HWCM - Ministry of Environment and Tourism

National Workshop on Human Wildlife Conflict Management 2005
dealing with conflicts have remained with the State, mostly MET, and has largely been dealt with
on a case-by-case basis. We have, however, encouraged such communities to form
conservancies as a counter strategy, and I believe that we have had some success in this regard,
as evident from the expansion of the conservancy system.
In the last two categories in particular, we also recognize that many of the conflicts are due to
wildlife that move in and out of our protected areas, and whose conservation status ultimately
depends on our ability to find a balance between costs and benefits. We very much want our
protected areas to be net exporters of valuable resources and economic benefits to neighbouring
people and regional economies. A situation where our wildlife from parks amounts to the export
of economic and social costs greatly undermines this objective. It is thus not possible for the
State or our Ministry in particular to disengage when problems occur outside our parks, because
we remain stakeholders in these problems.
I have referred to the ‘approach in Namibia’, and gave some indications of the general concepts.
A next speaker will go into greater detail about what this approach entails in terms of legislation
and policy. However, the point I want to make now is that the ‘approach’ is very much defined by
central Government and its implementation remains under the control of Government. The reality
is that Government has not always had the resources to handle this responsibility efficiently or
consistently. Some of you with experience in other countries will probably say that this indeed
applies to almost everywhere in Africa, if not the rest of the world. It is somewhat comforting for
us to see in the media how even European or American farmers react to stock losses from wolves
or bears or lynx. These seem to be global problems.
In our situation, with our progress in Community-based Natural Resource Management
(CBNRM), our progress towards decentralization of governance at all levels, and also our cultural
history concerning such matters, I believe that the time has come to reconsider aspects of the
role of Central Government in decisions and their implementation concerning conflict situations.
We need to consider if dealing with local conflict issues at the local level will not be more
effective. We need to identify what needs to be done to empower local communities to deal with
such conflict cases themselves. My perspective is that the current situation is frustrating for
everyone, and inefficient and unsustainable. Decisions made at central level take too long and
leave the regional staff of the Ministry with the almost impossible and mostly fruitless task of
intervening in individual conflict cases, often too late to have a desirable result.
Another important issue that I want to highlight is the absence of good information on these
important issues. The information currently available on the incidence and impact of human
wildlife conflict is not readily accessible to decision makers, and where available, data are not
necessarily collected in a standardized format. This makes it difficult to obtain an overall picture
of the true extent of the problem. In the past few years, progress has been made in capturing
some of this data through the ‘event book system’ that we have in selected areas. However,
much remains to be done if we are to ensure that we can fully assess and quantify the impact of
conflicts on people’s livelihoods. In order to focus our efforts on mitigation measures in areas of
high impact, it is imperative that we work towards a standardized monitoring, reporting and data
management system that has applications at local, regional and national levels. This will be
crucial to monitor and evaluate over time the impact of any policy direction and mitigation
measures implemented, and to provide the basis for adaptive management in this regard.
Lastly, I believe the time is right in Namibia to create a coherent policy on Human-Wildlife Conflict
Management and reflect upon the integration implied in this term rather than the single
14