The Illegal Bushmeat Trade in Zambia: Evaluating A Behaviour Change Campaign

This Is Not A Game www.thisisnotagame.info

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Sarah Davies, Luwi Nguluka, Mirriam Nasilele, Wisdom Muzoka, Maina Malaya, Natasha Kabanda, Vincent Nyirenda, Peter Lindsey

LEGAL ZAMBIAN

GAME MEAT Le g a l l y d i s t r i b u te d G a m e M e at a p p rove d by Th e D e p a r t m e nt o f N at i o n a l Pa r k s a n d Wi l d l i fe

TABLE OF contents

03

Abstract

10

Ethics Statement

04

Introduction

10

Results

Behaviour Change Campaign

14

Discussion

08

Methods

19

Presentation: Fresh And Dry

09

Survey Process

20

Sources Of Bushmeat

Illegal Bushmeat Trade In Zambia

06

Bushmeat consumption in the target consumer market (not necessarily campaign audience)

Abstract

B 23

Campaign Engaement And Response

25

Conclusions

26

Recommendations Acknowledgements Responses

ushmeat is a sought-after item in Zambia’s urban centres primarily for taste reasons, its perceived health benefits and luxury status. Huge amounts are being consumed by the urban markets every year, causing significant wildlife populations to decline in protected areas.

However, a three-year behaviour change campaign from the Department of National Parks and Wildlife with Wildlife Crime Prevention has had initial success in reducing illegal consumption levels as well as increasing interest in legal game meat and wildlife conservation issues in Zambia. Consumers report that they are aware of the various disadvantages of consuming illegal bushmeat and would much prefer to purchase licensed meat due to growing concerns about zoonotic diseases and the uncertainty of the species being consumed.

This paper highlights that to combat the increasing threat of the illegal bushmeat trade, it is important that the behaviour change campaign reaches a larger portion of the consumer market with its impactful, relevant messaging, focusing on issues which have been shown to resonate with the target demographic, through proven channels.

Further this paper highlights opportunities for the legal game meat industry to profit from this huge demand for meat from wildlife, through marketing themselves better to consumers and particularly by providing dry legal game meat alternatives to match the illegal product that is currently available.

4

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

1. Introduction

Illegal Bushmeat Trade In Zambia The illegal bushmeat trade has been reported as the greatest threat to overall wildlife populations in Zambia and other countries in the Southern African region (Lindsey et al 2017).

F

or millennia meat from wildlife has been relied upon for human consumption, however with growing human populations both rural and urban, unsustainable pressure is being put on wildlife populations in

protected areas across Africa. The demand is not just for subsistence from local communities but increasingly to supply a commercial trade as the bushmeat product is called for by the urban market (Brashares et al 2011, Lindsey et al, 2012). Large scale, illegal hunting can result in the devastation of wildlife populations across large areas with huge ecological consequences (Lindsey and Bento 2012) as well as the loss of critical eco-system services such as seed dispersal (Wright et al. 2007). Zambia has suffered a significant loss of wildlife over recent decades in particular a loss of prey species in National Parks and Game Management Areas (GMAs) (Lindsey et al. 2014) and increasing amounts of illegal bushmeat being confiscated have been recorded over past years by the Department of National Parks and Wildlife (DNPW), Zambia’s national wildlife authority (DNPW, 2021).

Illegal hunting in Zambia is driven by a diverse mix of suppliers and consumers and forms a massive informal, unregulated illegal industry that is primarily preference based (Overton et al, 2017). In Zambia there are public perceptions that bushmeat consumption is not only acceptable but healthy, as it is naturally sourced and that it supports local communities. It has been estimated that 1,140 tons of bushmeat are consumed in Zambia’s capital city, Lusaka each year, and further that the demand is 50 times this number (Overton et at, 2017). However, currently access to bushmeat is limited mostly to wealthy consumers due to a relatively costly, restricted supply.

The illegal bushmeat trade directly causes the death of thousands of animals every year. A rough estimation given the amount of meat estimated to be consumed would be over 22,800 impalas or 1,932 buffaloes. This contributes vastly to a dramatic decline of wildlife populations, including predator species, due to the loss of prey species, in Zambia’s protected areas. Bushmeat poaching comes at a huge cost to Zambia as it greatly reduces income from tourism and trophy hunting.

Illegal hunting in Zambia is driven by a diverse mix of suppliers and consumers and forms a massive informal, unregulated illegal industry that is primarily preference based (Overton et al, 2017).

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Through this, plus foregone employment due to the smaller

It has been estimated

tourism industry the bushmeat trade likely confers net nega-

that 1,140 tons of bush-

tive food security impacts. It is wasteful and a low value use

meat are consumed in

of a high value asset.

There is an opportunity for the Zambian legal game farming industry, if it was able to provide a legal supply of meat to satisfy this demand as can be seen in South Africa (Taylor et al, 2016) and Namibia (Lindsey et al, 2013). Zambia does have a legislative framework for legal wildlife ranching, which

Zambia’s capital city, Lusaka each year, and further that the demand is 50 times this

produces some legal game meat. In 2019, 103 game farms

number (Overton et at,

were registered with DNPW (Wildlife Producers Association

2017)

of Zambia, 2021) a reduction from 177 recorded in 2013 (Lindsey et al, 2013). However, the 103,506 kilograms of legal game meat being produced for sale by these farms (WPAZ, 2021) comes significantly short of the demand noted above.

Several constraints have been outlined which limit the growth of this important industry, not least the prevalence of the illegal bushmeat trade and the serious threat that it poses to income from wildlife both directly through poaching and indirectly through competition (Lindsey et al, 2013).

