NACSO RESEARCH DISCUSSION PAPER
Number 1
May 2002
Lessons learned in the southern African region on the formation, structure,
funding and functioning of national associations to represent community-based
CBOs working on common-property natural resource management
A consultancy report to the Namibian Association of Community Based Natural Resource
Management Support Organisations (NACSO)
ed
ov
In
n
Devolution
s
od
ho
eli
Liv
Incentives
io
at
rm
pr
Im
Partnerships
Re Sus
so tai
ur na
ce be
Ma Na
na tur
ge al
me
nt
By Brian T. B. Jones
TARGET
Proprietorship
fo
Ca
pa
cit
y
Empowerment
This series of NACSO Research Discussion Papers presents information in the form of forthcoming or new research and dialogue
pertaining to CBNRM It is intended to stimulate discussion and debate on theory, current practice, and innovations. The opinions
expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of NACSO. Comments and/or feedback are welcome.
Contact Details
Brian Jones
Independent Consultant
PO Box 9455,
Eros, Windhoek, Namibia.
Tel and Fax: +26461 237101
E-mail: bjones@mweb.com.na
NACSO
Namibian Association of Community-Based Natural Resource Management
P.O. Box 98353
Pelican Square
Windhoek, NAMIBIA
Tel: +26461 230888 /230796
Fax: +26461 230863
Email: nacso@iafrica.com.na
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
List of Acronyms
Executive Summary
Page
1
2
3
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
7
7
2. METHODOLODY
7
3. DISCUSSION: Lessons learned from regional experience
3.1 Role of donors
3.2 Dilution of focus
3.3 Accountability
3.4 Associations as lead agencies
3.5 Bottom up evolution
3.6 Sustainability
8
8
9
10
10
11
12
4. OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Roles and functions
4.2 Institutional structure
4.3 Accountability to members
4.4 Communication and linkages with relevant partners
4.5 Relations with other regional and national bodies
4.6 Funding and Sustainability
13
13
14
15
16
16
16
5. REFERENCES
18
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
19
7. FIGURES AND ANNEXES
Figure 1. Proposed National Conservancy Assiciation Institutional
Structure & Some Suggessted Roles & Responsibilities
Annexe A. Regional Case Studies
1. The BOCOBONET Case from Botswana
2. The Community Resource Board Association from Zambia
3. The CAMPFIRE Association in Zimbabwe
20
20
21
21
27
29
Annexe B. Persons Consulted
34
Annexe C. Checklist of Questions Used in Interviews
35
Annexe D. Terms of Reference
36
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
ABSTRACT
This report provides the Namibian Association of Community Based Natural Resource
Management Support Organisations (NACSO) with a series of recommendations and options
for providing support to the development of an association of community based organisations
(CBOs involved in natural resource management). These recommendations and options are
drawn from lessons learned from the development of similar associations elsewhere in the
southern African region and from ideas derived from interviews with NACSO members. The
lessons which emerged from three case studies focus on several issues. These are the role of
donors, the dilution of focus, accountability, associations as lead agencies, bottom up
evolution and sustainability. The recommendations and options developed out of these
lessons involve the importance of clearly identifying appropriate roles and functions,
institutional structure, accountability to members, communication and linkages, relationships
with other bodies (both regionally and nationally) and funding and sustainability.
1
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
LIST OF ACRONYMS
ADF
ADMADE
AGM
BOCOBONET
CAMPFIRE
CANAM
CBNRM
CBO
CDF
CHA
CITES
CONASA
CRB
DNPWM
DWNP
GMA
IRCE/PACT
IUCN
LIFE
MSE
MTR
NACOBTA
NACSO
NAU
NGO
NPWS
NRMP
PRA
RDC
SADC
SNV
TOR
USAID
VAG
WWF
ZAWA
African Development Foundation
Administrative Design Programme for Game Management
Areas
Annual General Meeting
Botswana Community based Organisation Network
Communal Areas Programme for Indigenous Resources
Conservancy Association of Namibia
Community Based Natural Resource Management
Community based organisation
CAMPFIRE Development Fund
Controlled Hunting Area
Convention on the International Traffic in Endangered Species
Community based Natural Resource Management and
Sustainable Agriculture
Community Resource Board
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management
Department of Wildlife and National Parks
Game Management Area
Institutional Reinforcement for Community
Empowerment/PACT
World Conservation Union
Living in a Finite Environment Project
Medium and Small Enterprises
Mid Term Review
Namibian Community Based Tourism Association
Namibian Association of Community Based Natural Resource
Management Support Organisations
Namibian Agricultural Union
Non Governmental Organisation
National Parks and Wildlife Service
Natural Resources Management Project
Participatory Rural Appraisal
Rural District Council
Southern African Development Community
Dutch Development Agency
Terms of Reference
United States Agency for International Development
Village Area Group
World Wide Fund for Nature
Zambian Wildlife Authority
2
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides the Namibian Association of Community Based Natural Resource
Management Support Organisations (NACSO) with a series of recommendations and options
for providing support to the development of an association of community based organisations
(CBOs involved in natural resource management. The recommendations and options are
drawn from lessons learned from the development of similar associations elsewhere in the
southern African region and from ideas derived from interviews with NACSO members. The
three regional case studies (from Botswana, Zimbabwe and Zambia are contained in Annexe
1.
A) Lessons Learned
Role of Donors
The impact of donors in supporting the development of CBO associations in Botswana and
Zimbabwe has been mixed. While donor funding has been used to help kick start these
associations, both BOCOBONET and the CAMPFIRE Association have become over-reliant
on donor funding. Donor support does not appear to have been strategically applied in terms
of building the sustainability of the associations. There has also been a tendency for
association secretariats to become accountable to donors rather than to the membership.
Dilution of Focus
Both BOCOBONET and the CAMPFIRE Association have developed their own programmes
of direct capacity building support to CBOs. The emphasis on implementation activities has
resulted in a dilution of focus away from the activities associated with an interest group. They
have mixed the roles of an implementing NGO with an advocacy organisation representing
the interests of members. This blurring of roles and dilution of focus has made the
associations less effective, has led to confusion among partner agencies and competition for
diminishing donor funding with other service providers.
Accountability
There is a tendency for association secretariats to become the dominant component of the
association because they deal with everyday management and interaction with partners. They
also tend to become accountable to donors rather than to the association members. Members
might lack confidence in supervising the secretariat which is likely to be better trained and
educated and come from the ranks of the technocrats.
Associations as lead agencies
In Zimbabwe the CAMPFIRE Association has become the lead agency in the country’s
CBNRM programme. In Botswana BOCOBONET wants to play a strong leadership role in
the country’s CBNRM Forum. In Zimbabwe this has led to the dissolution of the former
collaborative group that guided the CBNRM activities and there is less of a sense of cohesion
and common vision as in the past. In Botswana relationships between BOCOBONET and
3
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
other CBNRM NGOs have become strained as BOCOBONET strives to carve a niche for
itself. If CBO associations are to take on the role of the lead agency in CBNRM programmes,
this should not be at the expense of overall coordination and collaboration. Tensions will
arise as a newly established CBO association begins to flex its muscles. This tension should
be managed through the maintenance of strong collaborative arrangements and the
maintenance of common goals and objectives. At the same time, NGOs and government
need to accept that they will no longer have the same degree of control over the overall
CBNRM programme as they did in the past.
Bottom up evolution
In Zimbabwe and Botswana CBO Associations were established because it was felt important
for CBOs to have a voice at national level. Subsequently these associations tried to develop
some form of decentralised or regional system. In Zambia regional associations will be
established before a national body. The development of strong regional constituencies that
see the advantages of collaborating at a national level could well be important for
strengthening accountability within, and ownership of, a national association. There is an
opportunity in Namibia to let the need for a national association emerge from developing
regional groupings, rather than forcing it from above.
Sustainability
Both the CAMPFIRE Association and BOCOBONET are facing a sustainability crisis.
Neither organisation raises sufficient income internally to cover its costs and donor funding is
coming to an end. The provision of large amounts of donor funding has led to the initiation of
several activities and the engagement of staff members that the associations cannot pay for
themselves if outside funding is withdrawn.
B) Recommendations and Options
Roles and functions
An emerging CBO association should identify clear, but limited functions. This will help to
provide focus in terms of activities and funding requirements. It is recommended that a
Namibian association focus on representing its members interests rather than direct support
services.
If a national level conservancy association emerges and is established as the lead agency
within the Namibian CBNRM programme a new collaborative forum should be established
which brings together NACSO and the national conservancy association regularly to discuss,
plan, coordinate activities and strategise. Further, the conservancy association secretariat
should be fully accountable to members so that the members drive the leadership role of the
association within the CBNRM programme.
4
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Institutional structure
Support for the development of strong, accountable regional associations should precede
support for the development of a national association.
The ultimate governing body of a national conservancy association should be the annual
general meeting of members. The members should appoint an Executive Committee whose
primary function should be supervision of the Secretariat. All conservancies grouped in
regional associations should attend the AGM. The regional associations should be for
coordination, planning and discussion purposes, rather than representational i.e. the AGM of
all conservancies elects the Executive Committee and not representatives of regional
associations. An institutional structure of a national conservancy association is proposed in
Figure 1 in the main text.
Accountability to members
Accountability of the Executive Committee to members. The usual mechanisms should be in
place to ensure accountability such as annual reporting to the AGM on activities and financial
statements, annual elections etc.
Accountability of the secretariat to members. Apart from the usual reporting procedures (e.g.
quarterly to the Executive Committee and to the AGM) the following is recommended to
ensure that the secretariat is accountable to the Executive Committee and broad membership:



the secretariat is kept small (e.g. an Executive Secretary and an Administrative Officer).
salaries of the core staff should be paid from the association’s own funding
clear terms of reference/job descriptions with performance indicators should be
developed for the secretariat. The Executive Committee should carry out an annual
evaluation of the performance of the secretariat against the terms of reference and
indicators.
Communication and linkages with relevant partners
A new conservancy association should clearly recognise the existing work done by NGOs
and other environmental institutions. The association should try to identify the needs of its
members and then enter into partnerships with other implementing bodies to get those needs
addressed. Regular meetings should be held in a forum (suggested above) between the
association and partners.
Relationships with other regional and national bodies
Links with national bodies
The association should seek to develop relationships with other relevant bodies where
appropriate. Specific links should be developed with the Conservancy Association of
Namibia (CANAM) that represents the freehold conservancies.
5
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Links with regional bodies
The association should actively pursue links with similar bodies in the region such as
BOCOBONET and the CAMPFIRE Association. In its formative stages representatives of a
Namibian association should visit these organisations to gain first hand experience of lessons
learned, constraints and opportunities.
Funding and sustainability
It is recommended that income from membership be viewed as the core funding of the
association. Membership income should at the very least cover the full costs of staff, office
space, and general operating costs.
It is recommended that a simple and realistic financial feasibility study be undertaken to
estimate how much income an association could raise annually and what staffing and
activities could be supported with this income. If the result is that conservancies cannot
afford to support their own association, and are unlikely to, even with increased membership,
then this might indicate that a national association should not be formed.
Assuming that an association is formed that has secure core funding of its own, donor funds
could be sought for specific sets of activities with limited time spans that will add value to the
association’s core activities. If this requires the hiring of additional staff, it should be on the
basis of limited time contracts for the duration of the specific activity. Such staff should not
be viewed as core personnel on the permanent staff establishment.
6
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
The Namibian community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) programme has
reached a stage where there are 15 registered communal area conservancies and at least 25
emerging conservancies1. Rural residents have formed conservancies in order to manage
wildlife and tourism on their land. These community based organisations (CBOs) have over
the past few years begun to meet on a regular basis to share experiences, plan activities of
mutual benefit and to discuss future options.
The CBOs have identified the need to formalise their interactions and joint activities through
the establishment of an organised body. In some regions such as Kunene, there is already the
nucleus of a regional grouping of CBOs that meets regularly to discuss common issues. The
possibility exists for the development of regional CBO associations to lead to the eventual
establishment of a national association. The reasons for the development of an association or
associations are: a) advocacy – with government, support organisations and donors; b)
facilitation of policy development and its implementation; c) guidance to the national
programme; d) support to its members, etc.
The Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations (NACSO) has been requested
by the CBOs to provide them with assistance in establishing an association. There is
considerable experience within neighbouring countries (Botswana, Zambia, and Zimbabwe)
on the establishment and operation of CBNRM CBO associations. The purpose of this
consultancy is to obtain pertinent lessons from these countries by examining the strengths and
weaknesses of different approaches, and to make recommendations to the Namibian CBOs.
The full scope of work of the consultancy is contained in the Terms of Reference (TOR),
attached as Annexe 5.
2.0 METHODOLOGY
The TOR for this consultancy envisaged that the consultant would find an appropriately
placed person in Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe to supply the relevant information. This
information would be prepared according to an established format, and would then be
compiled into a consolidated report by the consultant. This methodology has been amended
for the following reasons: a) the consultant was visiting Zimbabwe on another assignment
and so had the opportunity to carry out interviews there himself; and b) no CBO association
has been formed in Zambia yet, although regional associations within Zambia are being
planned.
As a result, the following methodology has been followed:
1
At the time of publication as a NACSO Research Discussion Paper (November 2003), the number of
registered conservancies has reached 29, while there are approximately 56 emerging conservancies.
7
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
i)
May 2002
Botswana
For information on the Botswana Community Based Organisation Network
(BOCOBONET), a Botswana-based sub-consultant was contracted to carry out
interviews with BOCOBONET staff based on a checklist of questions developed by
the main consultant. This sub-consultant had recently carried out an evaluation of the
SNV/IUCN CBNRM Support Programme in Botswana which has been one of the
main providers of support to BOCOBONET. He was therefore asked also to provide
his own views on some of the main issues regarding the operation of BOCOBONET.
ii)
Zambia
In Zambia the Community Based Natural Resource Management and Sustainable
Agriculture (CONASA) Project is supporting the formation of regional associations of
Community Resource Boards (CRBs). As these associations have not yet been fully
established, it was not appropriate to use the same checklist of questions as for
BOCOBONET. A staff member of CONASA provided information and a number of
documents on the progress of the Zambian initiative.
iii)
Zimbabwe
The consultant visited Zimbabwe on another assignment and used the opportunity to
carry out an interview with the Programme Manager of the CAMPFIRE Association.
The same checklist of questions was used in this interview as that used for
BOCOBONET (attached as Annexe 4). The consultant also opportunistically
interviewed the Executive Director of the Zimbabwe Trust, an NGO that was
involved in the establishment and support of the CAMPFIRE Association.
In accordance with the TOR, this report is structured such that case study material concerning
each of the three CBO associations is contained in Annexe 1. The main body of the report
consists of lessons learned from these case studies and recommendations for NACSO and the
Namibian CBOs.
3.0 DISCUSSION: Lessons Learned from Regional Experience
A number of lessons can be learned from the experiences of Botswana, Zambia and
Zimbabwe in establishing CBO associations. The following lessons are drawn mainly from
BOCOBONET in Botswana and the CAMPFIRE Association in Zimbabwe, as these two
organisations have been operating for some time. Where appropriate, lessons are also drawn
from the emerging CBO association in Zambia.
3.1 Role of donors
The impact of donors in supporting the development of CBO associations in Botswana and
Zimbabwe has been mixed. While donor funding has been used to help kick start these
associations, both BOCOBONET in Botswana and the CAMPFIRE Association in
8
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Zimbabwe have become over-reliant on donor funding. Cushioned by donor funding, the
CAMPFIRE Association embarked on a major expansion of functions and staffing which has
become unsustainable. As a result, staff and functions have had to be cut back. There is a
perception that BOCOBONET has taken on additional roles in order to attract donor funding
because donors prefer to support implementation service providers rather than advocacy and
lobbying bodies. The formation of BOCOBONET was promoted by the USAID-funded
Natural Resources Management Project (NRMP) through the NGO IRCE/PACT in Botswana
as a means of leaving some form of support organisation in place that could assist CBOs
involved in CBNRM. This approach has also influenced the association towards taking on
additional implementational roles. Donor support does not appear to have been strategically
applied in terms of building the sustainability of the associations. There has also been a
tendency for association secretariats to become accountable to donors rather than to the
membership (see section on accountability below).
3.2 Dilution of focus
In Botswana, Zambia and Zimbabwe, CBOs engaged in CBNRM and agencies supporting
them have identified a need for mechanisms to be created to enable these CBOs to have their
views and interests represented in national fora. It has been recognised that if the CBOs act in
concert, they can be much stronger in terms of lobbying government and others. An
association representing the interests of member CBOs can be important for disseminating
information and coordinating with other stakeholders in CBNRM. Both BOCOBONET and
the CAMPFIRE Association have moved beyond these initially identified core functions of
advocacy, networking and coordination with other stakeholders. They have both taken on
certain service provision activities that have shifted the nature of their organisations away
from a role as an organisation aimed at representing the interests of its members.
BOCOBONET did have certain implementation functions as part of its original objectives
and these have tended to become its main focus of activities. Under funding from the African
Development Foundation, it took on a training role that involved providing support to new
CBOs. The CAMPFIRE Association also began carrying out the functions of implementing
agencies, such as training, monitoring and evaluation, institutional development etc.
In part, the shift towards implementation activities has been facilitated by the availability of
donor funding and reluctance by some donors to fund advocacy and lobbying bodies. It has
also been driven by a feeling that as the CBOs have been made the core focus of CBNRM
programmes, they should be in control of the support that is provided to their members. There
are also perhaps other advantages of providing implementation support to members. One
school of thought is that BOCOBONET’s direct role in the implementation of training
activities has taken the association away from its main advocacy and lobbying role. Another
school of thought is that it has brought the association more into direct contact with its
members.
However, it is clear that the emphasis on implementation activities of the two associations
has resulted in a dilution of focus away from the activities associated with an interest group.
As the associations have become more and more like implementing NGOs, the roles and
