned either individually or corporately. Knowledge can also embody relations of power. The importance of who owns and receives benefits from knowledge is illustrated by the ongoing controversy in developing countries concerning Northern pharmaceutical corporations' exploitation of indigenous knowledge of valuable medicinal plants. If, for example, a biodiversity conservation program includes a flora survey component, it is important that questions of ownership of the local knowledge used in that survey be addressed (see Chapter 6).

Applying Indigenous Knowledge to Conservation Programs

Indigenous knowledge and practices that conserve or advance biodiversity should be used as the basis for developing and implementing indigenously rooted biodiversity conservation programs. Indigenous knowledge can be used within a biodiversity program from its inception. This not only integrates local knowledge into program planning but also increases the likelihood of the program being sustainable. Forest conservation or regeneration programs could reference and exploit indigenous traditions of tree care and cultivation instead of basing them exclusively on non-African models.

National or international project personnel could be key catalytic agents in disseminating and adapting indigenous biodiversity-relevant knowledge from one group to another. Local knowledge can help advance conservation efforts in a variety of ways. For example:

• When program planners understand the full range of fauna and flora that different indigenous groups use, the planners can better assist the transfer of knowledge among groups. In one conservation initiative, it was found that one group's use of a medicinal plant to protect young fruit trees from termite attack was unfamiliar to another group with the same problem. The second group was, however, already aware of the plant and its mode of preparation and used it in another context, that of fish poisoning. Recognition by planners of knowledge that the second group already had about the plant helped facilitate its transfer and adoption to a new use context a tree protection program (Sharland 1989).
• Local knowledge can be tapped as a shortcut to compiling an inventory of biological resources. This has been done successfully in the conduct of soil and crop surveys in southern Sudan.
• Local knowledge can serve as a basis for environmental monitoring and as an early warning system of ecological changes. Knowledge of indigenous indicator species such as the cassava-eating grasshopper Zonocerus in Nigeria is one useful example. Local knowledge of the dates, severity, and geographical extension of specific Zonocerus outbreaks, not observed by a Northern research team, together with data on the range of crops attacked and the local significance of those crops, proved an invaluable addition to one research team's findings (Richards 1985).
• Local observers can act as monitors of faunal and floral growth, distribution, and change. They can structure their observations in their own terms, rather than passively using Northern terms. This can allow Africans to capture distinctions that cannot be noted using Northern categories.
• Finally, indigenous ideology can serve as a resource for conservation metaphors and practices. The Northern contrast between knowledge and belief obscures the significance of non-Northern accounts and practices that predicate the activity of spiritual agents. The North honors indigenous knowledge but dismisses indigenous beliefs as "primitive" or "superstitious." Many African conservation practices are unintelligible without reference to ideas that are labeled beliefs. Yet those ideas have significant potential for use in biodiversity conservation programs. As Richards has argued for agronomists, "an idea borrowed from the people, developed by the agronomist and returned to the people, is much more likely to be adopted than something alien to the culture" (Richards 1985). While the one-way agency in Richards' formulation is problematic, the underlying idea is useful.

Applying Indigenous Ideas

Protected Areas

The demarcation of large areas as restricted hunting zones for indigenous elites, as among the Lozi, can be found in African societies and has sometimes served as the basis for modern parks. Lesser known are the many scattered, smaller areas protected from hunting and agricultural use by the force of local belief. Protected areas believed to be the residence of spiritual agents can still be found throughout much of the continent. While their small size generally precludes their serving as substantial reservoirs of biodiversity, they do sometimes serve to preserve individual species of plants and animals and are useful, visible reminders to local populations of the rich value of local flora and fauna (see Box 12).

The Boabeng/Fiema Wildlife Sanctuary in Ghana protects a local species of monkey. This sanctuary was established through the initiative of the local Boabeng and Fiema communities who view this monkey as a representative of local forest and land spirits. As an example of biodiversity conservation programs initiated "from the bottom up," this model deserves close attention.

Marine Conservation in West Africa

In West African coastal areas, certain lagoons traditionally were considered sacred places by the local inhabitants. Specific species of fish and mollusks were protected, with their harvest regulated by a system of closed seasons, sacred days, and taboos. The old rules and regulations are no longer respected, however, and most lagoon fisheries are heavily overexploited. Nevertheless, tabooed species continue to be protected (Ntiamoa-Baidu 1991b). Similar taboos are widespread in Africa, and their potential utility in biodiversity conservation programs should be assessed by biodiversity conservation planners.

Territorial Cults

Among the Shona and some other peoples of central and southern Africa, the ancestors of the indigenous inhabitants of the land are believed to speak to the living through spirit mediums. The medium is identified with a specific hill or rock or grove and its territorial environs are protected from disturbance. Historically, the mediums have been consulted regarding rain and land-use practices. On some occasions, mediums have actively counseled resistance to specific colonial land-use policies and tillage techniques (Ranger 1985).

Zimbabwe's Joseph Matowanyika argues that these territorial cults articulate an implicit Shona environmental ideology:

All people in a specific area have to participate in the work of the territorial cult. By virtue of residence, one shares with other inhabitants the same environment and the same responsibilities toward it. Immigrants into the area are expected to make an act of formal recognition of, and submission to, the local territorial cult and to observe communal duties. These are fundamental facets of the Shona ethic, an ethic which needs further investigation for what it can offer to local sustainability (Matowanyika 1991).

Regulated Resource Exploitation

Educational programs on biodiversity conservation have a vast array of indigenous ideas on which to draw. Proscriptions on digging up plants and killing wild game among many Maasai groups are based on the idea that they are gifts of a creator-god that must be respected. The idea that the welfare of an individual lineage depends on its members maintaining a relation of respect towards a particular species of animal (refraining from killing and eating; turning away or avoiding a site where such an animal has died or been killed) is another widespread phenomenon. Even in areas where the actual practice has broken down, its affirmation of the ecological truth that human welfare depends on plant and animal welfare is worth noting and highlighting.

The domain of what Northern academia labels "magic" offers similar sources of ideas for the elaboration of biodiversity conservation educational programs. Among Zaire's Pagibeti hunter/farmers, for example, certain techniques believed to be successful in dramatically increasing forest kills, particularly one called pomoli, are feared because of their lethal effects on the user's community. The use of this technique is thought to guarantee an increase in game kills for the individual hunter employing it, but at the cost of provoking a corresponding increase in deaths among the human hunter's kin. Pomoli can serve in biodiversity conservation programs as a valuable metaphor for the long-range destructiveness that resource-exploitation techniques may have to human life, even though they may be dramatically successful in the short run.

Supporting Indigenous Conservation Initiatives

African government agencies that pioneer attempts to provide legal support for locally managed sanctuary or natural areas based on indigenous ideology (for example, Ghana's Environmental Protection Council) should be assisted in their efforts. Non-African conservationists' support for such efforts should include respect for priorities that may not seem consistent with international conservation priorities. Specifically, African perspectives on the need to utilize as well as conserve existing resources need to be addressed before new biodiversity conservation initiatives are launched.

CHAPTER FIVE

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION SYSTEMS

The Issue

Various methods are currently being used to slow the loss of biodiversity in Africa, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Biodiversity conservation planners need to understand these existing methods, as well as several new approaches for extending biodiversity conservation from protected areas alone to land and water inside and outside protected areas. These new approaches are based on:

• incorporating biodiversity management in all land-use planning and practices;
• developing innovative combinations of traditional and modern production and conservation systems, based on the needs and desires of the local communities and the requirements of governments; and
• strengthening the role of local communities and the private sector in biodiversity conservation.

Established Methods for Slowing the Loss of Biodiversity

Protected Area Systems

Traditionally, in many parts of Africa, Africans have protected biodiversity by means of cultural and religious rules. As discussed in Chapter 4, trees have been protected in sacred groves, taboos have limited the harvest of certain species of plants and animals, farmlands have been allowed to remain fallow periodically, and local plant varieties have been nurtured.

Beginning in colonial times, forest and game reserves were established to conserve flora and fauna. In 1915, for example, the colonial administration of Kenya introduced national park legislation aimed at protecting game from deterioration. By 1919, three territories in Kenya had been designated as national parks Nairobi, Tsavo, and Mt. Kenya (Khalil, in prep.).

Protected areas today serve the vital function of preserving concentrations of biodiversity and provide many additional benefits. They serve as reservoirs of wild plants and animals. Forests and woodlands in national parks and other protected areas reduce soil erosion by shielding the soil and influence climate by affecting temperatures and water cycling. Over time, sites that are free of human exploitation provide researchers and planners with referents for identifying trends in disturbed ecosystems. Finally, strict nature reserves and national parks as well as some kinds of forest reserves, buffer zones, and controlled areas are also important for education and tourism.

In many protected areas, however, biodiversity is under serious pressure. The establishment of national parks and protected areas often results in the displacement of communities from their traditional lands and hence may lead to local economic hardships and resentment. Few communities are involved in the establishment or management of neighboring protected areas. Consequently, local communities tend to have little incentive to protect the resources in protected areas, especially in times ot worsening economic or climatic conditions. Furthermore, new protected areas cannot be expected to conserve the wealth of biodiversity outside existing protected areas.

Sustainable Exploitation of Wildlife

Increasingly, efforts are being made to manage and accurately assess the size of animal populations so that sustainable harvest limits (mostly outside of protected areas) can be defined. In controlled-hunting zones adjacent to Arli and "W" National Parks of eastern Burkina Faso and in game management areas in Zambia and Zimbabwe, the government sets harvest quotas and leases parcels of land to private safari operators (Pascal Roamba, pers. comm.). In southern Africa where farmers have realized that meat, live-animal capture, and trophy values of wild animals can more than offset the losses due to wildlife depredations on farms commercial game ranching has evolved. In southern Burkina Faso, a government-owned game ranch established in and around the site of the former Nazinga Forest Reserve has demonstrated that the management of wild animals for sustainable harvest can earn a profit while conserving biodiversity (see Box 13). Unfortunately, however, many efforts at sustainable utilization of wildlife have been instituted as replacements to traditional production systems and therefore have resulted in tension between local communities and government or between local communities and private land owners.

Reforms in Modern Production Systems

Traditional African production systems such as hunting and gathering, pastoralism, subsistence agriculture, and subsistence fishing generally require and foster the maintenance of biodiversity. However, modern production systemssuch as monoculture farming with hybrid seeds, fertilizers, and pesticides are replacing traditional ones as the demands for higher levels of production for growing populations and for export have increased.

It is now widely argued that the introduction of specialized and mechanized agricultural systems, clear-cut timber harvests in natural forests, large-scale cattle ranching, and mechanized fisheries are not sustainable avenues toward economic development in sub-Saharan Africa. Even in the industrialized countries outside of Africa, increasing attention is being given to modifying food production systems for example, to control soil erosion and reduce fertilizer and pesticide inputs. In addition, new timber-harvest methods, such as low-intensity selective harvesting of trees in natural forests, may prove to be more compatible with biodiversity conservation. Such reforms, however, are only slowly being tested.

Ex Situ Conservation Techniques

Currently, two basic approaches are used in Africa to help conserve biological resources in situ (on site) and ex situ (off site). In optimal conditions, both should be considered together. There are, for example, important related roles for botanical gardens (ex situ) and the conservation of natural habitats (in situ). In general, however, ex situ techniques are not a substitute for biodiversity conservation at the ecosystem and landscape levels through maintenance of habitat.

In crisis situations, ex situ techniques may be able to help save some species or landraces from extinction. Gene banks and captive breeding are methods of last resort to rescue threatened germ plasm. In the Horn of Africa, for example, many landraces of agricultural plants as well as species of wild animals and wild plants are thought to be disappearing because of civil unrest and the consequent famines and migrations of people. In cases of civil strife or natural disasters, ex situ methods can play an important role, particularly for economically important species or varieties.

The Plant Genetic Resources Center (PGRC) in Ethiopia has demonstrated how gene banks can be established for crop genetic material and other plant species. PGRC has developed an extensive collection of crop landrace germ plasm of indigenous and introduced species, including coffee and cereals, and more limited additions of herbs, spices, and medicinal plants. The center has been designated as the coordinating institution for crop germ plasm conservation in Africa by the International Board for Plant Genetic Resources. With external funding, PGRC is also promoting the use and selection of indigenous landraces of crops by smallholders.

Other ex situ techniques, such as captive breeding by zoos and other institutions, are useful for preservation of threatened larger animal species. Captive breeding and subsequent reintroductions, however, are expensive. Moreover, the long-term success of biodiversity conservation by this method is unproven, and there are few cases of successful animal reintroductions. Finally, many African nations still lack the technical expertise and financial resources for most ex situ interventions.

Innovations for Effective Biodiversity Conservation

National parks and many other kinds of protected areas serve a vital function in conserving biodiversity. With the vast majority of biodiversity existing on land and water outside protected areas, however, it is necessary for biodiversity conservation to extend beyond national parks and other protected areas. Current methods for slowing biodiversity loss will not be adequate to meet the many threats that biodiversity in Africa now faces.

Changes are necessary in approaches to both production of biological resources and their conservation. Innovative ways of conserving biodiversity through sustainable use and other alternatives must be explored for all areas that lie outside of strict protected areas. In addition, there should be a general shift from crisis management to strategic planning (see Soulé 1991 for a discussion). Biodiversity conservation in Africa should involve longer term, more comprehensive, proactive measures, rather than fragmented and uncoordinated responses to the loss of species and habitats. In addition, there should be a change in focus from conserving primarily conspicuous animals and plants to a recognition of the need to conserve all kinds and sizes of living organisms, as well as the ecosystems within which they have evolved.

Valuable ecosystems are found in all African countries. These ecosystems are important not only in local or national terms but also, in many cases, in global terms. Every African country should formulate and adopt a national policy and strategy for conserving natural resources. Fortunately, some countries already have a strategy. Biodiversity conservation must be included in National Conservation Strategies and National Environmental Action Plans (see Chapter 6), with the biodiversity conservation measures clearly and precisely stated in every project plan. Biodiversity conservation components must also be incorporated in National Development Plans and in district and local development plans.

Biodiversity Management in Land-Use Planning

Improved land-use planning at the national level should be undertaken as an important step in the biodiversity conservation process. People need to use natural resources, so ways must be found to use those resources in the least destructive manner.

Table 7 categorizes various kinds of land uses according to the magnitude of their impact on biodiversity. The degree of destructiveness of some forms of land use is predictable. Most forms, however, are highly variable in their impact, depending on the biome or ecosystem type and details of uses and management. While some activities are inherently more destructive to biodiversity than others, most production activities could be improved in terms of meeting human needs as well as contributing to biodiversity conservation.

One model of a land-use plan might be to surround protected areas with concentric or adjacent zones of increasing exploitation and therefore lesser degrees of biodiversity protection. For example, a central national park or core non-use area could be surrounded by conservation areas (or corridors or buffer zones) and abutted by a traditional hunter/gatherer zone or a pastoral zone. In turn, these could be surrounded by game ranches, forest reserves, agroforests, and traditional agriculture. Still further out from the core could be zones of specialized mechanized agriculture, urban areas, and manufacturing industries. Some uses or production systems could overlap several zones, such as traditional pastoralism overlying a traditional hunter/gatherer zone, a controlled hunting zone, and a game ranching zone. Every African country has its own unique biodiversity resources, and the full range of biomes in a country must be considered in a land-use plan. Within each biome, there may be several major types of ecosystems.

In a given country, the process of incorporating biodiversity conservation in land-use planning should begin with the selection of a landscape containing one or more ecosystems. Then, within the selected landscape, zones can be planned according to their biodiversity value and sensitivity to biodiversity loss. Land uses should be varied, including strict protection, various forms of sustainable use, and carefully selected sites for intensive exploitation.

Such land-use zoning could result in a complex system of production activities arranged around a core area of less-intensive exploitation. Within a proposed network of production systems employing mixed technologies, zones should be clearly defined specifying where the priority is to preserve biodiversity and where production is the priority. Basic biodiversity information, land-use planning, participation by local communities, and skillful decision makers are needed for deciding the best combination of land uses and conservation methods. Local traditions and conditions are important factors in the land-use planning process, and local people must be involved at every step, from planning to implementation.

Policies must be set in place to decentralize the management of resources to the local communities. A move in this direction already has begun: Namibia currently is using the landscape approach and community-based management techniques for planning biodiversity conservation (Namibia 1992). The same has been recommended in several projects planned for Ethiopia and Burkina Faso, where the approach is referred to as "gestion des terroirs" land management (Faure 1992). (For further information on protected landscapes, policy making, and planning see Lucas 1992).

Recommending one plan for all landscapes is inappropriate, of course, because the details will vary according to pockets of endemism, existing traditional communities, centers of urbanization, and other variables such as mineral deposits. Including all kinds of uses and production systems in a given landscape is also not necessary. The best mix depends on the characteristics of each landscape. In general, modern technology systems for intensive production should be zoned for already modified lands, rather than on sites still containing high natural biodiversity. Finally, community participation and careful ecological and economic planning can result in a network of production systems that will be both sustainable and sensitive to biodiversity in the long term.

Innovative Combinations of Traditional and Modern Systems

To control the rate of biodiversity loss and to increase production, foreign conservation technologies must be adapted to the African context to complement traditional technologies. Neither traditional production methods nor modern production methods alone can do the job. These new combinations of traditional and modern methods can be sensitive to biodiversity conservation while providing adequate levels of sustainable production. Once again, however, this approach can succeed only with local participation. Local people must have a voice in, and be part of, the process of developing and implementing such innovative systems. They must also be the principal beneficiaries.

Examples of mixed systems, employing combinations of traditional and foreign technologies and values, are described below. Biodiversity conservation can, to varying degrees, be added to the spectrum of production activities. The systems discussed below are among the easiest for attaining effective biodiversity conservation.

As starting points for sustainable development and for biodiversity conservation, the following production systems and uses can be used to assemble various combinations of traditional and modern technologies to form improved production systems. The best combination and spatial distribution of production systems for satisfying all human needs for the longest time is also likely to be the one that tends to conserve biodiversity in the long term.

Limiited-Access Strict Nature Reserves

In most cases, a limited-access, strict nature reserve is appropriate at the core of the ecosystem being conserved. The use of such an area might be limited to research (e.g. a species-rich site within a national park) and to religious or aesthetic purposes (such as with sacred groves), thereby continuing the core area's accessibility to both modern and traditional uses. Even these uses, however, should be recognized as imposing a light level of exploitation; no use is without impact and cost. Tourism probably should be prohibited, or at least very strictly limited and regulated in the core area. Zones of more intensive use (for example, tourism, hunting and gathering, or even game ranching) could surround the limited-access strict nature reserve.

