Changing Land Use, Livelihoods and Wildlife Conservation in Maasailand

A participatory approach for modeling alternative future land use scenarios around Nairobi National Park using Bayesian Belief Networks

“…In the rare communities where wildlife revenues do generate a significant proportion of income, it is primarily distributed to households who own land near high-visitation conservation areas. Furthermore, households earning the most from wildlife often invest in land use practices (e.g., cultivation) that may undermine wildlife or pastoral livelihoods [22]. This is consistent with other studies that dispute the widespread assumption that by providing alternative income opportunities, ICDPs can reduce the use of natural resources by local people [1,17].…”

“…Pastoralism remains the most important source of income for many in the AKP. Nevertheless, wildlife-based tourism is still viewed as the basis for sustainable development across many of East Africa's rangelands [22]. The Maasailands of Kenya and Tanzania alone generate an estimated $1.5 billion in tourism revenues each year [22].…”

“…Nevertheless, wildlife-based tourism is still viewed as the basis for sustainable development across many of East Africa's rangelands [22]. The Maasailands of Kenya and Tanzania alone generate an estimated $1.5 billion in tourism revenues each year [22]. Past policies and many development projects are based on the assumption that community-based or private conservation initiatives will help reduce poverty while maintaining wildlife populations.…”

“…Past policies and many development projects are based on the assumption that community-based or private conservation initiatives will help reduce poverty while maintaining wildlife populations. In reality, the benefits from such initiatives are often limited, and there is gathering evidence that these assumptions are unrealistic -both in terms of increasing wildlife populations and reducing poverty [22][23][24][25]. In fact, most wildlife populations across Kenya have declined considerably over the last 30 years despite the work of numerous governments, non-government organizations (NGOs), entrepreneurial initiatives, and scientific research efforts [26,27].…”

“…In terms of poverty reduction, Homewood et al [22] demonstrate that across Maasailand, wildlife earnings are poorly distributed among local communities and contribute little earnings when compared to households that rely on livestock, farming, and/or non-farm wage work. In the rare communities where wildlife revenues do generate a significant proportion of income, it is primarily distributed to households who own land near high-visitation conservation areas.…”