Waging War for Wildlife. Green Militarization in Sub-Saharan Anti-poaching strategies

(1)

D__D5!

7Dg7ǝ

ǝ5s

J8ĺ7#1#SJ#lS#=8ĺ#8ĺNWĮN"J8ĺ8S#ĮG= "#8ĺNSJS#N

/ÓªĺJĝĺÓpªĺ¼¯ª ¯¼ÀÆ ÓÀ¯¼ėĺ¼ĝĺ-¯¼Úĺ7pÆÆÚÀ WªÓ¼ÀÆÚĺ¯ĺ1ª a¯¼|¯ÊªÆėĺîïĘóñë ĺÆÀÀĺÀÊ{©ÆÆĺ¯¼ĺÆĺ¼ĺ¯ĺ7pÀÆ¼Àĺ¯ĺ ¼ÀÀĺpªĺN|Ê¼ÆÚĺ7pªp©ªÆ ÊÊÀÆĺììĘĺíëìñ

(2)

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Situation Overview

Poaching as a criminal act has existed since the beginnings of landownership. During the 17th and 18th centuries, poaching was committed as an act of desperation by starving peasantry and even became a venerated facet of the civil disobedience depicted in early English ballads (Gregory, 2010: 53,338). An inability to curb the act of poaching in Britain led to the erection of many statutes, laws and regulations. The Waltham Black Act of 1723 made illegal hunting a capital crime, and spurred several small-scale conflicts resulting in the deaths of gamekeepers and many more poachers (Moore & Banham, 2014). Though bloody clashes occurred, the act of counter-poaching was strictly a matter of policing, and those captured would be prosecuted and imprisoned or hanged (Kirby, 1933:242). At this point in history, hunting was reserved for the upper echelons of society and the motivation for illegal hunting was traditionally borne out of necessity. The later international commodification of rare pelts, horns, tusks and furs generated a new breed of poacher, and those seeking to preserve heritage, maintain sovereignty, and conserve endangered species have found themselves at the forefront of a steadily escalating conflict.

Legislation and conservation efforts in the United States in the 19th century saw the policing of poaching escalate into armed conflict reaching an apex in 1891, when Canadian poachers caused the near extinction of seals near the Aleutian Islands (Ellsworth, 1974:14). At the behest of the U.S. Naturalist society, President William Henry Harrison commanded naval and marine intervention in an incident known as The Bering Sea Anti-Poaching Operations (15). This event marked the first instance of the utilization of military forces to ensure the preservation of an endangered species. The incredibly lucrative nature of the exotic animal market had effectively raised the stakes for both poacher and park ranger, leading to an all-out arms race on both sides of the fence.

Today in many regions of Africa, this same violence has reached a fever pitch. The Garamba National Park (GNP) of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is one such example, having become the scene of increasing violence as a result of highly-organized and heavily-armed gangs of poachers. Over 78 elephants were killed in a two-month period in 2014, several of which poachers gunned down by helicopter with marksman precision (Christy, 2014). Tusks, tails, brains and genitals were removed using chainsaws, and the rest of the carcasses were abandoned, dispelling ideas of subsistence poaching (FFI, 2014). Park rangers reported being overwhelmed in organized assaults

(5)

2

with fully automatic weaponry and fragmentation grenades. In June 2015, three rangers were killed in an ambush while attempting to track poachers (African Parks, 2015). A few months later, GNP rangers suffered four more fatalities while attempting to intercept a gang of poachers. The rescue helicopter dispatched to evacuate the remaining rangers took heavy fire and was nearly shot down in the process (Walley, 2015). High ivory demand has created an illicit market where opportunity to gain from poaching is higher than ever, and as a result, counter-poaching has become even more deadly (Christy, 2015). Today, GNP rangers report military style engagements with members of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), South Sudanese rebel gangs, and even Congolese military deserters (Walley, 2015). Combined, these gangs of commercial poachers have become a lethal and overwhelming threat not only to the park rangers and wildlife of GNP, but to the security of the entire region.

Escalating violence and rapidly declining elephant populations have raised alarms throughout the international community. The World Wildlife Foundation (WWF), European Union (EU), USAID and countless other bilateral, multilateral and non-governmental organizations and institutions contribute to the anti-poaching cause by donating millions of dollars worth of tools and equipment, and providing military training for park rangers (NGOPulse, 2015). Still, despite all funding and efforts, the rate of poaching in many countries has only accelerated. For several organizations, provided aid functions more as a desperate attempt to ‘do something’ rather than as part of a coherent policy strategy (Duffy, 1999:106). Other organizations look to technology for solutions. Google, in conjunction with the WWF, has invested millions of dollars in search of high tech solutions (Boyle, 2012), which some refer to as the quest for a ‘silver bullet’ (IAPF, 2015). While some technology has shown limited promise (i.e. Hart, et al. 2015), the most effective counter-poaching efforts are often low-tech, involving tedious patrols, long hours, good field-craft, and exceptional discipline (Henk, 2007). As one experienced ranger put it: “nothing beats a real dog” (Wall, 2014).

Rapid militarization and ever dwindling populations of endangered species in many regions have driven conflict to a military scale. To the international community, poachers threaten beloved mega-fauna (large mammals); an increasingly scarce natural resource (Padgett, 1995). To those living in the DRC however, poachers threaten the sovereignty, economic prosperity and future of the nation (DRC, 2015). The proliferation of cheap military grade hardware and ammunition has allowed ringleaders to furnish and deploy large commercial poaching gangs willing to engage in combat with park rangers. The use of militarized forces for conservation is referred to by Elizabeth Lunstrum (2014) as green militarization. The concept of green militarization forms the foundation of this thesis,

(6)

3

exploring the link between militarized responses and counter-poaching effectiveness. By researching the training, tactics, and technology of counter-poaching units across six Sub-Saharan nations, it is possible to determine which aspects of militarization have been successful, and whether increased green militarization is a potential solution to the problem of poaching. For the purpose of this thesis, I pose the question:

1.2 Research Question

To what extent can militarized counter-poaching initiatives provide effective protection of elephants within DRC’s Garamba National Park?

1.3 Scientific and Societal Relevance

1.3.1 Academic Relevance

Poaching has captured the attention of the international community, with a host of national bodies pledging assistance in the preservation of mega-fauna. In 1980, the United Nations listed GNP as a World Heritage protected site (UNESCO, 2016), and the United States Agency for International Development contributed over $55 million in 2014 toward counter-poaching initiatives (USAID, 2016). In order to best determine which measures or strategies to fund in countering the threat of poaching, all policy options and implementation strategies must be thoroughly explored and researched. This places this research within the interests of public policy and administration.