functions of the associations have become blurred. This blurring of roles and dilution of focus
has made the associations less effective because they have been trying to do too many things
9
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
at once. It has also led to confusion among partner agencies. Further, the associations are
competing with other service providers to CBOs for limited and diminishing donor funding2.
3.3 Accountability
BOCOBONET and the CAMPFIRE Association have similar structures and systems of
internal accountability. The model consists of a Board or Executive Committee that is elected
by and accountable to the annual general meeting of members. The Board then appoints a
secretariat that carries out day to day management and reports to the Board. In essence, there
are two distinct components to this model. On the one side is the membership, represented by
the Board or Executive Committee, while on the other side is the secretariat, which is hired to
carry out the activities of the association. Given the number and type of activities that the
secretariat carries out, and the injection of donor funding for these activities, there is the
danger that the secretariat becomes the dominant component of the association. This has
happened in the CAMPFIRE Association. Once the functions of the secretariat move beyond
being the voice of the members and a facilitator of networking and information flow, the
secretariat develops into a semi-autonomous body pursuing its own activities.
Further there is a tendency for the secretariat to become accountable to the donors rather than
the board or broader membership. This is unsurprising when the donors are providing
millions and the membership fees are contributing a few thousands in financial contributions.
The secretariat tends to become focused on satisfying donor conditions for receiving funds,
meeting donor reporting requirements, and meeting the objectives of the “project”. The
tendency of the secretariat to become semi-autonomous will be increased if the board of the
association provides weak supervision. In some cases, the extent to which supervision is
provided might be linked to the confidence levels of board members in monitoring the
activities of staff who are perhaps better trained and educated and come from the ranks of the
technocrats.
2
The experiences of two Namibian membership organisations, the Namibian Agricultural Union (NAU) and the
Namibian Community Based Tourism Association (NACOBTA), are also instructive. The NAU was formed to
represent the interests of white freehold farmers and to lobby government on their behalf. Following
independence, the NAU developed an extension and training arm called Agrifutura. However, Agrifutura has
subsequently been separated from the Union, which has gone back to what it sees as its core functions of
representing its members’ views to government and broader society. NAU takes the view that extension should
be carried out by the government and the union should not compete with an existing service provider.
NACOBTA began life as a membership organisation with a secretariat that was supposed to report to a
management committee drawn from members. It has, however, evolved over time into a service NGO that is not
really driven by its membership. The secretariat is more accountable to donors who fund the secretariat’s
implementing activities. Proposals have been made to formalise this change in nature of the organisation by
constituting NACOBTA as a trust. This would reduce the role of the membership in guiding the organisation
and supervising the secretariat, which would instead report to the board of trustees. In the case of NACOBTA,
there is a feeling that the shift in focus of the organisation has been appropriate in terms of the needs of
community-based tourism in Namibia, and that a conservancy association or associations would be more
appropriate for representing the interests of most current NACOBTA members.
10
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
3.4 Associations as lead agencies
It is unsurprising that CBO associations such as the CAMPFIRE Association and
BOCOBONET should tend to flex their muscles once they have been established and are
operational. As noted above, there is a feeling that the representative body of CBOs should be
the driving force within national CBNRM programmes and should take on the role of
coordinating the various stakeholders. In Zimbabwe, the other CBNRM partners accepted
this role for the CAMPFIRE Association and the association became the lead agency in
CAMPFIRE. It took on a major role in grant allocation of income from USAID for the
CAMPFIRE Development Fund and was expected to coordinate the inputs of other service
providers. As a result, the former CAMPFIRE collaborative group of implementing agencies,
which had guided the CAMPFIRE programme, effectively dissolved. Although there are
various fora where some of the implementing agencies meet, there is less of a sense of
cohesion and common vision among the various stakeholders as there was in the past. This is
partly because of the dual nature of the association as an advocacy body and an implementing
agency, taking on some of the functions of other service providers. It is also partly because a
similar mechanism for cooperation and coordination as the collaborative group was not reestablished. In Botswana, by contrast, there is a relatively strong coalition of CBNRM
stakeholders that includes BOCOBONET and meets under the umbrella of the National
CBNRM Forum. There are indications that BOCOBONET wants to play a stronger role
within this forum. However, the relationships between BOCOBONET and other CBNRM
NGOs have become strained as BOCOBONET strives to carve a niche for itself.
If CBO associations are to take on the role of the lead agency in CBNRM programmes, this
should not be at the expense of overall coordination and collaboration. Consideration should
be given to whether the agency responsible for coordinating others and driving the
programme should also be competing for the same pots of funding, particularly if
collaborative mechanisms are not in place for allocating funding3. Again, if CBO
associations are to take the lead, then consideration should be given to whether it is the
secretariat or the membership that is in the driving seat. The danger exists that a semiautonomous secretariat that is not guided and led by members, in effect becomes the lead
agency. This is of particular concern when the lead agency is the referee (guiding the
direction of the programme and coordinating service provision) and a player (carrying out
implementation activities) at the same time.
It can be expected that tensions will arise as a newly established CBO association begins to
flex its muscles, carve a niche for itself among the existing players, and take up the role of
lead agency. It is important that this tension be managed through the maintenance of strong
collaborative arrangements and the maintenance of common goals and objectives. At the
same time, NGOs and government need to accept that they will no longer have the same
degree of control over the overall CBNRM programme as they did in the past.
3
The former Living in a Finite Environment (LIFE) Project Steering Committee and the current
system followed by the Namibian Association of Community-based Natural Resource Management
Support Organisations (NACSO) are examples of such collaborative mechanisms. Funds were
allocated by the LIFE Steering Committee by consensus, excluding the possibility that the
government as lead agency could unfairly direct funds for its own purposes. The NACSO grants
allocation process operates in a similar manner.
11
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
3.5 Bottom up evolution
In both the Zimbabwe and Botswana cases, the CBO Associations were established because
implementing agencies felt the associations were an important requirement for CBOs to have
a voice at national level. BOCOBONET was also specifically promoted at the end of the
USAID-funded Natural Resources Management Project (NRMP) to provide continuation of
some of the support services the NRMP had given to CBOs. Both countries opted for
establishing national bodies with an implementing secretariat from the start. Quite early on,
BOCOBONET identified the need to establish regional committees to facilitate
communications and information flow, but these have not been established. The CAMPFIRE
Association has started to promote regional groupings of District Councils in order to develop
increased accountability between the secretariat and the membership. In Zambia by contrast,
the route being followed is first to establish regional associations of Community Resource
Boards (CRBs) and then move towards the development of a national body. Some of those
involved in the CAMPFIRE Programme believe this would have been a more appropriate
path for the CAMPFIRE Association to have followed. The development of strong regional
constituencies that see the advantages of collaborating at a national level could well be
important for strengthening accountability within, and ownership of, a national association. In
Namibia conservancies have started to cooperate at regional level because they see the
advantages of sharing information, discussing common issues and speaking with a unified
voice. There is an opportunity to let the need for a national association emerge from these
developing regional groupings rather than force the issue through the premature provision of
funding and support specifically aimed at a national body.
3.6 Sustainability
Both the CAMPFIRE Association and BOCOBONET are facing a sustainability crisis. The
main sources of donor funding for both organisations end in 2002 and new funding has not
been secured. The CAMPFIRE Association has had to reduce staff and cut back on functions
that were paid for with donor funds. Neither organisation raises sufficient income internally
(e.g. through initial registration fees, annual subscriptions or payments for services) to cover
its costs. The inescapable conclusion is that the provision of large amounts of donor funding
has led to the initiation of several activities that the associations cannot pay for themselves if
outside funding is withdrawn. In the case of the CAMPFIRE Association, the sustainability
issue is closely linked to the decisions that it took regarding its main focus and functions. By
taking on implementation roles such as training, institutional development, capacity building
etc., the association automatically increased their funding requirements far beyond what is
necessary for advocacy and representing members’ interests and far beyond what it can
afford from own funding sources. BOCOBONET developed some of its activities according
to what donor funding was available for, which was also not a good foundation for
sustainability
12
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
4. OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The options and recommendations set out below have been derived from the lessons set out
in the previous chapter and the recommendations for establishing a CBO association that
emerged from the case study interviews contained in the annexes.
4.1 Roles and functions
Clear and limited functions. An emerging CBO association should identify clear, but limited
functions. This will help to provide focus in terms of activities and funding requirements.

