skip to main content
10.1145/3448696.3448708acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesafrichiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Integrating a community-based co-designed wildlife activity recording tool into a multi-stakeholder conservation management system

Published: 08 July 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Namibia has successfully implemented a community-based natural resource management approach since independence. Considering the increasing number of conservation challenges within the global ecosystem, conservation techniques and tools need to be locally appropriated and integrated into wider data network infrastructures. Hence, in this paper, we reflect on how a wildlife activity recording tool, co-designed with indigenous communities in Northern Namibia, performs in terms of interaction in the field, integrates into a wider multi-stakeholder conservation management process and its likely sustainability. We conclude that local technology developments need to involve representatives from all stakeholder groups and consider appropriation issues of existing systems.

References

[1]
Mark Andrachuk, Melissa Marschke, Charlotte Hings, and Derek Armitage. 2019. Smartphone technologies supporting community-based environmental monitoring and implementation: a systematic scoping review. Biological Conservation 237 (2019), 430–442.
[2]
Amaury Belin and Yannick Prié. 2012. DIAM: towards a model for describing appropriation processes through the evolution of digital artifacts. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 645–654.
[3]
Oded Berger-Tal and José J Lahoz-Monfort. 2018. Conservation technology: The next generation. Conservation Letters 11, 6 (2018), e12458.
[4]
Elizabeth Bondi, Debadeepta Dey, Ashish Kapoor, Jim Piavis, Shital Shah, Fei Fang, Bistra Dilkina, Robert Hannaford, Arvind Iyer, Lucas Joppa, 2018. Airsim-w: A simulation environment for wildlife conservation with uavs. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies. 1–12.
[5]
Michael Bosomefi Chamunorwa, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, and Tariq Zaman. 2020. Bridging Internet Coverage Gaps among Nomadic Pastoralists in Namibia. In Companion Publication of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 179–183.
[6]
Chi-Yeung Choi, He-Bo Peng, Peng He, Xiao-Tong Ren, Shen Zhang, Micha V Jackson, Xiaojing Gan, Ying Chen, Yifei Jia, Maureen Christie, 2019. Where to draw the line? Using movement data to inform protected area design and conserve mobile species. Biological Conservation 234 (2019), 64–71.
[7]
Pedro de Araujo Lima Constantino, Henrique Santiago Alberto Carlos, Emiliano Esterci Ramalho, Luke Rostant, Carlos Eduardo Marinelli, Davi Teles, Sinomar Fonseca Fonseca-Junior, Rômulo Batista Fernandes, and João Valsecchi. 2012. Empowering local people through community-based resource monitoring: a comparison of Brazil and Namibia. Ecology and Society 17, 4 (2012).
[8]
Kristin Hanks, William Odom, David Roedl, and Eli Blevis. 2008. Sustainable millennials: attitudes towards sustainability and the material effects of interactive technologies. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 333–342.
[9]
Nicola J Bidwell. 2020. Wireless in the Weather-world and Community Networks Made to Last. In Proceedings of the 16th Participatory Design Conference 2020-Participation (s) Otherwise-Volume 1. 126–136.
[10]
Margaret Jacobsohn and Garth Owen-Smith. 2003. Integrating conservation and development: a Namibian case study. Nomadic Peoples (2003), 92–109.
[11]
Jesús Jiménez López and Margarita Mulero-Pázmány. 2019. Drones for conservation in protected areas: present and future. Drones 3, 1 (2019), 10.
[12]
Anne Borge Johannesen and Anders Skonhoft. 2005. Tourism, poaching and wildlife conservation: what can integrated conservation and development projects accomplish?Resource and Energy Economics 27, 3 (2005), 208–226.
[13]
Admela Jukan, Xavi Masip-Bruin, and Nina Amla. 2017. Smart computing and sensing technologies for animal welfare: A systematic review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 50, 1 (2017), 1–27.
[14]
Gereon Koch Kapuire, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, Colin Stanley, Donovan Maasz, Michael Chamunorwa, U Mbinge, DG Cabrero, RH Moller, and K Rodil. 2016. Technologies to promote the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge holders in digital cultural heritage preservation. In International Conference on Culture & Computer Science.
[15]
Leen Lambers. 2020. How to Teach Software Testing? Experiences with a Sandwich Approach. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation Workshops (ICSTW). IEEE, 425–428.
[16]
SM Lendelvo, M Pinto, and S Sullivan. 2020. A perfect storm? The impact of COVID-19 on community-based conservation in Namibia. Namibian Journal of the Environment 4 (2020), 1–15.
[17]
Francine Madden. 2004. Creating coexistence between humans and wildlife: global perspectives on local efforts to address human–wildlife conflict. Human dimensions of wildlife 9, 4 (2004), 247–257.
[18]
Muthoni Masinde. 2013. Survivability to sustainability of biodiversity: what do ICTs and indigenous knowledge have to do with it?. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Information and Communications Technologies and Development: Notes-Volume 2. 80–83.
[19]
Andrew Maunder, Gary Marsden, Dominic Gruijters, and Edwin Blake. 2007. Designing interactive systems for the developing world-reflections on user-centred design. In 2007 International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development. IEEE, 1–8.
[20]