Governing bodies are not the only entities interested in combating poaching. Each year, private organizations invest millions of dollars in counter-poaching initiatives (NGOPulse, 2015). This aid can come in the form of equipment, vehicles, new technology, or training. Several studies have shown that for park rangers, skill, expertise, strategy and perseverance have been instrumental in counter-poaching successes. Despite this, a hesitance to provide advisory or tactical support exists in NGO decision-making. In what NGOs often consider the “tragic choice” (Avant, 2004:365), the use of private military consulting or provider firms is often regarded as an endorsement of violence and reckless behavior (369). With adequate academic research regarding the potential effectiveness of green militarization, investment strategies in counter-poaching efforts can be guided more effectively. In the academic community, numerous studies have been conducted regarding the increasing militarization of police forces and border control agencies. While there is significant debate as to the merits of ‘militarization’ and which factors actually indicate militarization, very little research regarding the potential role of green militarization in conservation has been conducted. In her report “Green Militarization”, Lunstrum (2014) referred to a “surprising lack of scholarly investigation” into the phenomenon of militarization in conservation efforts (818). Since the practice of militarized

(7)

4

counter-poaching initiatives is only increasing (Caulderwood, 2015), the lack of research into its effectiveness or even identification demonstrates a clear knowledge gap.

Though the role rangers play is undoubtedly critical to the overall goal of the reduction of poaching behavior, rule of law, governmental effectives, corruption control, and the existence of political stability all also greatly contribute. The role of good governance is important to understand if progress against poaching is to be made. From an academic standpoint, understanding green militarization in the context of a state’s capacity to govern is necessary to draw broader conclusions.

1.3.2 Societal Relevance

With ongoing violence and instability in Central African nations, it is fair to ask why the survival of mega-fauna, particularly elephants, matters. Today, poaching is an extremely lucrative business. Despite the recent decline in ivory prices in China (Cornish, 2016), a single tusk is valued more than a pound of gold (Branford, 2014, Clark & Fears, 2014). With overwhelmed, fragile, or nonexistent court systems and highly porous borders, poachers have everything to gain, and very little to lose (Koross, 2013). Those that engage in poaching activities often have ties to criminal organizations, the success of which increases regional instability and decreases human security. Arguments advocating international intervention in conservation matters (such as the protection of nearly eradicated mountain gorilla populations) typically stem from the same responsibility to protect (R2P) principles as those that address genocides, war crimes and ethnic cleansing (Duffy, 2014:821). The unparalleled nature and an abundance of wildlife in GNP should logically generate a thriving tourism industry, but regional conflict and high levels of violence have secured north eastern DRC a fixed position on the U.S. government travel warning list. Though poaching is by no means the only criminal activity threatening the region, poaching serves to fund further criminal enterprise. Botswana’s swift militarization of counter-poaching initiatives led to ecotourism providing 12% of GDP in 2002 (Henk, 2005), and 15% by 2015 (Konopo, 2015). One report found that a single elephant’s tusks hold a current raw value of $21,000USD, 76 times lower than a live elephant’s potential lifetime tourism value of $1,607,624,83 (Branford, 2014). Based on these figures, Africa’s tourism industry has suffered a loss of $44,554,844.47 in 2014 alone (4). For those in the DRC who could potentially rely on tourism to bring much needed capital, poaching threatens livelihoods and economic stability. Mega-fauna are not just aesthetic set pieces for tourists seeking majestic sceneries. Elephants play critical roles within their ecosystems. Referred to as ‘ecological engineers’, elephants have significant influence on the health of their environment (UNEP, 2014). According to Sam Wasser of the

(8)

5

University of Washington Center for Conservation Biology, “[Elephants] keep woods down in the

savannah and are the most important dispersers of seeds of rain forest trees. The central African rain forest is the second most important area on earth for capturing carbon dioxide and storing it.”

(TANAPA, 2013:9). The removal of elephant populations poses grave threats to the biodiversity of inhabited ecosystems (UNEP, 2014:25).Other commonly poached mega-fauna provide critical ecological benefits as well. Hippo dung is a necessary element of healthy riparian habitats, since the dung sustains river fish (Rice, 2006). Grazers such as rhinoceros promote grassland diversity and allow for coexistence of trees and grasses by selectively consuming certain plants over others (Goldman, 2014).

Of further interest is the alleged link between poaching and terrorism financing. A report by the Elephant Action League (2011) posited a link between ivory trade and the Qaeda affiliate Al-Shabaab, a group cast into the international spotlight after the 2013 Nairobi Westgate mall massacre. The Al-Shabaab connection led to the destruction of millions of dollars worth of ivory in Italy (Dunn, 2016). Although cited by many NGOs and prominent politicians, the veracity of the original report was called into question, with one New York Times columnist calling it “divorced from reality”, citing the 2011 report’s dubious quotations from unnamed sources (McConnell, 2015). Though the Al-Shabaab financing link was weak, other groups are not so easily brushed off. One organization labeled a terrorist group by several governing bodies (3) has demonstrated a much clearer connection. Between 2006 and 2008, hundreds of elephants were slaughtered by members of the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), the infamous extremist group led by Joseph Kony responsible for the slaughter, rape and enslavement of thousands (Gould, 2014). According to a defected radioman of the LRA, the funds garnered by ivory were used to purchase ammunition and rocket-propelled grenades.

“Ivory operates as a savings account for [the LRA]”, a senior U.S. official reported (Christy, 2015).

The disruption of poaching activity can therefore serve to undercut the criminal funding. If, as Kony said, “we need the tusks to buy bullets” (Christy, 2015), criminals would need to find other, undoubtedly less lucrative means to finance operations. This thesis seeks to evaluate the facets of green militarization that can reduce poaching behavior when implemented properly. Analysis of effective strategies will enable local, national, and international initiatives to generate effective policy to reduce poaching behavior that is robbing African nations of critical resources while deteriorating regional stability. Private organizations will also benefit from understanding effective militarization, since a once taboo concept can provide solutions to attaining common goals.

(9)

6

2.0 Theory

2.1 Green Militarization Framework

The foundation of this research is the concept of ‘green militarization’. In order to effectively determine the degree to which a nation’s counter-poaching initiative has experienced green militarization, it is important to define ‘militarization’ and provide proper historical context. This chapter is organized as follows: first, the concept of militarization is broadly defined through a range of perspectives and disciplines. The focus on militarization is then narrowed to the idea of ‘green militarization’, or militarization within the context of conservation. Green militarization is then explored through counter-poaching actors, including the military itself, park rangers, private military companies (PMCs), the contribution of non-governmental organizations and finally, the international community. Though vastly different in terms of structures, policies, and purposes, all of these facets contribute to the existence of a militarized counter-poaching effort. Finally, poachers are discussed and delineated between the categories of ‘subsistence’ and ‘commercial’. Academic insights are applied in order inform as to how poachers themselves, as well as perceptions of poachers lend to the militarization of counter-poaching initiatives.

