Paper short abstract:

In Namibia, elephants cause destruction to livelihoods in conservancies. Incomes from conservation to local communities do not offset costs of destruction. Thus, community conservation leads to better resource management, but economic impoverishment for those who live with wildlife.

Paper long abstract:

In Namibia, the communal conservancy program has been promoted by international donors, including conservantion NGOs, as an alternative land use that simultaneously ensures wildlife conservation and provides livelihoods opportunities for rural communities. More than 25 years after the start of the program, 20% of the country is covered by communal conservancies and wildlife, especially the elephant population, has increased.

In this paper, I draw from previous long term research in arid northwestern Namibia to explore the distribution of economic costs and benefits to various social groups. The data show that elephant conservation is partly responsible for a significant growth in tourism and trophy hunting industries. Nevertheless, only a small percentage of the income which is generated through both remains with local communities. At the same time, elephants increasingly cause destruction of the water infrastructure in pastoral communities. These costs are hardly compensated for by the conservancy programme or the state. If such conditions persist, the conservancy programme is likely to lead to better resource management, but skewed economic impoverishment, furtherance reproducing inequalities and putting to doubt its contribution to economic empowerment and alleviation of rural poverty. In conclusion, I propose some tentative solutions how this paradox might be overcome.