Why keep lions instead of livestock? Assessing wildlife tourism‐based payment for ecosystem services involving herders in the M aasai M ara, K enya

This paper examines the effects of wildlife tourism‐based payments for ecosystem services ( PES ) on poverty, wealth inequality and the livelihoods of herders in the M aasai M ara Ecosystem in south‐western K enya. It uses the case of O lare O rok C onservancy PES programme in which pastoral landown...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Natural resources forum 2013-11, Vol.37 (4), p.242-256
Hauptverfasser: Osano, Philip M., Said, Mohammed Y., de Leeuw, Jan, Ndiwa, Nicholas, Kaelo, Dickson, Schomers, Sarah, Birner, Regina, Ogutu, Joseph O.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 256
container_issue 4
container_start_page 242
container_title Natural resources forum
container_volume 37
creator Osano, Philip M.
Said, Mohammed Y.
de Leeuw, Jan
Ndiwa, Nicholas
Kaelo, Dickson
Schomers, Sarah
Birner, Regina
Ogutu, Joseph O.
description This paper examines the effects of wildlife tourism‐based payments for ecosystem services ( PES ) on poverty, wealth inequality and the livelihoods of herders in the M aasai M ara Ecosystem in south‐western K enya. It uses the case of O lare O rok C onservancy PES programme in which pastoral landowners have agreed to voluntary resettlement and exclusion of livestock grazing from their sub‐divided lands. These lands are set aside for wildlife tourism, in return for direct monetary payments by a coalition of five commercial tourism operators. Results show that, on the positive side, PES is the most equitable income source that promotes income diversification and buffers households from the livestock income declines during periods of severe drought, such as in 2008‐2009. Without accounting for the opportunity costs, the magnitude of the PES cash transfer to households is, on average, sufficient to close the poverty gap. The co‐benefits of PES implementation include the creation of employment opportunities in the conservancy and provision of social services. There is however a need to mitigate the negative effects of PES , including the widening inequality in income between PES and non‐ PES households and the leakages resulting from the displacement of settlements and livestock to currently un‐subdivided pastoral commons.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/1477-8947.12027
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_1477_8947_12027</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_1111_1477_8947_12027</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c867-5b491fe2b60939644b5edb2f78b9b3ab3afb588463b8e080fb2d0ee47df40dbd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kL1OwzAURi0EEqUws_oBSGsnTpxMqKr4E0UslRgjO76mpklc-YaibDwCCy_Ik5AA4upKn3SGMxxCzjmb8eHmXEgZ5YWQMx6zWB6QyT85JBPGszRiMUuOyQniC2Nc8lhOyOfTpqdbgB2tnW-RuhY7UIZ6O4A9YOer7SVdIAKia5_pm6tN7SzQzr8Gh83X-4dWCIbuVN9A21HrA4XKYz94GooQ9q6C0bv39X40bCAYCCOh3QboA1UKlRs3qAt6T6Ht1Sk5sqpGOPvbKVlfX62Xt9Hq8eZuuVhFVZ7JKNWi4BZinbEiKTIhdApGx1bmutCJGt7qNM9FlugcWM6sjg0DENJYwYw2yZTMf7VV8IgBbLkLrlGhLzkrx6jlmLAcE5Y_UZNv4zJuIg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Why keep lions instead of livestock? Assessing wildlife tourism‐based payment for ecosystem services involving herders in the M aasai M ara, K enya</title><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><creator>Osano, Philip M. ; Said, Mohammed Y. ; de Leeuw, Jan ; Ndiwa, Nicholas ; Kaelo, Dickson ; Schomers, Sarah ; Birner, Regina ; Ogutu, Joseph O.</creator><creatorcontrib>Osano, Philip M. ; Said, Mohammed Y. ; de Leeuw, Jan ; Ndiwa, Nicholas ; Kaelo, Dickson ; Schomers, Sarah ; Birner, Regina ; Ogutu, Joseph O.