Introduction

Multiple-use landscapes support various activities such as livestock and agricultural production, settlements, and biodiversity conservation (Sayer et al. 2013). In many dry areas, these landscapes are threatened by interacting factors such as climate change and LULCC, leading to biodiversity loss and ecosystem services decline (Wang et al. 2023). Under changing climatic and socio-economic conditions, biodiversity conservation efforts have led to the expansion of conservation land use into adjacent multiple-use areas (Maxwell et al. 2020). However, without addressing LULCC causes, existing and newly formed protected areas in global drylands risk isolation and disconnected ecosystem functions and services (Maestre et al. 2016). The relationship between biodiversity conservation and LULCC in drylands is important given that drylands occupy 41% of the global land surface and are projected to increase by 11–23% throughout the twenty-first century (Maestre et al. 2016).

LULCC drivers vary across scales in response to interactions between local actions, national policies, regional and global markets, and environmental factors (Lambin et al. 2001; Kariuki et al. 2021). Human-driven LULCC in multiple-use landscapes provides insights that underpin the sustainable management of drylands under climate variability. Understanding LULCC dynamics can help countries to develop national strategies for meeting global sustainability agendas such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) (CBD 2022) and the SDG (UN 2015). The GBF aims to conserve 30% of the global terrestrial land by 2030 through an ecologically diverse and well-connected system of protected areas. At national scales, dry countries, like Namibia, that have achieved 30% coverage of conservation land are threatened by factors like LULCC, climate change, and concentration of human population in key resource areas. LULCC insights in such countries are needed to assess potential pathways to future LULCC and to inform national governance strategies of multiple-use landscapes.

Scenario analysis of LULCC is important for envisioning how current pressures may change multiple-use landscapes in the future and for exploring pathways to desired futures. LULCC scenario analysis also connects place-based perspectives with scientific evidence by coupling qualitative narratives with modeling (Capitani et al. 2016; Tengö et al. 2021) and triggering LULCC discussions once existing gaps are identified. In multiple-use landscapes, participatory and spatially explicit scenarios can support effective land use planning by exploring alternative futures and shared solutions (Kariuki et al. 2021, 2022). A focus on the long-term horizon of scenarios broadens the inclusion of long-term spatial and temporal LULCC processes.

Participatory scenario analysis in African drylands has assessed future conservation and development pathways for the Serengeti in Tanzania (Kariuki et al. 2022), community livelihoods in southern Africa (Chirozva et al. 2014), and human-wildlife coexistence in Namibia (Jiren et al. 2021). Yet, co-produced scenarios that spatially assess future LULCC in multiple-use drylands in southern Africa are missing. Such studies are needed given that climate change is expected to worsen LULCC impacts on biodiversity and livelihoods, and human impact on drylands lasts for decades as drylands do not regenerate quickly (Darkoh 2003).

Namibia, known for its pioneering work on community conservation and state protected areas, protects over 40% of its land (Mbidzo et al. 2021), and tourism contributes 5.5% to its Gross Domestic Product (MET 2010). Namibia’s wildlife is found in national parks, communal land, and freehold land (MET 2010), but management challenges exist in conservation areas with varying environmental settings and governance structures (Mbidzo et al. 2021). Namibia also has a low population density (NSA 2024) with most (70%) of its population being smallholder subsistence farmers (Gbagir et al. 2019) and food production associated with the loss of savannas (Wingate et al. 2016). Understanding LULCC in Namibia is critical, given past and projected climate change impacts in the country (Thorn et al. 2023).

This paper assesses the impact of future LULCC on wildlife conservation land use, farming communities, and the sustainability of the Etosha landscape in north-central Namibia by integrating perspectives from diverse stakeholders with quantitative secondary data. The study (i) co-produces LULCC scenarios for 2030 and 2063 and spatially models the type and extent of expected future land cover change, (ii) assesses areas of high LULCC and human-wildlife conflicts, and (iii) determines desirable futures aligned to the SDG Agenda 2030 and the AU Agenda 2063.

