In sum, if the distributive element of the wildlife programme is not satisfactorily resolved then wildlife management as a land use option may not be competitive even though it produces a greater return from the land overall. In Zimbabwe , the 'Responsible Authority' , the Department of National Parks has not been prepared to delegate the 'Appropriate Authority' to districts unless they accept the principle of distribution benefits according to the resource's distribution itself or in other words that 'those who pay the social cost of living with wildlife should reap the economic benefits'. We have districts and below them we have democratic institutions of wards and villages. The Boards' of Management at the district level have representatives from the Wards. At the Ward level there is a Ward Wildlife Management Committee with representatives from the villages.
Accountability is as crucial as good management.
They are not necessarily the marketers of wildlife. This is because the value of the wildlife depends critically on how well it is marketed and by whom. For instance, two different safari companies can produce very different results and this applies to hunting and photo safaris. We are trying to work towards the ideal joint venture where you achieve the highest market value , shared equitably between marketer and producer. The control over security of access to the resource is a strong lever on the producers side.