The drivers and consumer market of the illegal bushmeat trade are understudied in Zambia. It is vital that these are understood better for interventions to be successfully implemented. Studies have traditionally focused on illegal hunting, subsistence consumption by communities living proximate to protected areas and suggested law enforcement focused reforms. There is a lack of baseline information on the drivers of the trade, particularly the rationale for consumption in the commercial market. Research in this area often fails to consider that the major consumer market is a wealthier, more educated middle class based predominantly within Zambia’s urban centres, that is driving the consumption of this luxury product rather than poor, rural communities. As the middle class and household wealth in Zambia grows, this problem is only likely to get worse and as a result rural communities may be stripped of their wildlife assets.

In this study we explore the current knowledge, attitudes and practices around the illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia particularly within the identified target consumer market of urban, middle-class Zambians with access to disposable income. We also review the specific response to a behaviour change campaign targeting the consumers of illegal bushmeat in Zambia in order to better understand its impact and suggest recommendations for the future.

5

Behaviour Change Campaign

B

ushmeat poaching is often under-

This Is Not A Game (www.thisisnotagame.info) leveraged

estimated and overlooked in the

a growing social media audience in Zambia (Kemp, S.,

sphere of wildlife crimes tackled

2021) and social media influencers while also using tradi-

by governments and supporting non-gov-

tional media distribution channels such as television, ra-

ernment organisations.

dio, billboards and activation events. A previously outlined profile of the main consumer market of illegal bushmeat

High profile wildlife products such as el-

in Lusaka and their attitudes (Overton et al, 2017) was

ephant ivory, rhino horn, leopard skin and

used by the campaign to create messaging specifically

pangolin scales are often more likely to

tailored to resonate with this demographic and influence

be the target of law enforcement efforts

attitudes and behaviours to encourage the consumption

perhaps due to their higher financial value

of legal game meat over illegal bushmeat.

and their emotive value as the prominent “big five” species. The illicit bushmeat

The campaign targets illegal bushmeat consumers in ur-

trade and its drivers are not well under-

ban areas, as the biggest consumers and drivers of the

stood, and few conservation actions fo-

trade. The This is Not a Game campaign aims to shift

cus directly on tackling bushmeat poach-

social norms by nudging consumer demand away from

ing alone. The consumption and desire

illegal bushmeat towards legal game meat therefore re-

to consume illegal bushmeat in Zambia

ducing the number of wild animals killed. The campaign

seems to be widespread.

project team consists of advisors from DNPW, the Wildlife Producers Association of Zambia (WPAZ), legal game

However, little to no public information

meat outlets and various creative agencies. This nation-

about the detrimental impacts of the ille-

wide campaign provides information on the scale of the

gal bushmeat trade has been distributed

bushmeat trade, legal penalties and consequences for

to challenge this social norm, other than

wildlife and people, fostering a deeper understanding of

through largely unexplained, wildlife legis-

the importance of protecting Zambia’s wildlife overall. In

lation. Therefore, there seems to be an ob-

2017-2018 the campaign focused primarily on reaching

vious need for more public education and

Lusaka residents, as the city is Zambia’s biggest illegal

awareness-raising around the illegalities

bushmeat consumption area (Overton et al. 2017). From

and dangers of the illegal bushmeat trade.

2018 to 2020 the campaign expanded to include new au-

Such provision of information has been

diences in other major cities (Livingstone, Chipata, Kitwe,

shown to be effective through targeted

Ndola and Solwezi) identified as hotspots for illegal bush-

behaviour change campaigns in other ar-

meat consumption (WCP, 2021).

eas of environmental campaigning (BoldIn December 2017, DNPW in partnership with public benefit organisation Wildlife Crime Prevention (www.wildlifecrimeprevention.com), launched Zambia’s first behaviour change campaign focussing solely on the

erdijk et al 2013).

illegal bushmeat trade.

In Zambia 40 percent of households own radios, the majority of whom live in urban areas. Further 73.6 percent

In December 2017, DNPW in partnership

of households owned a cellular phone which are also

with public benefit organisation Wildlife

used to access radio stations. (Zambia Information and

Crime Prevention (www.wildlifecrimepre-

Communications Technology Authority, 2018) This in-

vention.com), launched Zambia’s first be-

formation was used to inform the choice of radio as the

haviour change campaign focussing sole-

predominant media channel for distributing the campaign

ly on the illegal bushmeat trade.

materials.

Figure 1 Examples of This Is Not A Game Campaign Materials Five scripted radio adverts were played 2,440 times over three years (December 2018-May 2020)

Radio

across 12 of Zambia’s most popular radio stations covering the major urban areas including Lu-

270

saka, Livingstone, Chipata, Kabwe, the Copperbelt and Solwezi.

Further, through the creative process, it was decided that a short public service announcement would be produced. A storyboard was drafted and reviewed with a final version apducted by a local media production company. The material was edited into a long version (six minute) public service announcement and a short version (one minute) television version (https://youtu.be/1OuxYTfQgkk). It was important to use Zambian creatives and media agencies for a message that would be realistic, understandable and would resonate with the target Zambian audience. This included the language, the costumes and the set. Everything needed to look and feel realistic otherwise the message would be disregarded as unrelatable.

The one-minute PSA was aired 201 times on DSTV (Digital Satellite Television) and GOTV; a

Adverts Aired

proved by DNPW. A four-day filming shoot at various locations throughout Lusaka was con-

TV

2400

Sub-Saharan African direct broadcast satellite service. The paid service provides multiple channels and services an estimated 11.9 million subscribers across 50 African states including 508,128 Zambian households. 60 percent of Multichoice subscribers in Zambia watch GOTV while the rest are DSTV subscribers. The cost of DSTV and GOTV ranges from $10USD per month to $80 per month depending on the subscription and is the most preferred TV service with middle and high-income households in Zambia. A total of 201 airing spots were secured on the following channels; Mnet HD, Super sport 9, Telemundo and Mnet Family. These channels are some of the most popular channels on the DTSV/GOTV bouquet. The PSA aired from 18 December 2017 to 28 February 2018. 84% of the adverts aired between 18:00 and 23:00 which are peak television watching times in Zambian households.

