tayna-impact

Displacement: Large numbers of people originally from the villages within the borders of the Tayna reserve and displaced by civil conflict have taken refuge in the town of Kasugho (Tchoumba 2011: 13). The few small villages located within the agreed ‘integral zone’ (see livelihoods section below) were encouraged to relocate through the provision of “magnet centres” outside the integral zone. These magnet centres offered clinics, schools and alternative livelihoods (Melhman 2010: 98).

Diminished livelihoods: The zoning plan for the reserve includes an integral zone where no exploitation of natural resources is permitted (with restrictions similar to that of a National Park). But the zoning plan, which was reportedly devised according to a participatory methodology, also provides for a ‘buffer zone’ extending 5 km from the limits of the integral zone, where current residents may remain and continue their pastoral and agricultural activities. It also provides for a ‘development zone’ outside of the reserve, where regular livelihood activities are permitted (Melhman 2010: 98).

Conflicts: No reports of conflicts have arisen.

Human rights abuses: No human rights abuses were reported.

Income generating activities: All staff hired for the Tayna project are from the local area. Former hunters were hired as trackers, and with a regular salary, they earned much more than they would have from subsistence hunting or local trade of bushmeat. Most staff have remained with the project as of 2010. (Mehlman 2010: 94). A number of development projects were also put in place in exchange for communities’ support for conservation in the area, including the construction of a small hydroelectric power station as well as the rehabilitation of clinics and schools (Yanggen, Angu, Tchamu: 146).

Presence of indigenous peoples: No reported indigenous presence.

Prior consultation: Tayna field staff began working with local villages throughout 2001 and 2002 to sensitise communities on the potential benefits of having a reserve and to define its limits (Yanggen, Angu, & Tchamou, 2010: 75-76). There are reports of land rights holders having signed a pledge of commitment, which is being interpreted as their consent for the project. However, there are concerns that this consent was given on the basis of partial and incomplete information and that it was obtained through overly-optimistic promises that the project would bring significant development and personal gain. (Tchoumba 2011: 9).

Participation and consultation: A CARPE report hails it as the first officially recognised community-managed reserve in DRC (Mehlman 2010). Local communities were able to find legitimate representation to voice their conservation cause, while all local political negotiations were handled by a local NGO (Mehlman 2010). However, concerns about a lack of adequate involvement of local communities have been raised, particularly in connection to a pilot REDD project being developed in the area (Tchoumba 2011).