It is recommended that a Namibian Conservancy Association should focus on
representing its members’ interests within the CBNRM programme and broader society.
It should focus on advocacy on behalf of its members, particularly with regard to policy
and legislation affecting their rights and duties, networking, communication and
information dissemination.

Ensure that the association does not create an unnecessary duplication of services.
Lead agency. The Namibian CBNRM partners should consider how the emergence of a CBO
association influences the existing relationships within the CBNRM programme. The
CAMPFIRE Association has been recognised as the lead agency within the CAMPFIRE
Programme, and BOCOBONET would like to take a leading role in CBNRM in Botswana.
The rationale for this approach is that the beneficiaries of CBNRM – local communities –
should be in control of the activities designed to benefit and assist them. If their
representative organisation is playing the leading role within the CBNRM programme, this
will give the communities greater ownership over the overall process. This approach was
advocated for Namibia by the Mid Term Review (MTR) of the Living in a Finite
Environment (LIFE) Project (Child et al 2001). The LIFE MTR proposed putting a national
conservancy association at the centre of the CBNRM programme with NACSO and the
government providing support4. The establishment of a conservancy association as a lead
agency was predicated by the MTR on conservancies being organised as sound participatory
democratic institutions. However, the MTR was silent as to how the new relationships would
be formally structured in order to maintain cohesion and collaboration. It was also silent on
the need for internal accountability within the conservancy association to avoid the problem
of the secretariat driving the association, rather than the membership. The following is
therefore recommended if a national level conservancy association emerges and is established
as the lead agency within the Namibian CBNRM programme:

A new collaborative forum should be established which brings together NACSO and the
national conservancy association regularly to discuss, plan, coordinate activities and
strategise. The meetings of these two groupings should be chaired by the conservancy
association which should be recognised as providing overall leadership for the CBNRM
programme. The member conservancies should define this leadership role. Under these
arrangements, NACSO and the conservancy association would hold their own meetings to
coordinate and plan their activities, but then meet for overall programme coordination.
This forum could include other organisations that might provide support to communal
4
This is perhaps an artificial distinction between NACSO and government as government is part of
NACSO
13
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
area conservancies that might not necessarily be part of NACSO (e.g. the Conservancy
Association of Namibia [CANAM] that represents freehold conservancies)5.

The conservancy association secretariat should be fully accountable to members so that
the members drive the leadership role of the association within the CBNRM programme,
rather than leadership being assumed by a semi-autonomous, largely unaccountable
secretariat.
4.2 Institutional structure
Strong regional associations. Experience from the region points to the need for strong
regional associations to provide the building blocks for a national association. Such an
approach can promote better accountability and better communication and information
dissemination. It also makes sense in terms of Namibia’s regional diversity.

It is recommended that support for the development of strong, accountable regional
associations should precede support for the development of a national association6. Allow
a strong call for a national association to emerge from the regions.
Primacy of conservancies and an Executive Committee. If a national association is
established, the institutional model followed by other associations within the region is
probably appropriate. However, the primacy of the conservancies and an Executive
Committee should be emphasised over the secretariat.

It is recommended that the ultimate governing body of a national conservancy association
should be the annual general meeting of members. The members should appoint an
Executive Committee whose primary function should be supervision of the Secretariat. All
conservancies grouped in regional associations should attend the AGM. The regional
associations should be for coordination, planning and discussion purposes, rather than
representational i.e. the AGM of all conservancies elects the Executive Committee and
not representatives of regional associations7.
The institutional structure of a national conservancy association could therefore be as
suggested in Figure 1.
5
CANAM can potentially be a useful ally of a national conservancy association, or regional
associations. It can promote links between freehold and communal conservancies amongst its
members and there might be technical support that it can also provide. Initial links should be explored
once a communal structure is in place, but the communal structure should retain its autonomy and not
become overwhelmed by the freehold association.
6 This support should not be in the form of funding regional offices, vehicles and other
infrastructure/equipment. Use should be made of existing conservancy facilities and equipment.
7 The aim here is to promote “participatory” democracy so that each conservancy can attend the AGM
and have its voice heard. This would not be possible if regional associations were to send
representatives to an AGM.
14
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
4.3 Accountability to members
Clear mechanisms need to be put in place to ensure that a conservancy association has high
levels of accountability. The secretariat needs to be accountable to members, as does the
Executive Committee.
Accountability of the Executive Committee to members. The usual mechanisms should be in
place to ensure accountability such as annual reporting to the AGM on activities and financial
statements, annual elections etc.
Accountability of the secretariat to members. Apart from the usual reporting procedures (e.g.
quarterly to the Executive Committee and to the AGM) the following is recommended to
ensure that the secretariat is accountable to the Executive Committee and broad membership:



That the secretariat is kept small (e.g. an Executive Secretary and an Administrative
Officer).
That even if donor funding is used for certain activities, the salaries of the core staff
should be paid from the association’s own funding (this should help make it clear that the
secretariat is accountable to the membership and not donors or NGOs).
Clear terms of reference/job descriptions with performance indicators should be
developed for the secretariat. The Executive Committee should carry out an annual
evaluation of the performance of the secretariat against the terms of reference and
indicators.
4.4 Communication and linkages with relevant partners
Recognising existing organisations and developing partnerships. A new conservancy
association should clearly recognise the existing work done by NGOs and other
environmental institutions. The association should try to identify the needs of its members
and then enter into partnerships with other implementing bodies to get those needs addressed.
In many respects the development of good relationships and links with other organisations
will depend upon the definition of clear roles and responsibilities of the association so that
there is little or no overlap of activities or competition for funding.
It is recommended that the main channel for communication and links with relevant partners
should be through the regular forum proposed in the section on the association as lead
agency above. Through this forum and discussions with individual service providers, the
association should seek to develop partnerships that will enable the needs of its members to
be met.
4.5 Relationships with other regional and national bodies
Links with national bodies

The association should seek to develop relationships with other relevant bodies where
appropriate. One of the tasks of the secretariat should be to promote knowledge about the
15
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
association as widely as possible among NGOs, donors, development agencies,
government departments etc. Specific links should be developed with the Conservancy
Association of Namibia (CANAM) that represents the freehold conservancies.
Links with regional bodies

The association should actively pursue links with similar bodies in the region such as
BOCOBONET and the CAMPFIRE Association. There could be opportunities for joint
advocacy at a SADC and other international levels (e.g. CITES). In its formative stages
representatives of a Namibian association should visit these organisations to gain first
hand experience of lessons learned, constraints and opportunities.
4.6 Funding and sustainability
Secure and sustainable financial base. A new conservancy association will need to ensure that
it has a secure and sustainable funding base from the start. All stakeholders – conservancies,
NGOs, donors and government – need to be entirely realistic about financial sustainability.

It is recommended that income from membership be viewed as the core funding of the
association. Membership income should at the very least cover the full costs of staff,
office space, and general operating costs. This means that core activities (those that
members are most willing to pay for) should be affordable without outside assistance.
Perhaps a general rule should be that if members cannot or will not pay for an activity,
then don’t do it8.

It is recommended that a simple and realistic financial feasibility study be undertaken to
estimate how much income an association could raise annually and what staffing and
activities could be supported with this income. If the result is that conservancies cannot
afford to support their own association, and are unlikely to, even with increased
membership, then this might indicate that a national association should not be formed,
unless there are overwhelming arguments for some form of external subsidy. It should
then be recognised that such a subsidy might be required in perpetuity. (The alternative
to a perpetual subsidy could be an endowment from which interest could be used to
supplement membership fees).

