BWABWATA KWANDU HUNTING CONCESSION: A Case Study on Contract Governance

1. BWABWATA KWANDU HUNTING CONCESSION: A Case Study on Contract Governance

2. Bwabwata Kwandu Hunting Concession Case Study By: Chris Weaver, Richard Diggle, & Theunis Petersen Organizations: WWF and IRDNC, NNF and MET Region: Caprivi Date: June, 2006

3. Introduction & Background • Community: Kyramacan Association, represents close to 7,000 residents of Bwabwata NP; • Members Association registered to serve as co-manager Bwabwata NP; struggled to acquire recognition since independence; • In 2006, finally recognized and granted the rights to benefit from Park resources; • Context: new community body tasked with effectively tendering and negotiating the two hunting concessions in transparent and optimal manner

4. Problem Identification • Tendering and contracting a new experience for the Association; • Some safari companies were attempting to influence key committee members by offering special “deals”; • Would the concessions be transparently awarded to the benefit of the broader membership or to the gain of individuals?

5. Importance of Case Study To Good Governance: • The transparent tendering and negotiation of hunting (or lodge) contracts is critical to the credibility of the CBNRM Programme – • Ensures integrity to the process; • Optimizes returns to communities; and • Leads to true community empowerment

6. The Tender Process • Quota approved by MET; • Association advertised concessions through NAPHA via letter; • Tender document sent to interested big game hunters; • 8 Tenders received; • Tenders reviewed and top offers chosen for interviews

7. Reviewing The Offers:

8. Tender Results:

9. Practicing for The Interviews

10. Interview Process: • Interviewed the top three offers

11. Final Results of Tender Process • Highest offer was turned down, even though it was much more than second-next offer; • Community experience with Safari Company offering the highest amount had been very bad in the past; • Committee opted for second highest offer, as the operator was deemed to be the best combination of partner and income; and • The interests of individual committee members were overcome by the wishes of the broader committee

12. Intervention Description: • Offers were publicly opened in a transparent manner; • Offers were compared by the entire committee; • Trade-offs (pros and cons) were openly discussed by the entire committee; • Tender process was guided by a diverse mix of unbiased stakeholders (i.e., committee, MET, NGO, and private sector); • Strong facilitation was required to ensure all committee members had a say in the selection process

13. Final Results: • Community was empowered with not only right to benefit, but also with right of choice; • Some safari operators have continued to attempt to influence the committee and individuals on the committee, but failed; • Excellent results have been achieved, but it has not been without challenges

14. Lessons Learned: • The greater the transparency in a tender process, the better the process is; • Involving the entire committee increases the chances that decisions with integrity will be made; • A good tender process requires considerable knowledge and skills transfer, and confidence building; • Knowledgeable facilitators are a essential to creating a level playing field for communities to negotiate with private sector

15. Conclusion True empowerment is not only about the rights to benefits, but about the right of knowledgeable choice The Beginning …