Comparative analysis of the implications of protected areas expansion on local communities’ livelihoods: a case of Ruaha and Kilimanjaro National Parks, Tanzania
| dc.contributor.author | Kapalata, Fidelis Ignas | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2020-02-01T08:57:05Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2020-02-01T08:57:05Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
| dc.description | Available in print form, East Africana Collection, Dr. Wilbert Chagula Library, Class mark (THS EAF S944.5.P78T34K36) | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract | This study examined the comparative analysis of the implications of protected areas expansion on local communities’ livelihoods in KINAPA and RUNAPA. The focus was to examine communities’ livelihoods before and after relocation, to assess the level of community dependence on PAs, as well as the level people’s attitudes on relocation and resettlement. The study was conducted in five villages namely Ikoga Mpya, Msagaji Mpya, Namwai, Ngarenairobi and Matadi surrounding the two PAs. Research tools for data collection involved household interviews, focused group discussions, field observation, key informant interviews and literature review whereby a total of 239 respondents were involved in this study. Descriptive data were analyzed by using SPSS and theme-content analysis. The results from this study revealed a change of the livelihood options in the studied areas after relocation. This is due to the fact that among the respondents there was an average increase of casual labors by 43% in RUNAPA and 46% in KINAPA. Similarly, the percentage of respondents who practiced farming after relocation dropped from an average of 75% to 28% in KINAPA and 74% to 38% in RUNAPA due to lack suitable land in their new areas. Various discussions suggested that the expansion and relocation processes were top-down and executed without adequate participation of the local communities. This was evidenced by 62% of respondents from RUNAPA of 81% of respondents from KINAPA who testified to be unaware of the process. Therefore this study recommends that, conservation-related benefits should offset the costs and different communities’ project should improve the living standard of local through poverty alleviation. In addition, the involvement of local people and alternative livelihood should be considered during the planning and management of PAs. | en_US |
| dc.identifier.citation | Kapalata, F. I. (2016) Comparative analysis of the implications of protected areas expansion on local communities’ livelihoods: a case of Ruaha and Kilimanjaro National Parks, Tanzania, Master dissertation, University of Dar es Salaam, Dar es Salaam | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://41.86.178.5:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/6867 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
| dc.publisher | University of Dar es Salaam | en_US |
| dc.subject | Protected areas | en_US |
| dc.subject | Ruaha National Park (Tanzania) | en_US |
| dc.subject | Kilimanjaro National Park (Tanzania) | en_US |
| dc.subject | Tanzania | en_US |
| dc.title | Comparative analysis of the implications of protected areas expansion on local communities’ livelihoods: a case of Ruaha and Kilimanjaro National Parks, Tanzania | en_US |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_US |