</creatorcontrib><description>This paper examines the effects of wildlife tourism‐based payments for ecosystem services ( PES ) on poverty, wealth inequality and the livelihoods of herders in the M aasai M ara Ecosystem in south‐western K enya. It uses the case of O lare O rok C onservancy PES programme in which pastoral landowners have agreed to voluntary resettlement and exclusion of livestock grazing from their sub‐divided lands. These lands are set aside for wildlife tourism, in return for direct monetary payments by a coalition of five commercial tourism operators. Results show that, on the positive side, PES is the most equitable income source that promotes income diversification and buffers households from the livestock income declines during periods of severe drought, such as in 2008‐2009. Without accounting for the opportunity costs, the magnitude of the PES cash transfer to households is, on average, sufficient to close the poverty gap. The co‐benefits of PES implementation include the creation of employment opportunities in the conservancy and provision of social services. There is however a need to mitigate the negative effects of PES , including the widening inequality in income between PES and non‐ PES households and the leakages resulting from the displacement of settlements and livestock to currently un‐subdivided pastoral commons.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0165-0203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1477-8947</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12027</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Natural resources forum, 2013-11, Vol.37 (4), p.242-256</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c867-5b491fe2b60939644b5edb2f78b9b3ab3afb588463b8e080fb2d0ee47df40dbd3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c867-5b491fe2b60939644b5edb2f78b9b3ab3afb588463b8e080fb2d0ee47df40dbd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Osano, Philip M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Said, Mohammed Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Leeuw, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ndiwa, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaelo, Dickson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schomers, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Birner, Regina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ogutu, Joseph O.</creatorcontrib><title>Why keep lions instead of livestock? Assessing wildlife tourism‐based payment for ecosystem services involving herders in the M aasai M ara, K enya</title><title>Natural resources forum</title><description>This paper examines the effects of wildlife tourism‐based payments for ecosystem services ( PES ) on poverty, wealth inequality and the livelihoods of herders in the M aasai M ara Ecosystem in south‐western K enya. It uses the case of O lare O rok C onservancy PES programme in which pastoral landowners have agreed to voluntary resettlement and exclusion of livestock grazing from their sub‐divided lands. These lands are set aside for wildlife tourism, in return for direct monetary payments by a coalition of five commercial tourism operators. Results show that, on the positive side, PES is the most equitable income source that promotes income diversification and buffers households from the livestock income declines during periods of severe drought, such as in 2008‐2009. Without accounting for the opportunity costs, the magnitude of the PES cash transfer to households is, on average, sufficient to close the poverty gap. The co‐benefits of PES implementation include the creation of employment opportunities in the conservancy and provision of social services. There is however a need to mitigate the negative effects of PES , including the widening inequality in income between PES and non‐ PES households and the leakages resulting from the displacement of settlements and livestock to currently un‐subdivided pastoral commons.</description><issn>0165-0203</issn><issn>1477-8947</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kL1OwzAURi0EEqUws_oBSGsnTpxMqKr4E0UslRgjO76mpklc-YaibDwCCy_Ik5AA4upKn3SGMxxCzjmb8eHmXEgZ5YWQMx6zWB6QyT85JBPGszRiMUuOyQniC2Nc8lhOyOfTpqdbgB2tnW-RuhY7UIZ6O4A9YOer7SVdIAKia5_pm6tN7SzQzr8Gh83X-4dWCIbuVN9A21HrA4XKYz94GooQ9q6C0bv39X40bCAYCCOh3QboA1UKlRs3qAt6T6Ht1Sk5sqpGOPvbKVlfX62Xt9Hq8eZuuVhFVZ7JKNWi4BZinbEiKTIhdApGx1bmutCJGt7qNM9FlugcWM6sjg0DENJYwYw2yZTMf7VV8IgBbLkLrlGhLzkrx6jlmLAcE5Y_UZNv4zJuIg</recordid><startdate>201311</startdate><enddate>201311</enddate><creator>Osano, Philip M.</creator><creator>Said, Mohammed Y.</creator><creator>de Leeuw, Jan</creator><creator>Ndiwa, Nicholas</creator><creator>Kaelo, Dickson</creator><creator>Schomers, Sarah</creator><creator>Birner, Regina</creator><creator>Ogutu, Joseph O.