A revised CBT strategy for Botswana: Reflections from experiences of the ban on trophy hunting

Abstract The study aimed to investigate the stakeholder experiences and perception of the ban on trophy hunting in Botswana that was instituted between April 2014 and May 2019 with the view to inform a revised strategy for Botswana CBT approach. Two communities were selected for this research, namely Sankuyo village in northern Botswana and Mmadinare in the eastern part of the country. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with respondents (Community trust leaders, small businesses, and former hunting employees) in both communities and structured interviews with community members. The study found numerous challenges experienced since the ban on hunting. Communities experienced an increase in wildlife numbers that led to an escalation of the Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) and the destruction of raw materials used by craft traders. The communities further bemoaned the lack of involvement in decision-making due to increased bureaucratic challenges. There is also a loss of revenue, regulatory impediments, and problems in the relationship with current ecotourism operators in Sankuyo, where ecotourism is practiced. The study, therefore, recommended a five-phase strategy that articulates the process and conditions needed in facilitating a CBT project. Furthermore, the study identified seven conditions that will enable the environment in CBT to bring about sustainability. The paper discusses the strategy, and its implications are that; while it is in the communities’ court to align with the strategy’s facilitation process, there is a need for authorities, on the other hand, to address issues identified to enable a conducive environment for sustainable community natural resource utilisation and conservation to occur.


Introduction
In many Southern and Eastern African countries, wildlife tourism is a cornerstone of communities (Van der Merwe et al., 2014). In most of these countries, both consumptive and non-consumptive forms are often practised side by side in the same area or destination (Lindsey et al., 2007). Mwakiwa et al. (2016) note that consumptive and non-consumptive wildlife tourists are attracted to the same type of species, particularly in the African context, where big game hunting is prevalent due to the presence of large mammals like the big five (elephant, rhino, lion, buffalo, and leopard) which also attract photographic tourists (non-consumptive). However, due to the plight of communities living in areas bordering protected areas, which led to Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) and bush-meat poaching, there was a need to align wildlife utilisation with conservation and community livelihoods (P. A. Lindsey et al., 2009;Gandiwa et al., 2013;Mbaiwa, 2018). One of the avenues to achieve this balancing act in Botswana is through the Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) programme, which devolves management of resources to local communities to incentivise conservation through hunting (consumptive) and photographic tourism (non-consumptive; Lindsey et al., 2015;Suich, 2012).
Botswana's wildlife tourism landscape has been characterised by hunting and photographic tourism utilisation until 2014, when a blanket ban on hunting tourism was applied. The Botswana government noted a concern about declining wildlife numbers as a motivating factor behind the ban (Mbaiwa, 2018). The ban has consequently caused a loss of employment and income to the Safari hunting operators who depended on revenue from this consumptive use of wildlife resources due to closures of their companies (Keakabetse, 2016). However, the ban's effect on local communities who had interests as concession leaseholders through the CBNRM programme is a grave concern. Most Community-Based Organisations (CBOs) derived income from hunting safaris through partnership or lease agreements with hunting operators allowing them to cede wildlife hunting quotas obtained from the government to hunting operators for cash payments (CAR (Centre for Applied Research), 2016). According to Pienaar et al. (2013), the estimated annual income generated from operations amounted to US$225,000 at the Chobe Enclave Conservation Trust (CECT) and US$224,560 at the Sankuyo Tshwaragano Community Trust, along with combined employment of 152 residents by the two trusts in 2012. Mbaiwa (2018, p. 47) stated that income from hunting was BWP 23,796,747 (US$ 2,4 million), which was two-thirds of the total revenue generated by all CBNRM projects in Botswana in 2011/12. By 2014/15, the reported average revenue for all CBOs surveyed by the CAR (Centre for Applied Research; 2016, p. 23) had dwindled to BWP1.3 million (US$130,000), which represented a decline of about 43% in revenue from the years prior. These figures represent what communities have lost financially and socially.
Nonetheless, the alternative that can be offered by photographic tourism is not definite. A study by Winterbach, Whitesell, and Somers (2015) on "Wildlife abundance and diversity as indicators of tourism potential in Northern Botswana" revealed that only 22% of the Northern Conservation Zone in Northern Botswana had intermediate to high potential for photographic tourism against 78% of areas with low tourism potential. This means that most CBOs stand little chance of success if they were to diversify into ecotourism within their concessions. The ban on trophy hunting exposed and illuminated fundamental issues with the current Community-Based Tourism (CBT) model in Botswana, which was masked by donor support and revenue from hunting.  noted limited skills transfer, no devolution of power, and inadequate revenue benefits as issues that existed not only because of the hunting ban but also because of the inadequacy of the CBNRM policy anomalies. Therefore, though the Botswana government lifted the hunting ban towards the end of 2019 to allow for the hunting of elephants, the challenges remain.
Therefore, the study aims to formulate a revised CBT strategy for Botswana, drawing lessons from the ban on hunting tourism to help improve Community-Based Tourism in Botswana, whose implications can be significant for the sustainability of wildlife tourism in the country and other African countries with similar problems. The research can assist in the following fundamental aspects of; revenue that accrues to communities, community participation in resource management and sustainability of natural resources. This is done by analysing previous CBT (Community Tourism Based models) and data obtained from the fieldwork conducted in this study. The paper starts by reviewing the literature on Community-Based Tourism (CBT) and analysing CBT models. It further presents the formulated mitigation strategy and discusses results that informed each of the aspects of the strategy.