The one-minute PSA also aired a total of 69 times on QTV between 13 December 2017 and 12 January 2018. QTV is Zambia’s biggest local television station available on several platforms including DSTV and GOTV and reaching millions of Zambians each day. Adverts aired three times a day between 07:00 and 22:00.

Figure 1 Examples of This Is Not A Game Campaign Materials

Billboards

16,200

8

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

F

urther, ten second snippets of the PSA

including: attending ZamFest (2018), Food

were aired on large electronic billboards

and Flames (2019) TV program Mastercook

throughout Lusaka during afternoon/

Zambia

(2020),

during

which

Zambian

evening (16:00 and 01:00). This includes the

celebrity chefs demonstrated how to cook

evening rush hour when many commuters

legal game meat to raise the profile of legal

are stuck in traffic. The ad was shown 180

game meat outlets. The team have conducted

times per day for a total of three months (6

numerous interviews on feature-length radio

December 2017 - 6 March 2018). In total the

and TV programs on national channels about

ten second clips were aired 16,200 times

the dangers and illegality of the illeg=al

across three strategic sites.

bushmeat trade. The campaign has also provided branding materials (posters and

On social media, the campaign Facebook

stickers) to 15 legal game meat outlets.

page had just over 15,000 followers in Figure 2 Example of Campaign social media post

On social media, the campaign Facebook page had just over 15,000 followers in May 2020 and presences on Instagram and Twitter.

May 2020 and presences on Instagram

In early 2021 surveys were conducted to

and Twitter. Almost daily, curated content

better understand the current knowledge,

is posted on these platforms to engage

attitudes, and practices around the illegal

followers and provide information on the

bushmeat trade in the main campaign

dangers of the illegal bushmeat trade.

areas and to understand the impact of the behaviour change campaign on bushmeat

As well as the above media channels, the

consumers in Lusaka and other cities to

campaign team also conducted various

maximize campaign impact going forward.

activation events throughout the three years

Methods Study Sites

F

urther, ten second snippets of the PSA were aired on large electronic billboards throughout Lusaka during afternoon/evening (16:00 and 01:00). This includes the evening rush hour when many commuters are stuck in traffic. The ad was shown 180 times per

day for a total of three months (6 December 2017 - 6 March 2018). In total the ten second clips were aired 16,200 times across three strategic sites.

On social media, the campaign Facebook page had just over 15,000 followers in May 2020 and presences on Instagram and Twitter. Almost daily, curated content is posted on these platforms to engage followers and provide information on the dangers of the illegal bushmeat trade.

As well as the above media channels, the campaign team also conducted various activation events throughout the three years including: attending ZamFest (2018), Food and Flames (2019) TV program Mastercook Zambia (2020), during which Zambian celebrity chefs demonstrated how to cook legal game meat to raise the profile of legal game meat outlets. The team have conducted numerousinterviews on feature-length radio and TV programs on national channels about the dangers and illegality of the illegal bushmeat trade. The campaign has also provided branding materials (posters and stickers) to 15 legal game meat outlets.

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

In early 2021 surveys were conducted to better understand the current knowledge, attitudes, and practices around the illegal bushmeat trade in the main campaign areas and to understand the impact of the behaviour change campaign on bushmeat consumers in Lusaka and other cities to maximize campaign impact going forward.

Town

Population Proximate protected areas

Lusaka

2,281,702

Kafue National Park, Lower Zambezi National Park

Kitwe

646,827

Kafue National Park

Chipata

508,361

South Luangwa National Park, Lukusuzi National Park

Livingstone

134,349

Mosi oa Tunya National Park

Survey Methods

Survey Process

T

he study used both quantitative and qualitative data collection through individual surveys and focus group discussions. As a result of the

COVID-19 pandemic, data collection methods had to be altered and rather than in-person surveys, online surveys, phone surveys and focus group discussions were conducted in a socially distanced format over a

Phone Calls

six-week period (February-March 2021).

Hunting or possessing meat from wildlife (bushmeat) without a licence in Zambia is illegal and therefore correctly understanding how much bushmeat is being consumed and why, can be challenging. In all of the data collection methods, sensitive questions were asked, which if asked directly are likely to be affected by non-response and social desirability biases, reducing their validity (Nuno and St. John, 2014). Therefore, anonymity was ensured. Indirect questioning reassured respondents that none of the information that they provided would be used against

Online Surveys

them or result in any legal consequences.

To try to mitigate the effects of social desirability bias the surveys were conducted online (selfadministered) or over the phone, rather than in person in the presence of an enumerator (Tourangeau and Yan, 2007). Sensitive questions were asked further towards the end of the survey once respondents were more comfortable with the subject. Enumerators did not hold themselves out as “conservationists”, nor were affiliated with any protected area, but rather explained that they were interested in the importance of wild meat as a food source in Zambia.

9

Focus Groups

10

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Ethics Statement Ethical clearance was received from the Copperbelt University (September 2020) and the research was permitted by a Memorandum of Understanding between Wildlife Crime Prevention and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife.

Each respondent provided free, prior, informed consent before they were interviewed and were ensured that any information that they provided would be anonymous. This consent was obtained verbally either in English or in a vernacular language with which the respondent was comfortable.

Respondents for all survey methods had to be over 18 years old.

RESULTS Phone survey

F

rom

March

status questions. As there is no robust

2021, 401 phone call surveys were

17

February

to

10

data on what defines Zambia’s middle-

conducted in English, Bemba and

class, we asked a series of questions.

Nyanja by four Zambian enumerators.

