An institutional analysis of deforestation processes in protected areas: The case of the transboundary Mt. Elgon, Uganda and Kenya

Abstract

Protected areas (PAs) are a country's key strategy to conserve and manage forest resources. In sub-Saharan Africa, the effectiveness and efficiency of PA institutions in delivering sustainable outcomes is debated, however, and deforestation has not been avoided within such formal regimes. This paper analyzes the processes that led to deforestation within the PAs on the transboundary Mt. Elgon, Uganda–Kenya, employing institutional theory. Landsat satellite imagery helped identify and quantify forest loss over time. The study showed how, since 1973, about a third of all forests within the PAs on Elgon have been cleared in successive processes. Within formal protected area regimes, complex political and institutional factors drive forest loss. We argue, therefore, that policies to counter deforestation using a PA model have to be considered and understood against the broader background of these factors, originating both inside and outside the PA regimes.

Introduction

Deforestation is a major global issue especially due to its impact on the environmental services that forests deliver, associated biodiversity depletion and contribution to climate change (Sunderlin et al., 2005). Furthermore, deforestation often negatively affects the livelihoods of people dependent on forest products and services, especially the rural poor in developing countries (Vedeld et al., 2007). Deforestation is, on the other side, also a main process in increasing agricultural production, especially in Africa (Openshaw, 2005).

Establishing and maintaining protected areas (PAs) constitute a country's key policy strategy to conserve and govern biodiversity resources (Zimmerer et al., 2004). PAs have been a central element in the governance of forest resources and many countries have brought significant parts of their tropical high forest under such regimes (Schmitt et al., 2009). Likewise, in East Africa, most biodiversity and carbon-rich tropical high forests are already under formal PA regimes (Matiru, 1999, Howard et al., 2000). PA establishment is a widely promoted measure to counter deforestation, and is now gaining a new momentum through the emerging REDD¹ climate change mitigation strategy (Angelsen et al., 2009). Assessing a country's performance in avoiding deforestation within their already established forest PAs can therefore also be seen as an approach to evaluate their potential capacity and constraints in complying with future REDD policy obligations (Oestreicher et al., 2009).

Instituting a PA is a major policy intervention that implicitly comprises a legal demarcation between humans and nature and, subsequently, the establishment of particular institutional structures, or resource regimes, to govern the respective area (Vatn, 2005). PAs are not uniform, but established and governed according to different categories of conservation and use (IUCN, 1994, Naughton-Treves et al., 2005). The effectiveness of PA models in delivering sustainable forest governance is disputed, however, and environmental degradation and even deforestation are not avoided within such regimes, despite their generally strong legal status (Oestreicher et al., 2009, Hayes, 2006, Clark et al., 2008). Many alternative solutions to advance their efficiency and effectiveness have been debated (Hutton et al., 2005). An important element of this debate revolves around the social impact and legitimacy of PA conservation strategies with regard to an often poor and natural resource-dependent population (Naughton-Treves et al., 2005, Kaimowitz and Sheil, 2007). It is becoming increasingly apparent that PAs can no longer be the domain of conservation and forest officials only, but that they should have a broader societal mission contributing to wider development concerns (Naughton-Treves et al., 2005).

Deforestation processes have complex causes and a multitude of effects. Causes of deforestation can generically be differentiated in proximate and underlying drivers (Angelsen, 2009). Proximate causes are direct activities such as logging or agricultural practices, while underlying causes or drivers can be political, economic, institutional and cultural factors (Geist and Lambin, 2009). Deforestation within already established PA units, however, represents a distinct institutional challenge, given the formal properties of the PA regimes where governments have decided to maintain forests, applied a legal protection and commissioned a governing organization (Oestreicher et al., 2009). Processes leading to forest loss within PAs are thus different to those that drive deforestation on other land tenure arrangements that lack such formalized government property rights status.

In this paper, we use institutional analysis to study deforestation processes in different PA regimes, using the case of Elgon on the boundary between Uganda and Kenya. The key research question we raised was: What processes drive deforestation within existing protected areas, using the case of Elgon in Uganda and Kenya?

Our objectives were (1) to assess the efficiency of the PAs on Elgon in avoiding deforestation; (2) to examine the processes that have contributed to forest loss within the PAs on Elgon and their ecological and social outcomes; (3) to analyze differences between the various types of PA regimes in their ability to address deforestation; and (4) to reflect on possible policy recommendations for PA governance to avoid future deforestation.