Community-Based Wildlife Management in Africa: A critical assessment of the literature

The protectionist approach to wildlife conservation has been blamed by some conservationists for failing to protect wildlife and its habitats, especially in Africa. The failure of this approach has triggered a rush by conservationists to find alternatives. One alternative that has gained support is the Community-Based Wildlife Management (CWM) approach. Four assumptions underlie CWM: (1) that the national governments and their wildlife authorities are willing to devolve ownership of, and management responsibilities for, wildlife to rural communities; (2) that the communities are interested to participate in managing wildlife; (3) that the communities have the capability to manage wildlife; and (4) that wildlife conservation and rural economic development are compatible. The idea of CWM is put to the test by bringing together the existing views on the approach and assessing the plausibility of the four assumptions on the basis of the literature. Although the aim of CWM - to address the failures of fences-and-fines - is laudable, the four assumptions are problematic. The approach is, therefore, less effective than it is said to be.