At the heart of the planning phase of the Okavango Delta Management Plan (ODMP) was an integrated drive around community consultation and partnership. It was a process that took three years and numerous kgotlas (community meetings called by local chiefs and elders).
Dr Lapologang Magole, research fellow in participatory planning at the University of Botswana’s Harry Oppenheimer Okavango Research Centre, reflects on the challenges and value of obtaining community partnership in river basin management. She is adamant that the goodwill generated between the planners and communities is carried forward in the implementation of the ODMP.
“The history of conservation in Botswana is one in which regulations stop people from using resources. When you say conservation, communities say: ‘Which part of our land are you taking away from us? Which resource are you going to stop us using?’
Our component (of the ODMP) was participatory planning; data management and research. As such we were tasked to play advocates for stakeholders, to make sure they took part in the ODMP every step of the way – in particular the local communities that reside in the Delta.
We asked them what they thought was important and what the ODMP should address – what are the issues that they face on a daily basis.
We had to explain that the ODMP was about sustainable use, not preservation of the resources. Communities have an experience of non, or superficial, consultation. We really had to build trust around these issues.
We documented every single thing that everyone said. We analysed it and sifted out the issues. We took minutes of each kgotla and identified how many times similar issues occurred, before grouping them by theme and frequency…
I can pick out the key issues as:
Wildlife : Predation and crop damage by elephants – that was a big issue. The background being (a ban on) hunting, CITES, and things like that. So, we had people/animal conflict.
Other concerns centred on land management issues that involved the Land Board (responsible for issuing land use titles in Botswana). There were complaints ranging from incompetence to issues bordering corruption.
People were also moaning about their non-participation in the tourism industry. Complaints included lack of assistance and technical knowledge, as well as racism in terms of labour issues and that the industry is foreign dominated…
It has been extremely important to get DEA (Botswana’s Department of Environmental Affairs) to have offices in Maun, close to the community, to implement the ODMP. The implementing office needs to be close to the communities. There needs to be a rapport.
The closeness has given the communities confidence that they (DEA) are not flying in from Gaborone (Botswana’s capital city), addressing them and then flying back. This is one of the things that made the communities feel this process is different and real. It boosted the communities’ confidence in government institutions.
It was critical for the coordinating agency (DEA) to remain in the region, in order that the spirit of the ODMP – which is the spirit that embraces community participation – is kept alive.
We also have to make sure that we have an institutional structure, whether formal or informal, that allows communities to participate in the implementation of the ODMP…
We saw a hostile community when we entered. By the time we were leaving, the communities were demanding answers. You could see they were feeling like they were part of the process. They were feeling like they had a certain level of ownership. Although I cannot say it was complete, you could see that they had gained confidence. They were really engaging with us. We need to continue this. When you are dealing with a disempowered community, the process is going to be long and slow. I cannot say we have achieved complete community ownership of the plan, but the planning must just keep going and we must build community groups for every resource that is being managed. This will really demonstrate partnership.”
Written by Alex Hetherington