Aires Afonso Mbanze, Natasha Sofia Ribeiro, Carina Vieira da Silva, and José Lima Santos. 2019. An expert-based approach to assess the potential for local people engagement in nature conservation: the case study of the Niassa National Reserve in Mozambique. Journal for Nature Conservation 52 (2019), 125759.
[21]
Mariah H Meek, Caitlin Wells, Katharine M Tomalty, Jaime Ashander, Esther M Cole, Daphne A Gille, Breanna J Putman, Jonathan P Rose, Matthew S Savoca, Lauren Yamane, 2015. Fear of failure in conservation: the problem and potential solutions to aid conservation of extremely small populations. Biological Conservation 184 (2015), 209–217.
[22]
Jayalaxshmi Mistry and Andrea Berardi. 2016. Bridging indigenous and scientific knowledge. Science 352, 6291 (2016), 1274–1275.
[23]
Chris Muashekele, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, and Gereon Koch Kapuire. 2019. Co-Design as a Means of Fostering Appropriation of Conservation Monitoring Technology by Indigenous Communities. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Communities & Technologies-Transforming Communities. 126–130.
[24]
Philip Muruthi. 2005. Human wildlife conflict: lessons learned from AWF’s African heartlands. African Wildlife Federation, Washington, DC, USA (2005).
[25]
NACSO. [n.d.]. NACSO. http://www.nacso.org.na/
[26]
Robin Naidoo, L Chris Weaver, Marie De Longcamp, and Pierre Du Plessis. 2011. Namibia’s community-based natural resource management programme: an unrecognized payments for ecosystem services scheme. Environmental Conservation 38, 4 (2011), 445–453.
[27]
Jessica L Oliver, Margot Brereton, David M Watson, and Paul Roe. 2019. Listening to save wildlife: Lessons learnt from use of acoustic technology by a species recovery team. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 1335–1348.
[28]
Stuart L Pimm, Sky Alibhai, Richard Bergl, Alex Dehgan, Chandra Giri, Zoë Jewell, Lucas Joppa, Roland Kays, and Scott Loarie. 2015. Emerging technologies to conserve biodiversity. Trends in ecology & evolution 30, 11 (2015), 685–696.
[29]
Kasper Rodil and Heike Winschiers-Theophilus. 2015. Indigenous storytelling in Namibia: sketching concepts for digitization. In 2015 International Conference on Culture and Computing (Culture Computing). IEEE, 80–86.
[30]
Kasper Rodil, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, Kasper L Jensen, and Matthias Rehm. 2012. Homestead creator: a tool for indigenous designers. In Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design. 627–630.
[31]
Fiona Ssozi-Mugarura, Ulrike Rivett, and Edwin Blake. 2016. Using activity theory to understand technology use and perception among rural users in uganda. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development. 1–10.
[32]
Colin Stanley, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, Edwin Blake, Kasper Rodil, and Gereon Koch Kapuire. 2015. Ovahimba community in Namibia ventures into crowdsourcing design. University of Cape Town.
[33]
Igor Steinmacher, Tayana Uchoa Conte, Christoph Treude, and Marco Aurélio Gerosa. 2016. Overcoming open source project entry barriers with a portal for newcomers. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering. 273–284.
[34]
Moren Tibabo Stone and Gyan Nyaupane. 2014. Rethinking community in community-based natural resource management. Community Development 45, 1 (2014), 17–31.
[35]
Greg Stuart-Hill, Richard Diggle, Bevan Munali, Jo Tagg, and David Ward. 2005. The event book system: a community-based natural resource monitoring system from Namibia. Biodiversity & Conservation 14, 11 (2005), 2611–2631.
[36]
Sarah Webber, Marcus Carter, Jason Watters, Bethany Krebs, Sally Sherwen, Clara Mancini, Fiona French, Kenton O’Hara, and Fiona French. 2016. HCI Goes to the Zoo: [Workshop Proposal]. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 3355–3362.
[37]
Florian J Weise, Helmut Hauptmeier, Ken J Stratford, Matthew W Hayward, Konstantin Aal, Marcus Heuer, Mathata Tomeletso, Volker Wulf, Michael J Somers, and Andrew B Stein. 2019. Lions at the gates: Trans-disciplinary design of an early warning system to improve human-lion coexistence. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 6 (2019), 242.
[38]
David Western, John Waithaka, and John Kamanga. 2015. Finding space for wildlife beyond national parks and reducing conflict through community-based conservation: the Kenya experience. Parks 21, 1 (2015), 51–62.
[39]
Piran CL White and Alastair I Ward. 2011. Interdisciplinary approaches for the management of existing and emerging human–wildlife conflicts. Wildlife Research 37, 8 (2011), 623–629.
[40]
Andrea Wiggins and Yurong He. 2016. Community-based data validation practices in citizen science. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on computer-supported cooperative work & social computing. 1548–1559.
[41]
Heike Winschiers-Theophilus and Nicola J Bidwell. 2013. Toward an Afro-Centric indigenous HCI paradigm. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 29, 4(2013), 243–255.
[42]
Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, Nicola J Bidwell, and Edwin Blake. 2012. Community consensus: Design beyond participation. Design Issues 28, 3 (2012), 89–100.
[43]
Matt Ziegler. 2019. Who Breathes the Smoke: Technologies for Community-Based Natural Resource Management. In Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. 1–10.
[44]
Matt Ziegler, Morgan Wack, Nancy Ingutia, Ian Muiruri, Nicholas Njogu, Kennedy Muriithi, William Njoroge, James Long, and Kurtis Heimerl. 2020. Can Phones Build Relationships? A Case Study of a Kenyan Wildlife Conservancy’s Community Development. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCAS Conference on Computing and Sustainable Societies. 219–230.