National Parks

The single most widely accepted form of use in national parks is tourism, the advantages and disadvantages of which have been reviewed (e.g. Boo 1990a, b and IRG 1992). Tourist viewing of wild animals, tropical forests, mountain tops, and coral reefs generates substantial foreign exchange and employs thousands of people. These areas also contribute to the maintenance of environmental processes (for example, climate and the hydrological cycle), aesthetics, and national pride.

Additional forms of legal production from national parks, such as the harvest of animal and plant products, occur in some countries. In Malawi, for example, community relations with National Park staff dramatically improved when the community was allowed access to the park to sustainably harvest such highly valued commodities as caterpillars, thatch and honey. In South Africa's Kruger National Park, ungulates are harvested as part of the park authority's management of animal populations, and the meat is sold. Kruger, however, is the exception rather than the rule. Cropping at other sites usually takes place outside national parks in buffer zones and other areas that are designated for sustainable exploitation.

In some parks and reserves, live capture of mammals and birds is done for the purposes of restocking other protected areas or for sale to zoos and the pet trade. In the national parks of virtually every African country, considerable illegal and unrecorded harvesting of mammals, fishes, and plants occurs by local communities and by poachers from nearby countries. The main disadvantage of national parks, as well as all the other protected categories described by IUCN-The World Conservation Union (in, for example, IUCN 1987), is that the few permissible activities provide only minimal revenue to nearby communities even when special efforts are made to increase those benefits.

Forest Reserves

The value of forest reserves for biodiversity conservation varies. In some countries, such as Cameroon and Tanzania, many of the reserves still support indigenous vegetation. By contrast, in Togo many of the forest reserves are managed by the government for commercial exploitation, and the original vegetation has been replaced with plantations of indigenous and exotic species such as teak, Terminalia, Anacardium, Kaya senegalensis, Gmelina arborea, at least three species of Eucalyptus, coffee, cocoa, and cotton (Tanghanwaye and Frame 1991).

In many African countries, forest reserves have been declassified because the land no longer contains any forest. Wild animals are protected in only a few of Togo's forest reserves, and some forest reserves contain villages and schools. Nevertheless, forest reserves often offer creative opportunities. In Ghana, for example, wild animal conservation could be introduced into the forest reserves.

Traditional-Use Conservation Areas

These areas include lands used traditionally for hunting or gathering, for pastoralism and agropastoralism, or for religious, sacred, and cultural purposes. These types of traditional production systems and uses could, in some cases, be allowed to overlap adjacent production zones. For example, seasonal movements of people and domestic livestock could be permitted into an adjacent game ranch 77 or controlled-hunting area. Such sites, where low-intensity harvest by local residents is permitted, are sometimes called "extractive reserves."

Areas designated for traditional-use management should have built-in flexibility with regard to production methods, because traditional practices change in time. Sometimes relatively simple interventions can bring desirable improvements, such as occurred when the minor technical input of introducing mango trees to the Tana River area in Kenya produced the extra cash income that relieved a need to clear more land for cultivation. Simply stopping dynamite fishing and boat anchoring on coral reefs may make local exploitation more sustainable. Although some traditional-use conservation areas are limited in size, they can be of fundamental importance to the well-being of some African communities.

Hunting and gathering are important activities in biomes ranging from rainforests to the semiarid woodlands to the coastal-marine zone. Wildland products include bushmeat and other animal foods (birds, fish, and invertebrates), firewood, construction materials (poles, thatch, fibers), plant foods (vegetables, fruits, seeds), medicinal plants, honey, and animal products other than meat (Woodford 1990). In the dry lowlands of Ethiopia, gums and resins are gathered from Acacia, Commiphora, and Boswellia trees; over three million tons were harvested commercially in 1988-89, with the value exceeding US$7 million and hundreds of people employed. Honey and beeswax are produced in Ethiopia at annual rates of 3,300 and 3,500 tons each, respectively, with a combined value of about US$70 million per year (Ethiopia 1992). Burkina Faso's karité fruit (Vitellaria paradoxa) is harvested and exported for its oil. In Kenya, marine mollusk shells are an important product for sale to tourists.

In several countries in Southern Africa, including Namibia, Zambia (ADMADE Program), and Zimbabwe (CAMPFIRE Program), a type of conservation activity commonly referred to as "Community Based Conservation" reinforces local communities' rights and capabilities to realize financial and other benefits from the sustainable management of natural resources on their land. These benefits may be the result of profits from safari hunting, tourism or the sale of animal products from culling or cropping. In each case a large percentage or all of the profits from these enterprises are returned to the community, offering direct incentives to continue to manage the resources sustainably Pure pastoralism is disappearing in Africa, as pastoralists become sedentary and more dependent on supplementary foods. Agropastoralism may be desirable in some areas to increase-production by adding agricultural foods to the diets of pastoralists and their livestock. In Somalia, agropastoralists grow grain for food, but they also use the same plants as fodder for their livestock. Agropastoralism is now much debated in the Ngorongoro Conservation Area of Tanzania, as families of Maasai pastoralists currently are illegally growing maize and vegetables inside the conservation area and are asking also to be allowed to grow exotic fruit trees.

Religious, sacred, and cultural uses of traditional lands are important but are difficult to measure in economic terms. In West Africa, sacred groves (see Chapter 4) represent a significant incentive for community participation in biodiversity conservation and a link with local heritage. The protection of sacred groves or other culturally protected areas should be encouraged, and these areas should be given official status.

Controlled-Hunting

Areas Most African countries have designated certain zones for hunting in which licensed "safari" hunting operators exploit the zones for profit. The operators usually are required to control poaching, develop water points, construct roads and tourist facilities, and manage fire in the zones. Numerous controlled-hunting areas are found in eastern Burkina Faso, adjacent to Arli and "W" National Parks, and throughout southern Africa. Generally, controlled-hunting areas do not permit local residents to have legal access to the diverse biological resources, although a few jobs are created. More attention should be devoted to increasing the access to these areas for local communities. If well managed, such areas can serve as reservoirs to replenish animal populations in heavily exploited surrounding areas.

Game Ranches

Game ranching is especially well developed and widespread in southern Africa, where it has become a lucrative supplement to modern cattle ranching and farming. A variation of game ranching is being developed in West Africa, in which local communities will become the owners and principal beneficiaries. Game ranches are expected to earn their revenue mainly from sport hunting, tourism, cropping for meat, and live capture of animals for restocking other protected areas (WAGREP 1992). Local residents, however, often retain access to the traditional natural products of the site, such as honey, small animals to eat, plants for food and medicine, firewood, and building materials.

The development of local fisheries can be another important benefit to communities. At Burkina Faso's Nazinga Game Ranch, nearby residents responded enthusiastically to the fishing opportunities created when small dams were constructed to provide permanent water holes. Six different fishing methods are used at Nazinga, according to the gender of the fisher and the season (Ouédraogo 1988). Game ranches can restore biodiversity to degraded areas. They can also help to satisfy the demand for bushmeat, an important part of the diet in both rural communities and cities, particularly in West Africa (Kalivesse 1991). Nonmeat products such as eggs, feathers, hides, skins, horns, heads, and safari-hunting trophies are other products making game ranches attractive in many areas.

Live-animal capture is another lucrative form of exploitation of wildlife, particularly in Zimbabwe and Ethiopia. During the 1980s, Ethiopia annually exported about 9,000 primates, worth about US$550,000. Ethiopia has some 190 civet farmers, who raise approximately 3,000 captive civets from which they annually obtain roughly US$1 million worth of anal-gland musk for the perfume industry (Woodford 1990). Such income-generating activities can be carried out sustainably on game ranches or game farms, with positive implications for the conservation of biodiversity.

Small-Scale

Agriculture and Agroforestry A mix of small-scale agriculture and forestry can enable local communities to be self-sufficient in food and construction materials. Traditional small-scale agriculture is done in many different ways, most of which are ecologically sound as long as the human population density does not rise above a certain level (see Box 14). The profitability of small-scale farming can also be raised by improving market roads so that a portion of the crops can be sold. Agroforestry is being developed in most sub-Saharan 80 African countries, with the assistance of the U.S. Peace Corps, CARE, and many other nongovernmental organizations. Greater use should be made of indigenous species in these schemes.

Commercial Biological Resource Production

Commercial production and exploitation systems, such as monoculture farming, logging, cattle ranching, and mechanized fisheries, are demanded by governments and some local communities as a means of providing jobs and cash income, but often result in decreased biodiversity. For example, commercial timber harvests have destroyed natural rainforests in Côte d'Ivoire and other West and central African countries, where biodiversity conservation was compromised to generate export earnings (ITF 1985). Selective harvesting of trees according to species and size and using appropriate methods (see, for example, Hendrison 1990) would have better contributed to both economic development and biodiversity conservation.

In recent years, commercial production techniques for some systems have improved, rendering them less destructive to biodiversity. For example, selective harvesting of trees, changes in plowing techniques, less destructive ranching of domestic livestock, less wasteful fishing methods, and the development of fish, mollusk, and crustacean farming all can help biodiversity conservation and make economic development more sustainable.

Intensifying production in sites that have relatively low importance for biodiversity conservation, or in which the land is already degraded, may help to relieve the pressure on other sites that still retain high levels of biodiversity. The problems are not all technical, however, and fundamental changes in government policies also are needed (see Chapter 6; see also Winterbottom 1990).

Commercial Non-biological Resource Production

Commercial production and exploitation systems include mining, petroleum extraction, and manufacturing industriesall of which tend to be destructive to biodiversity. The transfer of modern technologies from developed countries could aid in making these systems safer for biodiversity. Within the framework of a better-zoned landscape, these commercial systems could be made more compatible with biodiversity conservation.

Urban Centers and National Infrastructure

Human population centers and roads, railroads, airports, power-generating stations, dams, electric transmission lines, harbors, military bases, and other modern establishments are found in every nation on every continent, but their effects often can be catastrophic for biodiversity. National policies and land-use planning that address the necessity of biodiversity conservation can contribute immensely by restricting destructive forms of development in certain areas.

The Role of the Private Sector and Local Participation

Financing for the production systems described above need not depend on donor organizations, once demonstration projects have been established. Indeed, it is unrealistic to expect donor funds to accomplish all that must be done. Strong private sector involvement is important to sustain programs, as well as to initiate new ones. Where government policies permit private ownership of land and biological resources, the private sector can invest in and efficiently operate biodiversity conservation projects.

Money for private investment is available, in even the poorest African countries. In several West African nations, for example, wealthy local businessmen have already expressed interest in investment once laws and policies have been changed to make private game ranching possible. Some development activities will require financial assistance in the form of credit, as well as changes in land tenure laws. Tax breaks and vouchers could provide incentives for corporations to locate in designated zones and to use methods less harmful to biodiversity conservation. Most ventures are likely to require technical assistance to ensure that ecological sustainability and biodiversity conservation are fully addressed.

Indigenous scholars have much biodiversity information that should be used. Indigenous technology should be encouraged and its use compensated. Using indigenous information, pilot programs should be initiated to enhance the availability of economically valuable and useful species and to reduce pressures on natural systems.

Human well-being should not be sacrificed in the decision-making process. People need alternatives if they are deprived of the natural resources from which they formerly earned their livelihood. Some people will readily accept these alternatives, while others may not. Informed, open participation in the design of conservation strategies is therefore an essential component of this approach. Biodiversity conservation and use can enable the development of local communities and their nations. If development is in harmony with nature, it will tend to be more sustainable. (See Box 15)

CHAPTER SIX

THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT

The Issue

Biodiversity is affected by a wide array of policies in many sectors. The ways that policies affect biodiversity are also varied, ranging from indirect creation of incentives for the unsustainable exploitation of natural resources, to direct requirements that management of biological resources be improved. Although many countries have strong laws related to conservation within protected areas, these laws often are not enforced. As a result, the most significant impact of the policy environment on biodiversity tends to result from perverse or unintended effects of policies in other sectors, which directly or indirectly have adverse consequences for the conservation of biodiversity.

These unintentional effects represent more or less hidden costs of policies intended, for example, to boost agricultural production or stimulate economic development. These policies need to be identified and their implications fully analyzed, so that appropriate adjustments or reforms can be instituted.

Finally, a set of policies specifically addressing biodiversity conservation is still needed in most countries. Thus far, few countries have adopted comprehensive policies on biodiversity. Adopting such laws could enable biodiversity issues to be brought to the attention of decision makers more clearly and systematically than is possible at present. Within national governments, different sectors and ministries should share their concerns for biodiversity. In addition, each country should establish or designate a single national institution to take the lead role in planning, coordinating, and monitoring the conservation of biodiversity.

International Policies with Impacts on Biodiversity

Intellectual and Genetic Property Rights

The absence of fair and widely accepted international standards of protection for intellectual, genetic, and cultural property raises equity issues and may also discourage some forms of biodiversity conservation, research, and development. Developing countries have much to gain from effective policies providing economic incentives for in situ conservation through developing local capacity to survey and screen resources for potential use. International seed banks, private companies, and research institutes collect samples of germ plasm freely from developing countries. The products that are marketed as a result of research and development using such material, however, are subsequently held to be protected by the collecting nation's copyright, with little if any benefit returning to the countries from which the samples originated (Juma 1989).

Such equity issues have been difficult to resolve. For example, traditional farmers who maintain landraces and cultivars with commercial value on the international market should reap some economic benefit from their use. But systems to capture a share of the value added and return it to traditional farmers have not been adequately demonstrated up to now. Since much of the value added arises from development by international research laboratories or private sector firms, and is subsequently realized through sales on global markets, establishing fair compensation to all parties is not a simple task.

International seed research bodies have strongly opposed restrictions on access to germ plasm. For example, in the late 1970s the government of Ethiopia was warned that it risked being cut off from international seed research activities if it maintained an embargo on the export of indigenous coffee germ plasm (Juma 1989). To some extent, this has become another "North-South" issue, with industrialized countries tending to support free access to the genetic material found in nature, while developing countries argue that control over local biological resources is an issue of national sovereignty. Industrialized countries also hold that once patented or copyrighted, the distribution of genetic material should be subject to legally enforceable contractual arrangements, while developing countries tend to see this as a restriction of technology transfer and therefore an impediment to development.

If developing countries maintain different levels of protection or control over indigenous germ plasm, international firms will probably deal primarily with those from which the best terms are available (except in cases where unique material is available exclusively from one source). In this context, the best terms may not always be the cheapest financially: for many international firms, an unstable policy environment may represent a more significant disincentive than a consistently applied system of fees or royalties.

Shifting control from the international marketplace into the hands of national governments does not necessarily address the issue of equity for the traditional farmers or indigenous peoples upon whom much of the supply of germ plasm depends. A parallel exists in the case of revenues from logging or tourism, which traditionally have been captured by national governments with little benefit accruing to the local communities directly affected by the activity in question. Recent trends in conservation are emphasizing the need to ensure a more fair distribution of economic rents, partly on equity grounds but also to provide stronger economic incentives to local populations to help conserve the resource base that generates this revenue (McNeely 1988). A similar approach might be indicated in the case of biodiversity royalties.

Bridging this gap to the satisfaction of all parties would bring obvious benefits, although it will not be easy to achieve. A widely-cited case in Costa Rica offers a precedent: a U.S. pharmaceutical firm, Merck, has established an arrangement with the Costa Rican research institute Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (INBio), by which the latter receives compensation for samples of plant material sent to the United States for testing. The agreement stipulates that royalties will also be paid against the proceeds from eventual commercial sales, which will help provide long-term financing for INBio to continue its research program in the Costa Rican forest.

Similar ventures might be explored in Africa, although the situations are unlikely to be as clear-cut and simple to organize. One important difference is that most of the Costa Rican samples will be collected from closed-canopy moist-forest sites; thus, equity for local farmers has not been a major issue in that situation. In contrast, most of the cases of genetic property rights that have been raised in Africa involve germ plasm from domesticated crops such as coffee, thereby raising the issue of local rights to participate in decision making as well as rights to share in revenues from seed improvement.

An international convention on biodiversity was signed by 157 nations during the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. This treaty explicitly recognizes genetic and intellectual property rights, and its language stresses equity and national sovereignty issues with regard to ownership of and compensation for biological resources. From the point of view of many of the conference participants, the language of the treaty was softened so as not to jeopardize its acceptance, but the refusal of the United States to sign even the modified convention highlights the fact that biotechnology has become a significant North-South issue.

Economic Policies, Instruments, and Trends

The international trade system is an important indirect source of pressure on African biodiversity. A mix of subsidies (the Lomé Convention, industrialized country agricultural subsidies), trade agreements (most favored nation status, the General agreement on Tariffs and Trade [GATTI]; Preferential Trade Agreement [PTAJ]; United Nations Conference on Trade and Development [UNCTAD], customs and currency unions (Southern Africa Customs Union Agreement [SACUAI, Communauté Financiére Africaine [CFA], and tariff as well as non-tariff barriers exert significant influences on the structure of imports and exports, both regionally and globally.

The terms of international trade have generally been very unfavorable to African countries, resulting in depressed prices for primary commodities, stagnant exports of manufactured goods, persistent trade deficits, and extremely high levels of external debt. Multilateral development banks and some bilateral donors have pressed for policy changes, with mixed results. Some reforms have taken place, but documentation of negative impacts on the poorest levels of society is increasing. In addition, some analysts believe that the stabilization and structural adjustment programs initiated by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have had clearly harmful environmental effects (see Box 16; Reed 1992). Biodiversity has been affected: in some countries, the response to economic crisis has been expansion of production of export monocultures especially coffee, tea, and cocoa at the expense of 87 more diversified traditional systems or through clearing of forested land. Some countries in West and central Africa have expanded commercial logging for the same reasons.

Global Support for Conservation

The international community influences the establishment and management of protected areas and provides financing for many conservation activities. This international support influences national policies toward biodiversity, as well as funding levels, training, and the types of activities that will or will not be implemented. For example, there has been an upsurge in interest in the development of protected-area buffer zones in recent years, due to a growing belief among donors and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that, for equity and other reasons, total human exclusion from the protected-area system is neither feasible nor desirable. This approach is now being implemented through new land-use policies and multiple-use projects in several countries, as host country governments are being persuaded to modify their earlier conservation strategies. (As noted elsewhere in this report, however, some countries have been reluctant to adopt this approach or have lacked the legal/administrative framework to do so.)