</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201311</creationdate><title>Why keep lions instead of livestock? Assessing wildlife tourism‐based payment for ecosystem services involving herders in the M aasai M ara, K enya</title><author>Osano, Philip M. ; Said, Mohammed Y. ; de Leeuw, Jan ; Ndiwa, Nicholas ; Kaelo, Dickson ; Schomers, Sarah ; Birner, Regina ; Ogutu, Joseph O.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c867-5b491fe2b60939644b5edb2f78b9b3ab3afb588463b8e080fb2d0ee47df40dbd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Osano, Philip M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Said, Mohammed Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Leeuw, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ndiwa, Nicholas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaelo, Dickson</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schomers, Sarah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Birner, Regina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ogutu, Joseph O.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Natural resources forum</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Osano, Philip M.</au><au>Said, Mohammed Y.</au><au>de Leeuw, Jan</au><au>Ndiwa, Nicholas</au><au>Kaelo, Dickson</au><au>Schomers, Sarah</au><au>Birner, Regina</au><au>Ogutu, Joseph O.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Why keep lions instead of livestock? Assessing wildlife tourism‐based payment for ecosystem services involving herders in the M aasai M ara, K enya</atitle><jtitle>Natural resources forum</jtitle><date>2013-11</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>242</spage><epage>256</epage><pages>242-256</pages><issn>0165-0203</issn><eissn>1477-8947</eissn><abstract>This paper examines the effects of wildlife tourism‐based payments for ecosystem services ( PES ) on poverty, wealth inequality and the livelihoods of herders in the M aasai M ara Ecosystem in south‐western K enya. It uses the case of O lare O rok C onservancy PES programme in which pastoral landowners have agreed to voluntary resettlement and exclusion of livestock grazing from their sub‐divided lands. These lands are set aside for wildlife tourism, in return for direct monetary payments by a coalition of five commercial tourism operators. Results show that, on the positive side, PES is the most equitable income source that promotes income diversification and buffers households from the livestock income declines during periods of severe drought, such as in 2008‐2009. Without accounting for the opportunity costs, the magnitude of the PES cash transfer to households is, on average, sufficient to close the poverty gap. The co‐benefits of PES implementation include the creation of employment opportunities in the conservancy and provision of social services. There is however a need to mitigate the negative effects of PES , including the widening inequality in income between PES and non‐ PES households and the leakages resulting from the displacement of settlements and livestock to currently un‐subdivided pastoral commons.</abstract><doi>10.1111/1477-8947.12027</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0165-0203
ispartof Natural resources forum, 2013-11, Vol.37 (4), p.242-256
issn 0165-0203
1477-8947
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1111_1477_8947_12027
source Wiley Online Library All Journals
title Why keep lions instead of livestock? Assessing wildlife tourism‐based payment for ecosystem services involving herders in the M aasai M ara, K enya
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T05%3A38%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Why%20keep%20lions%20instead%20of%20livestock?%20Assessing%20wildlife%20tourism%E2%80%90based%20payment%20for%20ecosystem%20services%20involving%20herders%20in%20the%20M%20aasai%20M%20ara,%20K%20enya&rft.jtitle=Natural%20resources%20forum&rft.au=Osano,%20Philip%20M.&rft.date=2013-11&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=242&rft.epage=256&rft.pages=242-256&rft.issn=0165-0203&rft.eissn=1477-8947&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/1477-8947.12027&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_1111_1477_8947_12027%3C/crossref%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true