Assuming that an association is formed that has secure core funding of its own, donor
funds could be sought for specific sets of activities with limited time spans that will add
value to the association’s core activities. If this requires the hiring of additional staff, it
should be on the basis of limited time contracts for the duration of the specific activity.
Such staff should not be viewed as core personnel on the permanent personnel
establishment.
8
This might be a principle for NACSO to consider. Each member organisation could contribute to the
funding of core secretariat personnel. Donor funding could be used for any additional staff or
activities. Even if NACSO members’ funding originates with donors, it should increase accountability
and a sense of fiscal prudence if they have to use some of this funding to cover the costs of their own
organisation.
16
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
5. REFERENCES
ADF (1999) Grant Agreement between the Botswana Community Based Organisation
Network and the African Development Foundation. African Development Foundation,
Washington, D.C.
BOCOBONET (1999a) Constitution of the Botswana Community Based Organisation
Network. Botswana Community Based Organisation Network, Gaborone.
BOCOBONET (1999b) BOCOBONET Strategic Plan 2000-2005. Botswana Community
Based Organisation Network. Gaborone.
BOCOBONET (1999c) BOCOBONET 1999 Annual Report. Botswana Community Based
Organisation Network, Gaborone.
CAMPFIRE Association (1999-2000) Annual Report.
CAMPFIRE Association (2000-2001) Annual Report.
Child B, Page K, Taylor G, Winterbottom B, /Awarab K, with Bartel P and Grimm C (2001)
Mid-Term Review of LIFE-II and Assessment of the Namibia National CBNRM Programme.
USAID, Windhoek
17
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
A number of persons have provided information and ideas for this report and their
contributions are gratefully acknowledged.
18
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
7. FIGURES AND ANNEXES
FIGURE 1
PROPOSED NATIONAL CONSERVANCY ASSOCIATION INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE & SOME
SUGGESTED ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES
-
-
-
CONSERVANCIES
Combine in regional associations
Hold AGM
Elect Executive Committee
Hold Exec. Com. Accountable
Coordinate service providers
REGIONAL ASSOCIATIONS
Meet to discuss, plan and coordinate
Take regional issues to AGM
Provide information to/receive information
from Exec.Com. & Secretariat
Coordinate regional service providers
CONSERVANCY ASSOCIATION AGM
(all conservancies)
Elects Executive Committee
Holds Exec. Com. & Secretariat
accountable (receives annual reports,
financial statements etc.)
Provides overall direction for assn.
ASSOCIATION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
-
Appoints & supervises Secretariat
Holds Secretariat accountable
Submits annual report, financial
statements etc. to AGM
Responsible for Assn. funds & property
Provides leadership for CBNRM
programme
SECRETARIAT
-
Day to day operation
Liaison with service providers
Information/communication
Networking
Advocacy/lobbying
Contracting short-term support for specific activities
19
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
ANNEXE A. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES
1. THE BOCOBONET CASE FROM BOTSWANA
Background
In Botswana, various, policies, pieces of legislation, and government directives governing the
wildlife and tourism sectors provide the framework for allowing rural communities to gain
user rights over wildlife and tourism on their land and to benefit from the commercial
exploitation of these resources within the bounds of sustainability. The Tribal Land Board
may grant communities, if they have formed a representative, accountable and legal entity,
such as a community trust. The Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP) will also
award the community a wildlife quota for hunting purposes if the community meets the same
condition. The award of leases to communities depends on the community living in or
adjacent to a controlled hunting area (CHA) which has been designated for community use.
The approach is aimed partly at promoting rural development and partly at promoting
conservation outside of protected areas. Not only are communities expected to benefit from
the use of the resource, they are also expected to manage the resource sustainably.
Several communities have formed trusts and have received resource leases and wildlife
quotas. Most trusts focus on the use of wildlife for hunting and photographic safaris and have
entered into joint ventures with the private sector for these purposes. Some trusts have been
formed by communities wishing to manage other resources such as veld products.
Community Trusts are able to negotiate directly with the private sector and to retain the
income from contracts for hunting and tourism. However, in early 2001 the government
issued an edict that the revenues accruing to community trusts from wildlife and tourism be
held in trust for them by district councils. This edict has been resisted and communities have
so far managed to retain their income.
The initiative to give communities use rights for wildlife and tourism came from the USAIDfunded Natural Resource Management Project (NRMP) which began in 1989 and ended in
1999.
Brief history of the association
BOCOBONET was registered in February 1999 as an association that would represent the
interests of Community-based Organisations (CBOs) and Trusts that were involved in
CBNRM.
The initiative for the association came from the NRMP which had been providing technical
support to the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP) on implementing
Botswana’s CBNRM approach. The NRMP had also been providing direct support to a
number of CBOs. Part of the rationale for the formation of BOCOBONET was to ensure that
there would be some continuity after the end of NRMP and the CBOs that had been
20
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
established would have some kind of support base. One of the implementing agencies funded
by the NRMP, IRCE/PACT, was tasked with setting up this support base.
It is not clear why BOCOBONET was registered as an association and not as a ‘trust’. Time
may have been a factor, as the initiating body, IRCE/PACT, was closing its Botswana office
in 1999. It might have been easier to register as an ‘Association’. Some consideration is
being given to registering BOCOBONET as a trust on the grounds that this will be more
attractive to donors. On the other hand, there is no evidence to suggest that BOCOBONET
has been less favoured by donors because of its ‘association’ status.
The main driving force behind the formation of the association seems to have been the
NRMP through IRCE/PACT, which guided the process of setting up the association.
IRCE/PACT provided the funding for the mobilization/formation process.
In 1997 IRCE/PACT toured the country and met with various CBOs (including non-wildlife
CBOs) to discuss the idea of an association. A workshop was then held to discuss the idea
and an interim committee with representatives from 10 CBOs was formed. This was
followed by study tours to Namibia (NACOBTA), Zimbabwe (CAMPFIRE Association) and
South Africa. Three follow-up workshops were held to discuss the constitution, objectives
etc and by November 1998 a document had been agreed and finalized. The interim
committee appointed staff in December 1998 and in effect BOCOBONET started functioning
in early 1999.
One of the first main tasks of the Association was to expand its membership base. In
1999/2000 the executive toured the country, holding community meetings, to explain its
purpose and register interested CBOs. It currently has 55 registered members.
Structure of the association
BOCOBONET has an Annual General Meeting of member CBOs. They elect a Committee
of 14 members, which meets on a quarterly basis. The committee elects an Executive
consisting of Chair, Vice-Chair, Secretary, Vice-Secretary and Treasurer that meets as
required. The committee appoints an Executive Secretary who acts as a secretariat to the
committee and reports every quarter on progress and financial issues. Audited financial
reports are submitted to the AGM.
Staffing situation: Executive Secretary who supervises a Training Coordinator and an
Administration Officer/Book-keeper.
BOCOBONET has ambitious plans for a much expanded staff that would be comprised, at
the headquarters level, of the Executive Secretary, Deputy Executive Secretary, Marketing
Officer, Information Officer, Training Coordinator, Service and Loans Officer, and
Accountant, plus a number of regional offices with technical staff.
Membership is open to any CBO that is committed to the objectives and functions of
BOCOBONET. Provision is made for a category of associate member that is open to
individuals and NGOs.
21
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
The BOCOBONET strategic plan for 2000-2005 makes provision for the establishment of
regional committees to facilitate information flow, but these have not been established due to
a lack of capacity.
Roles, functions, authority and responsibilities of the association
In its mission statement contained in its constitution BOCOBONET says it will provide
quality services to its membership in the following areas: local and international networking,
lobbying and advocacy for its membership, information sharing and training, fund raising and
general assistance in natural resources management.
The association currently has the following core functions:
 Advocacy and lobbying
 Information gathering and dissemination (mainly in terms of the newsletter)
 Facilitating and coordinating the provision of technical services to CBOs
 Facilitating and coordinating training services to CBOs including a participatory training
approach with four modules: strategic planning (PRA), board training and constitution
development, financial management, and leadership.
 Networking with CBOs, NGOs and other CBNRM stakeholders
 Fund raising for organizational development
BOCOBONET has focused on all six areas but with varying degrees of intensity. Under its
funding agreement with the African Development Foundation, it took on the role of assisting
in the formation of 10 new CBOs in two years through participatory CBO formation
workshops. In 2001 BOCOBONET prepared a voluminous 15 Year Vision document. It has
come under criticism for proposing a considerable expansion of roles and staffing. The
vision document is being reviewed and was not available for scrutiny.
Accountability to members, reporting and communications
The Annual General Meeting of member CBOs is the ultimate governing body of the
association. The 14-member Board is elected at the AGM from member organisations. The
Board Executive Board reports to the overall Board and the Executive Secretary reports to
the Board every quarter, i.e. progress and financial reports. Audited financial reports are
submitted to the AGM. The Executive Secretary and other staff are on two-year contracts,
approved by the Board.
A bi-monthly newsletter is meant to be a main communication tool. BOCOBONET has had
difficulty producing this on a regular basis, and in 2001 there were only 1 or 2 issues. The
main problem is one of capacity. The main forms of communication have been through the
AGM and Board, occasional seminars, training workshops, and involvement in the
Ngamiland CBNRM Forum, and the National CBNRM Forum.
22
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Links to partner organisations
There is clearly some recognition of BOCOBONET’s role by government in so far as it has
been invited to participate in reference groups on such studies as the Rural Development
Policy Review, Formulation of a Poverty Alleviation Strategy, the National Development
Plan Reference Group, and Vision 2016 Reference Group. CBNRM is regarded as a
significant part of Botswana’s overall development strategy, as demonstrated by its inclusion
in National Development Plan 8.
BOCOBONET is a member of the Ngamiland CBNRM Forum, and the National CBNRM
Forum where it interacts with other stakeholders. However, relationships with NGOs have
become strained partly because of BOCOBONET’s funding situation, and to some extent a
lack of clarity in practice about its role. BOCOBONET is still trying to establish itself as the
CBO representation body.
There have been occasional
NACOBTA.
linkages with similar organisations in the region, such as
Key strengths of the association
One of the association’s strengths would appear to be in the field of advocacy and lobbying.
BOCOBONET regards its main areas of success as (a) assisting in getting the ban on the
hunting of lions (and other wild cats) modified. The ban was imposed in 2001 but in 2002
some CBOs were given quotas that included some wild cats (although not lions); and (b)
postponement of the implementation of the controversial Ministry of Local Government
directive that said CBO funds should be held in trust by district councils.
Key weaknesses of the association
A number of weaknesses can be identified:
 A weak funding base giving rise to questions about sustainability - fund raising is an
area in which the association needs to develop technical capacity
 A dilution of focus - partly dictated by the funding situation but a perception by the
BOCOBONET management that BOCOBONET should provide a broader range of
support services. It perhaps reflects the stage of organizational development and its
maturity
 A lack of implementation capacity resulting in weak development of some functions
e.g. coordinating technical assistance, coordinating training assistance to CBOs,
information dissemination
 Networking has also been a weak area and there seems to be an element of
competition between BOCOBONET and environmental NGOs, possibly reflecting its
financial insecurity and attempts to establish itself as a new player in the NGO arena
23
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Funding and Sustainability
Initial funding came from IRCE/PACT. Core costs (salaries, office rent, etc) were covered
for a period of 9 months. The limited period of the funding was because of the withdrawal of
IRCE/PACT from Botswana. In effect, this meant that BOCOBONET did not have the
opportunity to get established before it had to start searching for donor funds. Without a
track record this is difficult.
The main source of funding has been from the African Development Foundation (ADF). A
grant of Pula 1,135,548 was given for the period Sept 1999 – March 2002. The ADF grant
was aimed at assisting BOCOBONET develop and test participatory approaches with CBOs
in developing natural resource based enterprises. There was also funding for a participatory
training approach. BOCOBONET has been one of the main recipients of the SNV/IUCN
CBNRM Support Programme.
The support includes a total of P80,000 towards
BOCOBONET costs (unspecified) and technical assistance. Approximately 12 months of
direct Technical Assistance was given in the form of a National SNV Adviser. Additional
assistance has been given in the form of consultancy support, workshop support, etc. The
Mid Term Evaluation of the CBNRM Support Programme found that the component related
to BOCOBONET was the least successful in terms of implementation.
UNDP through the National Conservation Strategy Agency (NCSA) has provided Pula
300,000 for two years ending September 2002. This includes administration, development of
advocacy materials, newsletter production, workshops, travel to regional meetings, and
development of a website. A further Pula 65,000 over two years ending September 2002 was
received from the Global Environmental Fund.
BOCOBONET is working on a number of requests for further funding. The association’s
Executive Secretary currently describes the funding situation as difficult, particularly in terms
of covering core costs. All existing donor support will come to an end in September 2002,
with the exception of the CBNRM Support Programme. The latter, however, does not
provide any significant direct financial support. Thus, unless new donor financing is found
that will include or enable BOCOBONET to cover core costs, its financial situation in
September will be critical. It is already in survival mode.
Its difficulties seem to be a result of (a) insufficient core funding period at the outset, (b)
financial management problems and (c) high operating costs.
Obtaining funding, particularly core funding, has been a major difficulty for BOCOBONET.
Fund raising has been ranked as the top priority area for technical assistance from the
CBNRM Support Programme over the remaining 18 months of that Programme.
BOCOBONET attributes the difficulty of finding appropriate financial support to:
 Internal capacity. Fund raising, along with implementing the main functions of
BOCOBONET, rests with the Executive Secretary
 Donor withdrawal from Botswana. The expectation (from donors) that government
would fill the ‘gap’ by providing financial assistance to NGOs has been slow in
coming.
 Lack of a track record. The IRCE/PACT funding for 9 months did not give
BOCOBONET the time to establish itself as a credible organization.
24
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1