Literature review
When one discusses the topic of resource utilisation in developing countries, issues of sustainability and the local community's role cannot be cast aside. While there is a convergence of ideas between the sustainable and community-based approaches in that they both advocate for community involvement and shared benefit, the sustainable approach further espouses the ecological consideration, which makes all the three elements, namely economic, socio-cultural, and environmental, pivotal. Richards and Hall (2000) opine that sustainability as an approach is holistic and coherent as it focuses on a balance of the three bottom-line elements. On the other hand, Community-Based Tourism (CBT) considers local control through a bottom-up form "which emphasises development in the community instead of development for the community" (Sharma, 2004, p. 71). As one of the first authors to advocate for CBT, Murphy (1985) noted the critical aspects of planning and implementation in CBT to be centred around community's vision and values. Furthermore, CBT espouses two forms of community involvement: generation of benefits from tourism development and participation in the decision-making process Andriotis (2007), while Murphy (1988) adds that the exclusion of communities have detrimental effects on the profitability of tourism businesses. Dangi and Jamal (2016, p. 10) allude to the focus on community involvement of CBT while adding that it "applies the objectives of sustainable tourism". Therefore, within the CBNRM programme, a CBT initiative, all three aspects (community involvement, generation of benefits and conservation of resources) are fundamental. As alluded to in the introduction, incentivising communities to partner in resource management can sustain the conservation of resources. However, the converse also holds that when the incentive is diminished or stops, as is the case with the consequence of the hunting ban, the sustainability of the resources is threatened. In the paper, Mbaiwa (2018) not only noted the effects of the ban on the community, such as loss of income, jobs, the provision of social services and game meat but also alluded to an increase in poaching incidents and the re-introduction of negative attitudes towards wildlife by community members. Therefore, the latter effects mentioned represent threats to the conservation of wildlife that put in question their sustainability. Therefore, it is fundamental for strategies formulated to curb the impacts that loss of incentives by communities might have on resource conservation and sustainability. There is currently no strategy in existence within the tourism literature that consider mitigation of the ban on natural resource utilisation and specifically on hunting tourism. Even though 23 countries of the 46 countries in Sub-Saharan Africa practice hunting tourism (Maruping-Mzileni, 2015), leaving another 23 without hunting tourism operations. One would argue that there was a need for studies on how the effects of the hunting bans in such places have been mitigated. Further abroad, where tourism bans or restrictions have been imposed in different parts of the world, it has predominantly been due to over-tourism in places, such as the Lascaux caves (France), and the Taj Mahal (India), and Boracay (the Philippines; Blake, 2018). However, such restrictions were instituted at the behest of local communities in concert with governments due to the escalation of negative impacts in those areas. Nonetheless, the literature has put forth strategies and models of CBT that address various aspects of the CBT concept, which need to be analysed.

CBT models
The models and strategies vary in their focus on the development of CBT. For example, the critical focus of these models includes ownership and management issues in CBT projects (Ndlovu & Rogerson, 2003), exploring the potential of a CBT equestrian trail tourism product by utilising Bryden's 1993 model (Kline et al., 2015), considering "spreading the benefits to the wider community" (Mtapuri & Giampiccoli, 2013, p. 1), evaluating and managing preconditions for CBT projects (Jugmohan & Steyn, 2015), CBT projects from a community planning perspective (Jamal & Getz, 1995) and considering how theory and practice intersect in CBT development (Koster, 2007). Other models consider CBT from a broader, more comprehensive approach (Mtapuri & Giampiccoli, 2016;Okazaki, 2008). An analysis of the models, as demonstrated in Table 1 below, shows that , Jamal and Getz (1995), and Okazaki (2008) put more emphasis on planning from a community's perspective. The Community-Based Tourism Development Planning Model by  argues for basing CBT on a social learning or mobilisation framework that can foster sustainability of developments, while Jamal and Getz (1995) and Okazaki (2008) focus on collaboration in CBT. The difference between the two latter models is that Okazaki further adds the concepts of participation, power redistribution, and the recognition of social capital as critical aspects in the collaboration process. The  model, however, leaves out the specifics of an organisational structure that Community-Based Organisations (CBOs) can follow, while Jamal and Getz (1995) and Okazaki's (2008) sole focus on collaboration meant that issues of resource utilisation are not considered. Jugmohan and Steyn (2015) developed a model, the Pre-condition Evaluation and Management Model (PEM), to consider all pre-conditions needed in a CBT project; however, the specifics of the conditions to consider are missing as the authors argue that they are context specific. The model also fails to stipulate a criterion for issues to be regarded as pre-conditions. Mtapuri and Giampiccoli (2016) Comprehensive Model of CBT development considers the different steps needed to formulate CBT projects particularly offering different choices in CBT development business types within communities. However, the model fails to consider factors external to the community and how they can affect the environment needed for business operations. Therefore, when considering that all the models vary in relevance and application, the fundamental aspects and questions that can usher the academics and practitioners into a preferred model of CBT development remain.
An additional strategy for CBT and resource utilisation is Gandiwa et al.'s (2013) called Integrated Conservation and Development Project (ICDP). While different names refer to it, the strategy alludes to sustainable natural resource utilisation by local communities to aid the conservation of such resources. ICDP is often referred to as Community-Based Natural Resource Management (hereafter referred to as CBNRM) in Botswana and South Africa, Community Resource Management Areas (CREMA) in West Africa (B.T.B. Jones, 2015) and Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources or CAMPFIRE in Zimbabwe (Gandiwa et al., 2013). To avert confusion, the term CBNRM will be used as Swatuk (2005) noted that CBNRM has been predominant in the Southern hemisphere, especially in Southern Africa, where wildlife and protected area management became the focus of the programme. The programme advocates for devolution of power and control of resources to local people with the support of governments and civil society. At its core, CBNRM revolves around community involvement and participation in resource management. While the different initiatives share similarities, there is divergence "in the detail of administrative, legal and financial structures and policy implementation" in different countries (Blaikie, 2006(Blaikie, , p. 1943. Such divergence gives the CBNRM model adaptability to different contexts in various areas ranging from tourism to forest management which all utilise natural resources. The difference in the strategy as per administrative, legal and financial structures, and policy implementation, are often where weaknesses are exhibited. The administrative, legal, and  Jones, 2008;Tichaawa & Mhlanga, 2015). Kamoto et al. (2013, p. 293) also argue that while the policies are well intended from inception, implementation reflects "rhetoric more than substance" as governments elevate conservation interests more than rural livelihoods.
Therefore, most CBNRM initiatives, especially where wildlife is the predominant resource, suffer from misalignment between CBNRM and legislative goals devoid of community involvement in resource management and are weakened by an operating environment that is not conducive to their sustenance. Table 1 provides a list of CBT models with strong and weak points.
Therefore, each of the models is limited to mitigating loss of revenue from resource utilisation as there are applicability, flexibility, and adaptability issues to contend with. Nonetheless, certain aspects of the models are critical in developing CBT and thus relevant to any mitigation strategy. The need for CBT to incline toward a bottom-up approach is one such aspect in Koster, 2007Okazaki, 2008;Zapata et al., 2011). Others are community participation (Okazaki, 2008;in Koster, 2007, collaboration (Jamal & Getz, 1995;Kline et al., 2015;Okazaki, 2008;Richards & Hall, 2000) and careful adoption of the CBT business type that suits local community objectives (Mtapuri & Giampiccoli, 2016). The study's aim to offer a revised CBT strategy dovetails in filling the gap in literature where administrative, legal, and financial structures have been noted to be weak across different CBT models. Furthermore, the reviewed models have shown gaps in articulating a conducive environment needed for CBT development to be sustained.