2.1.1 Militarization Theory

The underlying foundation of ‘militarization’ is the ideology of ‘militarism’.

“Militarism […] is an ideology focused on the best means to solve problems. It is a set of beliefs, values, and assumptions that stress the use of force and threat of violence as the most appropriate and efficacious means to solve problems. It emphasizes the exercise of military power, hardware, organization, operations, and technology as its primary problem-solving tools.” – (Kraska, 2007:3) Militarization, then, is the implementation of the ideology of militarism (Kraska, 2007:3) in traditionally non-military tasks or occupations. ‘Militarizing’ involves adopting martial technology, techniques, and training in order to better fulfill goals and objectives. The process of militarization can be identified in any number of realms, including that of the police, prison systems, the internet, industry, and even outer space (Watson, 2011). The concept of militarization was originally depicted by many scholars as being synonymous with economic progress. The rigor, discipline and structure demanded by the defense sector provided the stability and security necessary to foster economic growth (Kwong, Zimmer, 1995:65). Militarization was also determined to provide a catalyst for change and harness a perception of nationhood (66). This provided motivation to foster ingenuity in the form of increased investment in research and development. Research and development, described

(10)

7

by experts as “the backbone of a globally competitive, knowledge driven economy” (Markovich, 2012) has been responsible for the development of some of today’s most critical, yet commonplace technology such as global positioning systems, air travel, penicillin and the internet (Shu, 2014). This is why structure, hierarchy, values, ideals and technology can all potentially indicate militarization. Modern usage of the term ‘militarization’ has focused less in terms of economic development and research and increasingly on the implementation of state-sanctioned violence, garnering the term a more pejorative connotation (ACLU, 2015). When discussing police or border patrol agents, civil rights groups point to increasingly impersonal tactics geared toward treating civilian populations as militarized threats (17). It is important to note that state run police forces have always been to some extent ‘militarized’, since like the military, policing inherently involves the use of state sanctioned physical force (Kraska, 2007:3). Therefore modern discourse focuses on the degree to which these forces have become militarized (4). Increased militarization is thus perceived as a blurring of boundaries between the police and military, creating a convergence of internal and external security roles (Lutterbeck, 2005). These blurred boundaries are embodied in the growing number of European paramilitary forces, such as the French, Austrian, and Greek Gendarmerie, the Dutch Maurechausee, the Italian Carabinieri, and the Portuguese Republican Guard (Lutterbeck, 2005:246). Modern police forces hold joint training with military personnel, and deploy advanced technology originally designed explicitly for military usage, such as the use of surveillance drones, thermal imagery, and armored personnel carriers (Kraska, 2007:4). This conception of a ‘militarized’ police force yields perceptions of disproportionate police aggression (ACLU, 2015:16).

The militarization of police can be associated with an increased perception of threat, or occupational hazard. The public shifting of perceived threat in policing can sometimes hinge on a single focusing event. For the U.S., such an event occurred in 1997, when heavily armored bank robbers, firing fully automatic Kalashnikov pattern rifles with high capacity drum magazines engaged in an ultimately lopsided firefight with under-equipped members of the Los Angeles Police Department (Parker, 2012). Two bank robbers fired approximately 1,100 rounds at police, while only 650 smaller caliber rounds were returned. By the end of the 44 minute firefight, twelve police officers and eight civilians were injured, and the suspects, each of which had been hit multiple times by officers, were dead (Verklan, 2005). This incident, known as the “North Hollywood Shootout”, elevated the perception of threat toward the public and law enforcement communities, and bolstered public support for the patrol officer adoption of ArmaLite AR-15 pattern 5.56x45mm rifles (Parker, 2012). The North

(11)

8

Hollywood Shootout is emblematic of the type of event that can shift ideologies toward militarization.

The militarization of police forces in the U.S. was also bolstered by external support and supply offered through the Department of Defense. The withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan led to a surplus of military materiel. Rather than paying for the storage and upkeep of much of this equipment, the Pentagon donated materiel to police forces across the nation, raising the value of military equipment in police supply from $1m(USD) in 1990 to $450m in 2013 (J.F., 2015). After the 2015 Ferguson unrest protesting disproportionate police force, President Obama enacted the cessation of the Pentagon’s surplus donation program stating:

"We've seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people the feeling like there's an occupying force as opposed to a force that's part of the community that's protecting them and serving them,". – Barack Obama (Johnson, 2015)

2.1.2 Militarization and Conservation

As discussed, the process of militarization can be applied to many fields, including that of conservation. Coined by Elizabeth Lunstrum in 2014, ‘green militarization’ is an attempt to focus militarization research toward the study of the implementation of militarism ideology with the intent to promote the conservation of nature (Lunstrum, 2014:818).

In order to better describe conservation tactics, it would serve to first define a few broader concepts involved in conservation. ‘Preservation’ is defined as the protection of wildlife or natural habitat from use (Duffy, 1999). ‘Conservation’ is the protection of wildlife or natural habitat from abuse while allowing for restricted use (97). Counter-poaching, the main topic of this thesis is an aspect of conservation, though many others exist such as public awareness, market control, and wildlife management to name a few. Public conservation and preservation lands tend to exist in two main forms. ‘National parks’ and ‘game reserves’ are both nationally managed and share many similar intentions but have different goals and legal standings. ‘Game reserves’ are typically preservation habitats which are intended to create sanctuaries for certain species of wildlife (Duffy, 1999:98). National parks are designed as conservation measures, in which resources can be secured and utilized in a sustainable fashion, often for educational or recreational purposes (12). Other forms of conservation land ownership exist as well, including private reserves, and communal conservancies (Steinhart, 1994).

