Learning from Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) in Ghana and Zambia: lessons for integrated landscape approaches

Abstract

Land use in much of sub-Saharan Africa is dominated by legislative frameworks based on a strong colonial legacy, focusing strongly on state control and minimal devolution of management responsibilities to local communities. However, attempts to reconcile conservation and socio-economic development by increasing stakeholder engagement in community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) have been undertaken since the late 1980s. Based on a review of published literature on historical land-use trajectories, the evolution of CBNRM, and key respondent interviews with NRM experts in Ghana and Zambia, this paper asks: What lessons can be learned from CBNRM to inform integrated landscape approaches for more equitable social and ecological outcomes? The paper discusses the positive characteristics and persistent challenges arising from CBNRM initiatives in both countries. The former being, improved rights and resource access, an established institutional structure at the local level, and a conservation approach tailored to the local context. The latter include the absence of multi-scale collaboration, inadequate inclusive and equitable local participation, and limited sustainability of CBNRM initiatives beyond short-term project funding timelines. The paper argues that integrated landscape approaches can address these challenges and improve natural resource management in Ghana and Zambia. We urge landscape practitioners to consider how the lessons learned from CBNRM are being addressed in practice, as they represent both challenges and opportunities for landscape approaches to improve natural resource management.

A Knowledge Review on Integrated Landscape Approaches

“…Jurisdictional approaches, together with community-based management, independent regional community associations, biological corridors, forest/rural productive units at landscape level, jurisdictional REDD+, and integrated water resource management, are some of the most common management frameworks to implement ILAs [22,40,86]. There is clearly an urgent need to implement ILAs and use the multifaceted values of landscapes [50].…”

“…In order to address issues of common concern in the landscape, ILAs typically use multi-stakeholder platforms as the governance structure to set the common goals, outline a shared vision, and drive collective action [41,47]. The landscape governance's improvement capacity will support the development of participatory theories of change that outline a shared vision and scenario building for the management plan [40]. A focus on the relationships between existing and upcoming policies is crucial to enhance good landscape governance [9].…”

“…One useful framework is the 'theory of change' where the goals, outputs, outcomes, and the framework itself are subject to assessment to foresee management scenarios in an iterative process [39]. Lessons learned from Ghana and Zambia on ILAs highlight the importance of the usage of participatory theories of change to frame the common vision, shared goals, and management plan(s) through historical trend analyses and scenario building for the future of the specific landscape [40].…”

“…'Landscape approaches are broadly defined as a strategy to integrate research, policy and practice for multiple land uses within a given area to enhance equitability and sustainability'[28,40] (p. 3).A strategyIntegrate research, policy, and practice. Multiple land-uses.…”

Sustainable Landscape and Livelihoods Programme, Mount Kenya : Situation analysis and baseline of the Impact evaluation

“…• The target outcomes of the landscape approach need to be iterated by all stakeholders -as the moment these appear (in the project proposal) to originate from RA and thus do not confirm with current thinking (Reed et al 2016;Adeyanju et al 2021)) on the ownership that is needed for a landscape approach to work.…”