May 2002
The nature of BOCOBONET’s functions. It is not a direct implementing body. This
is less attractive to donors
Competition between environmental NGOs in Botswana for limited funds.
Membership fees are now charged. Currently they are comprised of a registration fee (for
new members) of Pula 750 and an annual subscription of Pula 200. These fees from member
organizations make no significant contribution to operational costs. The income from 55
members paying Pula 200 per year yields only Pula 11,000, which does not cover staff costs.
In Nov 2001 the issue of BOCOBONET’s financial situation was discussed at a meeting of
members. The situation remains unresolved. Members are discussing the possibility of
raising Pula 300,000 over 2 years towards constructing a HQ building near Gaborone. It is
unclear in what detail member financial support was discussed. One issue that apparently
arose was the level of contribution by members – some CBOs have more financial resources
than others. According to the associations’ strategic plan for 2000-2005, the intention is to
charge members for direct services on a cost recovery basis. The plan recognises the need for
the association to become self-sustaining.
According to the Executive Secretary, the member contribution is a sticking point with
government in terms of funding. Government argues that CBOs have money that they are not
utilizing so why can they not contribute towards their own organization. BOCOBONET
plans to continue to lobby its members but according to the Executive Secretary, it is difficult
to convince them “because they do not feel the benefit of BOCOBONET’s services.”
Recommendations for anyone supporting the start of a new national association

Begin with a secure financial base, including sound financial management. This has been
a major weakness/constraint for BOCOBONET. The lack of funding for core costs has
been a pre-occupation and influenced how the organization operates and thinks.

Establish principles/regulations on how members will contribute financially. This does
not appear to have been done in the case of BOCOBONET, and it now is a challenge to
get CBOs to think in terms of making significant financial contribution towards
supporting their own organization. Financial sustainability planning should be done from
the outset.

Assuming that a secure financial base has been established, recruit relevant and
experienced staff from the outset.

Define clear but limited functions. BOCOBONET’s lobbying and advocacy role seems
to be undefined. So far it has been limited to lobbying government on issues that
negatively affect CBOs. Little attention seems to have been paid to educating CBOs on
their role in making the CBNRM strategy work.

Build partnerships. Clear recognition should be given to the existing work done by NGOs
and other environmental institutions. An association like BOCOBONET should be trying
to identify the needs of its members and then entering into partnerships with other
implementing bodies to get those needs addressed.
25
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1