International policies on biodiversity conservation can significantly influence, and sometimes even prevail over national policies, for example through trade or other sanctions. The United States has used GATT, for example, as a tool to pressure developing countries to comply with international agreements protecting intellectual property rights (Clark and Juma 1991). These agreements are often viewed within developing countries as favoring the interests of corporations based in industrialized countries, at the expense of technology transfer to developing countries.

On the other hand, in 1992 GATT ruled against a U.S. regulation that limited the import of tuna caught in nets that can kill dolphins. The Mexican fishing industry had charged that this regulation constituted an unfair non-tariff barrier to access to U.S. markets, an argument that GATT accepted. Similar situations could be faced by countries such as Sweden, where strong national environmental legislation may need to be modified to accommodate less-stringent standards elsewhere in Europe. At the same time, countries with weaker standards may be forced to strengthen these as a condition of their membership in the European Community.

National Policies with Biodiversity Impacts

Agriculture and Forestry Policies

Agriculture

Government policies in the natural resources sectors can play an important role in the loss of biodiversity. Nations as a whole bear the long-term consequences of environmental degradation and loss of biodiversity that result from investments and other activities undertaken in response to the tax, tariff, and subsidy structures found in many African countries.

In countries where food self-sufficiency has been established as a national goal, one result has often been preferential support for large-scale monocropping systems, often using imported seed. As a consequence, the area devoted to traditional crops has tended to decrease. Similarly, policies stimulat-ing export crop production have led to both deforestation and monocultures, and to the abandonment of indigenous plant varieties and species. Credit and extension support may be available only for "modern" crops, indirectly undermining biodiversity through a gradual loss of traditional species, varieties, and cropping systems more compatible with biodiversity conservation.

Agricultural extension systems typically promote the use of specially developed seed, often imported hybrids, and discourage the use of traditional seed and "inferior" cultivars. In Sudan, for example, extension services and donor agencies have promoted sorghum monocultures and discouraged traditional methods, even though the latter have proved far more resistant to drought and pests and are more sustainable in the long term (Bedigian 1991). Many "improved" seed varieties lack resistance to drought, and in much of Africa this factor has proved to be a significant drawback to their introduction. The Northern strategy of optimizing seed stock for yield, rather than for reliability of a harvest across a range of climatic conditions or availability of inputs, is arguably inappropriate for most of sub-Saharan Africa.

In Ghana, promotion of alternative cash crops such as yams has resulted in unanticipated deforestation. Not only do farmers clear land for cultivation, but they also clear forest to obtain poles needed to support the vines of growing yams (P. Veit, pers. comm.). In addition, agricultural extension services in many countries tend to operate along highly centralized lines, using top-down approaches that fail to engender the active participation of the farmers and frequently also fail to reach women farmers. Extension workers should focus more attention on women farmers and encourage the use and preservation of indigenous varieties and landraces.

Unnecessarily high levels of fertilizer and pesticide use have sometimes been stimulated through inappropriate price subsidies (Repetto 1985, 1989). This can directly as well as indirectly reduce biodiversity by killing other species along with pests and by causing contamination through runoff. A World Bank study found that the dependence on pesticides in the Gezira Province of central Sudan led to a massive and permanent reduction of beneficial invertebrates and that an aid program linked to multinational chemical companies inhibited rational pest control in Gezira (World Bank 1991).

Forestry

Forest policies in much of coastal West Africa stimulated a timber harvesting boom that resulted in some of the world's highest deforestation rates during the 1970s and 1980s (Gillis 1988). Governments in the region have tended to significantly undervalue their indigenous forest resources through low stumpage and export tax levels. In addition, these governments have operated logging concession systems that lead to large-scale waste as well as damage to noncommercial species. Similar trends are now developing in central Africa for many of the same reasons, and the biodiversity loss resulting from widespread deforestation could be even more serious than in West Africa (WRI 1993). Throughout Africa, many reforestation programs have emphasized planting of exotic species, such as Eucalyptus or Leucaena, further eroding local biodiversity.

In some countries, policies have been introduced to restrict or ban cuffing of trees, but in some cases these have had the effect of discouraging new planting. Farmers have little incentive to plant if they are forbidden to benefit from the eventual harvest of a mature tree. Often, patterns of tree tenure and rights to forest resources can have significant ecological consequences (Fortmann and Bruce 1988). In some parts of Kenya, agroforestry is inhibited by the gazetting of coffee and tea estates, which legally enforces monocropping (C. Juma, pers. comm.). The purpose of this policy is to protect crops deemed to be of national importance, but, by creating a disincentive to plant or intercrop other species, the policy has brought unintended negative effects on biodiversity.

Land Tenure, Land-Use Planning, and Land Markets

Land tenure and other legal issues related to land ownership and land use are additional important areas in which a national policy environment can contribute to destructive patterns of landscape change. Until recently, secure tenure rights in many African countries were often contingent on "improving" land that is, clearing it of trees. Customary land tenure practices that were more appropriate to local conditions have often been ignored by the state or have been replaced by laws and policies that encourage deforestation (Talbott and Furst 1991).

Land-use planning can and should influence the ways in which resource users have access to and impact on biodiversity. In many developing countries, however, land-use planning is typically practiced at rudimentary levels, at which the necessary skilled workers and data bases may not exist. A major source of pressure on biodiversity results from deforestation caused by agricultural encroachment, which often follows the opening of new roads or logging trails. Although such opportunistic conversion of forestland to agricultural use is a significant factor in African deforestation, it is seldom monitored or taken into account by land use plans (WRI 1993).

Government policy (and lack of appropriate policy) on demographic issues such as growth rates, urbanization, and internal migration also affect land use and biodiversity. In some countries, refugee movements and resettlement may be affecting biodiversity. In Zaire, for example, the migration of landless poor from the densely populated Kivu region reportedly is resulting in negative impacts on the Ituri forest, as well as in sparsely settled areas further west (WRI 1993).

In the Horn of Africa, refugees are often concentrated in semiarid areas at levels well beyond the local capacity to provide fuelwood for cooking, resulting in environmental degradation from overharvesting of biomass fuel. In eastern Sudan, government policy has prohibited Ethiopian refugees from collecting fuelwood; as a result, donor agencies have sought alternative sources of cooking fuel, such as briquetting of agricultural or other residues. In southern Somalia, Ethiopian refugees may have been responsible for environmental damage on fragile arid and semiarid lands. The relationship between civil unrest and environmental degradation in the Horn of Africa has recently been documented in a study published by IUCN-The World Conservation Union (Hutchison 1991).

On the other hand, in Nigeria and Kenya, some studies have shown that rising population density can lead to increased planting in existing agricultural land of trees and shrubs for such needs as fuelwood, fodder, fruit, and honey (Cline-Cole, Main, and Nichol 1990). In some cases, economic deterioration has resulted in the abandonment of colonial era plantations, some of which have now reverted to forest cover. This effect has been noted in Zaire (WRI 1993) and Mozambique (B. O'Keefe, pers. comm.).

In general, the treatment of land as a market commodity is a fairly recent phenomenon in most of sub-Saharan Africa and may have implications for biodiversity. In some cases, the availability of freehold land has led to purchase of large tracts by wealthy investors, displacing local residents who then seek new areas for subsistence cultivation. This may take place through the clearing of forested land, with a long-term impact on biodiversity.

Parks and Protected Areas

International interest in unique African species and ecosystems has stimulated the growth of a large tourist industry, especially in East and Southern Africa. These resources are generally seen by governments as national assets, whose control and protection is generally the responsibility of the state (Kiss 1990). Most countries in sub-Saharan Africa have set aside land for conservation areas, including 167 national parks and more than 500 other protected areas (MacKinnon and MacKirinon 1986; cited in Hannah 1992). Many of these protected areas have come under pressure, in part due to rapid population growth and also due to the lack of resources to adequately manage areas that in some cases are very extensive (Hannah 1992).

Typically, conservation (like tourism) is assumed to be the responsibility of the state, which enforces laws and administers parks and protected areas. As has been noted elsewhere in this report, local resource users frequently come into conflict with governments over rights of access to resources in protected areas. In some cases, governments have reformed policies to permit greater local use and control over biological resources (Kiss 1990). In Kenya, game reserves, such as Maasai Mara and Samburu, are controlled at the county council level. When the status of Amboseli Game Reserve was raised to the level of national park, however, the county lost its control over the area to the central government. In practice, county council control of game reserves often has resulted in disputes between local residents and councils over use of revenue from tourism, and better management systems are needed if local control is to be reintroduced (Marekia 1991).

Multiple-use areas and buffer zones have also been introduced as ways to balance local resource needs with conservation priorities (Wells and Brandon 1992). In Zambia and Zimbabwe, legislation allows for the return of benefits to local communities. In Kenya, a system for paying compensation to farmers for crop damage or other losses from wildlife was dropped due to abuse of the policy. However, the present lack of a compensation mechanism could, over the long term, seriously undermine local cooperation in Kenya's proposed multiple-use areas (Marekia 1991). Some policy goals, such as improving local economic growth by building market roads, may also facilitate poaching and other activities detrimental to biodiversity conservation (Wells and Brandon 1992).

In many African countries, there is growing recognition of the role of the private sector, and numerous multilateral and bilateral aid programs have been instituted to encourage entrepreneurial activity, often in conjunction with a scaling back of public and parastatal agencies. However, in some countries the potential for private sector initiative in biodiversity conservation is hindered by a legal framework that does not permit certain types of private venture such as game ranching. With limited exceptions, game cropping in Kenya has not been legal since the ban on hunting in 1977 (Marekia 1991). Therefore, policy reviews need to examine incentives and disincentives for appropriate private sector investment and should modify or reform the legal framework as necessary. The government of Burkina Faso has recently revised laws to permit game ranching, and Mali and Cote d'Ivoire are also considering similar policy changes.

In addition, governments often need to be more flexible in their approaches to the establishment and management of protected areas (Wells and Brandon 1992). In some cases, proposals to develop multiple-use areas bringing benefits to local people have been handicapped by a lack of alternatives to strictly protected areas. For example, the government of the Congo, in considering options for a new protected area, found itself limited to the establishment of a conventional national park from which local resource users would be excluded. In this case, and in other countries as well, there is a need for more effective conservation than is possible in most existing forest and hunting reserves, in which excessive resource exploitation is common, yet a fully fledged national park may not always be appropriate (W. Weber, pers. comm.). The lack of an administrative or legal category, of protected areas between the level of national parks and that of forest or hunting reserves handicaps the development of multiple-use areas that combine conservation with sustainable use.

In the Central African Republic, a protected core area surrounded by a multiple-use zone has been established for the Dzanga-Sangha National Park. One innovative feature of this plan is that 90 percent of park revenues are retained locally. This is an example of the recent trend of trying to make development more sustainable by giving local resource users a tangible stake in the biodiversity of their communities. In many cases, policy reforms are needed to provide the legal, land-use, and budgetary mechanisms necessary for such concepts to be introduced successfully. In some countries, however, political and economic uncertainties have shifted the attention of policy makers away from conservation issues, and innovative proposals often fail to make progress as a result.

Impacts from Missing Policies

Negative impacts on biodiversity can also stem from the absence of appropriate policies. The lack of land-use planning in general and of land-use planning sensitive to biodiversity specifically represents one of the most significant omissions within the policy environment of most African countries. Better land-use planning is needed, so that various forms and levels of intensity of production can be matched appropriately with specific agroecological zones in the manner described in Chapter 5 of this report. More generally, the system of national development plans found in most African countries (five year plans and so forth) in most cases makes little or no mention of biodiversity loss, reflecting the fact that policy makers are often only minimally aware of the scope and importance of this issue for development planning.

Other examples of missing policies include cases of economic externalities such as the emission of air or water pollution, which damages ecosystems or threatens species but whose costs are not borne by those responsible for the pollution. Regulatory policies may be necessary in such cases to compensate for the absence of economic incentives or disincentives. Enforcement of the "polluter pays" principle can help to control environmental damage in cases where responsibility can be ascertained. However, most biodiversity loss in Africa is not the result of industrial pollution, and reforms of this type should not be expected to alter present patterns of biodiversity loss substantially.

The fisheries sector represents another case in which the omission of policies is a factor in the loss of biodiversity. Most countries maintain little if any oversight over maritime resources and appear unable to establish guidelines for sustainable harvests or to monitor the operations of commercial fisheries. Large foreign operations are believed to be overexploiting many African coastal waters, and commercially valuable species (for example, crustaceans) are becoming increasingly scarce. Coral reefs and other fragile ecosystems are also being damaged with little effective response from governments, even though tourism in such areas represents a valuable source of foreign exchange. Even in the case of marine parks, enforcement is minimal and collection of souvenirs and trophies, illegal fishing, and destructive use of boat anchors on coral reefs are common practices (Stuart, Adams, and Jenkins 1990).

The introduction of the Nile perch into Lake Victoria is believed to have eliminated numerous endemic fish species (Juma 1991a; Lamb and McHugh 1986). Drought, overfishing, sedimentation, dynamiting, and pollution represent significant threats to biodiversity in Africa's coastal areas, rivers, and lakes (Groombridge 1992), which are among the world's richest, yet appropriate policies have yet to be produced except in a very few cases. Overharvesting has lead to serious resource depletion in the Niger River; a fish drying and smoking project proposed by Gesellschaft for Teknische Zussamenarbeit (GTZ) was cancelled as local catches dwindled below levels necessary to make even small-scale ventures commercially viable (M. Djedje and U. Fischer, pers. comm.).

Malawi has a policy banning the introduction of exotic species into Lake Malawi, which has more endemic fish species than any other lake in the world (Stuart, Adams, and Jenkins 1990). However, the long-term success of this policy could be undermined by the fact that Tanzania and Mozambique, which share the lake's coastline, have not adopted similar policies (I. Deshmukh, pers. comm.). In the other African Great Lakes as well, policies of the countries bounding lakeshores may affect biodiversity; these lakes together hold the world's greatest diversity of fish fauna (Stuart, Adams, and Jenkins 1990). Regional bodies, such as Southern African Development Community (SADC) in southern Africa, or Communauté Economique des Pays des Grands Lacs (CEPGL) in the Great Lakes area, could be useful mechanisms for negotiating multinational agreements to protect biodiversity.

However, few countries have yet established policies explicitly treating the issue of biodiversity. While some aspects of biodiversity are included in National Environmental Action Plans (NEAPs) or national conservation strategies, not all countries in sub-Saharan Africa have instituted such programs. In addition, some important aspects of biodiversity policy, such as intellectual and genetic property rights, are not normally addressed in NEAPs or existing conservation strategies. This suggests a need for 94 specific policies addressing such issues, preferably to be integrated within a comprehensive national biodiversity policy or strategy.

Finally, the standard system of national income accounts does not reflect the environmental costs of resource depletion and ecosystem damage in existing measures of economic performance. Some economists have proposed to modify the calculation of GNP or GDP to better identify a range of negative effects arising from depletion of nonrenewable resources or to account for other forms of environmental degradation (TSC and WRI 1991; Repetto 1989; Ahmad, El Serafy and Lutz 1989). WRI and others have shown that unsustainable natural resource use has serious economic consequences that are not reflected in standard macroeconomic statistics. In Costa Rica, for example, a recent study has calculated that the cumulative effects of deforestation, soil erosion, and overfishing between 1970 and 1989 resulted in the loss of natural resource "capital" equivalent to one year's GDP (TSC and WRI 1991).

By drawing attention to the long-term costs of unsustainable resource use, policy makers would have a stronger incentive to modify or reform policies that encourage investments carrying negative environmental consequences. Several Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries, including the United States, Japan, the Netherlands, Canada, and Norway, have begun to include various types of natural resource or environmental accounts in macroeconomic planning, and France has extended this concept to include cultural and historic assets as well as natural resources, under the rubric of "patrimony accounts" (Ahmad, El Serafy, and Lutz 1989). Such approaches might also have relevance for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, which tend to be even more dependent on natural resources than the OECD countries. Cote d'Ivoire, for example, has experimented with a "qualitative and quantitative soil account," which models land-use changes and soil erosion, and then projects their future economic implications for the consideration of policy makers (Theys 1989).

Obstacles to Policy Reform

The need for policy reform is widely recognized, but several kinds of problems are handicapping implementation. These can be classified into two basic categories: conceptual and practical constraints on policy reform.

Conceptual Obstacles

The underlying premise of proposals for modifying national accounts is that depletion of natural resources should be assessed as a cost to society. In contrast, current accounting systems show the returns to activities depleting such resources as net income, rather than as a drawing down of finite capital stock. Furthermore, while the cost of cleaning up environmental damage is normally accounted as a benefit economically, the cost of the damage itself never appears in national accounts.

Alternative methods for national income accounts fully reflecting the costs of resource depletion are not yet well developed and have not been adopted by the international financial community, although various approaches have been proposed. Several industrialized nations have begun to incorporate natural resource endowment, or environmental heritage ("patrimony"), components into the United Nations' system of national accounts (SNA). Several studies have shown that rates of economic growth in timber exporting countries would be much lower, or even negative, if resource depletion and environmental damage were factored in national accounts (TSC and WRI 1991; Repetto 1989). Several of those current proposals, however, are incompatible with each other, having different assumptions about the role of the SNA and about the range of changes that would be needed to address the environmental concerns noted above (Ahmad, El Serafy, and Lutz 1989).

Some economists defend the current system on the grounds that "depletion" is too vague a concept to be included in the SNA. The concept of "resource endowments" is not static: stocks that are not economically useful under one set of market prices or technologies for recovery or utilization might be much more attractive under different prices or technological conditions. Furthermore, rates of sustainable yield, definitions of overexploitation, and other necessary criteria may be subject to widely varying interpretations that could endlessly complicate, and possibly politicize, the efforts to make the SNA more environmentally sensitive. Whether to incorporate natural resource or environmental accounts in physical units, or alternatively to value these in financial terms, is another unresolved issue.

Nevertheless, a consensus appears to be developing among economists that the present system is flawed. Initiatives to better incorporate environmental factors within national accounts are likely to continue in the industrialized countries and, ultimately, to be introduced in many developing nations too. There is, at present, no widely agreed method for doing this, but incremental steps toward such a goal could be possible even without a formal amendment to the current SNA, and might help speed the negotiation of a new standard. From the perspective of this report, an unresolved question is whether biodiversity might be included as a distinct component of the SNA or whether it would be subsumed within a broader category of "natural resource endowments."

