Second hour: The second hour will be focused on a continuation of the simulation (adaptive management), reflection of the decision-making process and how this relates to larger-scale political and biophysical properties.
Students will first be asked to go back to their “villages”
Now that they have reflected on the process, students will discuss the following questions:
Did you feel like your process of decision-making appropriately weigh the types of information you were given?
Did you have any doubts about the decision that your group came to?
What other types of information did you wish you had to help you make a decision? (10 minutes)
Once the students have discussed these questions, the instructor tells them that this is an adaptively managed system and they have the option of changing their decision. Specifically, an NGO has arrived to conduct fieldwork in the region and has brought with them new information. The groups are each given a new handout including “NGO facts” - the NGO has information from larger scales (time, space, political) that could possibly influence their decision.
The students discuss the new information and whether it leads to a different decision on what to do with the village (15 minutes)
Once they make their new decision, the TA will again come up and write down whether their decision stayed the same or changed based on this new information.
Once the decisions are in, the instructor will show the class what really happened in this region to the villages that made these decisions. (5 minutes)
The instructor will lead a discussion with the entire class using the following discussion questions:
In what ways do you think the process we went through together is similar to what a village might undergo?
How is this process different? (this can bring in cultural, economic, lifestyle, relational differences)
What do you think are the costs and benefits to community-based natural resource management vs. a more top-down approach?
What are some of the global mechanisms that connect these types of processes in villages in Namibia to your own life here in the United States?
Generally speaking, why should it matter to this class how villages in Namibia decide to manage their land? (15 minutes)
The final assignment (to be completed at home) is to give the students back their cards they filled out at the beginning of the case study and have them write another essay/journal entry about whether their perception of the mutual exclusivity of conservation and development changed as a result of simulating the decision-making experience (5 minutes).
The lack of sustainable development potential of cattle and agricultural systems has been a stimulus for many southern African countries to examine wildlife utilization as an alternative development tool. While countries have taken different strategies, the ultimate goal of the various policy approaches is to capture wildlife’s biophysical and economic advantage to generate a continuous stream of benefits to local communities. In doing so, incentive exists for the conservation of wildlife and the ecosystems across the migratory ranges of different species.
In 1996 Namibia adopted legislation to allow communities to engage in wildlife resource management through the establishment of conservancies. Studies (1) have demonstrated wildlife’s economic advantage at the national and regional levels in generally increasing revenues from wildlife-based tourism However, questions remain in regards to understanding the actual benefits of wildlife conservation at the community level. If wildlife viewing and hunting tourism is to be a sustainable source of revenue and also create incentives towards conservation of wildlife and natural resources of local environments, then understanding how institutional factors affect local benefit attainment is key, as it is the local inhabitant who will ultimately make the decision to plant another row of crops, pasture more cattle, poach another animal, or conserve for future benefit.