4.7 Article

Models for the collaborative management of Africa's protected areas

Journal

BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION
Volume 218, Issue -, Pages 73-82

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biocon.2017.11.025

Keywords

Co-management; Delegated management; Financial-technical support; Government; Non-profit organisation; Public-private partnership

Funding

  1. Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusanunenarbeit (GIZ)
  2. German Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB)
  3. African Wildlife Foundation
  4. Range Wide Conservation Programs for Cheetah and African Wild Dogs
  5. National Science Foundation Coupled Human and Natural Systems Grant [115057]
  6. Peace Parks Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Africa's protected areas (PAs) are under severe and growing anthropogenic pressure. Resources for PA management are a small fraction of what is necessary in most countries, and many PM are failing to fulfil their ecological, economic or social potential as a result. Collaborative management partnerships (CMPs), where nonprofit organisations partner with state wildlife authorities, have the ability to improve PA management by facilitating long-term financial and technical support. While many have demonstrated success, there are barriers to setting up CMPs, including concern among some states that some partnerships may undermine sovereignty or appear an admission of failure. We interviewed 69 experts from state and non-profit partners about 43 PAs covering 473,861 km(2) in 16 African countries and analysed responses with principle component analysis to identify how partnerships differ, particularly in how they allocate governance and management responsibility. We identified three main CMP organisational structures: 1) delegated management, where a non-profit shares governance responsibility with the state and is delegated full management authority; 2) co-management, where a non-profit shares governance and management responsibility with the state; and 3) financial and technical support (advisory or implementary), where a non-profit assists the state with aspects of management without formal decision-making authority. Delegated models were associated with higher funding than co-management and financial-technical support partnerships, but models did not differ in PA land area size. Our study identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each model and offers recommendations for implementing successful CMPs, many of which are already playing a significant, positive role in conservation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available