Practical Obstacles

Political Context

As has been noted in this report, land pressure, the need for foreign exchange, and high levels of poverty pose major barriers to improving sustainability of resource use and conservation of biodiversity. Decision makers may feel that they have little choice but to acquiesce to activities that may prove detrimental to biodiversity. In most African countries, high population growth rates combined with the youthful age structure of the population mean that the number of job-seekers entering the economy is rising rapidly. Decision makers may look favorably on natural resource exploitation in rural areas, even at the expense of biodiversity, if this reduces demand for jobs, housing, and other services in overstressed urban areas. Shifting cultivators, who open forested areas for agriculture, charcoal burners, and artisanal miners, can be all be seen as selfemployed, and their initiative might be welcomed by governments that are hard pressed to cope with economic crises. One challenge, therefore, is to find ways of minimizing the adverse biodiversity impacts of such enterprises, without imposing an unrealistic burden on governments unable to provide alternative jobs or other means of gaining livelihoods.

In general, domestic constituencies for biodiversity are lacking, in comparison with natural resource users who benefit economically from existing modes of resource exploitation. In addition, conservation may sometimes be seen as a Northern, middle-class, or intellectual preoccupation imposed on developing countries, which may be incompatible with the economic realities faced by Africans. Education for biodiversity, therefore, needs to illustrate the ways in which the conservation of biodiversity is in the direct interest of African countries, to stimulate the creation of appropriate interest groups, and to develop channels for communication of support for biodiversity conservation to decision makers. (Further discussion of this topic can be found in Chapter 8.)

Assigning institutional mandates for multisectoral problems can be a significant obstacle where governments are organized along classic sectoral lines without effective mechanisms for handling complex issues that overlap agency jurisdictions. Policies and activities of different ministries may work at cross-purposes, while other important issues may lie outside the purview of existing departments. Because biodiversity is a complex and multidisciplinary topic, any strategy for conservation must involve actions and reforms across many existing sectoral lines (see Box 17), as well as across academic disciplines. The government of The Gambia, for example, has established an Environmental Unit within its Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment, which among other things is responsible for coordinating donor agency inputs to the planning and implementation of an integrated conservation and development project in and around Kiang West National Park.

Parastatal bodies such as grain, oilseed, and dairy marketing boards, agricultural and other research institutes, and seed banks may also be relevant. In addition, a country's central bank plays an indirect role through such functions as control of access to foreign currency. National development banks often control access to credit, which can influence patterns of investment potentially harmful to biodiversity.

Clearly, a comprehensive policy analysis and reform program for biodiversity must include a wide range of institutions with overlapping activities and practices. Their impacts on biodiversity vary in degrees of subtlety or directness, and the capacity to modify certain aspects of present policy or practice may be constrained in many respects. It is important to develop a set of priorities for analysis and action, as efforts to reform the policy framework might otherwise risk becoming dissipated by the scale and complexity of the task, and the apparent intractability of some aspects of it.

In Kenya, the National Biodiversity Unit has designed a matrix correlating policies at the microeconomic, macroeconomic, socio-legal, and research/training levels with categories based on ecosystem classifications or forms of land use: forestry/arid lands, agriculture, wetland/marine, and wildlife/other (NBU 1992). This approach can offer a useful way of structuring analysis and of establishing priorities for empirical research that might be needed to justify proposals for policy reform.

A final practical obstacle to policy reform is the fact that decision makers' attitudes to conservation are sometimes ambiguous, so that the scope for action may be limited. Priority may be given to conventional development projects, especially those identified as foreign exchange earners, while suggestions for restraint in natural resource exploitation may be labeled as "anti-growth." This often is the case in industrialized countries as well. Conservation activities with substantial recurrent costs may be problematic for governments already facing severe budgetary constraints.

Debt-for-nature swaps and other innovative financing mechanisms are being introduced as possible avenues for making conservation activities more attractive. The opportunity costs for such investments may be very low, as countries might not otherwise have access to such funds. On the other hand, such financing proposals might in some cases be perceived in an unfavorable light in situations where international debt has become a political issue.

Local Authority

Many of the initiatives recommended for more effective action in conserving biodiversity require competent and responsive local-level government services. The need to devolve decision-making power to local levels is increasingly accepted by governments, and efforts toward this end are being supported by various donor agencies. However, progress is often slow and has been inhibited by many realities of the policy environment in sub-Saharan Africa.

Funding and implementation constraints, as well as institutional and staffing constraints, are important obstacles to policy reform. Downsizing of the public sector has been a major objective of IMF and World Bank sectoral adjustment programs. In the long term, streamlining of governmental services is not inconsistent with decentralization and may in fact require it. In practice, however, it is not unusual to find that regional or local services are cut before those at the central government level. One result has been that many extension services and field agencies are paralyzed by lack of funds for transportation. In some cases, entire departments may be left without operating funds, and salaries may be months in arrears. In central Africa, the extremely low wage level of forestry officials has created a strong motivation for logging companies to avoid harvest restrictions and taxes through bribery (lIED 1988).

In the late 1980s, the government of Tanzania instituted a policy of ÒdecentralizingÓ government services. In practice, this meant that local authorities were left without budgetary support yet had few options for replacing needed funds through local resources. One result was a marked decline in the efficiency of local schools, with many teachers abandoning their classrooms to seek other sources of income. In many cases, the need for cash to pay rapidly rising school fees has forced farmers to switch from subsistence crops to cash crops, a move that has long-term implications for biodiversity. In the long term, weakened educational systems can clearly have negative implications for the conservation of biodiversity (see Chapter 8).

The capacity to analyze policies and to document impacts for decision makers also needs to be strengthened. Providing skilled staff at the local level, given the situation of most African governments, is likely to remain an extremely difficult proposition for some time to come. Making better use of local organizations, including what remains of traditional or tribal authority systems, and greater reliance on NGOs may offer one strategy for addressing this problem. In Niger, for example, Africare plans to organize natural resource management projects in conjunction with traditional authority structures, which are seen to be gaining in credibility and relevance as budgetary and political crises make the central government less able to function at the local level (J. Grey, pers. comm.). In contrast, the Kenyan government has on several occasions refused proposals to devolve certain natural resource management activities, such as forestry extension, to local levels (Zimmerman 1992).

There will continue to be a need for local authorities to coordinate effectively with national agencies for a variety of technical, as well as policy, reasons. For example, access to remote sensing data, or coordination with national development planners on siting of proposed infrastructure or other activities, will require coordination of this kind. Ensuring the effectiveness of this link will be another challenge in the process of decentralization of decision making.

Effectiveness of Policy Reform

Successes, failures, and lessons learned from recent policy reform efforts targeting biodiversity conservation are important research topics. However, the way in which new policies are implemented, not just formulated, will be a key factor in the success of policy reform programs. While specific policy or legislative instruments may be successfully put in place for the protection and conservation of biodiversity, certain day-to-day decisions can have the opposite effect, and actual trends may contradict stated policy goals.

For example, it may be official policy to include an environmental impact assessment as a condition of approval for certain kinds of investments. Yet it is common for fairly broad discretionary powers to be lodged with government officials judging the merits of specific cases. If these issues are typically resolved in ways that lead to depletion of natural resources, it can be concluded that the total policy environment is unfavorable toward biodiversity, despite the existence of legislation formally protecting it.

In some cases, the inability of the central government to meet its own payrolls has led to a strategy of expecting officials in departments such as forestry or customs to fend for themselves by raising whatever revenues they can. Implementation of policies in such situations can become haphazard, and here too actual events may differ substantially from official positions.

Another important aspect of the present climate for policy reform in sub-Saharan Africa concerns the need for greater "transparency" in government. This is not only a matter of controlling pecuniary corruption. Perhaps more important, it suggests the need for a broader spectrum of public participation in the decision-making process. For example, in many developed countries, executive decisions undergo public commentary and debate prior to becoming effective. This permits a wider range of opinions to be voiced and enables interest groups and others to express their views. In contrast, in some developing countries, executive decrees entail little if any public review, and external commentary on the decision-making process may even be actively discouraged.

In addition, in many African countries there are few legal checks on executive power, and groups opposed to certain developments have little recourse available to them. The findings of feasibility studies or environmental impact assessments may be kept secret, and it is often not possible to take legal action against the government to block ecologically damaging activities. Greater openness and accountability in public administration may be important steps toward the conservation of biodiversity. In addition, judicial reform and separation of powers may be important steps in strengthening the process of participation. In the industrialized countries, the courts have been a critical factor in the development of stronger environmental protection; such a development is also needed now in sub-Saharan Africa.

CHAPTER SEVEN

PARTICIPATION IN BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION

The Issue

Throughout the last two decades, the development community in Africa has moved away from "top-down" approaches towards more participatory, "bottom-up" approaches. The shift has occurred as recognition has grown that local cooperation, participation, and management are crucial to achieving both short-term development results and long-term sustainability. Similarly, the conservation community is beginning to appreciate the necessity of incorporating local participation in biodiversity conservation efforts. Conservationists are now looking to the development experience for useful lessons in how to bring local people into the conservation process in Africa.

What is Participation?

Local or community participation has been defined in a variety of ways in the literature. According to Paul (1987), community participation is the process "whereby people act in groups to influence the direction and outcome of development programs that will affect them." Participation may be thought of as the deliberate action of the people and government to respond jointly in the formulation, planning, and implementation of a strategy to satisfy a particular need. Brown and Wyckoff-Baird (1992) provide a broader definition by stating that participation "may best be defined as a continuum, from limited input into decision making and control, to extensive input into decision making, and ultimately stewardship of the resources."

In defining local or community participation, it is important to recognize that a "community" is a self-defined entity. Only those within a community know who belongs and who does not. Communities are made up of different "stakeholders" that have a variety of defining characteristics (for example, gender, class, power, ethnicity, religion, age). In the context of this report, the term "stakeholder" is used to refer to any individual or group with a distinct interest in the use and management of a particular natural resource. Stakeholders may include a variety of people, from members of government and industry to indigenous and international nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and may engage in diverse activities to make a living, thereby using resources in a multiplicity of ways.

Participation must also be viewed more broadly than simply local participation. In the development of national strategies, for example, participation must come from those professionals who can identify and classify the biological resources that exist in the various habitats of the countries and who can then assist in defining clear objectives for their conservation and use.

Evolution of Participation in Conservation

Traditionally, international and national conservation efforts have tended to rely on strict protection through the establishment of national parks and other protected areas. Communities surrounding protected areas, however, have often borne the costs and rarely received the benefits associated with neighboring protected areas and hence have usually had little vested interest in the protection of the biological resources in those protected areas. As a result, local people's attitudes often have been biased against the protected areas. Communities in western Ghana, for example, prefer forest reserves over wildlife reserves because their use of resources in wildlife reserves is more limited. In cases where the management of a protected area is weak, pressures of growing populations, widespread poverty, and unsustainable land-use practices outside the protected area boundaries can cause people to engage in illegal and destructive encroachment within protected areas (Wells and Brandon 1992). These pressures on protected areas in Africa are expected to increase with ever-increasing demands for resources.

The future viability of protected areas in Africa appears to hinge on the cooperation and support of local people. This cooperation and support, in turn, depends on whether the areas can provide local communities with benefits that are sufficiently concrete for people to want to maintain the areas as reserves. This point is illustrated in the case of Amboseli National Park in Kenya. In 1984, the Wildlife Extension Project (WEP), a community-based participatory project, was established around Amboseli. According to Hannah (1992), the "efficacy of this bottom-up method showed limited progress." Following the WEP project, however, the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) started implementing new policies aimed at securing constructive cooperation and dialogue with local communities around Amboseli through revenue sharing (Lembuya 1992). In January 1991, KWS set aside four million Kenya shillings (12 percent of 1990 Amboseli fees) to distribute among the four group ranches around the park. This initiative is still in its initial stages, but it is already beginning to positively influence local attitudes toward wildlife (P. Lembuya, pers. comm.). (See Box 18 for another example of community participation in Kenya.)

Efforts must also be made to mitigate land-use pressures in areas outside protected areas. In western Ghana, for example, people often view forest reserves as sources of land for future cultivation. There is an urgent need to develop practical options for meeting the growing demands of local communities. Such options include agricultural technologies and facilities to increase productivity through increasing yield per unit area, rather than increasing acreage of arable land; farming of useful wild animal and plant species (for example, rodents such as grasscutters [Thryonomys swinderianus] and a forest tree [Garcinia] used for chewing sticks in Ghana) and/or provision of alternatives to relieve pressure on wildlife populations (Ntiamoa-Baidu in prep.).

The importance of linking protected-area management with the economic activities of local communities was highlighted in the 1980 World Conservation Strategy (IUCN, UNEP, and WWF 1980). Across Africa, an increasing number of projects are attempting to involve local communities in efforts to conserve biodiversity in protected areas. In Madagascar, for example, the local community agreed to create the Beza Mahafaly Reserve in anticipation of development activities to improve their livelihoods (Wells and Brandon 1992). In the Administrative Design for Game Management Areas (ADMADE) in Zambia, local communities are directly involved in the protection and management of their wildlife resources in game management areas, and a significant portion of wildlife revenues (particularly from safari hunting) are returned to them (Kiss 1990). The ADMADE program has laid a foundation for the future empowerment of local communities to manage their natural resources on a sustainable basis.

Innovative mechanisms for ensuring the participation of local communities in the management of natural resources in neighboring protected areas must be explored and instituted. This will help to eliminate the feeling of reserves being "for the government" resulting in the general antipathy toward such reserves. As a first step, representation of relevant local groups on site management committees of reserves can greatly facilitate communication of project objectives and activities to the people, promote a participatory feeling, and eliminate misunderstanding (Ntiamoa-Baidu 1991b).

Extending Participation to Nonprotected Areas

Any future strategies for conserving biodiversity in Africa must be extended to include the biodiversity on the 96 percent of land outside of protected areas. This is land on which humans and nature interact. Conserving biodiversity on this land, therefore, requires the involvement of local peoplepeople who utilize natural resources to survive and who make resource management decisions every day.

The need to address biodiversity loss in unprotected areas has prompted conservationists to take a closer look at the links between conservation, development, and development strategies involving local communities in conservation efforts. The World Commission on Environment and Development's Our Common Future (1987), for example, detailed the complex links among poverty, development, and the environment, and helped direct a search for ways to tie conservation with development, make "sustainable development" work, and make conservation people-oriented (Wells and Brandon 1992).

The Communal Area Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) in Zimbabwe is one of the most widely known efforts to simultaneously promote conservation and development in unprotected areas in Africa. The paucity of other good examples of participatory conservation and development projects in Africa is due, in part, to a limited understanding of the process that leads to effective participation and, in part, to the difficulty in achieving genuine participation.

Complexities of Local Participation

One of the main challenges in engendering participation in conservation efforts is the fact that local people often view conservation as antithetical to development (Gartlan 1992). Efforts to involve local people in the conservation of biodiversity in Africa will not succeed in the long term unless local people perceive those efforts as serving their economic and cultural interests (Brown and Wyckoff-Baird 1992). For communities to be effectively involved, they also must have a degree of control over the resources to be conserved. According to Renard (1992), "[o]ne of the greatest obstacles to the establishment of community-based management regimes is the reluctance of government agencies to permit a formal transfer of management responsibilities to the community."

National governments may not support local participation or empowerment, especially if they regard it as a threat to central authority or as an encouragement to opposition groups. On the other hand, to the extent that biodiversity conservation is associated with Northern donors or national governments, such conservation may be seen by local communities as a tool for exerting influence and control and reject it on these grounds (Gartlan 1992).

Involving local people in the conservation of biodiversity is a complex, time-consuming task. Many donor organizations and project managers are under pressure to spend money quickly and cannot commit the time necessary to assess community variables, initiate community dialogue, and encourage involvement in every phase of a project. The need for patience may also conflict with feelings of urgency about the need to change or stop destructive patterns of degradation (Wells and Brandon 1992). This dilemma has been clearly expressed by the principal adviser to a project in Niger attempting to promote increased local participation in the tourist industry:

The intention is to involve local people in the design of projects.... However, while local communities may identify the problems which concern them (and which may or may not match the objectives of various projects or donors), true participation is often only developed after a project has already been accepted and is under implementation.... The urgency of the region's conservation problems dictates against the lengthy process of developing local support and participatory capacity, however important this may be for long-term success.... The project's philosophy is that popular support and, eventually, voluntary and internally motivated participation, can only be achieved through a belief in what one is doing. Therefore, the approach which the project is taking is to produce tangible evidence of the beneficial results of its various activities (quoted in Wells and Brandon 1992).

Participatory Strategies and Biodiversity Conservation

Participation commonly refers to some aspect of involvement of local populations in the design, implementation, and evaluation of projects. To initiate such a process, it is necessary to determine the primary stakeholders in the project individuals and groups with a vested interest in the outcome of the project. Often, women comprise one of the most important stakeholder groups. An understanding of ownership and management rights and responsibilities over resources as differentiated by gender is critical for projects to be properly designed. Once stakeholders have been identified, equitable partnerships must be established, so that all stakeholders feel comfortable with their roles in the project design process to empower the resource user groups and the rural organizations within which they are incorporated (Brown and Wyckoff-Baird 1992).

Participatory Approaches

Participatory approaches can have numerous and diverse objectives, operational strategies, and results. It is necessary to understand how different participatory strategies work and what they can be expected to accomplish, from both the perspective of the "actor/participant" and the "external agent." It is also necessary to understand that different strategies for encouraging participation and different levels of participation may be appropriate to different circumstances and different groups. The following are three types of participation strategies:

1. Mobilization Strategy. With this type of strategy, a project's plan for action is decided and designed by outsiders, usually by specialists within the initiating donor or government institutions, before local involvement begins. The program leadership then "mobilizes" the selected beneficiaries to endorse, collaborate with, and adopt the decisions taken. Control remains in the hands of the external agent. The participatory strategy of "mobilization" is relatively easy to initiate and manage but offers little prospect of engendering a sustainable base.
2. Community Development Strategy. This type of strategy calls for surveys to be carried out or for meetings to be held to better understand community and institutional perceptions about a specific problem that already has been identified as a constraint to development. In the more participatory situations, groups may then be involved, using participatory techniques, in the design and maintenance of specific initiatives and/or services to solve the problem. Actor/participants share a specified amount of control with the external agent, but decisions as to the actual amount rest with the external agent. As participatory community development strategies share some level of control with local participants, they are capable of generating significant levels of sustainability if the project output meets a strongly felt community need (e.g., improved water supply).
3. Empowerment Strategy. With this approach, community-based groups, often assisted by an outside facilitator, initiate a learning/empowerment process that enables them to define their own goals and objectives. The groups then assess the implications of options open to them, and decide and assume responsibility for actions to achieve their agreed objectives. This strategy places control in the hands of the participants, who claim both their rights and responsibilities. Empowerment strategies demand that the participants design as well as implement activities, thereby placing the highest levels of responsibility and control in participant hands, potentially resulting in high levels of sustainability.

