|
Figure 19: Land capability and economic returns
from land use in Namibia
|
In the development of the wildlife sector, non-consumptive
tourism on high quality wildlife land will give by far the
greatest economic returns (Barnes 2001, Martin 1993).
Brown (2004) and Martin (2004b) have pointed out that,
given land capability in the arid situation of Namibia,
the highest valued land uses over most of the country are
those based on management of natural resources (Figure
19). National and international policy constraints,
however, place wildlife at a competitive disadvantage with
land use based on exotic species. As a consequence, the
full potential of wildlife as landuse is not being realised
at present.
Barnes (et al 2001) state that in the medium to long term
the comparative advantages of land use based on domestic
livestock can be expected to decline as international subsidies
are phased out. They also point out that the comparative
advantages of wildlife land uses can be expected to increase
over time, due to continuing rapid expansion in international
tourist markets, increasing scarcity of wildlife elsewhere,
and the development of markets to capture international
wildlife non-use values as income. Their results show that
commercial livestock ranching has limited potential to compete
economically with wildlife use because it is capital intensive
and requires access to external markets.
The results of Barnes and de Jager (1995) suggest that, under
present circumstances, there is little financial incentive
for individual farmers practising livestock and game production
systems to convert to pure game production either for consumptive
or non-consumptive use. Their results clearly show that production
at a larger scale within conservancies is likely to be more
efficient both financially and economically than production
at a ranch scale. Safari hunting on private land appears to
have been profitable but only as a supplementary enterprise
alongside livestock or other wildlife land uses. Its profitability
appears, on livestock farms, to have provided the financial
incentive for much investment in wildlife and this, in turn,
has led to conditions where pure wildlife ranching is possible.
Requirements
The technical arguments for greater areas of Namibia to be
put over to natural resource management will not, on their
own, bring about the needed changes. It will require a high
level political commitment and the correct suite of incentives
to induce landholders (both communal and private) to convert
to a land use based primarily on wildlife. The high level
political commitment is already in place. In a speech delivered
on 3rd February 2004, the former President, Dr Sam Nujoma,
made the visionary statement that wildlife would be restored
throughout the north of Namibia, that ownership of wildlife
would be conferred on local peoples and that the economy would
be transformed by diversification based on wildlife uses .
. .
. . a dream where the animals returned, the forests
were restored and the people were no longer poor and hungry.
The return of animals to the land could benefit the people
if the animals once again belonged to them . . .
Already the trends amongst commercial farmers and conservancies
are extremely positive and Namibia's record of an expanding
wildlife industry over the past 10-20 years is impressive.
In 2004, there were more than 40 registered and emerging
conservancies with 150,000 members managing wildlife over
an area of 100,000 square kilometres in the areas where
elephant populations are expanding. To maintain the momentum
requires a greater devolution of authority for wildlife
management, the development of co-management institutions
and, in the specific case of elephant, an ability to realise
far greater returns from the species. Perhaps the greatest
danger that the vision will not be fulfilled lies in a possible
perversion of the intent of policy during the course of
putting it into practice (Corbett and Jones 2000).
|