(12)

9

Instead of directly originating through research in militarization, ‘green militarization’ was observed through the significant research regarding the effects of warfare and the environment (Lunstrum, 2014:818). Though warfare was initially assumed to only yield negative effects on environments (819), more recent research has identified limited areas in which wildlife has been allowed to thrive because of warfare (Lunstrum, 2014:819, Draulans, 2002:37, Martin & Szuter, 1999:38). Negative effects of warfare on wildlife populations are demonstrated by ‘game sinks’; areas made uninhabitable for wildlife due to conditions of war (Martin & Szuter, 1999:39). The opposite can also be true in ‘game swells’, or ‘no-man’s land’ in which the act of hunting becomes so dangerous for the hunter that wildlife flourishes (Draulans, 2002:38). These game swells have been demonstrated through bison populations in heavily contested fields (Martin & Szuter, 1999:38), and sightings of two of the world’s most endangered birds in Korea’s demilitarized zone (Kim, 1997:242). For these reasons, it has been suggested by scholars that the creation of a so called ‘green zone’ in GNP may lead to increased elephant populations (Draulans, 2002:39). This technique, other times referred to as ‘fortress conservation’, is a militarized tactic involving the forcible or incentivized removal of civilians from a protected area (Duffy, 2003:493). This is similar to the concept of establishing a demilitarized zone (DMZ). The conservation tactic of fortressing was first utilized in 1902, when James Hamilton, a Scottish landowner in RSA, forced the eviction of three thousand individuals living in the Sabi Game Reserve (Carruthers, 1993:14). Creation of conditions which create game swells can be unintentional as well, such as when the Zimbabwean Civil War between 1972 and 1979 created conditions in which elephant populations thrived. Hwange National Park became much too dangerous for poachers to operate, inadvertently creating a refuge for elephants (Westing, 1992:345). Despite minor potential conservational benefits in war, peacetime conditions have the most potential militarized benefit for wildlife, since military forces can be deployed to fight forest fires, repel poachers, and manage problem species; such as the use of U.S. troops to kill feral goats in Hawaii (Westing, 1992:345).

2.1.3 Counter Poaching Actors

Park Rangers

Park rangers or game wardens are individuals responsible for the protection of parklands. Historically, park rangers were appointed as wardens of royal game lands (Kirby, 1933), granting licensure, confiscating hounds, snares, weaponry, and accounting for the stock of game (Wharton, 1697). For centuries, these men were instrumental in the capture and prosecution of illegal hunters (Moore & Banham, 2014). Today, park rangers exist all over the globe, fulfilling an array of duties

(13)

10

including community education, maintenance, emergency services and law enforcement (Admin, 2011). Rangers often operate in large expanses of unforgiving terrain with little reinforcement (Johnson, 2010). In African nations, and in conservation lands not under military control, park rangers are the front line of defense against the threat of poaching in national parks and wildlife preserves. Often trained in small squad tactics, human tracking, and wild land survival, park rangers have demonstrated gradually increasing levels of militarization through military, paramilitary, or private military led training, the use of military grade weaponry or technology, and through tactics and field craft (SAS, 2015). The presence of increasingly militarized threats led to the use of militarized interventions, such as shoot-on-sight policies. Often appearing in national policy after drastic resurgences of poaching behavior, these policies authorize the lethal engagement of poachers, effectively blurring the lines between law enforcement and military rules of engagement.

The Military

Use of the military in civilian peace keeping applications differs across nations. The U.S. specifically forbids the use of military forces in domestic applications through the 1878 Posse Comitatus act (Doyle & Elsea, 2012:2). In other nations, military forces actively participate in domestic law enforcement. The DRC’s military forces mediate civilian disputes and resolve domestic concerns (Baaz & Verweijen, 2014). Western perceptions of military intervention in ‘public security’ sometimes lead to the perception of extra-military functions as indication of corruption (804). Western abhorrence of domestic military involvement can be traced back to the Magna Carta, in which it states:

“No free man shall be ... imprisoned ... or in any other way destroyed ... except by the legal judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.” – (in Doyle & Elsea, 2012:2)

The use of military forces in the unconventional application of conservation initiatives offers interesting insight. Due to the increased perception of militarized threat that commercial poachers pose, some nations have deployed national military forces as the primary counter-poaching force. In nations such as Botswana, where a clear interdependency between wildlife and economy exists, the military is perceived as a pragmatic solution to an existential threat (Henk, 2005). Policies which utilize the military differ from those in which park rangers or police become militarized, in that the task of counter-poaching itself has been relegated to the military. At times, military forces can be used to supplement park rangers (i.e. Zimbabwe (Messer, 2000:51)); other times military forces are given the tasks of park rangers (i.e. Botswana (Henk, 2005)). Still other times, military forces are used to train counter-poaching teams, or groups conduct joint training exercises (i.e. Kenya (KWS,

(14)

11

2016a)). Initiatives in which military forces are the primary counter-poaching units require discretion in order to distinguish between the lethal threat provided by highly armed gangs of poachers and the non-threatening legal issue of individuals killing for food (Henk, 2005).

Situations in which the military are involved generally require a level of public support, at times when poaching appears to be out of hand, enabling drastic measures to be enacted (i.e., Operation

Tokomeza in Tanzania). Due to a perceived increase in the sophistication, aggression and armaments

of poachers, some military forces expressed counter-poaching to be an acceptable task for the military (Henk, 2005) In 2000, Kenyan protection squads suffered several fatalities at the hands of poachers. Kenyan President Moi invoked ‘total war’ against poachers, deploying military forces, resulting in extended firefights in which automatic rifles were used by both sides (Land, 2000:24). In Kenya, Botswana, Zimbabwe and RSA, the military was deployed to subvert illegal hunting, each instance demonstrating varying degrees of success. Heavily militarized park ranger presence in areas which attract tourism can be problematic. The appearance of high security creates what Lucia Zedner refers to as a security paradox, in that high security, despite its promise of increased safety, inadvertently raises anxiety in the general public (Zedner, 2003:163).

Private Military Companies (PMCs)

The usage of PMCs in parts of Africa demonstrates another key aspect of green militarization. Some nations have extended histories in the utilization of PMCs in counter-poaching initiatives. RSA, for instance, in conjunction with Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands contracted KAS Enterprises in 1986 to provide security for wildlife (Axelrod, 2014:449). Firms such as these have been tasked with providing tactical support and training to park rangers and police forces across Africa. Training by PMCs can supplement existing training, or even factor as primary ranger training. The use of PMC consultants in the training of park rangers has been criticized for imparting “certain values and ideas”, (Duffy, 2014:824), or what Kraska (2007) refers to as a militarized ‘culture’. In effect, the use of PMCs can increase militarization in training, tactics, the use of technology, and threat depiction. In order to differentiate between types of services offered by private military companies, P.W. Singer’s (2003) “Tip of the Spear Typology” is utilized. This model distinguishes offered services by their relative position within the battlespace. This thesis analyses services provided within two categories: military provider firms (MPF), and military consultant firms (MCF). MPFs operate the “forefront of the battlespace”, and engage in direct combat with enemy forces (Singer, 2003:93). MCFs provide tactical and advisory support, often through training and consultancy (94). Combined, MPF and MCF

(15)

12

services contribute in militarizing ranger forces, whether through training and tactical support, or as on the ground force multipliers.