The above strategies differ substantively in terms of process and results. In essence, they become increasingly complex, yet more conducive to sustainable conservation and development as participant responsibility and control are increased. Unfortunately, most participation strategies in present use seem to fall within the "mobilization" and "community development" categories.

Participatory Assessment

Any truly participatory effort will involve stakeholders in defining and assessing problems and opportunities, ascertaining the various options available, defining the implications of those options, and making decisions as to what option(s) to pursue. Participatory assessment is a flexible documentation and analysis process that allows a group to move through these steps. Ongoing monitoring and assessment of the selected option can return the group to the participatory assessment when needed. The following is an outline of the steps to participatory assessment:

1. Analyze Community Situation. Community participants first need to clarify goals and objectives, and identify their existing resources: What do people mean when they talk about "conservation," or what do they think outsiders mean when they talk about it? Is their definition different from the government's or the project's? What resources and methods for conservation exist within the community right now? How are they being used? Is this the most effective use, or is it diminished by other situations that affect efforts? How is conservation tied to production activities?

   A major emphasis is on creating an understanding among the community participants that their perspective is valid and necessary, and although it may differ from project or national perspectives, neither is necessarily better than the other. This process depends upon adequate information and knowledge exchange between community and external sources so that both the community and outsiders have the necessary facts at their disposal.

2. Define Options. Community participants then need to identify the range of options available to them. For example, if conservation and/or production activities are judged to presently be inadequate from the community analysis perspective, the options for improvement need to be identified. A major emphasis at this stage is on ensuring that community participants adequately identify all options, including traditional practices that may have been discarded in favor of "modern" practices.

3. Evaluate Options. Not every option is a viable one. Therefore, at this step the participants must evaluate each option in terms of its applicability and implications. Questions that need to be asked are:

   • What level of access to necessary resources exists at the community level to initiate the option?
   • What level of control and responsibility can the group exercise in management of the option?
   • Where does control lie for situations that prove to be obstacles and are not within the authority of the community to change?
   • What are the implications of initiating this option in terms of maintenance, cost, environment, and social factors?

4. Prioritize Options and Select Actions. Community participants by this time have created and produced, through their own work and analysis, new levels of knowledge from which to make decisions and take action. Prioritizing options and actions is normally undertaken at two levels at this point. The first level is what the community groups can do for themselves with resources they have access to; the second group of priorities is what the groups can do for themselves with assistance from outside conservation programs.

   The major emphasis here is that the participatory assessment, through joint dialogue and analysis, produces knowledge that puts the community participants more responsibly in control of events that will affect them.

Beyond Assessment

Participation does not stop with assessment. Participation should be a central feature of implementation and of monitoring and evaluation. At the stage of implementation, the roles and responsibilities of each of the partners must be clearly articulated and understood. Participatory implementation can range from the community providing labor, materials, or cash to joint project management, community control, or decision making. Determining the degree of community participation will determine what mechanisms must be put into place for effective project implementation.

Participatory monitoring is the systematic recording and periodic analysis of information. Participatory monitoring provides an ongoing picture of the project's progress that is visible to both community members and project staff. It enables problems to be identified and solutions to be sought early. It also helps ensure that project and community resources are used effectively. Participatory evaluation carried out by a team of community representatives, local technical experts, and outside facilitators also enables a periodic assessment of how project objectives are being accomplished.

To facilitate community participation at all these stages, existing community institutions must be strengthened or new ones established where necessary. Local institutions can act as a focus of participants among local people and as a link between local people and external organizations, whether governmental or nongovernmental (Wells and Brandon 1992).

A Future for Participation in Africa

"Top-down" models for development and conservation have not achieved their expected results. The "bottom-up" approach, and the range of possibilities between top-down and bottom-up, are now being tried. Experimentation with new, more participatory models for conserving biodiversity are especially important in light of the need to conserve biodiversity throughout the African landscape.

It should be remembered, however, that many of the new, more participatory approaches to conservation have only been in effect for a short time. Immediate results cannot be expected. The conservation community must be willing to wait and watch, monitoring the progress of these initiatives carefully, to learn from the successes and failures of the process and incorporate these lessons in their work.

Africa is experiencing a new wave of democratic reforms at local and national levels. Despotic governnltnts are falling, and geopolitically motivated international support for oppressive regimes is in decline. In this context, it is now more possible than ever to build institutions and devise policies that will enable the participation of people at all levels to engage in sustainable natural resource management and biodiversity conservation.

CHAPTER EIGHT

EDUCATION, TRAINING, AND NETWORKING

The Issue

Across Africa, there is a wealth of traditional knowledge about, and an appreciation for, biological resources. Many Africans today, however, have been displaced from the environment in which their traditional knowledge applies. Officials in government departments and international agencies are increasingly being educated in the North or Northern-modeled systems and becoming disconnected from their traditional knowledge systems.

Awareness and understanding of biodiversity conservation issues, the importance of biodiversity and biological resource conservation to sustained development, and ways to conserve biodiversity need to be improved throughout the populace, including national government officials and lender/donor agencies. Present efforts in education and training to strengthen awareness and understanding of biodiversity conservation are inadequate. Awareness raising using both formal and informal mechanisms of education, training, and human-resource development is a necessary step in the implementation of strategies for conserving biodiversity.

Education

For the vast majority of rural Africans, education in the ways of a specific culture was an informal, but integral, part of everyday life. The traditional knowledge imparted by elders and others often involved a detailed understanding of local biological resources (see Chapter 4). Often, colonial governments saw indigenous schools of formal training (for example religious or cultural) as subversive.

Colonial governments introduced models of formal education from Europe. Some did so only slowly; the Portuguese, for example, did not build any schools until late in colonial history. Systems of primary and secondary education were established in most countries with slowly increasing enrollments. Various types of colleges were also established to cover higher education, although favored individuals usually obtained university degrees in Europe.

Mass education, at least at the primary level, was and has remained a major objective in the post-independence period. The ÒharambeeÓ movement in Kenya built and established many schools throughout the country before they became eligible for government funding. Colleges were upgraded to universities either shortly before or after independence, and many African countries now have several universities. Villages across Africa often raise money collectively to enable promising students to attend institutions of higher education.

Formal educational systems in Africa, however, have come under great stress in recent years. The population age-structure is skewed towards younger age groups, thereby placing large demands on educational facilities. Funding and availability of skilled teachers have not kept pace with the increase in student numbers in most countries. University education has also suffered from inadequate funding (World Bank 1989). In many countries, the lack of university funding has resulted in hostility between students and government.

The emphasis on formal education, in general, has been at the expense of traditional knowledge systems. Most schools use curricula and teaching materials based on those of Europe. Young Africans tend to grow up with input from two disparate knowledge systems (traditional and Northern), with very few links between them.

Environmental Education in Primary and Secondary Schools

The single most important activity that will enhance biodiversity conservation in the medium- to long-term is to raise well-informed future generations with a strong commitment to sustained management of biological resources and biodiversity. Biodiversity conservation should be an integral component of environmental education throughout formal education systems.

Results from environmental education may not be readily apparent, and such results should not be expected in the short term. That said, preliminary "results" of environmental education can be seen in such countries as Kenya, where environmental education of various types has prevailed for some time. Environmental activism among the educated middle class and grassroots rural groups is now apparent. School curricula and teaching materials have become much more locally relevant. Wildlife clubs have spread throughout the country, creating a constituency for wildlife conservation. Such clubs are also active and widespread in Tanzania and many other African countries.

Both traditional and modern knowledge systems and values need to be integrated into school curricula. It is important to pass local knowledge to young people through such means as folklore and proverbs, before it is lost. The Tin Aichia project in Mali, for example, has successfully integrated traditional farming, herding, handicrafts, and Koranic education into the French-based educational system. In this project, teachers are from the same ethnic group as their students.

Formal primary and secondary education in ecology and biodiversity conservation needs to be strengthened and made more relevant to rural life. Locally written textbooks and other instructional 112 materials are needed to explain ecology and biodiversity conservation within the framework of both traditional and modern knowledge. Environmental and conservation concepts should be integrated into all aspects of education, including the science curriculum and other disciplines such as history, literature, agriculture, home economics, health, business, manufacturing, and construction. The topic should be placed in the context of sustainable development and quality of life. In Namibia, curricula have been developed for the teaching of "life science" which includes not only biology but also ecology and agriculture. Particular emphasis is given to ecology and the environment, and how these subjects relate to the lives of all Namibians (Seely, Du Toit, and Marsh 1991).

It is also advantageous to have practical work as an integral part of school curricula. Simple biodiversity analyses of nearby habitats and ethnobiological surveys could be carried out. Restoration of school grounds with indigenous trees and studies of characteristics of crop varieties are other possibilities. Perhaps school visits from extension agents with biodiversity training, folklorists, and herbalists could become a routine feature of school syllabi. Biodiversity project competitions could be held, possibly sponsored by the private sector, within and between schools.

Extracurricular activities can also embrace environmental and biodiversity issues. Wildlife clubs, for example, undoubtedly play a significant part in supporting current types of conservation activities including protected areas. Perhaps the scope of these clubs could be broadened to embrace broader issues of biodiversity conservation across all elements of the landscape (see Box 19).

Higher Education

It is vital that institutions of higher education equip their graduates with an understanding of sustainable natural resource management issues, including biodiversity conservation. Although higher education inevitably involves a measure of disciplinary specialization, a case can be made that curricula should include certain basic topics for all students. For example, all first-year students at Addis Ababa University in Ethiopia attend a course in environmental conservation.

Postgraduate training is also advantageous in some areas to produce an echelon of decision makers and technocrats with specialist knowledge. Biotechnology and materials sciences, for example, are expected to produce an array of new products that may make conventional processes and products in Africa obsolete. For Africa to benefit from these advances, Africa must improve its science and technology training and aim at the highest standards for at least a minimum core of specialists (World Bank 1989).

From the perspective of biodiversity conservation, specialists need to be trained to deal first of all with the problems of identifying and classifying biological resources. Lack of adequate identification is generally the most serious bottleneck to ecological, economic, and many other types of research on tropical ecosystems. One factor leading to the scarcity of adequately trained specialists is inadequate support for taxonomic botany. Another is that relatively few institutions offer strong courses in plant systematics. Competition for funds reduces the budget share for herbarium support, systematic teaching, and research (Campbell and Hammond 1989).

Specialists are also needed in areas such as conservation biology, natural resources management, rural sociology, and traditional knowledge systems. The University of Nairobi offers a master's degree program in "biology of conservation," which has trained professional wildlife managers from many African countries, as well as American students. This course began more than 20 years ago, long before conservation biology became a recognized area of study in the United States.

Biologists alone, however, cannot and should not devise and implement biodiversity conservation measures. Effective conservation needs the collaboration of all sectors involved in natural resource management and community development. In some African countries, the natural and applied sciences are emphasized at the expense of social sciences. Social scientists, however, are vital to sustainable development and biodiversity conservation. More emphasis could be placed on producing professionals who can work in a transdisciplinary mode between, for example, applied ecology and anthropology.

African capacity could be strengthened by linking with foreign universities. "Twinning" arrangements in which student and faculty exchanges are formalized can be particularly fruitful. Regional (international) centers of excellence could be emphasized, rather than expecting each country to develop an internal capability through investment of its own resources. Previous attempts to optimize use of scarce human and financial regional resources such as at the University of East Africa and the University of Botswana, Lesotho and Swaziland have foundered. A new spirit of regional cooperation, however, is apparent in some parts of Africa (World Bank 1989). It may not be appropriate to regionalize undergraduate instruction, but regional graduate schools, possibly connected to regional centers of excellence, should be considered.

Specialized technical educational materials, instructional methods, and research topics could be made more appropriate to African situations. Institutions of higher learning in Africa are modeled on similar institutions in former colonial countries. There are good reasons for this situation, such as remaining part of the international academic network. Curricula could be made more locally relevant, however, by including elements of traditional knowledge systems without degrading international academic standards. For example, research and practice of traditional medicine could be more widely integrated into the curricula of medical schools. Some African governments do recognize and use the ethnomedical system to some extent, but the gulf between Northern and traditional approaches remains wide. Schools of agriculture ought to place more emphasis on traditional production systems and how they can be adapted to changing lifestyles.

Nonformal Education

It is not enough to enlighten future generations through the formal education system. Many Africans will never have access to such formal education, yet they deal with biological resources on a day-to-day basis. Widespread degradation of these resources is a pattern that many observe but, for a variety of reasons, are unable to halt without assistance. Nonformal education is one form of help required.

Basic literacy is a means of empowerment that enables people without formal education to better deal with bureaucracies that affect their lives. Literacy campaigns have been executed in several African countries with some measure of success. Environmental issues, including biodiversity conservation, could usefully be included in the material used in these campaigns.

Properly trained and oriented extension services can include biodiversity conservation among their concerns. Ideally, a single cros s-sectoral development agent would provide the interface between government and rural populations at the local level. These agents could then provide useful advice on conservation in response to the needs of communities. Assistance of this type is an important component of sustainable conservation systems such as those described in Chapter 5.

Many other informal ways to increase awareness in both cities and villages exist and can be enhanced by building on community input. Experience shows that people respond positively when they understand the long-term consequences of the loss of forests or other resources. Women's groups offer a particularly effective means of outreach at the community level. In general, it is better to modify, reform and strengthen existing grassroots structures and organizations than to create new ones. In situations where appropriate organizations do not already exist, however, they may have to be created.

Modern methods of outreach can also be effective tools for raising awareness. Exhibitions, fairs, and shows can be organized around themes relating to biodiversity. Promotions, bumper stickers, calendars, pop songs, and signs on roads are other potentially useful techniques. Radio in particular is one of the most effective means of mass communication in Africa. In Zaire, a private radio station includes an environmental broadcast that targets rural areas. In the 1980s the National Environmental Secretariat in Kenya visited regional agricultural shows with an interactive computer system. This software enabled ordinary citizens to visualize the consequences of their lifestyle decisions (for example, number of children) on natural resources. Newspapers in several African countries carry well-written articles on environmental concerns and editorially support "green" issues. Governments could declare a year for biodiversity conservation awareness. In addition, private-sector involvement in awareness campaigns should be promoted. For example, biodiversity messages could be carried on packaging, or conservation activities could be sponsored by local companies.

One often-overlooked means of receiving large returns from a small investment is to help exceptional individuals. Assistance should be given to outstanding individuals in recognition of their achievements in helping to conserve biodiversity.

Other Institutions

A variety of institutions not primarily involved in education can nevertheless make a significant contribution. Zoos, botanical gardens, and museums are appropriate institutions that can take a leading role in developing and implementing conservation education. Education units within these organizations might develop pedagogic materials for in-house exhibitions and could instigate outreach programs for schools and local communities.

Protected-area management authorities could further develop educational programs and ensure that local schools and other community groups have access to national parks and reserves. Vehicles are necessary to gain entry to most protected areas in Africa, thereby effectively excluding most local people. Management could acquire vehicles and provide guides to enable local groups to tour and better understand the rationale for protected areas. In countries where community conservation systems are being established as, for example, in Kenya and Tanzania, education is seen as an integral component of buffer-zone management.

Training

As with higher education, training institutions in all relevant sectors could include courses on environmental concerns in general and biodiversity conservation in particular. In many countries, training programs for teachers, extension workers for line ministries, and other government officials pay scant attention to these issues. Staff of international lender/donor agencies and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also need training in these fields, as well as training in understanding the African cultures in which they work.

National governments must address training needs and staff development. Technical staff in a wide variety of line ministries and departments should be made aware of how their work impinges on biodiversity conservation and other environmental matters. Field training should also be an integral component of staff development. Many officials are city-based and cut off from the realities of rural life. Within conventional conservation organizations (for example wildlife departments and national parks systems) substantial reorientation and retraining are needed in two respects. First, attention ought to be paid to all taxa and all elements of the landscape, rather than concentrating on megafauna and 116 protected areas. Second, community participation in protected-area management and biodiversity conservation outside protected areas needs to become an integral concern of these organizations.

Refresher and in-service courses on biodiversity conservation techniques and participatory methods are useful steps toward strengthening the understanding of professionals, managers, and technicians on biodiversity conservation. Exchange among students and specialists, as well as workshops, are also useful. Training and refresher courses offer the possibility of transfer of knowledge and experience among different countries and within countries. Courses, workshops, and professional exchanges could be conducted on a variety of themes related to biodiversity conservation that cut across a range of disciplines.

Training and development of local expertise is critical. Specialists are needed in various fields. There is a pressing need for qualified taxonomists to identify species and to assess areas of rapid loss of biodiversity. Training programs should emphasize the employment of local people for collection and identification. Rural people with specialist knowledge, such as herbalists, can greafly assist in compiling information on distribution, abundance and vulnerability of plant species.

Regional centers of expertise have an important role to play in specialist training. It is more cost effective to have regional institutions in fields where relatively few practitioners or expensive facilities are required than to duplicate them in each country (World Bank 1989). For effective biodiversity conservation, such centers could include instruction in remote-sensing, geographic information systems, taxonomy, ex situ conservation techniques, monitoring, wildlife management, indigenous knowledge systems, and applied anthropology. Institutions already exist that could serve as models for example, the regional remote-sensing centers in Nairobi, Kenya and Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso and the colleges of wildlife management in Mweka, Tanzania and Garoua, Cameroon. The Burkina Faso government and the University of Ouagadougou use the Nazinga Game Ranch as a training institute for wildlife principles (see Chapter 5).

Dissemination of new or improved techniques to rural communities is vital to sustained management of biological resources. Appropriately trained extension agents and peer training are two effective routes for dissemination. Individuals or groups of rural people can visit a neighboring community (or country) where a technique has proved successful and learn directly from the practitioners.

Networking

Efforts should be made to identify and strengthen activities that transfer or disseminate lessons learned, for example, through regional sharing of information. The transfer of ideas and technologies is an important aspect of the challenge to strengthen the capacity of African societies to take responsibility for the management of biodiversity in ways that are sustainable in the long term. The efficiency and effectiveness of communication and technology transfer can be enhanced through use of computer networks such as ECONET and PEACENET. Sharing of research findings and other information should be an important aspect of African networking among government, communities, and private organizations.