This

The surveys were designed to determine

of income, highest level of education

the current knowledge, attitudes and

as

practices

and

primary

whether they had been exposed to the This

We

concluded

Is Not A Game campaign material or not.

respondents

of

the

potential

consumer

included well

as

their

primary

source

smart-phone

ownership

method

of

transport.

that

most

market of illegal bushmeat in Zambia, were

survey

representative

of

the target illegal bushmeat consumer Respondents were identified using the

demographic because most (75 percent)

snowball sampling method. Enumerators

phone survey respondents had some

initially exchanged contact details of

form of tertiary education. Most survey

possible participants who were then

respondents

asked if they would be willing to share

formally (44 percent) or informally (29

contacts of further respondents that

percent )and therefore had a reliable

would be willing to participate in the

source of income. Almost all (92 percent)

phone survey. A mobile phone talk time

owned a smart-phone and 91 percent of

incentive of ZMW 20 (approx. $1 at the

participants used either a personal vehicle

time) was offered to respondents to

or public transport (buses and taxis) as

facilitate in recruiting more participants.

their regular mode of transportation.

were

employed

either

The survey was conducted by phone and Based on formative research (Overton et al., 2017), we previously identified bushmeat consumers as primarily urban residents who are able to pay for this luxury illegal commodity.

data was collected by each enumerator

60 percent of the respondents of this

through Survey Monkey with each survey

phone survey were female, which may

lasting

have created a bias given that females are

approximately

45

minutes.

more likely to be responsible for household Based on formative research (Overton

goods consumption, including bushmeat.

et al., 2017), we previously identified

We did not explicitly distinguish between

bushmeat consumers as primarily urban

legal

residents who are able to pay for this luxury

questioning consumption patterns due to

illegal commodity.

the sensitivity of this illegal activity.

These are relatively

and

illegal

bushmeat

when

wealthy and well-educated Zambians who possess some form of disposable income.

Forcing respondents to self-identify as

To ensure that we interviewed respondents

participating in criminal behaviour could

who fit the profile of an urban middle-class

have resulted in inaccurate data being

bushmeat consumer during our phone

collected.

surveys, we asked several socio-economic

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Response Rate A total of 414 individuals were contacted to participate in the phone call surveys. Of these 401 agreed to participate resulting in a response rate of 97%

Focus Group Discussions Eight focus group discussions lasting no more than two hours were held in Lusaka, Kitwe, Livingstone

and

Solwezi.

52

participants

401 Total Participants

identified from the phone survey were invited to attend focus group discussions based on how comfortable they were discussing their bushmeat consumption habits. Each discussion had less than 10 participants and was facilitated by one of the four Zambian enumerators. The participants were ensured of their anonymity and that any information provided would be kept confidential and not used against them or have

52 Total Focus Group Participants

any legal consequences.

Online Survey An online survey tool created on Survey Monkey was distributed via the This Is Not A Game campaign’s social media pages (Facebook and Instagram). This self-administered tool was aimed at people who had already familiarized themselves with the campaign material to determine the campaign’s impact on its audience.

8 Total Focus Groups

The typical amount of time spent to answer the 20-question survey was 6 minutes. The survey went live on Facebook on 15 February 2021 for two weeks. Survey participants were also recruited via email. To reach more participants the survey was boosted using paid advertising on Facebook.

140

There were 140 respondents to this online survey of which 63 percent were female (n=88) and 37 percent were male (n=52). Most were aged 25-34 years old (51 percent) and 98 percent of respondents were from Zambia, of which 61 percent were from Lusaka. The remaining 39 percent were mostly from prominent towns such as Livingstone, Kitwe, Mpika and Chipata.

Online Survey Respondents

11

12

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

The illegal bushmeat trade directly causes the death of thousands of animals every year. A rough estimation given the amount of meat estimated to be consumed would be over 22,800 impalas or 1,932 buffaloes.

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Legal Game Supply 103 Tons

13

Demand For Bushmeat 50,000 Tons

LEGAL ZAMBIAN

GAME MEAT Le g ally d is t r ibute d G am e M e at a pproved by Th e D e par t m e nt of N at ion al Par k s and Wi ld li fe

14

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Discussion

Bushmeat consumption in the target consumer market (not necessarily campaign audience) Meat from wildlife continues to be an extremely popular source of

Other reasons stated for not consuming illegal bushmeat were health

protein in Zambia. Almost all respondents (93 percent) identified as

concerns, concerns about the illegality of the meat, the cost of the

consumers of bushmeat (legal and illegal meat from wildlife) and 59

meat and a preference for other meats. Most participants seem to be

percent of these individuals had consumed meat from wildlife in the

more deterred by the unavailability of the meat rather than its illegality.

last 12 months. Those who had not consumed bushmeat in the last

When asked how often they would like to consume meat from wildlife,

12 months (41 percent) mostly stated that this was due to a lack of

46 percent of respondents said weekly and 31 percent said monthly,

availability.

demonstrating a high demand for this product.

Q Q

Beef Chicken

Do you eat any of the following?

Goat Lamb Bushmeat Fish None

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

100%

Weekly Monthly

In the past 12 5 Or More Times months (year) 4 Times how many times 3 Times have you eaten bushmeat?

2 Times Once None

50%

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Q

In an ideal world, if money and availability were not an issue, how often would you like to consume bushmeat?

Further, in focus group discussions, we found that most people had consumed bushmeat for the first time in a family setting at home. Bushmeat is often consumed together by families as a special meal. Thus, it has both cultural and historical significance to most consumers.

“I was less than 10 years old and at home, I remember eating it at different places thereafter, but it appeared to be a special meal.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Lusaka

Never Daily Weekly Monthly Yearly

0%

10%

20%

packaging of the meat to ensure legality.

“Yes, when I asked for papers and the seller did not produce them, I realized he was selling illegal bushmeat and decided not to buy for fear of being arrested.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Chipata

volved. Some respondents understood that bushmeat was an illegal product, but this did not impact their attitude or behaviour.

