How Can Protected Area Managers Implement Conservation Goals Without Exacerbating Poverty?

Brittney Vezina, an alumna of the Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE) working with Dr Charlie Gardner, and Malagasy non-profit, Madagasikara Voakajy, has conducted research on a proposed protected area in northern Madagascar to shed light on this question.

Protected areas often implement restrictions on natural resource use, which can have high socioeconomic costs to those whose livelihoods depend on this access. However, natural resource use can have negative effects on the integrity of ecosystems protected areas aim to protect. How can protected area managers implement conservation goals without exacerbating poverty?

Brittney Vezina, an alumna of the Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology (DICE) who received her MSc in Conservation Biology in 2018, worked with Lecturer in Conservation Science, Dr Charlie Gardner, and Malagasy non-profit, Madagasikara Voakajy, to conduct research on a proposed protected area in northern Madagascar with the aim of answering this question.

Authors argue that protected area managers must understand the factors driving livelihood choices in communities surrounding the protected area to develop ecologically- and socially sound management decisions. In Madagascar, legislation requires managers to create a ‘Social Safeguards Plan’ prior to creating a protected area, outlining how negative social impacts will be mitigated within their management plan. Such plans can include alternative livelihood programs or modified use zones within the protected area, as examples. Brittney explains,

“It is essential for managers to understand the root factors leading to resource-use within a protected area, in order to develop projects, alternative livelihoods or management decisions that will not only be well-received by communities, but will also be effective in addressing those root factors and, ideally, reduce or minimize resource-use.”

The authors conducted interviews and focus groups in three communities surrounding a soon to be protected forest, aiming to understand livelihood choices. Specifically, the authors investigated why livelihood choices led to charcoal production, the main threat to the proposed protected area.

Overall, the authors found charcoal production to be an important livelihood used for income to purchase rice, the staple crop and diet in Madagascar. It was evident that agriculture was becoming an increasingly difficult livelihood in the area due to many factors, including reduced precipitation, a lack of labour or the necessary tools for preparing land and issues with local cattle eating crops. Other livelihoods that would normally bring in cash for purchasing rice, including fishing and milk production, were also limited and decreasing in productivity, with charcoal production often being the only option.

Brittney explains, “Our research shows that the livelihood system is very limited and very complex. However, our research also shows that many livelihood supports could be beneficial, particularly so for agriculture. Many participants expressed that they would reduce charcoal production if they could grow enough rice for the year. Ideally, our research can help inform management plans for this protected area as they progress with the project.”

Learn more about Madagasikara Voakajy or donate to help advance their work

Leave a Reply