Boundary Conflicts in the Serengeti Region, Tanzania

Radley Horton

This thesis describes the conflicts between wildlife and the resident human population of the Serengeti region of North-Central Tanzania, and evaluates new policy approaches being implemented in the region which attempt to reconcile wildlife conservation with human needs. Regulation in the Serengeti dates back to the German and British colonial administrations of the early 20th century, which initially set up reserves in the region to regulate hunting by foreigners. While some regulatory changes occurred after independence in 1962, policies remained punitive in nature throughout the 1980's. The regulatory approach, based on punitive responses to illegal behavior, is now failing to protect the region's wildlife, since it is ill-equipped to address new threats to wildlife posed by expanding, often destitute, human populations. Human populations increasingly compete with wildlife for land and water, and both sides suffer from the conflict, which often leads to habitat destruction and the transmission of diseases between livestock and wildlife. Conflicts also occur between area residents and wildlife managers over the rights to wildlife meat, wildlife-generated revenues, and wildlife viewing. There are five regulatory zones in the region, each of which restrict human behavior to various degrees in order to protect wildlife. The region also contains an expanding human population placing increasing demands on the region's unrivaled abundance and diversity of wildlife. Recent attempts have been made by the Tanzanian government, with the assistance of public and non-profit international organizations, to adapt to the contemporary conflicts. The new approach uses positive incentives to change local attitudes and behaviors towards wildlife; it is based on the assumption that wildlife can only survive in the region if the local residents want it to. These policies can be divided into four categories: 1) revenue sharing and development assistance, 2) wildlife and natural resource utilization, 3) extension services, and 4) local control. These policies provide local populations with financial benefits from, and allow local participation in, wildlife management. Conceptually, the policies are generally sound, though they will require some fine-tuning and may produce some negative latent effects, most notably increased migration to the region. The new policies, however, are a better policy option than the old approach since they attempt to enlist support for conservation among area residents. It is particularly important that residents desire wildlife conservation since the government has been unable to protect wildlife by using a punitive approach. The four new policies will be more successful if accompanied by other policy changes. Specifically, residents should be granted land tenure and compensated for damages caused by wildlife. Additionally, eco-tourism should be promoted since more money will be available for area residents if the region earns more money from tourism. The new policies could also be undermined by external factors leading to a decrease in foreign visitation to the Serengeti region, or the presence of a large refugee population in the area.