Just over half of respondents (51 percent) actually stated that they preferred meat from livestock over meat from wildlife. The prima-

illegal bushmeat should be concerned about

therefore more comfortable with meat from

its illegality, 97 percent of respondents said yes.

livestock. Out of the 49 percent of respond-

However, 54 percent of respondents did

“I try to buy from legal seller because I’m scared to go to jail, but I like eating bushmeat. I even know that the supplier of unlicensed bushmeat is a transport conductor of the Mulobezi train.”

meat possession. Of those who stated they knew what the penalties were 67 percent of

a trader when making a legal purchase.

“There was a time when I was supposed to buy bushmeat but because of the check points along the road, I decided not to buy.”

Most of the respondents who stated they

– Focus group discussion participant, Chipata

what a consumer should be requesting from

they are not clear on what penalties are in-

wildlife, most people feel more familiar and

legality when purchasing bushmeat, leading

documents prove the legality of the meat and

50%

a result of the limited access to meat from

ed they did not request documents to prove

meat. There was uncertainty as to which

40%

However, when asked if people who consume

not know the exact legal penalties of bush-

was illegal bushmeat rather than legal game

30%

ry reason given was familiarity. Probably as

A majority of respondents (85 percent) stat-

us to assume that the meat being discussed

15

did ask for documentation when purchas-

– Focus group discussion participant, Livingstone

ents who preferred bushmeat over meat from livestock, its taste (36 percent), per-

ing bushmeat did not take any further steps

ceived health benefits (33 percent) and rep-

to ensure the meat was legal (90 percent).

them stated they were aware it was a pris-

utation as a delicacy (29 percent) were the

However, a small percentage of respondents

on sentence but were uncertain how long

main reasons that bushmeat was preferred.

stated they relied on a trusted supplier, legal

it was. So, while people understand that

game meat signage or certification and the

bushmeat possession is a criminal offence,

16

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Discussion Just over half of respondents (51 percent) actually stated that they preferred meat from livestock over meat from wildlife. The primary reason given was familiarity. Probably as a result of the limited access to meat from wildlife, most people feel more familiar and therefore more com-

Q

fortable with meat from livestock. Out of the 49 percent of respondents who preferred bushmeat over meat from livestock, its taste (36 percent), perceived health benefits (33 percent) and reputation as a delicacy (29 percent) were the main reasons that bushmeat was preferred.

Given a choice between bushmeat and meat from livestock (e.g. beef, chicken, lamb) which would you prefer to eat?

Livestock

51% (206) No Preference Livestock Bushmeat

No Preference

Bushmeat

3% (14)

45% (181)

Interestingly 96 percent of respondents thought there were disadvantages to consuming illegal bushmeat even though many of them admitted to doing so. The main disadvantages cited by respondents were the illegality of bushmeat (64 percent) and health concerns (59 percent).

Q

Environmental

Disadvantages or problems involved with consuming unlicensed bushmeat:

Economic Health Illegal Other (Please Specify)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Almost all respondents (97 percent) said that they would prefer to eat licensed meat from wildlife. This was driven by wanting to avoid the legal penalties of bushmeat consumption and possession, the belief that legal game meat is safer for one’s health and certainty about what one is eating. Interestingly some respondents also stated wanting to support a legitimate Zambian business as a reason to buy legal game meat. For the 3 percent of respondents who stated they preferred illegal meat, their primary reasons were the price, availability and relationship with their trader.

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Given a choice between unlicensed and licensed bushmeat which would you prefer to eat?

Unlicensed

No Preference

Bushmeat

97% (388)

3% (13)

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

No Preference

Suppo rting Tourism

Licensed Meat Available

Trustworthy Sou rce

Suppo rting A Ligitimate Supplier

Species Certainity

Legal Penalties

Conservation

0%

Safer For Human Consumption

Q

Licensed

17

18

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Discussion “My friend developed an allergy; he was losing his skin pigmentation – for this reason I only make sure that I consume bushmeat that is legal and from a trusted source.”

the campaign could do a lot more to educate the public on the dangers of illegal bushmeat. Some suggestions are outlined here:

know where to purchase legal game meat in

“It’s not out there, I didn’t know there was legal game meat. I was shocked when someone told me I could get arrested for eating illegal game meat. It should be advertised vastly.”

their area, showing an opportunity to supply

– Focus group discussion participant, Kitwe

– Focus Group Discussion Participant, Livingstone

However, 74 percent of respondents did not

this demand with legal meat when available.

Most respondents (97 percent) said they believed bushmeat consumption was bad for

Zambia’s

environment

and

wildlife.

“This may extinct wild animals thereby reducing inflow of tourism revenue in Zambia. Also, corruption is fuelled through illegal bushmeat trade.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Livingstone

“Work hand in hand with medical personnel we always trust what the doctor says.

Use a doctor to also educate the public on the dangers of consuming unlicensed bushmeat. Put posters in Hospitals or Clinics. Engage Musicians as well.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Kitwe

TV and social media, heard them on radio and

“Get more organisations involved, banks and telecoms to start speaking against the trade. Involve the shakers and movers on social media like Shi Mumbi, Zuba and the president himself.”

other forms of media. Most respondents felt

– Focus group discussion participant, Lusaka

When asked whether they had seen or heard messaging about the dangers of illegal bushmeat 46 percent of respondents said no. Those that had seen these messages saw them on

“Have the campaign in several languages, let the messages of the campaign be more relatable and let them cater different levels of people.

Introduce communitybased sensitization and involve members of that community to work with.

Also identify ambassadors who have a good standing and are passionate about conservation to work with identified ambassadors who have a good following.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Lusaka

So, whilst the demand for bushmeat remains high, people do seem to be concerned about its illegality (although the legal penalties are not well understood), health and environmental consequences. However, the concern does not yet seem enough to result in behaviour change and stop people consuming illegal bushmeat. People do state that they would prefer to eat legal game meat, but they don’t yet know where to get it. Further, not many people are aware of any campaign materials regarding the dangers of illegal bushmeat which shows that the campaign has not yet reached enough people.