2.1.4 NGOs and Militarization

In the years following the Cold War, a global redistribution of power occurred, with states ultimately sharing power in political, social and security matters with international organizations, businesses, and citizen groups called non-governmental organizations or NGOs (Mathews, 1997). In Africa alone, thousands of NGOs have operated in agriculture, medicine, rural and economic development, security and numerous other fields. Each NGO functions with different motivations - whether on academic, religious, humanitarian, conservation, or other principles (Farrington, 1997). The linear structure and common agenda within each organization often gives NGOs the ability to respond more quickly to the needs of its clients, and function in areas in which governmental forces have difficulties maintaining presence (3). Today, NGOs play an important role in the militarization of counter-poaching initiatives. While some organizations draw strict delineations as to what type of support or supplies are provided, others are more aggressive and are even directly involved in armed counter poaching objectives. Although the varied stances and contributions offered by NGOs have an arguably unified goal regarding the diminishment of poaching activity, strategies can sometimes be mismatched, ill conceived, or even paradoxical (Avant, 2004:381). In “Conserving Nature in the State of Nature”, Deborah Avant (2004) argues that NGO lack of expertise in matters of security has led to ineffective policy regarding the conservation of white rhinoceros in DRC’s GNP (377). The WWF’s lack of skill in armed patrols led to poorly trained, undisciplined park rangers with vague objectives and poor or incompatible gear (378). These park rangers were ineffective and inadequate against the onslaught of poachers and several were wounded or killed in conflict (381).

2.1.5 The International Community and Militarization

The international community plays a pivotal role in conservation efforts in Africa, both by providing international attention, and by providing funding and incentives to African initiatives. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) are all heavily involved in conservation initiatives (UN, 2016). UNESCO is responsible for designating World Heritage Sites, 135 of which exist in Africa. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) have been significant contributors to counter-poaching initiatives, providing equipment, training, vehicles and even forensic support

(16)

13

(White House, 2013). The EU has been a primary conservation donor in Africa, and has spent around 500m (EUR) in the past 30 years (EC, 2016).

One of the most impactful international agreements surrounding wildlife trafficking has been CITES. In July of 1975, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was ratified in 1975 with 10 Member States, a number which eventually swelled over 115 (UNEP, et al., 2013). African elephant populations were moved to Appendix I in 1989, granting the species the highest protected status under CITES. Appendix I status lists creatures threatened by extinction and bans all commercial trade. An Appendix I status regarding African elephants was opposed by Southern African nations, claiming that sale of ivory was crucial to the economic wellbeing of these nations (Padgett, 1995). The strength of CITES bans rested in the ability to levy sanctions against nations who were not abiding by regulations (Lemieux, 2009:453) While the ban led to an overall increase in elephant populations across the continent of Africa, population data analyses conducted between 1979 and 2007 found that many countries continued to lose elephants at an unprecedented rate (451). Those who opposed the ban pointed out that there are no reliable methods for testing legal versus illegal ivory and pointed toward the fact that those profiting from illegal ivory trade stockpile ivory in order to take advantage of the market during spikes of demand (455). In a few Southern African nations, elephant populations have been slowly increasing while urbanization has been diminishing grazing lands - causing difficulties for communities living near herds.

2.1.6 Technology and Militarization

Certain forms of technology are often cited as indication of militarization. Within law enforcement, the development of technology tends toward ‘non-lethal’ alternatives to traditional kinetic force or the advancement of traditional firearms; namely in weight reduction and customization facilitation (SAS, 2011:76). Many authors point toward technology originally developed for the military as indication of militarization; technology such as GPS systems, thermal imagery, and even barbed wire (ie. Lutterbeck, 2005, Duffy, 2014). Today much of this technology is available to civilians for any manner of purposes including wilderness survival, hunting, sport shooting, or recreation. For this reason, it is oftentimes necessary to gain insight as to the application of the technology at use. For example, ‘non-lethal’ technology, while developed in tandem for military and police purposes, is administered differently by doctrine. The U.S. military developed ‘non-lethal’ weaponry as means to coerce the enemy from cover in order to subject them to lethal effects (SAS, 2011:87). Herein lays a

(17)

14

critical distinction between militarized and non-militarized technology; the methods with which the technology is administered.

The field of conservation has experienced an upsurge of technology popularly labeled as ‘militarized’, such as heat-seeking planes, drones, remote sensors, RFID sensors, and border defense technology (Merchant, 2012, CSIR, 2016). Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology has been increasingly touted as a potential solution to poaching issues. Combined with thermal or infrared optics, users on the ground are able to spot poachers at night or through dense brush. The true effectiveness of UAV solutions is unclear at this stage, due to logistical and financial constraints (Hart, et. al, 2015:1).The usage of UAV technology in counter-poaching has been referred to by some as an indication of militarization (Duffy, 2014:827), but as civilian drone technology proliferates, the dichotomy becomes more muddled. Though the word ‘drone’ conjures to mind hellfire launching predators, the reality is often closer to a toy. Conservation drones are hand-launched, have a 20 mile (~32km) range, and can stay airborne for about an hour (Merchant, 2012, Hart, et al, 2015:11). Infrared thermography, or thermal imagery has been found to be effective at locating poachers through even dense underbrush when compared to conventional flashlights (Hart, et al., 2015). Research found that targets could be readily identified up to 60 meters away. This study tested both a $2kUSD model, and a $20k model, finding no discernible difference in effectiveness. Relatively inexpensive but effective optics constitute promising technology for counter poaching forces (9). Technology such as this was originally developed for the military, but whether its usage indicates militarization depends on application, since thermal optics could be used in foot patrols, or used as targeting optics for firearms.

2.1.6 Poachers and Militarization

The way poachers are presented to the public, to the international community, and to the counter-poachers themselves can have a significant impact on the support of militarization efforts and the engagement of suspects. Depictions differ significantly between goals, agendas and initiatives, as well as between actors and institutions. Depictions of threats often simplify circumstances in order to create an easily digestible ‘good and evil’ narrative accompanied by an actionable solution. An example of such a narrative is the NGO Invisible Children’s Kony2012 campaign (Gould, 2014). Joseph Kony, leader of the LRA was cast in the international spotlight in an attempt to ‘make Kony famous’. A 30 minute video was uploaded to YouTube, garnering 76 million views within a week - becoming the most viral video in history (208). The Kony2012 campaign distilled an exceedingly complex history of regional conflict down to a single entity - Joseph Kony. The viral nature of the

(18)

15

campaign, along with the broad usage of social media led to some referring to the campaign as ‘slacktivism’, claiming that ‘‘[Kony2012] suggests to the next generation that one can fight the

injustice and evil in ‘dark Africa’ from the comfort of your own home, without any knowledge of the geopolitical causes or local consequences’’ (208). The narratives created by local and international

actors for illegal hunters similarly simplify poachers, from the depiction of heavily armed foreign terrorist to the struggling impoverished sustenance hunter. For some efforts, failure to gain public support with proper depiction can derail initiatives before they even begin. One Texas based NGO, VETPAW, was forced to abort its Tanzania park ranger consultation program when YouTube videos surfaced of member Kinessa Johnson declaring that she would “kill some bad-guys” (Peter, 2015). This led to articles such as one in the Daily Mail titled “Poaching the Poachers!” (Robinson, 2015). In response, AWF member Kathleen Garrigan stated: “We always want a simple answer. It’s either

good or bad. It’s black or white. Unfortunately, the nature of the environment and the nature conservation in Africa is mixed and nuanced” (Peter, 2015).