Study areas
This study was conducted on two villages that offered hunting tourism prior to the ban in 2014. The two areas, Sankuyo and Mmadinare, were selected based on the following criteria (i) ease of access and (ii) disparity in the length of engagement with hunting tourism (Sankuyo has been involved in CBNRM since 1996, while Mmadinare started in 2008). According to 2005 figures (Winterbach et al., 2015), there were 38 wildlife concessions in northern and eastern Botswana; 18 were designated for hunting or multi-use (both hunting and photographic tourism) purposes. Sankuyo village owns two of these concessions, while Mmadinare owns one.

Sankuyo
The village of Sankuyo is in Northern Botswana in the Ngamiland district, about 85 km northeast of the major tourist town of Maun. According to Statistics Botswana (Government of Botswana: Statistics Botswana, 2014), Sankuyo village's population comprised 410 residents within 77 households during the last census in 2011. The management trust representing the village in tourism ventures is the Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust (STMT). According to the current trust leader, the trust is a legal entity representing the villagers and owns "head leases" to two wildlife management areas (WMA), otherwise known as concessions, called NG33 and NG34 (as shown in Figure 1) which on the fringes of the Okavango Delta and Moremi Game Reserve and offer both hunting and photographic tourism.

Mmadinare
Mmadinare is a semi-urban village about 15 km from the copper-mining town of Selebi-Phikwe in eastern Botswana (MDT (Mmadinare Development Trust), 2014). The town's position relative to the town is illustrated in Figure 2. Natural resource utilisation is pursued through a community trust called the Mmadinare Development Trust, founded in 2000, but it was not until 2008 that they got involved in hunting tourism. According to the current leader, the trust's sole revenue source was the hunting of (predominantly) elephants within one concession (CT27; however, the map does not show the position of the concession), but at the time of the interview in 2018/2019, there was no source of income for the trust as hunting had been the only source. According to the 2011 population census (Government of Botswana: Statistics Botswana, 2014), the village has a population of 12,086.

Sampling criteria and size
The participants were drawn from the community, community trusts, former hunting employees, business operators, and a public tourism organisation.
Firstly, village participants (community members) from both communities of Mmadinare and Sankuyo were sampled using a quota sampling technique. Quota sampling forms part of the non-probability sampling method, where researchers create a sample involving individuals that represent a population (the two communities), and the researchers choose these individuals (communities) according to specific traits or qualities, in this case, ethnic groups in the communities (Maree and Pietersen, 2016). These samples can be generalised to the entire population. Saunders et al. (2016, p. 297) state that in deciding on the sample size, the degree of homogeneity of the population should be taken into consideration. Therefore, considering the heterogeneity of the population in both villages, where various ethnic groups reside, a quota sampling was used, which divided each village into four parts using cardinal points (South, North, West, and East) to ensure representation of all diversity in the communities. The total sample size of forty-six (46) persons from both communities was selected (n = 21 in Mmadinare and n = 25 in Sankuyo village). Baki (2020) utilised a similar sampling approach in a study of Turkish tourists.
Secondly, a purposive sampling technique called the key informants' strategy was used in this study to select participants from the Community Trusts. Key informants have leading positions in society or their area, which helps to yield in-depth information (Payne & Payne, 2004); for example, Mahachi et al. (2015) employed a similar sampling criterion in their study of the exploitation of renewable energy. The current Manager of Sankuyo Tshwaragano Management Trust (STMT) (at the time of the research) and the previous chairman of STMT, and the vice-chairman of Mmadinare Development Trust, were selected for a total of three participants.
Thirdly, a snowball sampling technique was used to select employees from the former hunting operations and small business operators, as these participants were difficult to locate. This sampling criterion generated six individuals, with two former hunting employees participants from each community. At the same time, only two small businesses were willing to participate in the Sankuyo community and none in Mmadinare. The lack of business participants in Mmadinare resulted from an inclusion criterion that was not met which was used to ensure that the participants were relevant. Only businesses that were in operation before and after the ban on hunting were used to ensure the participants shared perspectives on their experiences before and after the ban on hunting. Finally, one participant was selected from a public tourism organisation called Botswana Tourism Organisation (BTO). The summary of the interviewees is communicated in Table 2. The criteria used to determine the participant was an essential informant technique. This meant a total of fifty-six (n = 56) participants (n = 46 community members, n = 3 community trust leaders, n = 4 former hunting employees, n = 2 small business owners and n = 1 public organisation representatives) formed part of the study.

Data collection and analysis
A semi-structured interview instrument was used to collect data from Community Trust leaders, former hunting employees, small business operators, and the BTO participant. In contrast, a structured interview was developed for community members. The reason for doing structured interviews with community members was that the researchers wanted a larger sample from the communities. A structured interview allows this as it takes less time. Structured interviews use predetermined and structured questions to obtain information from a larger pool of participants in a cost-effective and timely manner (Altinay et al., 2016) and are also referred to as "quantitative research interviews" (Saunders et al., 2016, p. 391). A semi-structured interview allows for additional questions outside the interview schedule, allowing the interviewer freedom to explore the issues further (Harrell & Bradley, 2009;Nieuwenhuis, 2016). The semi-structured interviews were analysed using a thematic analysis method. A summary of the process is that interviews were conducted with the aid of a Dictaphone, followed by transcribing. As part of transcription, the researcher translated the information from Setswana to English, as most of the interviewees responded in the local language of Setswana. Therefore, this researcher-led transcriptions and translation allowed the researcher to ensure that meaning, words and impressions were not lost in translation. The information was then coded and categorised, and finally, themes were formed. The structured interview data analysis employed descriptive statistics in the form of frequencies and cross-tabulations. The questions asked in the structured interview were categorical variables, and therefore, frequencies and cross-tabulation were deemed relevant. Semi-structured and structured interview results were presented and discussed together to arrive at the findings.

Results: Discussion of a revised cbt strategy
The proposed mitigation strategy is constructed through both input from the literature and the empirical results to deliberate on what could best work in communities to mitigate the ban on hunting. The strategy is made of five phases, which are referred to as "facilitation conditions and process" and the "enabling environment", which has seven aspects deemed to make the environment conducive for development (see, Figure 3). These different facets of the strategy are discussed below, and the findings are discussed within and as part of the strategy to illustrate what informed each phase of the strategy.