CHAPTER NINE

MONITORING, EVALUATION, AND RESEARCH

The Issue

In much of sub-Saharan Africa, there is a serious lack of natural resource inventories and other baseline data that are of fundamental importance for monitoring biodiversity trends. Consequently, biodiversity conservation projects and development projects often are designed and implemented using inadequate information. In addition, conservation projects usually lack built-in provisions for monitoring the biodiversity and ecology, as well as the economic and social well-being of local residents. Consequenfly, it is impossible to accurately assess the impact of most projects and to provide adequate feedback for making corrections and refinements.

The purpose of monitoring is to recognize changes (in direction, size, rate) when they occur, to assess the reasons for the changes, and to predict their consequences. Information should be compiled on the levels and patterns of biological resources, ecology, human conditions, and other factors prior to the start of a conservation initiative. This basic information can provide the foundation for project monitoring and evaluation, as well as a framework for management decisions. Such baseline inventories allow later comparisons of important trends so that project implementation can be improved. If carefully selected, indicators can help identify both positive and negative trends in conservation.

How to Conduct Monitoring and Evaluation for Changes in Biodiversity

Monitoring begins with deciding at what level to conduct data gathering and analysis. The levels selected depend on the questions that need to be answered. In general, biodiversity conservation projects should monitor ecosystems, habitats, populations, species, and genetic variability. The issue of genetic variability is frequently overlooked in monitoring, yet should be given more attention. Entire ecosystems must be monitored because what is happening in one part of an ecosystem may be different from what is occurring in other parts of the same ecosystem. Consequently, changes in one area are likely to have effects elsewhere eventually. In addition, physical information will be needed, such as rainfall, streamfiow, soil erosion, and pollution levels. Socioeconomic data will be needed on individuals, households, villages, towns, and regions. It is essential to be able to compare before and after a project at a specific site, but it is also enlightening to continue comparing that site with other sites over a long period of time.

There is always a need for coordination of monitoring activities and standardization of methods among the government, institutions, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), projects, and communities. A distinction must exist, however, between government monitoring and project monitoring, because the priorities and long-term interests of the two are different. Every project must have its own built-in monitoring and evaluation, despite anything that the government may be doing. This does not mean that there will be a duplication of effort, because each level needs different kinds of monitoring data. Despite these differences, the results of the project monitoring must be made available to the government for its decision making, and data from government sources should contribute to the baseline for a given project.

A system for monitoring must be adopted, preferably using the simplest techniques capable of producing the required answers. The monitoring methods selected should be compatible with existing systems at the national and international levels, and the sustainability of monitoring systems should be assessed from the outset. Monitoring can frequently be conducted by local people, and this practice should be encouraged whenever possible.

Project Identification and Planning

Within any African country, information available from national development plans, land-use plans, maps of biomes and vegetation, and other sources can provide a baseline for planning biodiversity conservation efforts. If a national biodiversity conservation strategy already exists, that is a good starting point. All countries, however, should establish a national-level system of strategic natural resource and land-use planning that incorporates biodiversity issues.

Project planning should reflect the objective of conserving representative ecosystems from each of the biomes within a given country. Within the selected ecosystems, biodiversity conservation efforts should be planned in the context of human economic and social needsin other words, by integrating conservation with sustainable development (see Chapter 5).

Government departments and private institutions already have gathered considerable data on socioeconomic factors, ecology, and biodiversity in each African country. Much of the existing baseline biodiversity and ecological information, however, is of limited usefulness, because of inconsistencies in spatial and temporal scales and in duration and precision (Huntley 1988). For some critical aspects of biodiversity, such as the clearing of moist forests and the floristic impoverishment of arid lands, the data shortage is particularly serious. Because this kind of information is fundamental to identifying project sites and planning projects, there should be increased efforts to collect more and better-quality data.

New approaches that integrate biodiversity conservation with sustainable development may require additional basic research for final project site selection and planning. Even though baseline information is often inadequate, there is seldom the luxury of being able to wait for an adequate data base. Often, two to three months of applied field research in a preproject planning stage, such as survey transects or discussions with local communities (that is, rural appraisal), may be sufficient to address major gaps in the information base prior to the start-up phase. During the planning process, it is important to ensure that a project will have sufficient flexibility to permit corrections, additions, deletions, or refinements that may be indicated once the baseline data have been collected and interpreted.

The Need to Establish a Baseline

Defining the baseline is a crucial step in successfully implementing and maintaining long-term biodiversity conservation projects. Baseline data collection can be expensive and time consuming. Therefore it is important to carefully determine the most essential baseline data required and to ensure that the project allocates appropriate funding to obtain necessary information in a cost-effective manner.

Baseline information should be gathered on all factors relevant to the project, including social, biological, ecological, institutional, economic, and policy conditions and trends. Basic inventory data may need to include species and varieties, boundaries of habitat types, social and economic conditions, and demography of the human populations. Baseline data for monitoring biodiversity status include inventory of species and varieties, ecosystem processes, habitat types, and population densities of different species. From a social perspective, baseline data are needed on the existing socioeconomic and demographic conditions and on existing policies that influence biodiversity.

Data collected on species distribution, habitats, and ecosystem structure and function are important indicators of biodiversity status and viability. Establishment of short-term and long-term conservation priorities is generally based on inventory data. Assessment of the real impact of conservation activities in species-rich areas, however, is problematic, because inventory data alone seldom is adequately detailed for monitoring at the project level.

Zambia offers an example of the value of baseline data. In Zambia, bamboo is used in crafts, such as making baskets for sale. When local bamboo began dying throughout the area, the foresters did not know the cause. Plans were formulated to develop an expensive plantation for bamboo. However, on examining forestry department archives, they discovered that a similar die-off had occurred in the same area around 1949. In fact, these die-offs were found to occur at long intervals, when the bamboo flowers and produces seeds. Thus, what was needed in this situation was not an expensive new plantation but alternative activities for the local people during a period of several years until the bamboo regrew.

Methods of Monitoring

There is a considerable body of literature on monitoring biological diversity worldwide. Biological techniques vary from large-scale assessments using remote sensing and satellite imagery to small-scale transect surveys. Some monitoring is done at the national level and as part of basic research to describe biological and climatic cycles and socioeconomic trends. This kind of monitoring is costly, because of the huge volume of data that is collected and analyzed. For project monitoring, precisely defined questions must be formulated, so that reliable answers can be provided in a timely manner. Monitoring of a project is a never-ending task; thus, it must be done cheaply and simply, so that it can continue indefinitely beyond the initial few years in which a project is initiated. Modern "high-tech" approaches to monitoring have a role in biodiversity conservation, especially when huge areas are involved, but the most important and fundamental monitoring for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development is done by simply getting into the field, walking, looking, measuring, recording, talking, and collaborating with the local residents.

The following monitoring methods for changes in biodiversity (not social or other indicators) are ordered by decreasing scale from landscape down to the community level, although many methods can be used at different levels.

Remote Sensing

Remote sensing or satellite imagery may be used to measure trends in land use and can sometimes detect patterns of change in vegetation types. Much of the satellite imagery presently available through regional centers in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso and Nairobi, Kenya, lacks sufficient detail for certain forms of analysis. In some cases, field technicians may have more detailed information for a project site than is available from satellite imagery.

Remote sensing requires ground truthing, which tends to be time-consuming and costly. For monitoring the condition, boundaries, and trends of broad vegetation types over very large areas, however, remote sensing can offer significant advantages. This technique has been widely used in the forest region to monitor deforestation and to map forest extent (see, for example, Green and Sussman 1990).

In many parts of Africa, and especially in the high rainfall areas, compiling time series imagery from remote sensing is complicated by the incidence of heavy cloud cover. Rugged terrain can make its use even more difficult. Also, trade-offs may need to be made on the scale, or resolution, to be used. Certain satellites, such as SPOT and Landsat TM, offer higher resolution than others, but data acquisition costs are also much higher (UNSO 1990). In addition, high-resolution images may require more time for analysis, due to the larger size of scenes; in other words, more images are needed to cover a given area than would be true for imagery from lower-resolution sources. Recent efforts have been made to assess whether lower resolution but less costly imagery from the AVHRR weather satellites can be useful for monitoring deforestation in Africa (BSP 1993). In general, imagery is expensive and difficult to get, but it is useful for both monitoring and community participation. In Zambia, for example, local chiefs appreciate being shown the images of what is happening to their areas and have used this information to participate in conservation projects (D. Lewis, pers. comm.).

Geographic Information Systems

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) are computerized methods for generating maps and organizing data, based on spatial and other data stored in digital form. Socioeconomic data also can be organized in the GIS format. This material is often acquired through satellite imagery or aerial photography, and 122 may also be enhanced by means of global positioning systems (see below). GIS software is becoming an essential tool for land-use management. It permits the rapid and accurate assessment of alternative development scenarios, comparison of trends, and other essential management functions. As the necessary computer hardware and software decline in price and increase in speed, flexibility, and "user-friendliness," these systems will become increasingly practical options for African countries seeking ways of improving conservation initiatives and environmental monitoring.

Global Positioning Systems

Global Positioning Systems (GPS) can improve field research by providing accurate mapping data for inventories and monitoring systems. GPS systems are often used in conjunction with GIS systems. GPS can also be used to facilitate "ground truthing" of remote sensing imagery and aerial photographs. An experimental effort to test GPS for this purpose was recently carried out in eastern Zaire, in conjunction with a gorilla population study (BSP 1993). In Sudan, a USAID project introduced the use of GPS techniques for forestry extension workers studying desertification.

Indicator Species

The maintenance of an ecological process in an ecosystem may be linked to the activities of a single species. For example, several tree species may depend on a single insect species to pollinate their flowers. Since loss of the insect species would mean the loss of the several tree species as well, the insect's status can be considered an indicator of forest status. Thus, it may be important to monitor the insect in this case. The disappearance of an indicator species does not, however, in every case signal a decline in the rest of an ecosystem's biodiversity. Conversely, an indicator species may persist despite serious losses of other taxa within its ecosystem.

Nevertheless, indicator species may be used for monitoring biological conditions, with one or more needed for each ecosystem.Because the indicator species should be conspicuous, vertebrates typically birds or mammalsare chosen. The indicator species must also be sensitive to ecological changes, so that it can provide an early warning. For plants, the presence of exotics, pathogens, pioneer or invasive species can be useful measures. In wetlands, a big vulnerable animal species such as the African crowned crane can be a good indicator species, if its annual reproductive success is monitored. Simply monitoring the number of adults, however, may be inappropriate for a long-lived species, because it may take too many years to recognize a problem. Elsewhere, carnivores or even amphibians may be the most useful indicator species. (For further discussion, see Landres, et al. 1988 and Huntley 1988).

Scientific Sampling

Objective assessments of biodiversity can be made by employing other scientific sampling techniques, for example, transect surveys or stratified random sampling. The social and economic condition of local communities also can be measured by surveys based on statistical sampling methods. Local technicians can contribute to the systematic collection of monitoring data for example, by regularly reading rain gauges, streamfiow, and lake levels.

Subjective Observations

A community's awareness of diminishing returns is an important tool in monitoring biodiversity trends in specific locations. This kind of monitoring is appropriate at the village level; the repeated surveys are valuable for involving people and for communication. Diminishing returns can be measured by the effort required to find an individual plant or animal or by the size of harvest per unit of time expended. Older residents know where the forest edge used to be. Elders also have the perception of whether people have enough land to subdivide for their children. The younger hunters know how far or how long they had to walk to find game two or three years ago, compared with today. Local people who use medicinal or other plants may notice trends in plant populations through changes in effort needed to collect them. Many fisheries departments have long relied on catch data and effort data in their monitoring of fish stocks. People also can record noteworthy ecological events. The limitation of such measures is that they are largely a compilation of subjective perceptions, but the reliability of the conclusions probably is adequate for the needs.

Interviews and Collaboration

People in the local communities have much traditional knowledge, some of which is vital to the success and sustainability of any development and biodiversity-conservation program (see Chapter 4). Unfortunately, all this information may not be collected and assimilated in time for the planning stage of the project. If, however, this information is incorporated into the monitoring process, it can provide important feedback for refining the course of the project.

Choice of Parameters

Deciding what to measure is of fundamental importance in monitoring, so that unnecessary expenditure of time and money can be avoided. The most meaningful indicators of true success in biodiversity conservation must be identified in advance. Noss (1990) lists the attributes of a good biological indicator of biodiversity change. An indicator should be:

• sufficiently sensitive to provide early warning of change;
• distributed over a broad geographical area, or otherwise widely applicable;
• capable of providing a continuous assessment over a wide range of stress levels;
• relatively independent of size of the area;
• easy and cost-effective to measure, collect, assay and/or calculate;
• able to differentiate between natural cycles or trends and those induced by anthropogenic stress; and
• relevant to ecologically significant stress.

The parameters to be monitored should be chosen before the project begins. Sometimes, as a project develops, it will be necessary to include new parameters for measurement, because objectives may change or important or efficient parameters may not have been recognized during the planning phase (Donovan 1984).

Six criteria to be considered for selecting parameters for monitoring the success of projects and for monitoring overall environmental change are (Donovan 1984):

1. Objectivity. Is the indicator impartial, tangible, or material (as opposed to subjective)? Could both a skeptic and a project advocate agree on facts generated by the measure?
2. Verifiability. Are the information sources reasonable, available, or accessible? If special studies or surveys are required, are funds and skilled personnel available to conduct them?
3. Plausibility. Is the measure believable or genuine? It should vary with the project's progress but not be significantly affected by changes in unrelated factors.
4. Comprehensiveness. Are all major aspects of the project being measured, and, if not, what additional indicators are needed?
5. Targeted. Is the measure explicit or specific, including the amount, time, and, if appropriate, target audience or place?
6. Independence. Is the indicator separate, discrete, and distinct from other measures?

The characteristics of three parameters (composition, structure, function) for describing baselines, monitoring, and evaluating terrestrial biodiversity are described in Noss (1990). Similar frameworks could be used to develop a set of indicators that can be used to influence conservation policies and to assess whether the plans and programs carried out to implement those policies actually achieved their stated objectives.

Applied Research

In the course of project implementation, specific problems may arise that cannot be resolved using the data available from the project monitoring system. In such cases, additional data gathering may be necessary. It sometimes is possible to find the needed information by communicating with departments in the government, universities and other institutions, private voluntary organizations, businesses, or individuals. Using already available data is faster and cheaper than starting anew. If the existing data prove to be inadequate, however, then clearly and precisely defined research may be appropriate.

There may also be occasional need to investigate new components for a project. For example, a project may need to study the social, economic, and biological feasibility of a new component, such as introducing community farming of snails and rodents for food. As new opportunities or concepts arise, a project should have the flexibility to incorporate these into the existing project framework.

Traditional African approaches to land use may also require applied research to better understand how decisions regarding traditional uses of biological resources are made. The social, economic, cultural, spiritual, and political aspects of land use are important components for understanding how modern societies can implement biodiversity conservation programs and are important subjects for further research. Finally, public policy research that is relevant to biodiversity conservation may be needed.

Implementation of Monitoring, Evaluation, and Research

Monitoring and evaluation of biodiversity conservation may be implemented by various entities: governments and institutions, private organizations and individuals, and local communities. Project personnel and local people should be responsible for a significant portion of any monitoring and evaluation. External assessments and evaluations may also be advisable, at intervals of one or two years, to provide the opportunity to draw on expertise from outside the project and to provide independent verification of the project's achievements and progress.

Detailed technical knowledge and professional experience are necessary for formulating the questions, designing the monitoring methods, and conducting the evaluations. Technicians with minimal training, however, can collect most of the data. For example, the training and participation of local-level "parataxonomists" (as has been successful in Costa Rica) and other initiatives could be undertaken in Africa. Each project must identify appropriate questions that will provide meaningful answers to important questions with an economy of data collection investment.

The diversity of approaches and methods used to conserve biodiversity makes it difficult to evaluate the impacts of different projects. Conservation agencies and institutions sometimes even use several methods within a single project. Projects may also vary in their specific objectives and long-term goals. Because of the differences among projects, evaluation questions must be targeted for specific projects. A project's true success, however, is measured by what it does for the socioeconomic condition of the local communities and for biodiversity conservation. Project success has sometimes been assessed primarily in terms of the achievement of administrative targets related to funding, spending, personnel management, or construction. While this may be important in the short term, it must not be confused with the evaluation of the true success of a project. Responsibilities for monitoring, evaluation, and research can be distributed at different levels, and training and technical assistance may be necessary to strengthen capacities and provide coordination.

International Centers for Technical Cooperation

Centers for specialized biodiversity study may need to be regionally based, since this kind of investment is often beyond the financial resources of individual countries. For example, centers for rainforest management or for game ranching could be established regionally. Such centers would facilitate exchange of information among countries with overlapping ecosystems or biomes. This would also allow equal access to valuable information that would otherwise be unaffordable for some countries. The remote sensing centers in Nairobi, Kenya and Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso could also introduce and coordinate standardized systems of environmental, monitoring and, data collection.

National Technical Institutions

If monitoring and evaluation activities are to be institutionalized at national and local levels, a reorientation of needs and methods from international perspectives to country and local conservation-use perspectives is needed. Collection of adequate baseline data and implementing prescribed monitoring schemes require appropriately trained nationals. National-level monitoring can only be guaranteed by developing government-level institutions.

It is important that each African country develop expertise in biodiversity conservation, including the capacities to conduct research, monitoring and evaluation, and for hands-on training. A multidisciplinary program or agency in each country could assist projects that combine sustainable development with biodiversity conservation. (This may require funding over a longer term than is normally available through donor-financed projects, however.) Such an institution could assist in designing monitoring and evaluation systems for conservation projects and ensuring the sustainability of these monitoring systems. If conservation monitoring is multidisciplinary, economies might be possible by developing relationships with on-going activities in other sectors.Multidisciplinary review committees can assess monitoring efforts and whether a country's national conservation strategy, if one exists, is being implemented in all sectors.

The national institution could monitor local communities' biodiversity management and socioeconomic trends. The staff should include a team of ecologists and social scientists. The ecologists would oversee biological and ecological surveys throughout the country, at each project site. They should be proficient at surveying natural resources and in identifying ecological trends. They could survey all project sites at intervals of three to five years, depending on funding and staffing, and should also be available for immediate response (Òtrouble-shootingÓ) whenever a community requests their assistance.

Projects with specific needs could develop local and national capacities to conduct research and monitoring relevant to those needs. Training and human resource development are critical factors in monitoring and evaluation. Many African countries still lack adequately trained nationals to meet the needs of biodiversity conservation. Collection and subsequent use of baseline data for monitoring and evaluation require research experience as well as a thorough knowledge of relevant subject matter.