To properly evaluate poacher depiction, it is important to understand reasons why someone might poach. Motivators for poaching vary significantly, and those poaching out of necessity require different intervention than those motivated by greed (Duffy, 2015:346). While initiatives addressing local poverty and wealth inequality do little to stave international demand for exotic animal products, initiatives seeking to shutter international markets fail to address the basic necessities of the impoverished (346). For explanatory purposes, poachers here are separated into two categories: sustenance poachers and commercial poachers. Dividing poachers into two categories is admittedly a simplification, since an expanding market for meat and diversified protein sources has commercialized subsistence style poaching (Gandiwa, et al., 2012).

Subsistence Poachers

Subsistence poachers are those who engage in poaching in order to provide sustenance for themselves or their families. Here, this definition is extended to those who kill wildlife illegally for reasons other than financial or material gain. These poachers sometimes act as bushmeat traders, exchanging meat from an illegal kill for necessities. Bushmeat trading often occurs in areas in which alternative protein is scarce or otherwise unaffordable (Gandiwa, et al., 2012). Whether bushmeat hunting is considered poaching varies between local and international ordnances and the targeted species (Lindsey, et al., 2011:83). Hunting constituting poaching can involve unauthorized hunting on private property, a lack of hunting permits or tags, unlawful methods (spotlighting, snares), and often results in illicit sales (85). One study conducted in a Zimbabwean community found that bushmeat poachers tended to be

(19)

16

young, unemployed, with poor food security (87). Of the buyers of poached meat, 75% surveyed preferred bushmeat, since it was cheaper, tasted better, and added variety when compared to the meat of domestic livestock (88). As of 2014, Sub-Saharan Africa is home to over 3.4 million refugees (Amnesty International, 2015). The Rwandan crisis was disastrous to wildlife as millions of refugees resorted to poaching for sustenance. (Draulans, 2002). The concept that poverty is a singular motivator for illegal hunting is an oversimplification. Some poaching occurs as a result of tradition or cultural feelings toward prestige and power (Duffy, et al., 2015:345). Illegal hunting incidents may occur as retribution, such as in the example of villagers killing an elephant in Tanzania after the trampling death of a child (Big Life, 2016), or farmers relying on crop output killing in response to the destruction of crops (Frey, 2013). Others may illegally kill wildlife due to the resentment toward governing bodies seizing prime land for conservation (Igoe, 2002). Studies have demonstrated that the mere presence of researchers is a deterrent on subsistence poaching behavior. This is not the case for the more lucrative commercial poaching (Piel, et al., 2015).

Commercial Poachers

Commercial poachers are differentiated from subsistence poachers through means and motivation. Commercial poachers are often well armed and equipped, typically through financiers, and pose a significantly more acute threat to both wildlife and park rangers. Kills made by commercial poachers are often performed for the specific intent to remove high valued parts, such as tusks and horns; leaving the rest of the carcass to rot (FFI, 2014). These poachers can be veterans of civil wars or insurgencies, capable of utilizing military grade tactics and precision while engaging counter-poaching forces. Incidents have occurred in which commercial poachers used advanced technology such as veterinarian anesthetics, toxin compounds such as arsenic, thermal imagery, UAV technology, and sound suppressors (SAS, 2015). Commercial poachers can be further separated in two gang types, local and organized. Local gangs often hunt using their own weapons, whereas organized commercial poachers are typically supplied and paid by middlemen or wealthy financiers. Compensation is typically awarded based on the weight of trophies retrieved from poaching (Marceau, 2001:31). In countries with strong support toward militarized responses, poachers are often depicted as outsiders; trespassers from bordering nations, such as the Zambian poachers in Zimbabwe and Mozambican poachers in RSA. Criminologist David Garland (1996) refers to this perception as “criminology of the other”; depicting criminals as dangerous members of society, often from a different racial or social group that bear no resemblance to “us” (461). Perceptions of poachers as “the Other” are prevalent in RSA literature, where illegal hunters are labeled “evil, cruel poachers”,

(20)

17

and park rangers are “courageous and loyal native rangers” (Carruthers, 1993). Regardless, the way an illegal hunter is depicted is a critical factor in policy discourse, public acceptance, and international attention.

Poacher Armaments

Reports on types of weaponry utilized by poachers in Central African nations finds that military style weaponry such as fully automatic Kalashnikov pattern rifles are far more common that hunting rifles, due to the steep price tags ranging from $1,365-$2,200USD (SAS, 2015:13). Kalashnikov pattern rifles have smaller bores, making them less effective at killing large game, but these weapons provide better offensive capabilities, leading to more lethal encounters with anti-poaching units (17). Larger caliber ammunition fitting hunting rifles is also significantly more costly in Central African nations, with a single hunting rifle cartridge costing upward of $34USD. Again, the opposite is true for Kalashnikov pattern assault rifle ammunition, with cartridges costing $0.17USD each (18). These prices make it significantly less expensive for poachers to outfit themselves for combat than for big game hunting. In addition to the low cost of military style weaponry, seized weaponry often cycles directly back into the hands of poachers, and in some countries, state owned firearms have poor oversight and are stolen and sold to gangs (SAS, 2015:11) Traditional weaponry such as bows and spears require skill and training, the existence of which is becoming in some areas less common (23). These factors ultimately contribute to the perceived level of threat that commercial poachers pose to anti-poaching teams.

