An evaluation of collaborative resource management and the measurement of illegal resource use in a Ugandan national park

Protected area management in developing countries faces the challenges of building support for conservation among neighboring residents and monitoring the social and ecological impacts of conservation programming. This study examines a collaborative resource management (CRM) program at Kibale National Park, Uganda that allows residents to fish inside the park. Like other integrated conservation and development programs, the goals are to help alleviate poverty and build support for conservation and conservation-related behaviors. I empirically analyze the program's impact using an 81 item personal survey, with 94 CRM fishers and 91 respondents in a control group and additional data from a focus group, semistructured interviews, and document review. Results show fishers earned significantly more income (median=U.S. {dollar}376.02) than the control group (median= U.S. {dollar}196.19, U=2953.50, p<0.001), and tribal affiliation influenced earnings. Fishers reported significantly more positive attitudes toward park staff than the control group (all p-values <0.05) and indicated more support for conservation (U=2906.5, p<0.01). Although CRM fishers deterred illegal activity, some may also extract resources illegally. Management recommendations include increased monitoring of fishers and their harvest levels, ecological studies of the fishery, and a seasonal moratorium.; Results of the CRM fishing survey indicated few respondents divulged illegal behavior when directly questioned; yet illegal resource use is a major threat to conservation worldwide. To manage effectively, the number of people engaging in illegal activities needs to be estimated. However, people violating the law seldom identify themselves for fear of retribution. A second survey was conducted with 251 residents to test the use of the randomized response technique (RRT) to better measure illegal activities. The RRT allows respondents to disclose sensitive information because the interviewer cannot ascertain an individual's true response to the incriminating question. Estimates of six types of illegal resource use, such as removing plants and snaring wildlife, were compared using surveys with the RRT versus direct questioning. The RRT survey method yielded an estimate of significantly more illegal activity than direct questioning for each type of illegal resource use (all p-values <0.001). This suggests the RRT is a potentially powerful tool for understanding conservation threats in the developing world.