Protected Areas in Burundi: Is the Lack of Clearly Defined Boundaries a Major Obstacle to their Effectiveness?

Burundi's protected areas were created with a view to counter the degradation of the natural environment and preserve its biodiversity.  Their effectiveness is often questioned, and the lack of clear demarcation, as well as shortcomings in monitoring, are put forward as the main causes of poor performance. The aim of the present study is to verify these allegations and formulate recommendations for better management and efficiency. The study involved a comparative analysis of the perceptions of three main stakeholder categories (17 Managers, 34 from local administration and 171 from the local community) on the status of protected areas and the main reason for their creation, the state boundaries and conflicts. The results of the status and attribute analysis show that most protected areas (87.57%) are centrally managed, with only a small proportion (21.43%) allowing for the participation of stakeholders other than the State in decision-making. Over 60% of all categories perceive that the boundaries are clear, and this applies to all Burundi protected area categories. Protected area categories IV and V record comparatively low proportions of positive clarity of boundaries. However, the majority (over 60%) report a lack of consensus on limits, the existence of protected areas, local population conflicts and attest to a direct relationship between the existence of conflicts and the lack of consensus on limits. These results show that what's important is not to set limits, but to have a consensus on these limits and to respect them. It is recommended that Burundi's protected areas be aligned with the logic of the new conservation paradigm, which advocates the participation of all stakeholders in decision-making.