2.2 Governance

The term ‘governance’ is a malleable one, utilized in international relations, public policy, and both the public and private sectors (Walters, 2004:28). Despite significant academic attention, there is no global consensus regarding a singular definition of the concept of governance (Kaufmann, 2010:3). Broadly speaking, governance refers to the interaction and decision making of all actors or stakeholders involved in a common issue which lead to the creation, reinforcement or reproduction of social norms or institutions (Hufty, 2011). In other words, governance allows one to remove focus from the processes of individual actors and look instead at the actual processes of rule (Walters, 2004:28). Traditional views on governance oriented themselves from the top down, with upper level authority figures purveying governance. The increasing complexity of modern society, the spread of globalization and a resurgence of neoliberalism has made it crucial to assess governance from the bottom-up (29). The World Bank defines governance as:

(21)

18 “The traditions and institutions by which authority in a country is exercised. This includes (a) the process by which governments are selected, monitored and replaced; (b) the capacity of the government to effectively formulate and Implement sound policies; and (c) the respect of citizens and the state for the institutions that govern economic and social interactions among them.”- Kaufmann et al. (2010:4).

Within the arena of conservation, assessing governance is critical. While heads of government play critical roles in governing conservation efforts, international and supranational entities with interests in conservation apply pressure, or offer incentives. NGOs such as the WWF invest millions of dollars annually in conservation efforts (NGOPulse, 2015). Private entities such as those in the ecotourism, legal hunting, or PMC industries rely on the profits accrued through conservation efforts (Henk, 2005). Individual communities and indigenous tribes experience the successes and failures of conservation efforts first hand (Monami, 2016). Every entity has its own set of values, agendas, motivations, and strategies. Assessing governance is a way of looking at the summation of efforts, as well as the collective ability of these actors to govern.

2.3 Effectiveness

The concept of effectiveness is used within this thesis as opposed to the concept of ‘efficacy’, which simply seeks to determine whether a practice “works” (Amundson, et al. 2003). Efficacy focused research seeks to provide empirically backed, evidence based results regarding a specific intervention. Research focusing on effectiveness evaluates results in a real-world setting, while attempting to identify external dynamics which may be at play (11). The pursuit of efficacy is more valuable in fields such as medicine, in which sterile laboratory conditions can allow for the elimination of extraneous variables and provide causal data regarding an intervention’s ability to provide results (12). “Efficiency” is another term often used interchangeably with “effectiveness” and “efficacy”. Efficiency, however, regards the optimal allocation of resources toward a desired goal (Webster, n.d.). Efficiency-based research therefore is conducted in order to determine whether interventions are optimally applied. Neither the concept of “efficiency”, nor that of “efficacy” is therefore appropriate for this thesis. In order to proceed, it would serve to review existing literature to determine previous methods utilized to determine effectiveness.

Military Effectiveness

Since the core of this research is the concept of militarization, the concept of military effectiveness should be explored. Military effectiveness is defined by the ability to inflict damage upon the enemy and win battles (Peterhson, 2015:3). In a broader sense, military effectiveness relies on integration (culture and cooperation), responsiveness (ability to adapt to threats), skill (overall battlefield performance), and material resources (4,5). The use of military effectiveness in counter-poaching

(22)

19

strategies would therefore involve an anti-poaching unit’s ability to lethally engage poachers. While this is to some degree measurable, poacher fatality rates would not necessarily indicate that the overarching goals of counter-poaching, namely conservation, are being met. Military effectiveness is therefore likely not an adequate standard for determining counter-poaching effectiveness, rather it might be logical to assume that successful counter-poaching as a marked decrease in poaching incidents.

Poached Carcass Counts

In the case of counter-poaching, effectiveness could theoretically be measured by an increase or decrease in poaching behavior within an affected region. Unfortunately, it is impossible to know the true number of mega-fauna poached on an annual basis within individual nations. The CITES Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) program assesses changes in poaching behavior across regions through the number of carcasses that survey teams have encountered during patrols (Ihwagi, 2015:2), but these regions are divided into eastern, western, and southern regions with no regard for individual nation. Due to a number of circumstances, accurate estimates on national levels are impossible to determine. Factors involved include the perceived legality of poaching per nation, corruption, indeterminate cause of death, political opportunity in skewed numbers (whether higher or lower), vastness of the landscape, porous borders and migratory patterns.

Unexpected impacts such as the killing of a prolific bull, or of a fertile sow make estimates additionally problematic. For example, Solio Game Reserve in Central Kenya is a breeding ground for black rhinos in an effort to transplant birthed animals in different regions (Patton, 2015:102). The killing of several breeding males resulted in unanticipated declines in population due to aggressive male traits in the remaining population. The unexpected loss of seven males resulted in two thirds of the female population remaining uncovered for breeding purposes (104). Losing seven females resulted in an additional loss of nine potential calf births, as well as increased aggression in males, leading to more deaths (103). Hidden effects of poaching demonstrate broader implications in the killing of certain animals. For reasons such as these, it may be inadequate or incomplete to look at effectiveness in counter-poaching in terms of individual specimens poached, even if such numbers were available.

Dietary Habits and Arrest Records

Other poaching estimates involve surveys regarding local dietary habits. Information regarding the level of poached protein present in local diet, and can help map illicit bushmeat markets. One study

(23)

20

used structured interviews among illegal hunters, bushmeat buyers, and ranchers in Savé Valley Conservancy in Zimbabwe (Lindsey, et al., 2011:84). Results of the interviews helped determine key drivers of illegal hunting, as well as prevalence of the practice (93). Another study found surveys regarding dietary habits to be more effective at garnering reliable data than directly asking about poaching habits or looking at arrest records (Knapp, et al. 2010). This study, conducted in the areas surrounding the Serengeti in Tanzania, found that coupling reported dietary habits with arrest records results is a cost-effective data collection technique to determine local poaching behavior (183). Limitations regarding dietary habit surveys exist however, since results hinge upon the trust of respondents as well as the skill of interviewers (Lindsey, et al., 2011:84). Several biases typically involved in self-report methods can diminish the accuracy of responses (85). Dietary surveys do not directly shed light on trophy or commercial poaching habits, since these activities do not always result in bushmeat consumption, and therefore have little bearing on local dietary habits. Additionally, while these surveys have the capability of determining subsistence style poaching behavior in small areas, it would be incredibly resource consuming to attempt to utilize similar methods on a national, or international level.

Population Trends

A final method for determining the effectiveness of counter-poaching initiatives is the observation of broad population trends. To assess populations, this thesis makes use of data from the African Elephant Status Group (AESG). These data give a broad idea as to the overarching effectiveness of counter poaching initiatives within each country, since effective counter-poaching would yield increasing populations, and ineffective counter-poaching would continue seeing declines. Both CITES and the UNC recognize the IUCN/SSC AESG African Elephant Database as the most exhaustive and reliable source of African elephant population data (UNEP, et al. 2012:17).Though broader population trends ignore other phenomenon such as cross-border migration, transplantation, legal hunting and natural disaster, the overall result of effective counter poaching should nevertheless be an increase in population counts. Despite instances of drought and war taking the lives of hundreds of elephants (Steinhart, 1994:62), research has determined again and again that over-hunting is the leading driver of species decline (Ihwagi, 2015:2). Additional limitations regarding population trends include non-spatially explicit results, making it impossible to determine which villages are most apt to poach (Knapp, et al. 2010:179).