May 2002
Ensure 0rganisational simplicity. BOCOBONET has grand plans. This does not help
their credibility. Better contract in services than try and provide all the answers yourself.
2. THE COMMUNITY RESOURCE BOARD ASSOCIATIONS IN ZAMBIA
Background
From 1984-1988 Zambia’s former National Parks and Wildlife Services (NPWS) undertook a
pilot scheme in Lupande Game Management Area (GMA) in the Luangwa valley, which
worked out and tested administrative designs that allowed communities to support
conservation in their areas. The ADMADE (Administrative Management Design for Game
Management Areas) concept was adopted as the national program for CBNRM. It was
designed to improve the management of wildlife in GMAs with a foundation built on the
primary assumption that the sustainable management of wildlife in GMAs would improve if
communities could play a central role in it’s utilisation. It was also believed that communities
would respond to the challenge of local management provided that they received benefits
through a share of the revenue collected by NPWS through consumptive wildlife utilisation.
The community structures established to receive income and manage wildlife under the
ADMADE Programme have evolved over time. The current ADMADE structure is based
largely on community organisation centred on Village Area Groups (VAGs). A VAG is
defined by a geographic area and represents all households living within its boundary. This
ranges from 500 to 1500 people. An ADMADE unit consists of all the VAGs in a prescribed
area and corresponds to one or more chief’s boundaries. At the head of this structure is a
democratically elected leadership referred to as the Community Resource Board (CRB)
provided for under the Zambian Wildlife Act. The CRBs are recognised as legal entities
representing the local community in their respective areas.
According to the Wildlife Act of 1998, a board comprises:
a. Not more than ten but not less than seven representatives from the local community
who shall be elected by the local community
b. One representative of the local authority in the area
c. A representative of the chief in whose area a Board is established to represent the
chief.
Other members of an ADMADE unit include:
a. Chiefs
b. Zambian Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) Officer (Unit Leader)
c. Resource Management Committee (made up of elected members from each VAG)
d. Community Development Committee
e. Bookkeepers (employed by CRB)
f. Financial Management Committee (made up of members from each VAG)
g. Village Scouts
There are currently 22 CRBs existing in Zambia. None of the CRBs have as yet been
registered by ZAWA.
26
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Brief History of the Zambian CRB Association
The impetus for the establishment of a CRB Association in Zambia seems to have come from
a decline in capacity of ZAWA in the field. At a wildlife sector stakeholder meeting held by
CONASA in July 2001, the chair of one of the CRBs presented a paper on the need for a
CRB association. He said that the CRB leaders had discussed the recent breakdown of
wildlife management by ZAWA in their areas. The formation of a CRB Association was
tabled as a means through which CRB leaders could more effectively promote their views
and concerns to Government.
CBNRM implementers in Zambia believe community federations such as a CRB association
would strengthen the capacity of CRBs to support CBNRM. They also believe such an
association would increase the level of interaction between the community groups amongst
themselves and with NGOs, private sector, Government and ZAWA. The formation of an
association would enable the negotiation of collaborative management agreements, which are
called for in the 1998 Wildlife Act.
The main reasons for forming an association were the following (CONASA 2001):
 The community wanted to speak with one voice on matters concerning wildlife
conservation countrywide.
 The Association would reduce risks of misunderstanding between government and
community leaders on wildlife issues.
 The Association would make the CRBs more organised and effective in their natural
resource management.
 It would seek membership status on ZAWA Board to ensure community
representation on issues affecting community interests.
 It would reduce unfair trade practices between rural communities and private sector
partners.
 It would assist the Government in evaluating the effectiveness of existing policies and
regulations in wildlife conservation.
 It would help to increase opportunities for negotiating joint ventures between the
community and private sector.
The wildlife stakeholders’ meeting agreed that a CRB Association should be formed and
participants said they would support the establishment of such an association. Some key
points were identified for consideration in the formation of the CRB Association. It was
suggested by the meeting that the proposed CRB Association should have wildlife as its main
focus since it was being proposed under the provisions of the Zambia Wildlife Act No 12 of
1998. It was also suggested that association should start with the areas that had CRBs already
and expand as they became more established. The point was made that communities should
have a sense of ownership of the Association since they were the ones forming it. Linkages
with other stakeholders and supporters as well as mechanisms for funding should be
developed. It was emphasised that the Association should be strong at grassroots level before
it took on a national identity.
Currently CONASA is facilitating the formation of the CRB association, through provision of
training on such issues as how to write a constitution and the administrative aspects of
running the association. CONASA is also helping the CRBs to raise funding for the
association. Last year a private sector organization promised to pay the registration fees for
27
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
the association once it was ready to register. However, due to lack of funds, communication
and logistical problems, the CRB leaders have decided to first form regional associations, i.e.
Kafue National Park CRB association, Luangwa National Park CRB association etc.
CONASA is currently providing training for the Kafue National Park group which falls
within the CONASA project area. The Luangwa valley group is also trying to raise funds to
help them form an association. The aim is that eventually there will be a national CRB
association to act as the coordinating body for the regional associations
An obstacle facing the registration of the associations is the pending legal registration of
CRBs with ZAWA. No CRB has been registered with ZAWA, due to the administrative
problems being faced by the institution. According to the Wildlife Act, 1998, the CRBs
should be registered with ZAWA before they can be recognised as legal entities. Another
obstacle is that some of the individual CRBs do not have constitutions and CONASA is
assisting those in the Kafue area without constitutions to develop appropriate constitutions.
The regional CRBs have not been registered yet.
Roles, functions, authority and responsibility of the association
The functions of the regional group of CRBs will be firstly to represent CRB interests as a
whole, and also to strengthen the capacity of the CRBs to interact more effectively with other
stakeholders and government. These interactions have taken place in a rather inefficient way
in the past as an individual CRB leader would travel long distances to Lusaka to meet with
ZAWA, the Government and others to raise their individual concerns, which might not be
afforded much attention. It is also seen by CONASA as more strategic and more efficient for
the project to deal with an association rather than with individual CRBs.
3. THE CAMPFIRE ASSOCIATION IN ZIMBABWE
Background
Under Zimbabwe’s CAMPFIRE Programme, wildlife legislation gives “appropriate
authority” over game animals to freehold farmers and to Rural District Councils (RDCs) on
communal land. Appropriate authority gives the RDCs (which are elected local government
structures) the right to sell a trophy hunting quota to a hunting company and retain the
income from the sale of the quota. RDCs are also able to enter into joint ventures with the
private sector for tourism development. According to guidelines provided by the wildlife
authorities, the RDCs are expected to devolve authority to a lower and smaller level of
administration called the “ward”. A key principle of the CAMPFIRE Programme is that
“producer” communities, i.e. communities that have wildlife on their land and suffer the costs
of living with wildlife, should gain the benefits of wildlife utilisation. Income from trophy
hunting and tourism is therefore expected to go to these “producer” communities. Some
RDCs have devolved authority to the ward level and allow income to reach the “producer”
communities, while others retain control and use wildlife income for general purposes within
their district, even in areas where there is no wildlife.
28
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
As the RDC is the administrative unit to which “appropriate authority” over wildlife is
devolved by central government, it is the RDCs that have formed a national association in
Zimbabwe to represent their interests. This organisation is called the “CAMPFIRE
Association”.
Brief history of the association
The association grew out of a need for the RDCs with appropriate authority over wildlife to
coordinate activities, deal jointly with support organisations such as NGOs and donors, and
facilitate the flow and exchange of information. The idea of an association was supported
strongly by the CAMPFIRE implementing agencies. It seems to have emerged as a result of a
need identified by the implementers and recognised by the RDCs. The Association has grown
considerably since it was established in 1991 when four RDCs were members. By 1992 there
were 12 and by early 2002, 48 of the 57 RDCs in Zimbabwe had become members of the
association. Although the original focus was on RDCs with appropriate authority over
wildlife, members include councils with communities that derive income from fisheries,
forestry, ecotourism and resources such as mopane worms.
Originally, the CAMPFIRE programme was guided by a collaborative group of organisations
involved in programme implementation and led by the Department of National Parks and
Wildlife Management (DNPWM). The CAMPFIRE Association was a member of this group,
but as the association grew in strength and began to assert itself, it was recognised as the lead
agency in the programme. The implementing agencies reorganised themselves as the
“CAMPFIRE Service Providers”.
Particularly due to the availability of considerable amounts of donor funding (primarily from
USAID) the association expanded its roles and responsibilities beyond the original ones of
coordination, networking and advocacy. It began to develop the role of service provider to
councils alongside the other service providers in the CAMPFIRE Programme. Once donor
funding was reduced, the association had to reconsider its role as service provider and shed
some of these activities.
Structure of the association
The association has four categories of membership: full, associate, honorary and ex-officio.
Only the RDCs can be full members. As part of its attempt to improve its sustainability, the
association is considering bringing in private sector organisations such as hunters’
associations in other categories of membership. There is also a possibility that membership
would be extended to communities at a lower level than the councils.
A General Assembly of members is the ultimate authority and governing entity of the
association. The Board of Management formulates policy to guide the day-to-day
management of the association’s affairs and reports to the General Assembly.
The
Secretariat, headed by a Programme Manager (formerly Director), carries out the day-to-day
operations of the association and reports to the Board of Management. Over the past 10 years,
the Secretariat has gone through periods of expansion and contraction in response to the
needs of members and the availability of donor funds. The Secretariat initially consisted of a
29
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Director, a private secretary to the Director, and an administrator. This small nucleus of staff
grew to 15 at the peak of donor funding and in addition to the original four positions included
a Projects Officer, a Financial Manager, a Monitoring and Evaluation Officer and an
Information and Communications Officer
Due to the phasing out of donor funding, the association has recognised the need to downsize
the secretariat. Currently there is a Programme Manager (replacing the former position of
Director), who provides strategic leadership, directs day-to-day operations, supervises the
secretariat staff, and is responsible for ensuring the future sustainability of the association. A
Business Development and Communications Officer is responsible for planning with regard
to finance, marketing and public relations. The Finance Officer is responsible for the
financial accounts and statements. There are four support staff: A finance and administrative
clerk; a programme assistant, who provides secretarial services to the Programme Manager
and general administrative support to the Secretariat; a receptionist and a driver.
Roles, functions, authority and responsibilities of the association
The association currently has the following core functions:
 To represent its members and carry out advocacy on their behalf in interactions with other
stakeholders such as government and service providers
 To facilitate communications among members and externally
 To carry out advocacy on behalf of the overall CAMPFIRE programme
 To act as the lead agency and drive the development of the overall policy and direction of
CAMPFIRE
 To coordinate donor support to CAMPFIRE
 To work with Development Associates (the United States Contractor) on the allocation
of USAID CAMPFIRE Development Fund (CDF) grants9
 To facilitate exposure visits between councils in Zimbabwe and to other countries
Accountability to members, reporting and communications
Essentially, the AGM of members is the main vehicle for accountability within the
association. The AGM elects the board, which then takes executive decisions such as
approving the plans and recommendations of the secretariat. However, the system has not
worked effectively because communications between the Board and members has not been
good. The Secretariat has tended to be accountable to its main donor, USAID, rather than its
membership. As a result it became the dominant component of the association. In order to
improve accountability, the association has promoted the establishment of 5 regional
groupings of RDCs to promote better communication and coordination. These regional
groups meet twice a year and review regional plans and progress. The regions also present a
regional report at the AGM.
Communication within the association takes place through regular circulars issued by the
secretariat and ad hoc meetings.
9
USAID has set up the CDF to enable RDCs and others to access funds for infrastructure and other
projects
30
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
Links to partner organisations
Formal meetings used to be held regularly by the CAMPFIRE Collaborative Group, which
brought the major stakeholders together for coordination purposes. Now that the collaborative
group is no longer operational, such meetings are no longer held. Coordination tends to take
place through the meetings of the CDF, but only brings together those administering the fund
and those receiving the funds, rather than all stakeholders. The association has direct links to
the DNPWM through monthly CDF project management meetings and interactions over
issues such as CITES and hunting quotas.
Key strengths of the association
According to the current programme manager, the association is the only “community-based”
organisation in Zimbabwe with such a wide base across the country. The association has
good relationships with its members, who give the association good support. The association
has a unique position in Zimbabwe because of its membership and is well placed to attract
further support. The association has effectively represented its members interests to
government (e.g. holding a workshop on key CBNRM issues for Parliamentarians) and at
international fora such as CITES. The association played a major role in the advocacy and
propaganda battle that took place around the listing of elephants at CITES over the past seven
years.
Key weaknesses of the association
The key weakness identified by a number of individuals has been donor dependency and the
failure of the association to plan for when donor funding would be reduced. The expansion of
the programme in terms of staff and functions was a direct result of the injection of large
amounts of donor funding. It was not related to the ability of the association to pay for itself.
The current programme manager believes some of the functions that the association took on,
such as monitoring and evaluation, institutional strengthening and training could have been
carried out by service providers within the CAMPFIRE Programme. Monitoring and
Evaluation, has now, for example, been taken on by WWF Zimbabwe. The association faces
a “sustainability crisis” which poses question marks over its future. He also believes that the
association has suffered from management problems that led to the failure to develop and
adhere to strategic plans and meet goals.
Funding and Sustainability
Apart from donor funding, which still accounts for about 50% of income, the association also
derives income from membership fees which have been set at a fixed amount (ZD15 00010)
for some years. The association also collects a 2% levy on income that members derive from
income generation activities up to a maximum of ZD28 000 (about ND933 at the most
accurate of the parallel exchange rates). Because the association was previously cushioned by
donor funding, it has not until recently felt it necessary to review the membership fee or the
10
ZD15 000 = approx. ND1 875 at the official exchange rate and ND882 and ND500 at various
parallel rates which are a more accurate indicator of value of the ZD
31
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
levy. It now needs to do this in the face of declining donor funding and rampant inflation.
The association also did not carry out any checks to see if the income provided by members
was in fact equal to 2% of their income from natural resource use. A study by an accounting
firm revealed that RDCs tended to pay the 2% on their hunting revenue, but not on income
from photographic tourism, sale of hides, timber etc. Some income is also received from
levies on ivory sales by RDCs
According to current Programme Manager, the association, flush with donor money, spent all
its income and did not plan for the future, when donor money would dry up. Once the current
USAID funding ends in September 2001, it is not clear how the association will pay for itself.
It will only be able to meet 50% of its current requirements, which have already been
reduced.
It is hoped that developing new types of non-decision-making membership will bring
additional funds. For example a category of “Friends of CAMPFIRE” could be established
where individuals or organisations would pay a membership fee, but not be able to vote at
meetings.
Another possible source of future funding is from a proposed endowment trust fund for the
overall CAMPFIRE programme. The association would be able to request funds for recurrent
costs from the trust.
Recommendations for anyone supporting the start of a new national association