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

19

Presentation: Fresh vs Dry The majority of illegal bushmeat available in Zambia is prepared dry (either air or smoke-dried), packaged in bundles of old newspaper or food sacks for ease of transportation from protected areas to urban centres. Conversely, legal game meat is mostly sold in fresh cuts. With regards to preference in the presentation of bushmeat, we asked respondents whether they liked fresh or dry meat. 68 percent of people who ate bushmeat, preferred dry bushmeat.

Q

Dry

68% (271) When you eat bushmeat do you prefer fresh or dried meat?

No Preference Fresh

17% (67)

16% (63)

When probed further about their preferences, 45 percent of those who preferred dry meat stated their primary reasons for the preference was taste. Cultural practices (28 percent) and availability (16 percent) were also significant factors in this choice.

50% 40% 30%

As most Zambians have never consumed fresh bushmeat, it is unsurprising that taste is such a significant driver. Interestingly however,

20%

taste, culture and availability were also the reasons why the minority (17 percent) of people preferred fresh bushmeat over dry. So, it might

10%

be that consumers have a perception that they prefer the taste but actually don’t have experience of the alternative to compare.

Taste

Health

Easier To Store

Easier To Prepare

Culture

Availability

0%

20

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Discussion Sources Of Bushmeat Most respondents sourced their bushmeat from friends and family or traders. Zambian society is a very polite and respectful place. Cultural norms consider it rude to question the origins and legality of meat prepared and offered to guests at a family member or friend’s house. Therefore, most consumers at a social event are currently not likely to ask where the meat that they are offered came from and if it is legal.

Q

Other (Please Specify)

Where do you typically purchase or consume bushmeat from?

Friends/Family Caterers Restaurants Traders Markets Butcheries Supermarkets

This is a challenge when encouraging consumers to verify the source and legality of their bushmeat. However, it may also be an opportunity to encourage hosts of such special occasions not to put the health of their loved ones at risk by purchasing illegal bushmeat. Once again easily accessible legal game meat can reduce the demand for illegal bushmeat and the use of unreliable and untrustworthy sources.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

“There was a time when I was supposed to buy bushmeat but because of the check points along the road, I decided not to buy.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Chipata

21

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Species Identification

Q

No, Never

37% (149) When you are purchasing and/ or consuming bushmeat do you know what animal it comes from?

Yes, Always

33% (132)

Yes, Sometimes

30% (120)

Only 33 percent of survey respondents believed that they always knew what species of animal they were consuming every time they ate bushmeat. This is an important finding that can be used as leverage in campaign messaging, as the primary source of information on the origins and species of the meat is a criminal bushmeat trader who cannot be trusted.

COVID-19 has brought international attention to wild meat with calls to ban its trade and con-

Covid 19

Q

sumption (and, in some places such as China, action). We asked questions in our survey to discover if COVID-19 has affected bushmeat consumption patterns in Zambia’s major urban areas. There does seem to be an understanding that eating bushmeat and wild animals are linked to the global pandemic, with 70% of respondents in total giving these as the primary source of Covid-19.

Domestic Animals Eating Bushmeat

What do you think is the primary source of Covid-19?

Eating Regular Meat Environmental Damage Lab Experiments Lack Of Hygiene Lack Of Medicine None Of The Above Wild Animals Other (Please Specify)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

22

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Discussion

When probed about COVID-19 specifically, 69 percent of respondents stated COVID-19 had not altered their bushmeat buying patterns. Most of these individuals however had not been buying bushmeat regularly anyway and were therefore not affected by factors such as reduced supply.

For those who had been affected, the majority of whom were eating less, cited a lack of supply and fear of diseases as their primary reasons for ceasing to consume illegal bushmeat.

Q

Stopped Buying Eat Less

How has COVID-19 affected your buying or eating of unlicensed bushmeat?

In focus group discussions we found that COVID-19 was indeed influencing bushmeat consumption patterns in some people:

“It’s not out there, I didn’t know there was legal game meat. I was shocked when someone told me I could get arrested for eating illegal game meat. It should be advertised vastly.”

– Focus group discussion participant, Kitwe

There is therefore still an opportunity to highlight the link between zoonotic diseases such as COVID-19 and the illegal bushmeat trade to try to further reduce the demand.

6% (24)

29% (99) Eat More

0% (2)

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Campaign Engagement And Response

i

Uncertainty of species of animal being eaten,

ii

Health risks/diseases,

iii Harm to tourism industry and Zambian economy, In order to better understand the response to the This Is Not A Game behav-

The majority

60%

of respondents reported that their opinion about illegal bushmeat had changed in the past 3 years.

And 78 percent of these people reported that this change was as a result of information they had learnt through the campaign.

iour change campaign an online survey was circulated on the campaign social media sites and the following responses received.

As expected, 95 percent of the online (targeted audience members) survey respondents had heard or seen messages about the dangers of eating or buying illegal bushmeat and 72 percent recognized images associated with the campaign specifically.

The majority (60 percent) of respondents reported that their opinion about illegal bushmeat had changed in the past 3 years. And 78 percent of these people reported that this change was as a result of information they had learnt through the campaign. As this was a self-administered survey, we are confident of the accuracy of this statement. It shows that the campaign has had a positive impact on the attitude that people in the target audience have about illegal bushmeat consumption.

As was expected, given that the targeted audience was people who had seen the campaign, a large proportion of them (69 percent) said that they had not eaten bushmeat in the past year. The rest had eaten it between once and monthly in the past year.

Most people asked (97 percent), thought that there were disadvantages associated with eating illegal bushmeat. The most common disadvantages considered were

iv Harm to wildlife, v

Legal risks/prison sentences.

