INTERVENTION SUMMARY

This case study examines the impact of Harvest-Based Initiatives (HBIs) on poaching in Tanzania by comparing two adjacent protected areas, Ugalla Game Reserve, which permits community-based resource use, and Rungwa Game Reserve, and follows a stricter exclusionary model. HBIs allowed legal activities, such as beekeeping and fishing, providing income and food security for local communities. These activities were supported through training and licensing, giving local people a stake in resource protection. Anti-poaching efforts in both areas included regular patrols by government rangers. However, Ugalla’s model was more integrated, pairing enforcement with incentives for local compliance and cooperation. The results revealed that Ugalla experienced significantly fewer poaching incidents despite comparable budgets and ranger deployment levels. This outcome suggests that combining community incentives with law enforcement can enhance conservation impact more effectively than enforcement alone.

INTERVENTION DETAILS

What was the problem?

Population pressure and limited access to natural resources in local communities led to wildlife poaching and illegal harvesting in Tanzania. The exclusion of local communities from accessing and using resources in wildlife-protected areas was identified as among the root causes of biodiversity loss.

What was the Intervention and How was it Implemented?

Harvest-Based Initiatives (HBI): Harvest-based initiatives (HBIs), which were implemented in Ugalla Game Reserve, involved giving communities around the reserve access to the natural resources within and surrounding the nature reserves. These communities were also provided with information about how they can prevent over-utilization, ensuring that they are less likely to engage in poaching. This approached allowed them to make up for resource and financial deficits that were present before being granted access. (Reduce Provocations - reduce frustrations and stress)

Anti-Poaching Patrols: These involved rangers conducting patrols to monitor and protect wildlife resources in both nature reserves. Rangers collected data on illegal activities and arrested poachers during these patrols. (Increase the Risks - extend guardianship)

Was the Intervention Effective, Ineffective, or Promising?

The Harvest-Based Initiatives (HBI) intervention was effective in reducing poaching activities in the Ugalla Game Reserve when compared to the Rungwa Game Reserve. There was a significant difference in the mean poaching incidences between Ugalla Game Reserve, with 29.6 incidents, which implemented the intervention and Rungwa Game Reserve, with 51.8 incidents, which didn’t. In Ugalla Game Reserve, 587 poachers were arrested. The primary illegal activities included fishing (45%), logging (37%), hunting (17%), and grazing (1%). In Rungwa Game Reserve, 1141 poachers were arrested in the same period. The main illegal activities were illegal mining (46%), illegal logging (42%), hunting (10%), grazing (1%), and ivory poaching (1%). The opinions of rangers on how to reduce poaching also reflect the differing management approaches and suggest the HBI model improved cooperation between communities and rangers along with perceptions about effective conservation strategies.

How do We Know?

Harvest-Based Initiatives (HBI) was shown to be an effective conservation strategy in the Ugalla Game Reserve because it provided legal and sustainable access to some resources, and changed the relationship between the local community and the protected area, leading to a reduced incentive for illegal activities compared to Rungwa. This approach also positively influenced the perceptions of rangers, leading them to recognize the importance of community involvement and benefit-sharing in conservation.

Were Conservation Outcomes Measured?

While the conservation outcome was not measured, the study tracked arrests, incidents of illegal activity, and ranger-community dynamics as indicators of reduced poaching pressure.

ASSESSMENT

The study found significantly fewer poaching incidents in Ugalla Game Reserve, which allowed harvest-based initiatives (HBI), compared to Rungwa Game Reserve, which did not allow HBI.

The intervention worked by engaging communities in legal resource use (beekeeping, fishing) and creating economic incentives aligned with conservation. HBIs offered an alternative to illegal poaching, promoted ownership of conservation goals, and shifted ranger perceptions of communities from adversaries to collaborators. This change in social norms and economic behavior helped to reduce the incentive and perceived necessity for poaching. The model also indirectly strengthened trust between local people and rangers.

Several contextual factors shaped effectiveness: 

  • The Ugalla Game Reserve has a history of community involvement in resource management, with HBI being practiced for over fifty years. This suggests a degree of understanding of the local context, but the sources do not provide details on any specific pre-implementation analysis conducted for the HBI intervention. 
  • Legal access to natural resources in Ugalla through HBI programs versus exclusion in Rungwa. 
  • Ranger perceptions towards the conservation benefits of HIB were more positive in Ugalla. 
  • llegal fishing in Ugalla was noted as being vulnerable to corruption as a means of income for "immoral" rangers, possibly to supplement low salaries deemed to lower staff morale. 
  • Increased mining pressure in Rungwa, which may have diverted enforcement effort. 
  • Differential levels of infrastructure, the size of reserves, and the levels of ranger staffing, which may have an impact on patrol coverage.

The HBI intervention was implemented in the Ugalla Game Reserve, while the Rungwa Game Reserve served as a control site. Ugalla Game Reserve allowed fishing and beekeeping and had decades of experience implementing HBIs with community buy-in. Rungwa Game Reserve followed a traditional anti-poaching enforcement ("fortress conservation") model and prohibited local resource access. Both sites implemented anti-poaching patrols with similar per km² budgets and ranger-to-area ratios. However, patrol man-days and total patrol distance were higher in Rungwa, suggesting greater enforcement investment but less effective outcomes in terms of lowering poaching rates.

The study did not conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis but provided budget estimates, including $30km²/year for anti-poaching operations in Rungwa and $31km²/year in Ugalla. Ugalla's results suggest that lower poaching rates can be achieved with similar or lower financial input when HBIs are included. Investment in HBI-related livelihoods likely incurred additional but unquantified costs.

SCP COLUMNS

Extend guardianship
Reduce frustrations and stress

ADDITIONAL DETAILS

Citation

Nachihangu, et al. (2022)

Year Range

2015-2020

Country

Tanzania

Landscape

Woodland

Target Species

Multiple species

Problem type

Poaching

Source: Nachihangu, J., Massao, C. A., Nahonyo, C., & Richard, U. (2022). The impact of harvest-based initiatives on wildlife poaching around the Ugalla and Rungwa game reserves. Global Ecology and Conservation, 40, e02320.