Environmental assessments prior to project planning and in subsequent monitoring also can be done by private enterprises, NGOs, research institutions, and consulting firms. NGOs play a vital role in rural development in Africa, and, to achieve sustainability in their projects, many already are incorporating ecological principles. With some minor changes, their efforts could in many cases include biodiversity conservation as well. These organizations represent an important aspect of local capability to participate in sustainable development and biodiversity conservation. In some cases local enterprises and individuals may also have a fruitful role to play in this regard, while larger local and foreign firms undertaking major projects should be encouraged to implement independent environmental impact assessments for proposed investments.

Local Participation

Local participation is a prerequisite for research, monitoring, and evaluation and must be encouraged and enhanced at the onset of a project. Encouraging local participation is a complex and time-consuming process, but local people remain the most intimately linked with biological diversity. A long history and tradition of using biological resources has developed an inherent tendency among local people to monitor biological resources. As noted earlier in this chapter, local residents can contribute labor and traditional knowledge for basic research and can provide essential baseline data for a description of the ecosystem and its biodiversity. Local people should be employed by institutions and private organizations to collect specimens, compile social and economic information, and measure biotic and abiotic parameters. This must be, however, done in a coordinated and efficient manner under competent supervision, otherwise time and money will be wasted on collections that nobody will have time to identify, catalog, or analyze.

Local Capabilities for Monitoring

Local residents can also contribute to monitoring processes. Because of the closeness of the communities to nature, local people may be quick to detect changes anticipated in projects. As a general principle, it is easier for people to undertake activities that rely on what they already know than to learn unfamiliar things. Where necessary, local participation could be fostered through specialized training.

Local communities are more likely to be aware of species and habitats that are used on a regular basis than those that are rarely used. Based on this assumption, it is likely that local residents can recognize:

• changes in effort to harvest a product;
• changes in habitat boundaries;
• disappearance of a formerly common plant, animal, or fungal species; and
• arrival of alien invading species.

The first item reflects the community's awareness of diminishing returns. Local people may observe changes in time, effort, or distance required to encounter specific animals and plants. Local people who use medicinal or other plants may be able to assess trends in plant populations by considering any change in effort needed to collect them.

Second, local communities could monitor changes in the physiognomic boundaries of the vegetation stands within their ecosystem, for example; is the forest edge in the same place, and does the canopy have the same proportion of cover?

Third, local people are likely to recognize the disappearance of a species, except for inconspicuous organisms. This potential local capability has its limitation, however. Toxic chemicals (for example, DDT) or diseases sometimes can be factors that may not have affected indicator species during the time period, but that may have affected other organisms. In general, untrained people cannot recognize changes in population size, except in extreme cases such as either disappearance or irruption of a population.

Finally, local people usually will recognize the appearance of a plant or animal that formerly did not occur in the vicinity. Such appearances can have ecological importance. Invasive species sometimes thrive in their new environment, and replace or destroy indigenous species. Mongooses and rats introduced to islands have had devastating effects on their prey species. Pigs, goats, and other herbivores can eat local plant species or varieties to extinction. If a community's technicians detected a change, they could request technical assistance from the national or regional biodiversity monitoring unit. If the community's technicians did not detect any changes, then the national or regional monitoring unit would return only at regular intervals.

Local communities could compile a time line, which lists the main events in the community's history that relate to sustainable development and biodiversity conservation. The time line would describe events and achievements and could help in identifying trends and problems. Sketches or diagrams could help to illustrate the relationships among local leaders, organizations, and institutions. In collaboration with local technicians, communities could compile trend lines for such things as drought, floods, fires, epidemics, soil erosion, natural vegetation cover, crop yields, population, immigration or emigration, education, and the presence or absence of conspicuous species. Seasonal charts could be compiled to show labor demands and availability, crop activity, and plant diseases. Maps could show water distribution and use-areas of people and livestock. (For details see National Environment Secretariat, et al. 1990.)

An example of the valuable role that local people can play in monitoring biodiversity trends took place in four communities in Ghana. The people in the communities studied perceived a drastic decrease in extent of forestlands over the years. They were also fully aware of the decline in wild animal populations and the scarcity of bushmeat and other forest food items such as snails, mushrooms, wild yams and fruits. The majority of the people interviewed were able to identify causes for the declines, attributing them to forest destruction through increased farming activities and over-exploitation of wildlife resources (Ntiamoa-Baidu, in prep.). This type of information could by enormously valuable to the implementation of targeted and appropriate projects.

CONCLUSION

Enormous challenges face Africans striving to conserve their biological heritage while improving their standards of living. Africans value biological resources for a broad range of material and spiritual reasons. As a result, they are severely affected by the degradation or permanent loss of these resources. Perhaps more than anywhere else on earth, Africans rely, for their short- and long-term prosperity, on the continued functioning and production of the biological resource base. Biodiversity, therefore, is inextricably linked to present and future development on this continent.

On the other hand, the term "biodiversity conservation" has been interpreted by most donors and international NGOs as the preservation of spectacular mammals, endemic species or highly diverse ecosystems. This perspective has led to a focus on establishing and managing protected areas in selected countries. Little attention has been paid to biodiversity conservation outside of parks and reserves, even though the vast majority of species on earth are not found within these protected areas. Protected areas have been, and can still be, the nuclei of strategies to conserve biodiversity, however, our view must now extend beyond parks and reserves if we are to ensure that they will not become simply large open-air zoos over the course of the next century.

The information and ideas contained in this report reflect a perspective on conserving biodiversity in Africa that is increasingly shared by both Africans and non-Africans; a perspective that combines these African and international values and knowledge systems to find more promising paths toward meeting the challenges of conservation and sustainable development.

Past Perspectives

In the process of development, many Northern nations chose to mine the environment to meet their needs and desires. By using often unsustainable or environmentally destructive practices, and by exploiting the resources of other nations, developed countries achieved an enviable standard of living. As a result, however, they have impoverished vital life-sustaining systems in their own and other countries. In contrast, many Africans understood how to adapt themselves and their cultural, spiritual, and economic practices to match the capacity of the environment to meet their needs. Hence, Africans have not yet sacrificed their biological resource base to development. In many places Africans continue to manage the resources they have used sustainably for thousands of years.

Nevertheless, for Africans, time has begun to alter this relationship to the land for many reasons. Colonial regimes abolished traditional African cultural and tenurial systems. Values and material goods from developed countries became the desired standard at great cultural and economic cost. The effort to combine international and African political and economic systems has not yet provided a stable base for development. Finally, populations have grown markedly and deep poverty has become widespread and seemingly insurmountable.

As Africans seek to attain a standard of living similar to their Northern counterparts, many see no choice but to follow the same path to development that developed countries took, a perspective which has been supported by donors in the past. Yet, the options for development available to Africa are very different from those available to European nations in the past century. Africa's present and future are fraught with extraordinary difficulties; difficulties that cannot be solved by mimicking the no longer feasible development strategies that were so environmentally and culturally destructive in the past.

A New Perspective

Given the increasing globalization of economic systems and environmental impacts, it is now imperative that the world's nations collaborate to find the means to adapt the evolving needs of humans to the finite resources of the natural environment. In Africa, the solution to this challenge will require combining the strengths of both African and non-African knowledge and value systems. Africans can no longer rely solely on the traditions that once clearly defined their role and position in the natural world. To overcome the obstacles they face, Africans will need many of the technologies that Western science has developed. Yet Africans must use their intimate knowledge of the environment and the role of people within it to select, modify and adapt these outside technologies if they are to work effectively within an African social and ecological context.

Conserving biological resources in all countries for the benefit of all inhabitants will require a broader vision than is presently taken. Planners at all levels must regard the entire landscape as an interconnected, functional system, and plan for varying degrees of use that correspond to the differing, but interactive, physical and biological characteristics of landscape components. Human activities and ecological functions are inextricably linked in complex and far reaching ways. Ecosystem function, wildlife migration patterns, local climate, water cycles, river flow, seed dispersal, etc., all cover or cross into areas larger than most projects, parks or government administrative zones. Thus, there is no longer room in Africa for development to be implemented through isolated and independent activities without considering the local, regional and global consequences. Development and conservation planning must move toward a more regional or landscape perspective if solutions are to be found to Africa's environmental management problems.

Finally, to identify the role of biodiversity in development, as well as to learn and give value to African knowledge, the participation of all stakeholders using biological resources must be sought and won. This can be accomplished through the development of an enabling environment that maintains a democratic "social contract" of shared rights and responsibilities between all tiers of government and constituents. The right to manage the resources around them should be returned to communities at the grass roots level, and the benefits reaped from the use of these resources must accrue to all stakeholders, particularly the true custodians of the resources the local people.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
As Used in this Report

BIOGRAPHICAL SUMMARIES

The African Biodiversity Consultative Group

Prof. Emmanuel Chidumayo is a Senior Lecturer in the Biology Department at the University of Zambia, teaching and conducting research in tropical ecology. Professor Chidumayo has participated in the preparation of various major environmental reports, including the Zambia National Conservation Strategy, a National Soil Conservation and Agroforestry Needs Assessment for Zambia, and a report on the Environmental Effects of Agricultural Change and Development in the Northern Province, Zambia. Professor Chidumayo received his M.Sc. (Theory) in Conservation Biology from the University of Nairobi and his M.Sc. (Research) in Biology from the University of Zambia. Professor Chidumayo worked for 10 years as Conservator of Natural Resources in the Zambian Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources.

Dr. Mohamed Khalil is the co-Director of the Advanced Centre for Environment and Policy Studies in Nairobi, Kenya. Dr. Khalil also serves as a part-time Lecturer in the Economics Department at the University of Nairobi. Dr. Khalil has written extensively on biodiversity policy issues. He received his Ph.D. in Science and Technology Policy Studies at the University of Sussex, UK. Dr. Khalil has served as Program Director at the African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) and the Executive Director of ACTS Biopolicy Institute.

Dr. Patricia McFadden is a Program Officer with the Centre for African Family Studies (CAFS) based in Nairobi, Kenya. Dr. McFadden has served as Chairperson of the Steering Committee for the Gender Relations Project, Executive Secretary of the Association of African Women for Research and Development (AAWORD), and Editor of the AAWORD newsletter, "ECHO." She has written extensively on women in the agricultural sector in Swaziland. She received her Ph.D. in sociology from Warwick University in the United Kingdom and is originally from Swaziland.

Dr. Steven Njuguna is the Coordinator of the Biodiversity Conservation Programme in Eastern Africa for IUCN-The World Conservation Union. Dr. Njuguna has served as the Associate Director at the Centre for Biodiversity at the National Museums of Kenya. He received his Ph.D. in ecology from the University of Nairobi.

Dr. Yaa Ntiamoa-Baldu is a Senior Lecturer in the Zoology Department at the University of Ghana. Dr. Ntiamoa-Baidu is currently on a two-year sabbatical leave, serving as Project Officer for the Save The Seashore Birds Project. The project is aimed at protecting seashore birds and their coastal wetland habitats. Dr. Ntiamoa-Baidu received her Ph.D. in zoology from Edinburgh University, UK. Before coming to the University of Ghana, Dr. Ntiamoa-Baidu worked for 12 years in the Ghana Department of Game and Wildlife, starting as an Assistant Game Warden and rising to Deputy Head of Department in charge of the Wildlife Research Division.

Dr. Ademola Salau is Deputy Vice Chancellor and Professor of Geography at the University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Dr. Salau is Coordinator of the Multinational Working Group on Environment for CODES/RIA (Council for the Development of Economic and Social Research in Africa, Dakar, Senegal). Dr. Salau is the Chairman and trustee of the Nigerian Environmental Study/Action Team (NEST), which published the first ever environmental profile on Nigeria entitled Nigeria's Threatened Environment. Dr. Salau is Coordinator of the lIED/NEST, NGO Country Report for the UN Conference on Environment and Development. Dr. Salau received his Ph.D. in from Rutgers University in the United States.

Dr. William Weber is the Assistant Director for Africa of Wildlife Conservation International, responsible for planning and coordinating the organization's African conservation program. He was a co-founder of the Mountain Gorilla Project in Rwanda and has served as the field manager for the Ruhengeri Resource Analysis and Management project, also in Rwanda. Dr. Weber received his Ph.D. in Land Resource Management from the University of Wisconsin.

BSP Consultants

Dr. Alden Almguist is a literary examiner at the Library of Congress. He has expertise in indigenous knowledge systems in Africa, based on many years of research in Zaire. Dr. Almquist received his Ph.D. in Anthropology and Africa Studies from Indiana University.

Dr. Ian Deshmukh is a senior associate with Associates in Rural Development, Inc. (ARD). He has taught, researched and consulted on tropical ecology and sustainable use and conservation of biological resources for fifteen years. For three years, he worked in southern Somalia on ARD's Juba Environmental and Socioeconomic Studies Project. Prior to joining ARD, Dr. Deshmukh was a faculty member at the University of Nairobi for six years, where he taught ecology, natural resources and conservation at undergraduate and graduate levels. Dr. Deshmukh received his Ph.D. in Ecology from the University of Dundee, Scotland.

Dr. Paula Donnelly-Roark is an independent consultant with expertise in participatory development issues. She has worked extensively in Africa. Formerly, Dr. Donnelly-Roark was the Director of the Office of Research and Evaluation for the Africa Development Foundation. Dr. Donnelly-Roark received her Ph.D. in Social Change and Economic Development from the University of Colorado.

Dr. George W. Frame is an independent consultant who has over twenty-seven years of experience in large mammal ecology, animal surveys, ecosystem conservation, habitat management, biodiversity conservation, land use policy, and game ranching. He has extensive experience in Burkina Faso, where he worked as a scientific advisor to the Nazinga Game Ranch. He has also conducted ecological and behavioral research in Tanzania. Dr. Frame received his Ph.D. in Wildlife Ecology from Utah State University.

J. Frederick Swartzendruber is an independent consultant with experience in project identification, design, implementation, and evaluation as well as policy analysis and impact assessment. He has field experience in Ethiopia, where he headed a project that introduced improved cookstoves to Ethiopian households; Sudan, where he was an advisor on the production and marketing of renewable energy technologies; and Botswana, where he headed a small enterprise development program. Mr. Swartzendruber received his M . A. in International Studies from the School of International Service at American University.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_____. 1989. "Process as Resource: The Agricultural Ideology of Bora and Huastec Resource Management and its Implications for Research." In Natural Resource Management by Indigenous and Folk in Amazonia, edited by D. A. Posey, and W. Bolee. Bronx: New York Botanical Garden Advances in Economic Botany Series. pp 63-77.

Almquist, L. A. 1991. "Divination and the Hunt in Pagibeti Ideology." In African Divination Systems, edited by P. Peek. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp. 101-111.

Anderson, David, and Richard Grove, eds. 1987. Conservation in Africa. People, Policies and Practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Aylward, Bruce, and Edward B. Barbier. 1992. "Valuing Environmental Functions in Developing Countries." Biodiversity and Conservation 1 (1): 34-50.

Bedigian, Dorothea. 1991. "Genetic Diversity of Traditional Sesame Cultivors and Cultural Diversity in Sudan." In Biodiversity: Culture, Conservation, and Ecodevelopment, edited by Margery L. Oldfield and Janis B. Alcorn. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

Belshaw, Cyril 5. 1976. The Sorcerer's Apprentice. An Anthropology of Public Policy. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Biodiversity Support Program (BSP). 1993. Central Africa. Global Climate Change and Development Technical Report. Washington, D.C.: Biodiversity Support Program.

Blurton-Jones, N., and M. J. Konner. 1976. "!Kung Knowledge of Animal Behavior." In Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers, edited by Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Boo, Elizabeth. 1990a. Ecotourism. The Potentials and Pitfalls. Vol. 1. Washington, D.C.: World Wildlife Fund.

________ 1990b. Ecotourism: The Potentials and Pitfalls. Vol. 2: Country Case Studies. Washington, D.C.: World Wildlife Fund.

Brown, Michael, and Barbara Wyckoff-Baird. 1992. Designing Integrated Conservation and Development Projects. Washington, D.C.: Biodiversity Support Program.

Cameroon, Republic of. Ministry of Plan and Regional Development. 1990. Republic of Cameroon, The Korup Project. Plan for Developing the Korup National Park and its Support Zone. Yaounde, Cameroon.

Campbell, David G., and H. David Hammond, eds. 1989. Floristic Inventory of Tropical Countries. New York: New York Botanical Garden.

Cherfas, J. 1992. "Farming Goes Back to Its Roots." New Scientist 134 (1820): 12-13.

Chidumayo, E. In prep. "Use of Biodiversity for Agricultural Production in the Miombo Ecosystem of Southern Africa." A report prepared for the Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC.

Clark, Norman, and Calestous Juma. 1991. Biotechnology for Sustainable Development: Policy Options for Developing Countries. Nairobi, Kenya: African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) Press.

Cline-Cole, R. A., HAC. Main, and J. E. Nichol. 1990. "On Fuelwood Consumption, Population Dynamics, and Deforestation in Africa." World Development 18 (4): 513-528.

Dianzinga, Scolastique and Paulette Yambo. 1992. "Les femmes et la foret: utiuisation et conservation des res-sources forestieres autres que le bois." In Conservation of West and Central African Rainforests, edited by Kevin Cleaver, Mohan Munasinghe, Mary Dyson, Nicolas Egli, Axel Peuker, Francois Wencelius. World Bank Environment Paper Number 1.

Dickson, K. B. 1969. Historical Geography of Ghana. London: Cambridge University Press.

Dixon, J. A., and P. B. Sherman. 1990. Economics of Protected Areas. A New Look at Benefits and Costs. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Donnelly-Roark, P. 1992. "Using Participatory Strategies to Promote Biodiversity Conservation." A report prepared for the Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC.

Donovan, Richard Z. 1984. Evaluating Multiple-Objective Forestry Projects: Issues and an Approach. Occasional Paper No. 2, Burlington, Vermont: Associates in Rural Development.

Dorm-Adzobu, C., G. T. Agyepong, C. E. Amoako-Nuama, W. Oduro, A. A. Oteng-Yeboah, and E. Sackey. 1991a. Ghana Biodiversity Review. A report prepared for USAID, May 1991. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Agency for International Development. Figure 7-4

Dorm-Adzobu, C., O. Ampadu-Agyei, and P. G. Veit. 1991b. Religious Beliefs and Environmental Protection: The Malshegu Sacred Grove in Northern Ghana. Washington, D.C.: World Resource Institute, and Nairobi: African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) Press.