Phase 1: Planning
The strategy's first phase is the planning stage. This stage allows CBT leaders to consider the planning approach, participation, collaboration, and objectives. Zapata et al. (2011, p. 741) mention bottom-up and top-down approaches in the development of CBT. The authors argue that it is essential to clarify how and by whom will decisions are taken. Nonetheless, the top-down approach is deemed to be induced and funded by external agents, which leads to dependence on these agents for mediation and knowledge. The bottom-up projects are characterised by market-led development, local entrepreneurship, and business-based (Zapata et al., 2011, p. 741). This leads to solid ownership, meaningful economic impact due to linkages with local suppliers, and more management and marketing processes control. The CBNRM model practised in Botswana is theoretically centred around a bottom-up approach, even though the reality is far removed from what was intended (Kamoto et al., 2013;Lepper & Goebel, 2010). The following themes emerged from the findings:

Bottom-up stage
• Community involvement led to benefit realisation (this was noted as a factor that led to the success of the hunting operations) • Donor initiated, the government facilitated and bottom-up initiatives (The current structure of CBT initiatives) Principal among the challenges, as noted by the study participants, is not allowing communities to have a say in their projects, as stated by one participant (a Trust leader);

"You can't have a person in Gaborone taking decisions for someone in Sankuyo. Whatever one might see as noble in Gaborone might not be what the person in Sankuyo desires" (interviewee 2).
A former trophy hunting employee further explained that; "The problem is, if you take decisions as to the Tourism leadership about tourism in the community without involving the community, then the community can do nothing. Likewise, as a minister, when you make decisions without community input, the community can do nothing" (Employee 4).
During the inception of the CBNRM projects, communities were more involved, an aspect that has since changed. One of the factors that lead to failure to adhere to a bottom-up is the Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) policy which will be discussed in detail within the "enabling environment" in this strategy. Therefore, this strategy advocates for a bottom-up approach as it also has implications for the second aspect of community participation.

Community participation stage
Community participation and collaboration with other stakeholders are critical in CBT development and, as has been lamented by participants in the study. In their response to the issue of collaboration and community participation, trust leaders' participants highlight that powers have been usurped from communities. One of the trust leaders had this to say; "Right now, the community has no say. The government signs lease with operators and exclude the communities in those lease agreements. It is difficult because the communities cannot raise issues with the operators because they don't appear anywhere in the lease agreement" (Interviewee 2-Trust leader).
The sentiments are echoed by business operators, who raised the issues with the regulation that impede their operations.
"Nowadays its difficult [because] the Safari operators are not allowing us [access to raw material].
Regulations have been changed. So, to get access to harvest raw materials [for basket weaving], we have to ask for permission from the Safari Operator. At present, we resort to buying material from places like Shorobe village" (Business 2).
The bone of contention is that the CBNRM policy, as viewed by participants, has some aspects that encumber community participation, a view the BTO participant highlighted and acknowledged: The policy is there to smoothen the coexistence [between communities and wildlife], even though it is slightly troublesome hence I am saying that we need to look at the policy again because a lot has changed since 2007" (Representative 1). It is, therefore, a significant concern for the main stakeholders to feel disenfranchised as such sentiments have a bearing on the success of conservation initiatives. Community participants go further to equate the status quo to local disempowerment, as highlighted by two participants; "The challenge I can talk about is that it's like the people from overseas have been given total control over our land" (Community 5 -Sankuyo). Another concurred that the "Government is discriminatory in their approach. That is why few locals participate in tourism instead of foreigners" (Community 11-Mmadinare).  apportion the blame to the lack of proper implementation of the policy and the over-arching powers of the Technical Advisory Committees (TAC). Chipfuva and Saarinen (2011, p. 152) link the issues to public institutions as they retained the powers and failed to devolve to local communities. Therefore, the status quo goes against the ethos of the concept of CBNRM, which is centred around the devolution of powers to communities to incentivise them to partake in resource conservation. Okazaki's (2008) model critically looks at community participation and collaboration with other stakeholders and states three levels at which participation and cooperation can be considered. The model contends that there is nonparticipation, degree of tokenism and degree of citizen power. Therefore, applying the Okazaki (2008) model, the current scenario where communities are informed and consulted is tokenistic and requires a move to the highest level of degree of citizen power for devolution of powers to be realised. On this argument, the proposed strategy advocates for more devolution of power to communities through collaborative partnerships with other stakeholders that will allow the communities to have control in the development of CBT projects.

Setting objective stage
The third stage of the planning phase is the "setting of objectives". Once the approach, community participation and collaboration have been rationalised, an empowered community can be better positioned to articulate its vision and goal of what they aim to achieve through tourism. Koster (2007) and Kline et al. (2015) reiterate the point that setting objectives is part of the planning stage and argue that an external party can initiate it. However, Mtapuri and Giampiccoli (2016) contend that the setting of objectives can be either internally or externally. Nonetheless, it's the contention of this strategy that the initiative should start internally within a community and be shaped together with collaborative partners in the literature (Jamal & Getz, 1995;Kline et al., 2015;Okazaki, 2008; views as a demonstration of inter-dependence and sharing a vision.

Phase 2: Legal set-up
Community-based tourism has a choice in how they want to structure their organisation. Mtapuri and Giampiccoli (2016, p. 161) call this arrangement a "venture type" and argue that it can be formal or informal. The authors argue this choice of formal or informal depends on the rationale behind involvement in CBT (in other words, the vision or objectives), where informal can be preferred for small operations and formal for scaled-up operations. These options are not prescriptive but rather possibilities depending on prevailing conditions. The proposed strategy argues for a more formal legal setup based on the status quo in CBT projects in Botswana. Furthermore, the CBNRM policy (Government of Botswana, 2007: iii) advocates setting up a legal entity that could be a trust or cooperative and ensure that all community members' rights are protected. Therefore, as Figure 3, the legal set-up could be a trust, cooperative, or community enterprise.
The first option, the Trust, is the most predominant legal entity in Botswana's CBT development (CAR (Centre for Applied Research), 2016; Lepper & Goebel, 2010;Mbaiwa, 2015;Pienaar et al., 2013), though no particular reason is given for the preference of this type of legal entity. Nonetheless, trusts are governed by a board of trustees elected from the community to run their business affairs to benefit the community as a whole.
The second option, community cooperative, implies an organisation formed by community members who produce goods and services where the members benefit from their produce (Birchall & Ketilson, 2009). In tourism, Mohamad et al. (2013) argue that cooperatives foster the creation of different businesses meant to improve the member's aspirations. The authors contend that cooperatives prevent elite's manipulation, engender community empowerment, and elicit competitiveness from members.
The third option in the legal set-up is a community enterprise, which denotes a mature state in a CBT initiative where the project is treated like any other business (Mtapuri & Giampiccoli, 2016, p. 163), there is collective ownership (Goodwin, 2009, p. 28) and local entrepreneurship (Zapata et al., 2011, p. 741). In this scenario, Zapata et al. (2011) argue that capital is raised from within through risking their own funds with external agents only providing support, while Mtapuri and Giampiccoli (2016) note that this set-up allows communities to access loans from the banking industry. The proposed strategy highlights these legal set-ups as options but is not prescriptive on the one to be chosen by a community. This allows communities to interrogate a legal set-up best aligned to their objectives and prevailing conditions.