Put in place sustainable funding strategies from the start. Use donor funds as a stepping
stone, but don’t be over-reliant on them. Build a set of activities that can survive without
donor funding. Operate with the minimum of donor support and identify the services that
members will be most willing to pay for
Ensure that the association does not create an unnecessary duplication of services. Keep
the Secretariat lean and mean
The association should be “home-grown” and based on local values
Try to develop strong regional chapters before “going national”. This can help hold the
national level in check so it does not become too strong and dominant. Decide on what
the regional chapters should handle and what should be handled at the national level
Partnerships with the freehold sector should be explored as both can learn from each other
The CAMPFIRE Association would be open to visits by Namibian CBO representatives
who want to find out more about the association
32
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
ANNEXE B. PERSONS CONSULTED
Martin Byram
Champion Chinoyi
Andee Davidson
Mr Grobler
Charles Jonga
Susan Matambo
Marshall Murphree
Peter Tilley
Ernest Tshamekang
PEER Consultants, Botswana
Executive Director, Zimbabwe Trust
Institutional and Business Adviser, LIFE Project, Namibia
Namibian Agricultural Union
Programme Manager, CAMPFIRE Association, Zimbabwe
NGO Specialist, CONASA Project, Zambia
Chairman, CASS Trust, Zimbabwe
Chief of Party, CONASA project, Zambia
Executive Secretary, BOCOBONET, Botswana
33
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
ANNEXE C. CHECKLIST OF QUESTIONS USED IN INTERVIEWS
Lessons learned in the southern African region on the formation, structure, funding and
functioning of national associations to represent community-based organisations
(CBOs) working on common property natural resource management
Checklist of questions for semi-structured interviews
1.
2.
3.
4.
Why was the association formed? When?
Was its establishment due to demand from CBOs or driven by others (e.g. donors)
What support has it had from donors, NGOs etc?
How is the association structured (staffing, reporting and different levels, e.g. board of
trustees or coordinating committee)?
5. Has the structure changed over time? If so why?
6. What are the functions, authority and responsibility of the association? (Particularly
interested in issues of advocacy vs service provision. If a function is service provision to
CBOs, why was this taken on and can the association afford it?)
7. How does the association ensure that it is accountable to its members? (How do
managerial personnel get appointed, how often and how does the executive get appointed,
financial reporting to members, AGMs etc)
8. How does it communicate with its members?
9. How does it link with and communicate with other CBNRM partners (e.g. govt., NGOs
etc)
10. Key strengths of the association (with specific reference to the structure and its operation)
11. Key weaknesses (specifically what is not functioning effectively and efficiently, why, and
what would be the ideal situation)?
12. Funding levels and sustainability (what is current funding level, is it sufficient, where will
future funding come from, do members pay fees, can these fees cover costs, any other
sustainability issues)?
13. Relationships with any similar regional bodies (e.g. CAMPFIRE Association)?
14. Recommendations for anyone supporting the start of a similar association in Namibia
34
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1
May 2002
ANNEXE D. TERMS OF REFERENCE
Terms of Reference for a report on:
Lessons learned in the southern African region on the formation, structure, funding and
functioning of national associations to represent community-based CBOs working on
common-property natural resource management
Background
The national Community-based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) Programme in
Namibia has reached the stage where there are now 15 registered Conservancies and at least
25 emerging Conservancies. Each of these entities consists of members, a constitution (or
evolving constitution), a designated geographic area (or an area under discussion) and a
committee (or interim committee) elected or selected to represent the interests of its
members. Each of these entities constitutes a Community-based Organisation (CBO) that
aims to manage its natural resources in a sustainable and optimal way, with and for the
benefit of its members.
The 40 or so CBOs working within the CBNRM programme represent the interests of
perhaps 200,000 people over an area of about 10 million ha. Over the course of the past few
years, many of the CBOs have met on a regular basis to share experiences, to plan activities
of mutual benefit and to discuss future options. One issue that has begun to emerge strongly
is the need felt by the CBOs to form an Association – perhaps first at regional levels, but
leading to the national level. The reasons for the development of the Conservancy
Association(s) are: (a) advocacy – with government, support organisations and donors; (b)
facilitation of policy and its implementation, (c) guidance to the national programme, (d)
support to its members, etc.
NACSO, the Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations, has been requested
by the CBOs to provide them with some assistance in establishing an Association.
There is considerable experience within neighbouring countries (e.g. Zimbabwe, Botswana &
Zambia) on CBNRM CBO Associations. The purpose of this short consultancy is to obtain
pertinent lessons from these countries by examine the strengths and weaknesses of different
approaches, and to make recommendations to the Namibian CBOs.
Scope of work
A. The objective of this consultancy is to provide pertinent information to the registered and
emerging communal area Conservancy Representatives in Namibia on how they might
establish effective and efficient regional and/or national Conservancy Associations. The
work should draw on the experiences in neighbouring countries - Zimbabwe, Botswana
and Zambia – and address the pertinent issues that need to be addressed and borne in
mind, including:
 Roles and functions
 Institutional structure
 Accountability to members
 Communications and linkages with relevant partners
 Relationships with other regional and national bodies
35
NACSO Research Discussion Paper, No. 1

May 2002
Funding and sustainability
B. It is envisaged that the consultant will find an appropriately placed person in each of the
above-mentioned neighbouring countries to supply the relevant information. This
information would be prepared according to an established format, and would not require
more than one-days work per person per country.
C. The consultant would design the format, which would include sections such as:
 brief history of the development of the Association in each respective country;
 structure of the Association with explanations as to why this structure emerged;
 roles, functions, authority and responsibilities of the Association;
 accountability to members, reporting and communications;
 key strengths of the Association – with specific reference to the way it is structured
and the way it works;
 key weaknesses of the Association – specifically what is not functioning effectively
and efficiently, why, and what would the ideal situation be; and
 recommendations for anyone supporting the start of a new national Association.
D. The consultant would receive and compile the information from the respective countries
into a concise report that sets out the options, lessons learned and a set of
recommendations against each of the issues listed in the bullet points in A). The reports
from neighbouring countries would be attached as appendices.
E. It is anticipated that this short consultancy will take no more than six (6) to eight (8) days
in total – one to one-and-a-half (1-1½) each for three resource people in three
neighbouring countries and three to four (3-4) for the consultant designing the format,
finding appropriate resource people and compiling the short report.
F. The report should be completed and handed in to the NACSO office by end February
2002.
36