| dc.description |
Wildlife Management Area (WMA) provides an avenue for rural communities to
participate in wildlife management. Ideal interventions require initiatives based on felt
needs thereby bridging the gap between theory and practice. The intervention is however
constrained with socio-economic and institutional factors. The study assessed socio-
economic and institutional factors influencing local community adoption and
operationalisation of the WMA concept in the management of Pawaga-Idodi pilot area in
Iringa, Tanzania. Specifically; the study assessed (1) socio-economic characteristics and
their management implications, (2) status, constraints and opportunities, and (3)
functioning and appropriateness of the existing institutional framework. Two research
phases were adopted, one involving preliminary study where Participatory Rural Appraisal
exercise, secondary data collection, questionnaire pre-testing, and key informant
discussions were undertaken. Questionnaires were administered to 187 household heads
and participants’ observations were undertaken in phase two. Content and structural
functional analyses were used to analyse information from key informants, participant
observations and secondary data. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were
done. Chi-square and ANOVA analyses were used to explain variations in various aspects
across the study villages.
Significant variations (P<0.001) were observed in income
sources, land tenure and perception of membership to the MBOMIPA association.
Population increases were significant at P<0.01 while off-farm activities and trust to the
association were not significant at P<0.05. A Logistic model was developed to explain the
influence of socio-economic and institutional factors in adoption and operationalisation of
the WMA concept. Results were significant (P<0.001) implying that, socio-economic and
institutional factors influence the adoption process. The study concluded that, uncertainty
on wildlife tenure rights, unclear institutional setup at village and inter-village level, andiii
low awareness are perhaps key areas for concern. The study recommends appropriate
attention to the institutional framework at village and inter-village level, benefit sharing
and a tailored extension package. |
|