Phase 3: Business arrangement
A business arrangement follows a legal setup as phase three of the strategy. It sometimes might happen that it takes place simultaneously. That is to say, once any business is legally registered, it has different choices of how it wants to proceed as a business venture. The same is relevant to community-based tourism. Community-Based Organisations (CBO) have an option to team up with a private tourism entity in a joint venture or partnership agreement. UpCounsel (2019) clarifies that though a joint venture and a partnership involve an agreement between two parties or more, their difference lies in that joint ventures are short-term and are for a specific project. A partnership is more long-term and has no time defined for its end. Both business arrangements require some form of contribution that can be either; property, knowledge, money, effort, or talent (UpCounsel, 2019). The study findings are that joint venture agreements entail communities ceding land rights they hold for a fee which is proving to be insignificant as responses from trust leaders allude to this fact.

"Photographic tourism would be able to bring in more tourists if we had our facilities such as lodges, vehicles etc. But if we base our assessment only on land rentals, then there isn't much money, but we need to have opportunities to run our facilities. If we could move Kaziikini [camp site]
to be a fully-fledged 5-star lodge, then we will make money" (Interviewee 1-Trust leader). Mtapuri and Giampiccoli (2016, p. 159) caution that clarity of roles in a partnership should be formalised to alleviate any problems. Therefore, this has led Sankuyo CBO to consider a sole CBO operating arrangement. This means a CBO preceding teaming up with a private entity in a joint venture or partnership arrangement to autonomously operate their business venture. However, such an option presents a challenge as there is a need for skills in organising, marketing, funding, and business management for the venture to stand any chance of success (Mtapuri & Giampiccoli, 2016). Nonetheless, one of the participants stated, "Finances could be attained from donors and loans could be asked for, only under the condition that we have leases" (Interviewee 1-Trust leader). Where a CBO has confidence in the skills developed from constant interaction and knowledge transfer from private entities (as is the case with Sankuyo Trust, who have been in wildlife utilisation since 1996), running a venture independently should be a serious option to be considered. Therefore, the proposed strategy considers all three alternatives as options because CBOs without much access to skills will have to consider a partnership or joint venture arrangement, while those with developed skills capacity can run their own ventures (which is something that has not been done in the country as yet) for better returns.

Phase 4: Wildlife resources analysis
Wildlife is a critical resource for CBT in Botswana as most of the CBOs in the country had wildlife utilisation as a revenue earner prior to the ban of hunting in 2014 (CAR (Centre for Applied Research), 2016). However, the variety of wildlife resources in these areas is not the same. In fact, many of the concessions in northern Botswana have low photographic tourism potential as highlighted in the introduction, meaning that there is limited variety of wildlife resources in those areas (Winterbach et al., 2015). This made certain CBOs to struggle more than others, or in certain cases, some had no source of revenue at all after the ban of hunting as photographic tourism is limited by the availability of resources. Therefore, it is an aspect the proposed strategy considers as it has a bearing on possible products that can be developed in an area. In areas where there is an abundance of wildlife, communities have ecotourism ventures to fall back on, as it is the case in Sankuyo. However, where there is less variety of wildlife and scenic beauty, the communities have struggled, which is best illustrated in the case of Mmadinare community. The proposal is for communities found in each of these scenarios to consider other natural and cultural resources as alternatives to mitigate the loss of hunting revenue. Phase 5, therefore, further discuss the options in the diversification of products

Phase 5: Product development
The products development phase allows communities to consider possible products that are best possible for their communities. This can be in the form of consumptive and nonconsumptive wildlife tourism products. Prior to the ban of hunting, there was often lack of diversity in the products offering within communities, which reinforces the notion of dependence in a single source of revenue as well as complacency. Mbaiwa (2004c, p. 46) noted the lack of re-investment of revenue from hunting proceeds which ultimately led to misuse of such funds. This demonstrates the failure by communities to adequately diversify revenue sources even though funds were available, which ultimately had implications on their livelihoods and sustenance of the projects. Findings from the study highlighted the struggles experienced by communities due to the ban, even in communities where ecotourism was practised. Trust leaders in both communities decry the loss of revenue to the trusts and the employees who worked in hunting operations. The situation is even dire in places where photographic tourism is not viable like Mmadinare, which culminates in a financial struggle for survival by the trust as explain by the trust leader; "With there being a hunting ban, we have lost our source of revenue. At this current moment we are trying to get funding from different sources to fund our tourism projects however, it is causing a strain on the trust" (interviewee 3-Trust leader). Even in Sankuyo, where photographic tourism was present, there were struggles as noted by the Sankuyo participant; "We had no transition approach. The only trust that was well prepared was that of Khwai. However, areas such as Sankuyo were not ready. Since the ban, Sankuyo only started generating money two years later even though we still had Photographic Tourism" (interviewee 1-Trust Leader).
Therefore, the proposed strategy advocates for diversity of products to allay dependence on a single source, such as in the case of hunting. Currently, the natural resources base available in Botswana is varied. CAR (Centre for Applied Research;2016, p. 20) identifies 10 natural resource products, such as veld product, landscapes, terrestrial animals, birds, fish, thatching grass, firewood, heritage sites, and salt. All the resources are developed or ear-marked for development under the CBNRM programme, meaning communities are seen as an avenue towards their conservation. Therefore, the strategy calls for the diversification of products. Firstly, to relieve the dependency on wildlife resources which pose a risk to wildlife due to the proliferation on many impacts that can hamper conservation efforts. Secondly, to increase the income generating sources for communities which will increase benefits to communities and incentivise community members to participate in the conservation of all-natural resources they benefit from.