(24)

21

3.0 Research Design

This chapter describes the research design of this thesis by outlining the type of analysis being performed, detailing the variables utilized, and the rationale behind the use of a multiple case study design. The following section provides an overview of the procedures and processes used for gathering and analyzing the data that inform this thesis. This is then followed by a section that further extrapolates on the indicators utilized to operationalize the concept of green militarization. This includes the rationalization for labeling training, tactics, technology and threat depiction of counter-poaching strategies as militarized, and details the methods utilized by the World Bank and the African Elephant Database to gather and collate governance indicators and elephant population estimates respectively.

3.1 Analytical Framework 3.1.1 Type of Analysis

In order to determine the effectiveness of green militarization in counter-poaching initiatives, this thesis employs qualitative units of analysis. In addition, this research is informed by quantitative analysis in the form of governance indicators and elephant population databases. Qualitative analyses are useful for determining whether correlative relationships exist between specific variables in the real world context. This will be achieved through secondary source analysis and desktop research. Qualitative methods are also necessary in order to identify the level of militarization that exists in counter-poaching initiatives. Outside of a laboratory, it is nearly impossible to control for all existing confounding variables; it is possible, however, to identify and eliminate many alternative explanatory variables in order to avoid omitted variable biases. Multiple case-study designs allow one to generate potentially generalizable evidence by promoting insight in similar cases. For these purposes, six nations have been selected as units of analysis, with the years 2006 and 2013 as the time-space element of observation, and counter-poaching units as the unit of observation. Limiting observed outcomes between the years of 2006 and 2013 allows for a measure of control (Kumar, 2011).

3.1.2 Variables

Independent

In analyses, independent variables allow one to test items for correlative traits. There are two independent variables analyzed within this thesis. The first is the concept of governance. These data

(25)

22

are retrieved through the World Bank’s International Governing Indicators database (see previous chapter for additional information). These numbers help to determine a governing body’s capacity to respond to the issue of poaching through a range of six indicators. Within this research, governance indicators grant context to counter-poaching initiatives and further help explain successes and failures. The second independent variable involves the level of green militarization the acting counter-poaching authorities have achieved. The concept of militarization is divided into three categories: those which are lightly militarized, those which are moderately militarized, and those that have been fully militarized. This label is generalized to the entire counter-poaching effort of six selected national bodies. The methods utilized for determining which counter-poaching strategies fall into which militarization category is detailed at the end of this chapter.

Dependent

Dependent variables are the stable observed traits which are posited to correlate with variation in independent variables. The ability to determine whether an independent variable correlates with dependent variables allows one to determine whether influential factors exist. The dependent variable of interest within this thesis is the level of counter-poaching effectiveness observed between the years of 2006 and 2013. In this thesis, and due to specific limitations in available data, broader estimated elephant populations are employed from the African Elephant Database, and the African Elephant Status Report (AESG, 2007) as commissioned by the Species Survival Commission and the AESG. The dependent variable in this case is posited to have a relationship both with the governance of the national body, and the level of militarization a country’s counter-poaching strategy has attained. 3.2 Case Studies

Case studies involve the empirical investigation of phenomenon within real life contexts (Tsang, 2014:371). These characteristically ‘small-N’ inquiries have often been criticized with regard to generalizability as compared to ‘large-N’ quantitative methods. Generalizability, often interchanged with the term ‘external validity’, is commonly defined as the ability to use research from one case to draw inferences in other cases. Eric Tsang (2014) argues that case studies may be more effective in generating theoretical generalization and falsification. These facets are instrumental in theory testing as well as theory building (372). This supposition relates to the fact that in-depth investigation allows one to ‘peel off the back of a watch’ in order to locate causal factors that may otherwise have been discounted or undiscovered. Since real life phenomenon draw from tremendous nuance, the ability to observe events within their natural settings allows one to tease out hidden variables. Multiple case study designs may produce more generalizable information than single-case studies. This is due to the

(26)

23

fact that single-case designs can be inundated by characteristics that exist only within the individual case. Multiple-case designs can eliminate several of these factors, leading to more thoroughly generalizable evidence (Yin, 2009:52).

Elephants were selected as the mega-fauna of interest due to their spread across Africa as well as the commercial value of ivory. While rhinoceros are arguably more threatened than elephants in Africa (especially in RSA), 98% of African rhinoceros are found in four nations: RSA, Namibia, Zimbabwe, and Kenya (AWF, 2016). 40% of this amount is found in RSA alone. Compounded with the relatively small population of roughly 29,000, rhinoceros population counts do not provide as broad a range as that of elephant counts.

This thesis uses a multiple-case study design, with DRC, Tanzania, Botswana, RSA, Kenya, and Zimbabwe as selected cases. These southern, central and eastern African nations were chosen based off of their extensive histories of engagements against the threat of poaching. Nations such as Burundi, Rwanda and Lesotho were not investigated, since these nations are significantly smaller and do not face the same challenges as the six nations selected. For this reason a country must be at least 250,000 square kilometers to be included. Another consideration is the availability of information in conjunction with language limitations on behalf of the author. Mozambique, Angola and Namibia were former Portuguese colonies wherein Portuguese is the official language. Similar barriers prevented in depth investigation into the Republic of Chad, with its primary Arabic language. Western and North African nations were not considered, since the elephant populations within those regions as estimated by the AESG are extremely minimal (AESG, 2013).

Some of the preservation initiatives instituted in Central African nations have been done so in an effort to appease members of the international community as part of debt forgiveness programs (Faden, 2005). The outcome of one such initiative allowed for the collective management of the Sangha Tri-National forest regions of Cameroon, Central African Republic (CAR), and the Republic of the Congo (128). Surveys of the region determined that these large swaths of forest contain similar vegetation and forest communities - as well as similar problems (TNS, n.d.). The effect of the 1999 Cooperation Agreement between the three central African nations effectively created a multi-national conservation initiative which shares cross-border policies and strategies. These strategies regard not only designated national parks, but logging concessions and sport hunting grounds (2). Because of this regional as opposed to national strategy, the Central African nations of Cameroon, Central African Republic and the Republic of the Congo were not selected to be analyzed within this thesis.

Waging War for Wildlife. Green Militarization in Sub-Saharan Anti-poaching strategies

­D__D5!

­7Dg7ǝ

­ǝ5s

J8ĺ7#1#SJ#lS#=8ĺ#8ĺNW ĮN"J8ĺ8S#ĮG= "#8ĺNSJS#N

Table of Contents