Dwomoh, D. 1990. Forest Conservation: The Contribution of Sacred Groves (A Study of Sekyere West District, Ashanti Region). B. A. (Hons) dissertation, Geography Dept., University of Ghana, Legon.

Environmental Protection Council (EPC). 1976. Traditional Approaches to Conservation: Sacred Groves in Ghana Mimeo. Accra, Ghana.

Ethiopia, Government of. 1992. National Report on Environment and Development. A report prepared for the UN Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1992. Draft. Addis Ababa.

Falconer, Julia. 1992. "Non-timber forest products in Ghana's forest zone: issues for forest conservation." In Conservation of West and Central African Rainforests, edited by Kevin Cleaver, Mohan Munasinghe, Mary Dyson, Nicolas Egli, Axel Peuker, Francois Wencelius. World Bank Environment Paper Number 1.

Fargey, P. J. 1991. Assessment of the Conservation Status of the Boabeng-Fiema Monkey Sanctuary. Report submitted to the Flora and Fauna Preservation Society, London, England.

Faure, Armelle. 1992. Perception de I'Approche Gestion des Terroirs par les Population Rurales au Burkino Faso. A report prepared for the Ministére de l'Agriculture et de l'Elevage, Secretariat Général, Unité de Gestion Opérationnelle du Programme National de Gestions des Terroirs. Ouagadougou, Burkino Faso: Caisse Centrale de Cooperation Economique.

Food and Agriculture Organization. 1991. Forests in Africa: 10th World Forestry Congress. Fact Sheet no. 8. Rome: FAO.

Fortmann, Louise, and John W. Bruce, eds. 1988. Whose Trees? Proprietary Dimensions of Forestry. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

Frame, G. W. 1989. Population Estimates 1989 of Large Mammals in the Nazinga Game Ranch, Burkina Faso. Monitoring Unit of the Ecology Center, Nazinga Project, Association de Developpement de l'Elevage de la Faune Africaine (ADEFA), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

___________, and L. Herbison Frame. 1990. Large-Mammal Biomass Estimates 1983 to 1989, and an Estimate of Ecological Carrying Capacity at the Nazinga Game Ranch, Burkina Faso. Monitoring Unit of the Ecology Center, Nazinga Project, Association de Developpement de l'Elevage de la Faune Africaine (ADEFA), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

Franke, R., and B. H. Chasm. 1980. Seeds of Famine: Ecological Destruction and the Development Dilemma in the Western Sahel. Montclair, New Jersey: Allanheld, Osmum.

Fraser, Robert, ed. 1991. The World Trade System. Harlow, Essex, U.K.: Longman Group.

Gartlan, S. 1992. National and Local Factors in Rainforest Conservation: A Comparison of the Korup and Kilum Projects. Paper presented at the Symposium on the Conservation of African Forests, Wildlife Conservation International, June 29-July 3, 1992. Boston, Massachusetts.

Ghana Export Promotion Council (GEPC). 1991. Medium Term Plan. 1991-1995. Accra: GEPC.

Gillis, Malcolm. 1988. "West Africa: Resource Management Policies and the Tropical Forest." In Public Policies and the Misuse of Forest Resources, edited by Robert Repetto and Malcolm Gillis. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Glanville, R.R. 1938. "Rice Production on Swamps." In Sierra Leone Agricultural Notes, 7.

Green, G. M., and R. W. Sussman. 1990. "Deforestation History of the Eastern Rainforests of Madagascar from Satellite Images." Science 248: 212-15.

Groombridge, B., ed. 1992. Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's Living Resources. Report of the World Conservation Monitoring Centre. New York: Chapman & Hall.

Hannah, L. 1992. African People, African Parks. An Evaluation of Development Initiatives as a Means of Improving Protected Area Conservation in Africa. Washington, D.C.: Biodiversity Support Program and Conservation International.

Hendrison, J. 1990. Damage-controlled Logging in Managed Rain Forest in Surname. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Agricultural University.

Hufschmidt, Maynard M., et al. 1983. Environment, Natural Systems, and Development: An Economic Valuation Guide. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Huntley, B. J. 1988. "Conserving and Monitoring Biotic Diversity: Some African Examples." In Biodiversity, edited by E. O. Wilson. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Hutchison, R. A., ed. 1991. Fighting for Survival. Insecurity, People and the Environment in the Horn of Africa. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Hyman, E. 1981. "Valuation of Extramarket Benefits and Costs in Environmental Impact Assessment." Environmental Impact Assessment Review 2 (3): 227-264.

Hyman, Eric, and Bruce Stiftel. 1988. Combining Facts and Values in Environmental Impact Assessment: Theories and Techniques. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

International Institute for Environment and Development (lIED). 1992. Environmental Synopsis of Ghana. London: Overseas Development Administration.

____________. 1988. National Forest Management for Sustainable Timber Production. Draft. London: International Timber Organization.

International Resources Group, Ltd. 1992. Ecotourism: A Viable Alternative for Sustainable Management of Natural Resources in Africa. Report submitted to the U.S. Agency for International Development, Bureau for Africa.

International Task Force (ITF). 1985. Tropical Forests: A Call for Action. Parts I, II, and III. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.

International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). 1987. IUCN Directory of Afrotropical Protected Areas. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

_______, 1991. Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

___________, United Nations Environment Programme, and World Wildlife Fund. 1980. World Conservation Strategy: Living Resource Conservation for Sustainable Development. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Jachmann, H. 1990. Movements of Elephants in and around the Nazinga Game Ranch, Burkina Faso. Monitoring Unit of the Ecology Center, Nazinga Project, Association de Developpement de l'Elevage de la Faune Africaine (ADEFA), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

__________. 1989. Testing the Dropping Count Method against Other Survey Techniques for Estimating Elephant Densities at the Nazinga Game Ranch, Burkina Faso. Monitoring Unit of the Ecology Center, Nazinga Project, Association de Developpement de l'Elevage de la Faune Africaine (ADEFA), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

_________. M. O'Donoghue, and K. Rood. 1989. "Influence of Fire on Elephant Use of Combretum/Terminalia Woodland in Southern Burkina Faso." Oikos 54: 310-14.

_________. 1988. "Numbers, Distribution and Movements of the Nazinga Elephant." Pachyderm 10: 16-21.

Jacobson, Jodi L. 1992. Gender Bias: Roadblock to Sustainable Development, edited by Ed Ayres. Washington, D.C.: Worldwatch Institute.

Janzen, Daniel H. 1988. "Tropical Dry Forests: The Most Endangered Major Tropical Ecosystem." In Biodiversity, edited by E. O. Wilson. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Johnson, Nels. In prep. Keeping Company: Strategies for Setting Biodiversity Conservation Priorities. Draft. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.

Juma, Calestous. 1991a. "Sustainable Development and Economic Policy in Kenya." In Gaining Ground: Institutional Innovations in Land-Use Management in Kenya, edited by Amos Kiriro and Calestous Juma. Rev. ed. Nairobi: African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) Press. pp. 51-86.

__________. 1991lb. "Managing Biological Diversity in Kenya." In Gaining Ground: Institutional Innovations in Land-use Management in Kenya, edited by Amos Kiriro and Calestous Juma. Rev. ed.

Nairobi: Africa Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) Press. pp. 125-154.

__________. 1989. Biological Diversity and Innovation: Conserving and Utilizing Genetic Resources in Kenya. Nairobi: ACTS Press, Nairobi, Africa Centre for Technology Studies.

Kalivesse, A. 1991. "Supplying the Local Bangui Markets with Bushmeat." Nature et Faune 7 (3): 39-42.

Khalil, Mohamed. In prep. "Structural Adjustment and Biodiversity: A Review of Development Policies in Kenya." A report prepared for the Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, D.C.

Kiss, A. 1990. Living with Wildlife: Wildlife Resource Management with Local Participation in Africa. World Bank Technical Paper no. 130, Africa Technical Department Series. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

Lal, R. 1979. "The Role of Physical Properties in Maintaining Productivity of Soils in the Tropics." In Soil Physical Properties and Crop Production in the Tropics, edited by R. Lal and D.J. Greenland. Chicester, England: Wiley.

Lamb, R., and D. McHugh. 1986. "Big Fish Threaten Africa's Great Lakes." Ambio 15 (2): 119-20.

Landres, P. B., J. Verner, and J. W. Thomas. 1988. "Ecological Uses of Vertebrate Indicator Species: A Critique." Conservation Biology 2 (4): 316-28.

Lee, R. B. 1976. "!Kung Spatial Organization: An Ecological and Historical Perspective." In Kalahari Hunter-Gatherers, edited by Richard B. Lee and Irven DeVore. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Lembuya, Peter. 1992. Amboseli National Park, The Surrounding Group Ranches and Community Conservation. Nairobi: African Wildlife Foundation.

Lieberman, D. D. 1979. Dynamics of Forest and Thicket Vegetation on the Accra Plains, Ghana. Ph.D. thesis, University of Ghana, Legon.

Little, Peter D., and David W. Brokensha. 1987. "Local Institutions, Tenure and Resource Management in East Africa." In Conservation in Africa. People, Policies, and Practice, edited by David Anderson and Richard Grove. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 193-209.

Lucas, P.H.C. 1992. Protected Landscapes: A Guide for Policy-Makers and Planners. Published for IUCN by New York: Chapman & Hall.

MacKinnon, J. and K. MacKinnon. 1986. Review of the Protected Areas System in the Afrotropical Realm. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

__________. 1991a. "Local Perceptions and Value of Wildlife to Communities Living in the Vicinity of Forest National Parks in Western Ghana." In Protected Area Development in Southwest Ghana. Report by Environment Development Group, Oxford, UK.

__________. 1991b. "Coastal Wetlands Conservation: The Save the Seashore Birds Project." In Living with Wildlife, edited by A. Kiss. World Bank Technical Paper no. 130. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

__________. 1987. "West African Wildlife: A Resource in Jeopardy." Unasylva 39 (2): 27-35.

_________, L. J. Gyamfi-Fenteng, and D. Abbiw. 1992. Management Strategy for Sacred Groves in Ghana. A report prepared for the World Bank and the Environmental Protection Council.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). 1987. Technologies to Maintain Biological Diversity. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ouédraogo, J. de M. 1988. Description des Principales Méthodes de Peche Utilisées au Ranch de Gibier de Nazinga, Burkina Faso. Rapports Spéciaux de Nazinga, Série C, no. 31. Nazinga Project, Association de Developpement de l'Elevage de la Faune Africaine (ADEFA). Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso.

Overseas Development Administration (ODA), U.K. Government. 1991. Population, Environment and Development: An Issues Paper for the Third UNCED Preparatory Committee. London.

Paul, S. 1987. "Community Participation in World Bank Projects." Finance and Development, 24 (4): 20-23.

_________. 1985. "Environmental Ethics and Global Imperatives." In The Global Possible:Resources, Development, and the New Century, edited by Robert Repetto. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.

__________. and Malcolm Gillis, eds. 1988. Public Policies and the Misuse of Forest Resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Richards, P. 1985. Indigenous Agricultural Revolution: Ecology and Food Production in West Africa. Boulder, Colorado: Westview.

Richards, P. 1979. Community Environmental Knowledge in African Rural Development. IDS Bulletin 10 (2): 28-36.

Rodgers, Everett M., and Rabel J. Burdge. 1972. Social Change in Rural Societies. 2nd ed. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Ruitenbeek, H. Jack. 1990. Economic Analysis of Tropical Forest Conservation Initiatives. Examples from West Africa. Surrey, U.K.: World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF-UK).

Salau, Ademola. In prep. "Population Growth and Conservation of Biodiversity: An African Perspective." A report prepared for the Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, D.C.

Salwasser, H. 1987. Editorial. Conservation Biology 1(4): 275-277.

Scott, M. F., and G. Gormley. 1980. "The Animal of Friendship (Habbanaie): An Indigenous Model of Sahelian Pastoral Development in Niger." In Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Development, edited by D. W. Brokensha. Washington, D.C.: University Press of America.

Seely, Mary, Derick Du Toit, and Alan Marsh. 1991. Life Science. Windhoek, Namibia: Gamsberg Macmillan Publishers, Ltd.

Sharland, R. 1989. Indigenous Knowledge and Technical Change in a Subsistence Society: Lessons from the Moru of Sudan. London: Overseas Development Institute, Agricultural Administration Network Paper 9.

Soulé, M. E. 1991. "Conservation: Tactics for a Constant Crisis." Science 253: 744-50.

Stuart, S. N., R. J. Adams, and M. D. Jenkins. 1990. Biodiversity in Sub-Saharan Africa and Its Islands: Conservation, Management, and Sustainable Use. Occasional paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission no. 6. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Swift, M. J., P.G.H. Frost, B. M. Campbell, J. C. Hatton, and K. B. Wilson. 1989. "Nitrogen Cycling in Farming Systems Derived from Savanna: Perspectives and Challenges." In Ecology of Arable Land, edited by M. Clarholm and L. Bergstrom. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 63-76.

Talbott, K., and M. Furst. In prep. Ensuring Accountability: Monitoring and Evaluating the Preparation of National Environmental Action Plans in Africa. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.

Tanghanwaye, N. N., and G. W. Frame. 1991. African Elephant Action Plan. Togo. National Plan for Elephant Conservation. Unabridged vers. Lome, Togo: Ministry of Environment and Tourism; Direction of National Parks, Fauna Reserves and Hunting.

Theys, Jacques. 1989. "Environmental Accounting in Development Policy: The French Experience." In Environmental Accounting for Sustainable Development, edited by Yusuf J. Ahmad, Salah El Serafy, and Ernst Lutz. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

Thomas, D. W., J. McC. Thomas, W. A. Bromley, and F. T. Mbenkum. 1989. Korup Ethnobotany Survey. Final Report to the World Wide Fund for Nature. Surrey, U.K.: World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF-UK).

Tropical Science Center (TSC) and World Resources Institute (WRI). 1991. Accounts Overdue. National Resource Depreciation in Costa Rica. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute

Udvardy, M.D.F. 1975. A Classification of the Biogeographical Provinces of the World. IUCN Occasional Paper no. 18. Morges, Switzerland: IUCN.

United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. 1992. In Environmental Law and Policy, edited by Marlene Jahnke. Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany: International Council of Environmental Law.

United Nations Activities. 1992. In Environmental Law and Policy, edited by Marlene Jahnke. Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany: International Council of Environmental Law.

United Nations Research Institute for Social Development (UNRISD). 1990. Social Dynamics of Deforestation in Developing Countries. Issues and Research Priorities. Paper for Workshop, 27-29 August, Geneva.

United Nations Sudano-Sahelian Office (UNSO). 1990. Ecological Monitoring. the Senegal Model. New York: United Nations.

United States Agency for International Development (USAID). 1988. Progress in Conserving Tropical Forests and Biological Diversity in Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.: USAID.

Walker, Brian. 1989. "Diversity and Stability in Ecosystem Conservation." In Conservation for the Twenty-first Century, edited by David Western and Mary Pearl. New York: Oxford University Press.

Warren, C. M. 1992. Indigenous Knowledge. Biodiversity Conservation and Development. Paper presented at International Conference on Conservation of Biodiversity in Africa. Nairobi, Kenya: National Museums of Kenya.

Warshall, Peter. 1989. Mali: Biological Diversity Assessment. Tucson, Arizona: University of Arizona, Office of Arid Lands Studies.

Webster's Third New International Dictionary. 1986. Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam-Webster.

Wells, Michael, and Katrina Brandon. 1992. People and Parks: Linking Protected Area Management with Local Communities. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

West African Game Ranching Extension Program (WAGREP). 1992. Identification of Four Sites for Commercial Game Ranches in West Africa. A report prepared for the World Bank. Vol. 1. WAGREP Phase I. Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso: African Wildlife Husbandry Development Association.

White, F. 1983. The Vegetation of Africa: A Descriptive Memoir to Accompany the UNESCO/AETFAT/UNSO Vegetation Map of Africa. Paris, France: United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization.

Wilkie, D. S. 1989. Human Settlement and Forest Composition within the Proposed Okapi Rain Forest Reserve in Northeastern Zaire. Final Report. Salt Lake City, Utah: University of Utah, Department of Anthropology.

_________. 1988. "Hunters and Farmers of the African Forest." In People of the Tropical Rain Forest, edited by J. S. Denslow and C. Padoch. Berkeley, California: University of California Press.

Wilson, Edward O. 1992. The Diversity of Life. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

ed. 1988. Biodiversity. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Wiltshire, Rosina, et al. 1991. "Recasting the Population-Environment Debate: A Proposal for a Research Program." Mimeo. A research proposal submitted to MacArthur Foundation.

Winterbottom, R. 1990. Taking Stock: The Tropical Forestry Action Plan after Five Years. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.

Woodford, J. D. 1990. The Status of Wildlife in Ethiopia: Its Conservation and Utilisation. A report prepared for the European Economic Community.

World Bank. 1992a. Social Indicators of Development. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press.

______. 1992b. World Development Report. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

_______. 1991. World Development Report 1991. Washington, D.C.: Oxford University Press.

______. 1989. Sub-Saharan Africa: From Crisis to Sustainable Growth. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

______. 1983. World Tables. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

World Bank Environment Division. 1992. Integrated Natural Resource Management. Working Paper no. 4. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Africa Technical Department.

__________ 1991a. Country Capacity to Conduct Environmental Assessments in Sub-Saharan Africa. Working Paper no. 1. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Africa Technical Department.

_________. 1991b. Local Participation in Environmental Assessments of Projects. Working Paper no. 2. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, Africa Technical Department.

_________. 1991c. Forest Policy Paper. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). 1987. Our Common Future. London, U.K.: Oxford University Press.

World Resources Institute (WRI). 1993. "Human Interaction with the Forests of Central Africa." In Central Africa Global Climate Change and Development. Technical Reports. Washington, D.C.: Biodiversity Support Program.

_________. 1992. World Resources 1992-93. Washington, D.C.: WRI.

_________, IUCN - The World Conservation Union, and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1992. Global Biodiversity Strategy: A Policy-makers' Guide. Washington, D.C.: WRI, IUCN, UNEP.

World Wide Fund for Nature. (WWF-UK). 1989. Republic of Cameroon: The Korup Project Plan for Developing the Korup National Park and Its Support Zone. Appendix 13: Social Cost-Benefit Analysis. Surrey, U.K.: WWF-UK.

Zimmerman, R. C. 1992. Recent Reforms in Natural Resources Management in Africa. Convergence Toward and Divergence from a Model Role for Public-Sector Institutions. Draft report to U.S. Agency for International Development, Washington, D.C.