Products
As discussed above, not all communities are endowed with a wide variety of wildlife. CBOs can engage in ecotourism (non-consumptive) where the wildlife resource conditions allow them. Likewise, communities with limitations in variety of wildlife that attracts ecotourists, should consider consumptive or a mix of consumptive and other non-consumptive products other than wildlife to mitigate the loss in revenue. The study findings indicated the following themes in terms of products that can be developed in the communities.
• Natural resource utilisation (like fishing and dam tourism) • Cultural resource development The suggested products emanate from the findings as proposed by the participants. Former hunting employees and trust leaders proposed consumptive use of resources like fishing, hunting, game farming, and extraction of river sand to sell to the construction industry. One of the former hunting employees had this to say; "There is also fishing at the dam that can be done to benefit the community. I heard someone from a different community saying that they utilised river sand as a resource to sell and benefit the community. I think we can also do the same, we have sand here" (Employee 3). The trust leader in Mmadinare also proposed the creation of a game farm in one of the pieces of land the trust has for consumptive purposes. Other options are non-consumptive but rather looks to maximise the cultural resource base within communities as explained by one of the former hunting employees; "Most of the villagers are elderly. So, you find that there will be those that are woodcarvers, basket weavers, etc. I believe if there could be a craft shop where they could sell their crafts it would help" (Employee 2). The business operators also buttress the point of creating a platform for crafts to be displayed and sold to the tourism market, "Hey . . . What can be done? I think if there was a curio-shop in the village and then we have a person who can market these baskets. Then, the community shouldn't take a share in this arrangement" (Business 1). The BTO participant also concurs that cultural assets in our communities remain untapped; "I think our culture is one of the things we don't celebrate that much. In some countries there is no tourism like the one we have in Botswana, its only culture" (Representative 1). The community on the other hand simply believe tourism products should be increased (n = 9), lifting of the hunting ban (n = 9) and improvement in Human-Wildlife Conflict management (n = 18). Of those that propose an increase in tourism products, few specifics were given such as "agro-tourism", "Aqua-tourism" and increase in the number of campsites. Therefore, this demonstrates that a community may choose consumptive, non-consumptive or a mixture of options in their efforts to diversify their product base. Firstly, consumptive products that can be developed are wildlife farming and breeding, hunting tourism, fishing, and curios.

Game farms
Breeding of wildlife in game farms as an option requires land to develop. Nonetheless, the Mandarin community, for example, sit on land they acquired, which can be used for game farming and breeding. Game farms could be developed by any community as the most important requirement is land, which communities have in abundance. However, the skills required in this endeavour is not readily available, which prompted the Trust Leaders to opine that partnership should be the preferred business arrangement in this type of business venture. "However, after assessing our intentions, I realised that in order for us to build a lodge or farm game, we would need a certain level of expertise. We therefore then agreed that we would partner with those that had capital to inject into the project" (Interviewee 3[a trust leader]). The game farm suggestion is noteworthy when one considers the significant contribution of private game farms to the South African hunting industry (Saayman et al., 2018). The contribution is not only in monetary terms but conservation as well through increase in the number of species (Kitshoff, 2013) which leads to sustainability of resources. Furthermore, game farms could also be a source of game meat to the local market, thereby diversifying the market and revenue streams for communities. The South African example also comes to mind, where the "biltong hunting" which serves the local market is estimated to be five (5) times more than the trophy hunting sector (Saayman et al., 2018;. However, for this to materialise, a policy needs to be formulated to support this endeavour. The current policy, game ranching policy of 2002, does not cover game farming. In fact, the policy explicitly states that a different policy needs to be developed for game farming, which is a more intensive form of production than game ranching (Government of Botswana, 2002, p. 2).

Trophy hunting
Another product to be considered is hunting tourism as well as fishing. While the study's main aim is to mitigate the ban on hunting, findings show that there is a desire for the ban to be lifted, and hunting is needed in some areas. The trust leaders were very much adamant that lifting the ban will help dissuade community members from doing harm to wildlife; "The government should remove the hunting ban, or it will result in members of the community poisoning those animals" (Interviewee 1). The community members also support the lifting of the ban as one has poignantly put it; "open hunting camps and allow hunting to resume". Though the government of Botswana has reintroduced hunting towards the end of 2019, it only covered elephants (which are seen as the predominant problem animals), while hunting of other species remains banned.
The lifting of the ban is supported by the fact that Botswana practised a controlled hunting approach, where quotas were determined after survey data informed species to be hunted (Cassidy, 2000). The controlled hunting approach coupled with the noted increased number of certain species like buffaloes, along with elephants, calls for the re-consideration of the ban on hunting. One of the trust leaders reiterate this concern of increasing destruction of elephants; "After the hunting ban, elephants then became more of a liability than an asset as they began to destroy crops. Right now, we are unable to plant our crops because of the elephants" (interviewee 3). The wildlife resource conservation is threatened due to escalation in hostile attitude towards wildlife by communities. A percentage of 47.8% of community participants from both Sankuyo and Mmadinare rate their attitudes towards wildlife to be either negative or very negative. A further 68% believe that wildlife negatively affects community livelihoods. Mbaiwa (2018) cite similar sentiments from communities in his paper. These negative attitudes are worrisome as community buy-in is needed in the successful conservation of wildlife species. The animosity, therefore, threaten the sustainability of resources.

