| dc.description |
Sustainable utilization of natural resources in particular wildlife and forestry is a
challenge not only for Botswana but for many other developing and developed
countries. The formulation and implementation of policies that encourage sustainable
utilization of these resources is also not easy especially when it has to deliver both
developments to people as well as conservation objectives. Community Based Natural
Resources Management (CBNRM) approach were established to involve local
communities in managing and monitoring natural resources to ensure sustainability of
the resources being monitored. This study aimed at comparing the livelihood options
for Sankuyo and Shorobe communities, the former being a tourism/wildlife under
CBNRM approach community while the later is an agricultural based community.
Data were using questionnaires, focus group discussions, field visits and observations,
key informants and stakeholders/situation analysis. Data were analyzed using excel
program and results were summarized in table, figures and charts. Results show that,
although these two communities are homogeneous in terms of ethnic group’s
composition but they have different livelihood options and strategies. Sankuyo
community relies heavily on tourism activities and most of the household members
are employed in tourism related activities. Shorobe on the other hand derive their
income from cattle and farming. Many of the interviewed household (66%) in
Sankuyo are headed by female while in Shorobe (58%) are headed by males. These
female headed households live with their grandchildren while their daughters and
sons are working elsewhere. Sankuyo community seems to be more educated than
Shorobe. In Shorobe 63% of the respondents reported to have no formal education
while in Sankuyo no one reported to have no education. While in Sankuyo 28% had
secondary education only 10% had secondary education in Shorobe. Results also
show that hunting and other tourism activities in Sankuyo contributes about 67% of
the total income in the community while other activities contribute only 33% while in
Shorobe many household are accrued by selling cattle and some other crops. Other
economic activities that contribute to the household income for Shorobe were selling
local beer (Mochewa), fishing and petty businesses. It is concluded that the changes in
policies for wildlife management have a great impact to the livelihood of people. It is
therefore recommended that local communities should be involved in the decision
making process to avoid the negative impacts that may be associated with the policy
changes. Involving the local community will not only increase the sense of ownership
but also build capacity to the members of these communities. |
|