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Infusing Futuring into Community-based Co-design: A Pathway to Innovative Technology Design with Indigenous Communities in AfricaProceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference10.1145/3628096.3629049(151-161)Online publication date: 27-Nov-2023
  • (2022)Namibian Experiences Establishing Community Fish ReservesLand10.3390/land1103042011:3(420)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2022

Index Terms

  1. Integrating a community-based co-designed wildlife activity recording tool into a multi-stakeholder conservation management system
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Information & Contributors

        Information

        Published In

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        AfriCHI '21: Proceedings of the 3rd African Human-Computer Interaction Conference: Inclusiveness and Empowerment
        March 2021
        182 pages
        ISBN:9781450388696
        DOI:10.1145/3448696
        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        Published: 08 July 2021

        Permissions

        Request permissions for this article.

        Check for updates

        Author Tags

        1. Conservation
        2. Conservation technology
        3. Indigenous communities
        4. Namibia

        Qualifiers

        • Short-paper
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Funding Sources

        • European Union

        Conference

        AfriCHI 2021

        Contributors

        Other Metrics

        Bibliometrics & Citations

        Bibliometrics

        Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)32
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
        Reflects downloads up to 24 Jan 2025

        Other Metrics

        Citations

        Cited By

        View all
        • (2023)Infusing Futuring into Community-based Co-design: A Pathway to Innovative Technology Design with Indigenous Communities in AfricaProceedings of the 4th African Human Computer Interaction Conference10.1145/3628096.3629049(151-161)Online publication date: 27-Nov-2023
        • (2022)Namibian Experiences Establishing Community Fish ReservesLand10.3390/land1103042011:3(420)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2022

        View Options

        Login options

        View options

        PDF

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format.

        HTML Format

        Figures

        Tables

        Media

        Share

        Share

        Share this Publication link

        Share on social media