Curios
Finally, curios are also suggested as a consumptive option by small business operators and former hunting employees because animal by-products could be used in this endeavour. This will also supplement and increase art and craft products. Business operators believed that hunting afforded them the opportunity to explore other craft products, as was observed by one of the business participants; "But I learned that the porcupine quills needed license from the wildlife department for one to possess. So, I ended up going to wildlife to get the license. The license is called Dealer Trophy license . . . So, nowadays I make baskets but because I have a Dealer Trophy license, I can make leather jackets and hats" (Business 1). However, the use of animal by-products present supply challenges due to the ban on hunting, prompting the craft makers to resort to buying which eat at their profit and present sustainability challenges. One of the business operators buttresses this point "At present we resort to buying material from places like Shorobe village" (Business 2).
Communities can also consider non-consumptive products. Some of the products to be considered are art and culture-based, like cultural villages, cultural sites, and curios. Culture as a resource has been noted by various participants in the study; BTO representative, former hunting employees, and community members. Therefore, this demonstrates that the requisite resources for cultural products are available in the case study communities, which includes heritage sites already present in the case of Mmadinare. Additionally, cultural villages serve as an amalgam of cultural performances where villagers share their skill and knowledge in return for financial gain. The products could serve the domestic market as well, which presents an opportunity for the communities to diversify their market. Another non-consumptive product is water-based recreational activities especially in areas where there is presence of bodies of water-like Mmadinare which have a dam in its vicinity. Recreation, especially in less ecologically sensitive areas like dams are ideal to attract wide variety of clientele including the domestic market. This allows activities like water sports (e.g., jet skiing and speed boats), cruise and sport fishing.
Nonetheless, for the products to be developed, funding will be a critical factor, especially in communities with scarce variety of wildlife as they currently have no or limited revenue they accrue. However, various funding options are available that will aid in the realisation of these ventures. Notwithstanding all, other factors are needed to be addressed for the products to be successful, which are further explained in the next section.

Enabling environment
The findings from the empirical results alluded to various issues that were deemed to be current challenges that were raised by different participants. These challenges, together with findings on what the participants believed to be factors required for any strategy to work, informed the consideration of the enabling environment. This section is presented according to the themes identified by the findings.

Policy review
A critical factor in enabling a conducive environment is the legislative instrument. Findings in the study have shown that community participation is lacking as noted by the trust leadership, businesses, community members, and former hunting employees. The following sub-themes were advanced through analysis of input from all study participants.
• Unsatisfactory policy • Regulatory impediments Small business operators decry the current dispensation which require them to seek permission before accessing raw materials as noted by one business participant; "Regulations have been changed, I mean for those Safari companies who have been leased the land. So, for us to get access to harvest raw materials, we have to ask for permission from the Safari Operator" (Business 2). Trust leaders noted the side lining of communities in decision-making, even in lease agreements for the concessions they are meant to control; "Right now, the community has no say. The government signs leases with operators and excludes the communities in those lease agreements. It is difficult because the communities cannot raise issues with the operators because they don't appear anywhere in the lease agreement" (Interviewee 2). Communities on the other hand also feel left out, citing foreign dominance in the industry as something systematic; "The challenge I can talk about is that it's like the people from overseas have been given total control over our land" (Community Member). This anomaly was brought about by the introduction of the CBNRM policy. Therefore, communities' feel their powers have been appropriated by other stakeholders like TAC (Technical Advisory Committee) and private tourism operators, which defeats the basic crux of CBNRM to devolve powers to communities. As such, the bottom-up approach and increasing community participation (discussed in the Planning phase of the proposed strategy) will remain mere rhetoric until sections of the policy can be rationalised to align with the aim of the CBNRM model. Furthermore, the benefit-sharing model proposed in section 10.3 of the CBNRM policy (Government of Botswana, 2007, p. 14) is another area of concern. This provision means communities retain only 35% of their revenue which limits the full realisation of benefits by communities and threaten efforts to incentivise resource conservation. Therefore, this will impede communities in the development of other products and needs to be addressed for successful implementation of the mitigation strategy. For example, a policy on game farming is needed to address the breeding of wildlife and aid communities in diversifying their products.

Ease of bureaucratic processes
Bureaucratic challenges as highlighted in the study findings are both a result of the existing land management and licensing processes as well as the CBNRM policy itself. These have created an impediment on the functions of trusts and businesses. One of the trust leaders clarified the issue; "the government decided to take land from under the supervision of the land boards and into the land bank which meant that hunting concessions were managed by the Department of lands" (Interviewee 1). This department falls under a different ministry which complicates bureaucratic processes. The land issue is not the only process that requires inter-ministerial engagement. The same trust leader explained; thus, "Tourism processes are taxing and departments lack harmony. For example, at our boat station, we first have to go to Water Utilities Corporation to get rights, then go to DEA (Department of Environmental Affairs), who will require a project brief before they can allow you to do EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment). After that you need to go to Lands department to get land rights. After that, you go to the Department of Tourism for licensing after which if you have built a lodge then you go to the council for an occupation certificate". Therefore, there is need to straighten processes to ensure that they are efficient in delivering service to other stakeholders. Noted delays in licensing of operators and regulations that impede basket weavers in accessing raw materials will have a detrimental effect on the proposed mitigation.

Improvement of infrastructure
Infrastructural development has been a critical component in tourism development, so it is less surprising when study findings indicate that community members and former hunting employees want infrastructure to be improved. Some of the communities that engage in CBT, such as Sankuyo, are located in peripheral areas. This means certain developments lag behind like roads, telecommunications, and electricity, which then have an unfavourable effect on tourism development. One of the Former hunting employees made this assertion; "The problem right now is that our roads are bad. So, I think we need to improve the roads and provide electricity because there is no electricity so that developments can come" (Employee 1). Therefore, the improvement of infrastructure helps to create a conducive environment for tourism development and aid the mitigation strategies to be successful.

Improvement of Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) management
Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC) is a long-running issue in communities in peripheral areas and one of the catalysts of CBNRM adoption during its inception (Lindsey et al., 2007;Mutanga et al., 2015;Winterbach et al., 2015). Human-wildlife conflict is also a problem that was prevalent before the ban of hunting in 2014 and escalated due to the ban. Therefore, one of the issues communities would want an improvement on, is the management of HWC. HWC has an impact on an individuals' livelihoods which are derived through farming. Therefore, the following suggestions were made by the community members as to how the issue might be addressed; "Educate people in the community on wildlife tolerance to prevent conflict between the two"; "Fence farming area to keep out animals to allow farming to thrive"; "Use escort guides to fight Human-Wildlife Conflict"; "Improve management skills in the community".
The fact that farming is a core livelihood in these areas means income from tourism and wildlife utilisation is supplementary to traditional livelihoods (McGranahan, 2011) and therefore there is need to address HWC by improving management efforts. Improved management will ensure sustainability of wildlife resources while at the same time safeguarding community livelihoods which in itself is a mitigation in the ban of hunting.

