The Role of Local Perceptions and Priorities in Establishing Sustainable Livelihood Opportunities around Mt Mulanje, Malawi Clemmie Borgstein 920411101090 MSc student of Forest and Nature Conservation Supervisor: Verina Ingram Department of Forest and Nature Policy Wageningen University and Research Centre May 2017 Photo – Ruo Valley, Mulanje (Borgstein, 2016). Table of Contents Overview ......................................................................................................................................... 3 Figures ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Tables .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................... 4 Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 5 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Scientific objectives ............................................................................................................................ 15 Problem statement ............................................................................................................................. 15 Research questions............................................................................................................................. 17 Theoretical framework ...........................................................................................................17 Grounded Theory ................................................................................................................................ 18 Sustainable livelihoods approach ................................................................................................. 19 Community in conservation ........................................................................................................... 22 Conceptual Framework ...........................................................................................................25 Definitions of key words .................................................................................................................. 26 Methods .........................................................................................................................................27 Results ...........................................................................................................................................36 What are local people’s perceptions of conservation of Mulanje? ................................. 36 What are local people’s perceptions of their own natural resource use & livelihoods? ............................................................................................................................................ 41 What livelihoods do people envision for themselves without use of the mountains resources? .............................................................................................................................................. 51 Discussion ....................................................................................................................................53 Reflection on results ............................................................................................................................ 53 The bigger issues .................................................................................................................................. 58 Influence of methods on findings, & limitations ........................................................................ 62 Concluding Remarks .................................................................................................................64 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................65 Appendix .......................................................................................................................................70 Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................................................. 70 Appendix 2 ............................................................................................................................................. 74 Appendix 3 ............................................................................................................................................. 76 2 Overview Figures Figure 1 – Location of Mt Mulanje on a map of Malawi. The inset shows Malawi’s position in Africa Figure 2 – Maize fields and one of the rivers running of Mulanje, in front of Chambe Peak, rainy season (Borgsteinm 2017). Figure 3 – topographical satellite image of Mulanje from a southerly perspective (http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/view.php?id=44017) Figure 4 – Women from the focus group in Nessa Village (Borgstein, 2016). Figure 5 – The SLA framework as used by Allison & Horemans (2006) Figure 6 – Hierarchical structures within a district in Malawi. Figure 7 – Conceptual framework outlining the present situation, the desired focus of the thesis research, and the prevalent theories relevant to the model. Figure 8 - Focus group in Makuluni Village, (Borgstein, 2016) Figure 9 – TA Mkanda at her house in front of Chambe Basin, (Borgstein, 2016) Figure 10 - Breakdown of in what form the natural resources were mentioned by each village. Blue is for subsistence, red for cash, and green if it was unspecified. Figure 11 – Livelihoods as mentioned in the form of subsistence (blue) or cash (red) per village. Figure 12 – Differing livelihood types per village. Figure 13 – Focus group in Msikita Village, with Susan (far right) (Borgstein, 2017) Figure 14 – Tea picker, Sayama Estate (Borgstein, 2017) Figure 15 – River pathways coming off Mulanje (Borgstein, 2017) Figure 16 - Grass harvested from the mountain plateau, carried down and being dried to make brooms to be sold, Nessa Village (Borgstein, 2016). Figure 17 – Man selling pineapple and avocado pears from Nessa Village (Borgstein, 2016). Figure 18 - the information gathered from my research fitted into an SLF. More in-depth understanding of people’s livelihood assets and the strength/influence of each category could help in implementing more informed livelihood strategies. Figure 19 – The ‘crater’ on the southern edge of Mulanje, pictured from Sayama Estate (Borgstein, 2017) Tables Table 1 - Overview of village perspectives of conservation; purple represents yes (Y) and green represents no (N). Blank cells represent no data. No. 1.1 – 1.6 represent the first set of focus groups per location and 2.1 – 2.6 represent the second set. Table 2.1 - Overview of natural resources mentioned by each village, in a gradient of use from purely subsistence to purely cash. Blue represents resources used for subsistence, purple shows resources used for both subsistence and cash, and red represents those used only for cash. 3 Table 2.2 – an overview of the main livelihoods came up with by each group during the activity in the focus groups with livelihoods summarised into categories of subsistence (blue) cash (red) or both (purple) Table 3.1 - livelihoods without the use of the mountain’s resources, separated as subsistence/cash (purple) or just cash (red). Abbreviations DF department of Forestry FG focus group GEF Global Economic Forum GVH group village headman LVH livelihoods MAB Man and Biosphere MMBCP Mulanje mountain biodiversity conservation program MMCT Mulanje Mountain Conservation Trust MMFR Mulanje Mountain Forest Reserve MJ Mulanje NR natural resource NRU natural resource use NTFP non timber forest products TA traditional authority VFA village forested area VH village headman VNRMC village natural resource management committee Acknowledgements First of all a huge thank you to my supervisor Verina Ingram who guided me through the many stages of this process. Secondly, Carl Bruessow for his guiding of the more practical aspects, as well as offering me many forms of support and help in Mulanje itself. The whole team of MMCT were invaluable and made my time in Mulanje even better than it would already have been. Susan Pota, dear friend and facilitator with an endless smile, words of encouragement and without whom of course my field work would not have been possible. Also to all the people who have contributed something to this research, all the focus group participants as well as the village headmen, group village headmen and TAs who gave me their time and attention. And finally my parents and siblings, whose love and guidance is boundless and continues to always give me strength! 4 Abstract Mt Mulanje and it’s Forest Reserve offer a vast range of natural resources, a seemingly ideal support system for the many impoverished communities living primarily