This confirms our perception that people are mostly worried about short term, direct risks to their health and the state of the meat that they are consuming. Longer term, less direct risks like impact on the economy and the environment are of less concern. Legal risks and prison sentences are not concerning probably because they are not seen as likely.

Only 48 percent of respondents reported that they knew how to tell the difference between illegal bushmeat and legal game meat. Of these 67 percent knew that they should ask for a DNPW licence. This shows that the campaign needs to work harder to provide information about how to verify legal game meat.

The majority (62 percent) had seen the campaign on Facebook, with 30 percent having attended events and 26 percent having heard campaign materials on the radio.

Only 31 percent had visited the website. 79 percent followed the campaign on social media. However, it should be noted that the online survey was circulated through social media and therefore biased towards those who had engaged with the campaign through social media. Further investigation needs to be done to better understand which communication channels reach the most people.

The most commonly reported information received from the website was: “Information about where to purchase Zambian legal game meat” (85 percent), closely followed by “Information about health risks of eating illegal bushmeat” (77 percent) and then “Information about the illegal bushmeat trade on wildlife conservation in Zambia” (74 percent). This perhaps shows that the website could contain more information about the “legal risks and prison sentences linked to eating illegal bushmeat” which only 61 percent of people said they obtained from the website and “information about the impact of the illegal bushmeat trade on local communities” which only 59 percent of people said they obtained from the website.

23

24

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

The most common reason for following the campaign on social media was to “know more about Zambian wildlife conservation” (85 percent) with 69 percent following the campaign on social media to find out more about where to get legal game meat from and 50 percent wanting to know more about the risks involved with eating illegal bushmeat. Most people thought that the message that the campaign was trying to portray was that illegal bushmeat is a threat to wildlife conservation in Zambia (83 percent). Slightly less people thought that the campaign was trying to let people know that illegal bushmeat is dangerous and carries diseases (69 percent) with 62 percent of people thinking that the campaign was trying to let people know that affordable legal game meat is available in Zambia.

When asked for suggestions for other messages or information that the campaign could use to get its message across better, the largest category that was mentioned was community outreach (both rural and urban). Which is not something which the campaign has ever addressed. Other suggestions which were mentioned to a smaller degree included school outreach and influencers.

In the audience survey we asked about trusted sources for information about food; 60 percent go to friends and family for advice about what to eat and 57 percent went to social media (over medical professionals and radio and TV). Showing that social media campaigns and influencers should be the relevant channels to reach our target audience with the campaign information.

The most common reason for following the campaign on social media was to “know more about Zambian wildlife conservation” (85 percent) with 69 percent following the campaign on social media to find out more about where to get legal game meat

Picture Of Harmful Traps Used To Catch Bushmeat

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

Conclusions Illegal bushmeat consumption in Zambia’s urban centres is still high and deemed socially acceptable in the consumer demographic.

Illegal bushmeat consumption in Zambia’s urban centres is still high and deemed socially acceptable in the consumer demographic. Preferences for meat from wildlife are taste driven with cultural connotations and delicacy status.

However, consum-

ers are aware that bushmeat is illegal and there are negative consequences for purchasing and consuming it, but this knowledge is not yet translating to effect behaviour change, i.e., not purchasing, or consuming illegal

Preferences for meat from wildlife are taste driven with cultural connotations and delicacy status. However, consumers are aware that bushmeat is illegal and there are negative consequences for purchasing and consuming it, but this knowledge is not yet translating to effect behaviour change

bushmeat. Consumers do have concerns about health issues, possible exposure to zoonotic diseases such as COVID-19 and the uncertainty of species that they are eating as well as

environmental

consequences.

There is a still also a significant lack of awareness about the availability of legal game meat and where to purchase it from, even though an overwhelming majority would prefer to be purchasing licensed meat.

There are opportunities here to leverage awareness of the various reasons not to eat illegal bushmeat and drive messaging home with more substantiated information through trusted sources and repeated engagement in order to turn this initial awareness into behaviour change. The provision

of affordable and accessible legal alternatives would enable this behaviour change by avoiding the need for consumers to completely cease to enjoy this important cultural item but be able to continue to experience it safely. Due to the overwhelming preference for dried meat from wildlife, it is important that the legal industry is providing a dried product as a directly comparable alternative. It is possible that offering legal game meat as an alternative to illegal bushmeat will only be acceptable to consumers when it is offered in a dried form.

The reported cultural significance of eating bushmeat at social gatherings, as well as personal relationships with traders, makes it a more sensitive topic to address and possibly harder to change. Any messaging must be culturally sensitive, using trusted sources to convey the dangers of feeding unsafe meat to family members and friends.

The behaviour change campaign that has been implemented seems to have had successful initial results with a much lower illegal bushmeat consumption level reportedly resulting from changed opinions from information learnt from the campaign. As an overall conclusion we can therefore determine that, for those whom it has reached, the campaign has had the intended outcome of reducing bushmeat consumption. The drivers of this reduction seem to have been associated with short term, direct risks such as health which should be further emphasized in future campaign materials. Further many audience members are using the campaign to learn where to get legal game meat from.

Highlight: The behaviour change campaign that has been implemented seems to have had successful initial results with a much lower illegal bushmeat consumption level reportedly resulting from changed opinions from information learnt from the campaign.