Capacity building
The issue of capacity building as a factor in the success of CBT is noted in the literature (Kontogeorgopoulos et al., 2014;Manyara & Jones, 2007;Silva & Wimalaratana, 2013). The study findings also allude to skills capacitation as a factor, either as a gap that needs to be addressed in board trustees and employees or there is the adequacy of skills enough to allow a trust to run its own operations. However, what is of concern is that there seems to be limited deliberate efforts to capacitate communities as expressed by a BTO representative. The organisation resorts to encouraging this endeavour instead of making deliberate efforts to upskill members involved in community projects. The representative had this to say; "We encourage, we shouldn't forget that we are in competition with the rest of the world so obviously the output/services that we provide should be of quality". The lack of effort to capacitate communities hampers their empowerment, limiting and frustrating communities' efforts in mitigation initiatives. Therefore, building skills capacity creates an environment conducive for the realisation of initiatives intended to mitigate the impact of hunting and ensure their sustainability.

Marketing
Marketing is a factor that has come out in the literature review as one of the challenges bedevilling CBT initiatives. The issue of marketing is linked to skill capacity building as it is quite often a result of lack of skills. The study findings also allude to the need for marketing of community produced services and products to aid their distribution as a factor that can lead to the success of mitigation. Marketing ensures that there is access to the market for the products and services from CBT and this entails specialised skills to reach the international market, which is the predominant market in the consumption of nature-based and community-based tourism in Botswana. The findings note the support offered by the Botswana Tourism Organisation (BTO) in providing an avenue for local producers to access international markets. However, such efforts are not enough as the local Travel and Tourism Expo that is offered as a marketing initiative, does not have the appeal yet, to draw a good number of international operators as other well-established expo's do. Furthermore, the exposure is not commensurate with building capacity in the area of marketing which still leaves communities dependent on BTO experts for anything marketing related.

Funding
At the centre of the mitigation strategy is the utilisation of natural and cultural alternative products as illustrated in Figure 3 Therefore, there is a need for capital to get most of the products off the ground, making funding a critical aspect for the success of the mitigation. The trust leader's participants mentioned the myriad alternatives that can be pursued to avail funding for products to be developed. There is a mention of the Conservation Trust (which was created by the CBNRM policy to fund conservation efforts), external conservation donor funding and even funding from local banks are some options advanced by the participants. One of the trust leaders had this to say; "Finances could be attained from donors and loans could be asked for, due to the condition that we have leases. With the leases we can even approach a bank to finance the building of the lodge" (Interviewee 1). However, land in some areas remains undeveloped despite the availability of funding options. Therefore, there is need to address other issues discussed in the "enabling environment" section before funding becomes a reality. For example, ease of bureaucratic processes is needed to address issues especially surrounding the issuance of leases, skill capacity needs to be built on areas of business management and marketing and improvement of infrastructure to aid development and movement of goods and customers, are some of the issues discussed that have a bearing on the successful attainment of funding from some of the funding sources available. Furthermore, the suitability of donor funding is questionable as studies have noted that most of the CBT projects are dependent on such support so much that without external funds they will cease to exist (Harrison & Schipani, 2007;Mitchell & Muckosy, 2008;Rainforest Alliance & Conservation International, ND in, 2008;Lenao, 2015). Inskeep (1991, p. 450) argue that evaluation of progress in tourism development is essential as it helps to monitor the impact of the development on communities and to determine how objectives are effectively met. As mentioned in the discussion of phase 1 of the strategy, it is important for the stakeholders to set and agree on the main objective of initiating a CBT project. It is the set objective that will influence the rest of the other phases in the facilitation process of a project. Nonetheless, irrespective of the project's objective, one needs to note the overriding objective of the CBNRM programme of conservation through incentivising community participation. In that case, CBT projects have to incorporate the CBNRM objective in setting their own objectives. Therefore, evaluation of how effective the objectives have been met is necessary as unmet objectives have a negative bearing on conservation of resources. A world conservation strategy document by IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources; 1980) noted the cure and prevention roles of a strategy by addressing current problems while allowing stakeholders to anticipate and avoid problems in the future through an evaluation process. The proposed strategy will allow the objectives to be redefined through feedback from the evaluation. The feedback will also help to constantly improve the enabling environment. The evaluation process in the strategy will be guided by the four principles advanced by UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation; 2009) for community-based projects. The evaluation needs to be participatory (including all stakeholders' direct interest), negotiable (allow the evaluation process to be agreed by stakeholders), learning centred (establish process of how lessons learned will be used) and Flexible (be adaptable to changing factors affecting the management of CBT projects).

Conclusion
The paper set out to present a revised CBT strategy drawing lessons from the experiences of the ban of trophy hunting in Botswana to improve the accrued revenue to local communities and community participation in resource management for a sustainable utilisation and conservation of natural resource. The main contribution of the revised strategy is to address the current CBT models' shortcomings. This was achieved by incorporating three elements that are central to the sustainability of CBT management and success; (i) Factors to facilitate the process of setting-up CBT initiatives, (ii) consideration of the enabling environment and (iii) allow for evaluation and feedback on the operations of the CBT to ensure continued improvements. Firstly, the process of starting CBT initiatives is a five-stage process that consider different factors which are best relevant to the utilization of natural resources of a particular area. The revised strategy also contributes that for CBT to be successful, public organisations need to create and aid a conducive environment that can enable local communities to derive maximum return from their participation in CBT projects. Finally, all stakeholders need to participate in and ensure that evaluation processes are in place for the realisation of the set objectives by making regular adjustments in order to achieve such.

Study limitations and further research
There were a few critical limitations that affected the study. The first was the limited perspective of the public sector in the study due to the withdrawal of the ministry participant. This meant that the government's perspective was limited to one participant from Botswana Tourism Organisation. Though BTO is relevant, given its role in CBNRM management, it might not best represent the government's position as the ministry would have done as it is a quasi-governmental organisation. This limited the study. The second limitation was financial resources, which limited the choice of case study communities to only those that were easily accessible due to their proximity to major villages or towns. This, therefore, meant that the length of time the community had been involved in CBNRM was not considered. The longer length in CBNRM means communities have more experiences to share and future research should consider this aspect in approach to selection of case study communities.
Future research should focus on finding the best approach to improve the management of Human-Wildlife Conflict (HWC). HWC is a longstanding issue which has implications on resource sustainability. The study also recommends that further research be undertaken to determine a balanced revenue distribution model for communities. The status quo is that communities retain 35% of revenue from CBNRM projects as prescribed by the policy. However, the literature demonstrates that CBOs struggle to achieve financial sustainability (see discussions on Policy Review above) as they fail to break-even, and others are not making enough to invest in capital expenditure.