Pages

Thursday, April 30, 2015

Winning policy lessons from the Great Elephant Debate

In Summary
By KWAME OWINO
More by this Author
On April 25, 2015, I joined up with two friends to debate elephant conservation policy at an event hosted by the Brookhouse School in Nairobi.
Our side that argued that elephant conservation policy in Kenya was wrong-headed and reform is required today. This debate was the culmination of intense publicity under the catchphrase#Tweet4Elephants.
While the debate was conducted before an audience of more than 200 people, there was no straw poll to determine which side won by persuading the larger audience about its case. Thanks to technology, the full debate can be found here(the main debate starts at 00:49).
Instead of rehashing the points made by opposing teams, I choose to consider the lessons that I learned about how professionals form and communicate policy ideas in Kenya.
The team that I was on argued that Kenya should rethink conservation policy and develop a wider portfolio of economic instruments in conservation.
The standing argument for conservation has involved the maintenance of ban on trade in ivory, augmenting the resources available to the Kenya Wildlife Services (KWS) and to burn stockpiles of existing ivory in Kenya.
I refer to this strategy as the policy trifecta: “Ban, more Money and Burn”. This trifecta has been the major approach and produced the unacceptable result that now confronts this generation.
It implies that the major refrain in Kenya is ‘if a familiar policy idea fails to work, then double up on it’, an idea not only manifested in conservation policy but also in agriculture, where sugar-milling firms that have been losing public money for 30 years still argue that if the policy were applied strictly for one more year, then all would be well.
In other words, ‘our policy is good but just suffers from poor implementation’. In general, the ability to admit that a policy experiment has failed and needs replacement is a huge problem in Kenya.
STATUES AND TRINKETS
Also, like most issues that require multilateral solutions, banning ivory trade puts Kenya in situation where conservation policy is consistent with the US policy position, but in conflict with China’s.
So while Kenyan citizens may advocate a tougher stance in Kenya’s diplomacy, they are not sure the government is willing to take that stand. Thus the communication that filled the hall alluded to what Chinese feelings would be if “Kenyans slaughtered pandas”. This doesn’t work because the Chinese government would need to be persuaded to restrict the rights of its citizens to purchase statues and trinkets that many really want to buy.
Congo's President Denis Sassou-Nguesso (C) and
Congo's President Denis Sassou-Nguesso (C) and Chad's President Idriss Deby (2nd L) light afire a five-ton stockpile of ivory tusks siezed from poaching and trafficking on April 29, 2015, in Brazzaville. AFP PHOTO | LAUDES MARTIAL MBON
Thus, while I consider that the trifecta is neither necessary nor sufficient to save elephants, the argument needs to be framed in less polarising terms.
More informed communication that is focused on results would try and persuade the government of China that ensuring elephant conservation is in its interest too. This is one area in which trying to use US power as leverage against China would delay positive reform substantially.
While our team conceded that there is a place for ideology in informing policy discourse, we were alarmed by the absence of data-driven analysis to inform Kenya’s conservation policy. One member of our team stated, to the consternation of the audience, that a century and a half ago, this continent had 27 million elephants. That we are now down to under a million suggests that this majestic animal is heading towards extinction.
SELECTED AUTHORS
I was surprised as well by hands-on conservationists in the region who communicated with me, claiming that there is a dearth of economic analysis to inform conservation policy.
This confirms the danger facing policy communities in which the majority have contact with selected authors within their discipline and not others. Policy discourse on conservation will benefit greatly from cross-disciplinary thinking.
At the end of the debate, it was evident that there are many well-meaning people who worry about the fate of the African Elephant. It is upon those in my team to persistently invite them to the view that markets are appropriate instruments for achieving broad goals.
It is possible to experiment with a variety of market solutions, stabilise the population of elephants and even see them thrive beyond this generation. That would ensure that the debate was not just fun on a rainy evening. Using government’s coercive power through the trifecta will not suffice.
Kwame Owino is the Chief executive Officer of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA-Kenya), a public policy think tank based in Nairobi. Twitter: @IEAKwame

No comments:

Post a Comment