25

26

The illegal bushmeat trade in Zambia

Recommendations he behaviour change cam-

T

meat at social events. It remains

must continue to be leveraged and

paign overall must reach more

important that all campaign mes-

supported through putting potential

people on a more regular basis

saging is culturally sensitive and

consumers in touch with retailers

to be heard by the consumer mar-

keeps in mind the current knowl-

and ensuring that the supply meets

ket. More information across more

edge and attitudes of the consumer

their demand. Through this, further

channels needs to be provided to

demographic revealed by this study

job creation, revenue generation

enable consumers to verify the

to ensure resonance with the audi-

and growth of wildlife populations

legality of their legal game meat.

ence. However more investigation

can be ensured for this important

Current concerns (such as legal

into the success and reach of var-

sustainable, wildlife-based Zambi-

penalties, disease, uncertainty of

ious media channels is needed.

an industry.

difference between illegal and le-

The major preference for a dried

There is a further need for more ro-

gal, availability of legal game meat)

form of meat from wildlife must be

bust law enforcement from DNPW

should be verified, substantiated

recognised by the legal game meat

regarding the illegal bushmeat

and emphasised using the same

industry. There is a significant op-

trade with consumers currently

current, successful platforms of

portunity for the legal game meat

either not aware or not concerned

TV, radio, social media and influen-

industry to produce a more directly

about the legal penalties of being

tial personalities to turn these con-

viable alternative to the dried ille-

caught with illegal bushmeat. Pen-

cerns into behaviour change.

gal bushmeat bundle, to offset the

alties should be publicized more

threat that the illegal bushmeat

widely and enforced, not just on a

Innovative suggestions are needed

trade poses to the legal industry as

trading level but also at the retailer

to address the social complexities

well as profit more effectively from

and consumer level.

of asking about the derivation of

the huge demand for this good.

species, mechanisms to tell the

The desire for legal game meat

Acknowledgements Wildlife Conservation Network’s Lion Recovery fund provided funding for this study and the campaign it evaluates.

The Department of National Parks and Wildlife were the main government partners for this study and have provided invaluable support from the inception of the project.

The Wildlife Producers Association of Zambia, Dr Peter Lindsey, Kim Watson, Dr Vincent Nyirenda and the Copperbelt University also provided guidance throughout the study.

Evaluating a behaviour change campaign

27

References African Development Bank, (AfDB), ‘The Middle of the Pyramid: Dynamics of the Middle Class in Africa’, the Chief Economist Complex, Market Brief, April 20, AfDB, Tunis, 2011.

Bolderdijk, J., Steg, L., Geller, E. et al. Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning. Nature Clim Change 3, 413–416 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1767 Brashares JS, Golden CD, Weinbaum KZ, Barrett CB, Okello GV (2011) Economic and geographic drivers of wildlife consumption in rural Africa.

Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:13931–13936 Kemp, S., Datareportal, Digital 2021 – Zambia (12 February 2021) https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2021-zambia Lindsey PA et al (2012) Illegal hunting and the bush-meat trade in savanna Africa: drivers, impacts and solutions to address the problem. Panthera/Zoological Society of London/Wildlife Conservation Society, New York Lindsey PA, Barnes J, Nyirenda V, Pumfrett B, Tambling CJ, Taylor WA, et al. (2013) The Zambian Wildlife Ranching Industry: Scale, Associated Benefits, and Limitations Affecting Its Development. PLoS ONE 8(12): e81761. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0081761 Lindsey, P.A., Havemann, C.P., Lines, R.M., Price, A.E., Retief, T.A., Rhebergen, T., Van der Waal, C., Romañach, S.S., 2013b. Benefits of wildlife-based land uses on private lands in Namibia and limitations affecting their development. Oryx 47 (1), 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0030605311001049.

Lindsey, P. A., Nyirenda, V. R., Barnes, J. I., Becker, M. S., McRobb, R., Tambling, C. J., Taylor, A., Watson, F. G., & t’Sas Rolfes, M. (2014). Underperformance of African Protected Area Networks and the Case for New Conservation Models: Insights from Zambia. PLoS One, 9(5), e94109. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0094109 Lindsey, P.A., L.S. Petracca P.J. Funston H.Bauer A. Dickman K. Everatt ,M. Flyman, P. Henschel , A.E. Hinks , S. Kasiki , A. Loveridge , D.W. Macdonald , R. Mandisodza, W. Mgoola , S.M. Miller, S. Nazerali , L. Siege, K. Uiseb, L.T.B. Hunter. The performance of African protected areas for lions and their prey. Biological Conservation 209 (2017) 137–149 Overton, J., Davies, S., Nguluka, L., Chibeya, D., Nsende, E., Sompa B., Simukonda , C., and Lindsey, P., “The illegal bushmeat trade in the Greater Kafue Ecosystem, Zambia: drivers, impacts and solutions” 2017 Nuno, A., St John, F.A.V. How to ask sensitive questions in conservation: A review of specialized questioning techniques. Biol. Conserv. (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.09.047 Chomba, C., Nyirenda, V., Shanungu, G., Simukonda, C., Nyirenda, M., Kaumba., C. An Updated Population Status of the Endemic Kafue lechwe (Kobus leche kafuensis) on the Kafue Flats, Zambia, for the Period 1931-2015. Global Journal of Biology, Agricultural & Health Sciences (2015) 154-164 Taylor, W.A., Lindsey, P.A., Davies-Mostert, H.T., 2016. An Assessment of the Economic, Social and Conservation Value of the Wildlife Ranching Industry and its Potential to Support the Green Economy in South Africa. The Endangered Wildlife Trust Tourangeau R, Yan T (2007) Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychol Bull 133:859–883. https://doi. org/10.1037/0033-2909.133.5.859 van Velden, J.L., Wilson, K., Lindsey, P.A. et al. Bushmeat hunting and consumption is a pervasive issue in African savannahs: insights from four protected areas in Malawi.Biodivers Conserv 29, 1443–1464 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-020-01944-4 Zambia Population Total https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL?locations=ZM Zambia Information and Communications Technology Authority, 2018 national survey on access and usage of information and communication technologies by households and individuals: A demand side assessment of access and usage of ICTs in Zambia

This Is Not A Game

Contact Us @ThisIsNotAGame info@thisisnotagame.info www.thisisnotagame.info