Materials and methods

Study area

The Etosha landscape study area covers 84,589 km2 of four regions in north-central Namibia: Oshikoto, Omusati, Ohangwena, and Oshana. These regions are part of the Cuvelai-Etosha Basin that encompasses Etosha National Park (hereon referred to as Etosha) and several communal conservancies (Fig. 1). The Cuvelai-Etosha Basin is a low-lying plain with interconnected water channels (‘oshanas’) originating from southern Angola and draining at the Etosha Pan (Liehr et al. 2017). The average rainfall is 300–450 mm/year, occurring between November and April, with a gradient from the west (drier) to the east (wetter) (Turner et al. 2022). Soils consist of Kalahari sands and clays. The sandy soils are nutrient-poor and unsuitable for agriculture (Bloemertz et al. 2018). Water is scarce and boreholes and artesian wells are important water sources (MET 2007).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Location of the study area, Etosha National Park, communal conservancies (a, Uukolonkadhi Ruacana; b, Uukwaluudhi; c, part of Ehirovipuka that is found in the administrative regions of north-central Namibia; d, Lipumbu ya Tshilongo; e, King Nehale; and f, Okongo) (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2018) and irrigation sites (Enkono et al. 2013; Mendelsohn et al. 2006; Togarepi et al. 2018)

Full size image

Etosha (22,269 km2) is Namibia’s most visited park drawing 22% of Namibia’s tourists (World Bank 2021). It was declared a national park in 1958, fenced from the mid-1950s until 1973 with an 800-km partly electric, cable, and stock fence (MET 2007). Parts of the fence are currently not well maintained and allow wildlife and livestock movements (MET 2007). Along Etosha’s land border is a 40-km buffer zone that supports livestock grazing (Turner et al. 2022). North and east of Etosha are communal farms and conservancies where sedentary livestock keeping, seminomadic pastoralism, wildlife keeping, and smallholder farming occur (Mannetti et al. 2019). Southeast of Etosha are irrigated commercial farms (MET 2010). A veterinary fence separates private large-scale farms used for livestock and wildlife production from communal conservancies and smallholder farms (Fig. 1) (Coppock et al. 2022). Climate variability often causes crop failures (MET 2010).

North-central Namibia’s population is 1.1 million and forms 37.8% of Namibia’s national population (NSA 2024). Population densities in Ohangwena and Oshana are the highest in Namibia while those of Omusati and Oshikoto are above the national average (NSA 2024). Seven communal conservancies and five community forests cover 16% of the land area (Fig. 1), supporting 52,382 registered users through various income sources (MEFT and NASCO 2023). High population and uncoordinated grazing management have led to overutilization of resources (Coppock et al. 2022).

Stakeholder composition

The Kesho framework (Capitani et al. 2016) was used for participatory scenario development. The framework integrates participatory approaches with quantitative modelling, guiding stakeholders to develop narratives that inform quantitative modelling. It has been applied across multiple land use systems including coffee production (Capitani et al. 2019), small islands in the Indian Ocean (Newman et al. 2024), agriculture (Thorn et al. 2022), and conservation (Kariuki et al. 2022).

A 3-day scenario development workshop was held in November 2022 in Oshikoto Region (Fig. 1) to develop LULCC scenario narratives. Subsequent virtual meetings with a subset of stakeholders were done once the spatial scenario outputs were produced to disseminate them and solicit feedback. The selection of the engaged stakeholders was done by researchers from the University of Namibia. It was informed by working relationships the researchers had with the stakeholders and an actor mapping exercise. The selection targeted stakeholders that lived and/or worked in north-central Namibia and had interest and/or influence in LULCC in the area. The selected stakeholders had experience in conservation, agriculture, community-based conservation, land-based livelihoods, tourism, urban planning, infrastructure development, and land and water management (Online Resource 1 Table S1). In total, 16 stakeholders and researchers representing Etosha, local and regional governments, non-governmental organisations, academia, traditional authority, communities living inside and outside communal conservancies, and the management of communal conservancies participated in the scenario development process (Online Resource 1 Table S1).

The stakeholders were formally invited to the workshop by the University of Namibia verbally and through a written letter. The invitations outlined the workshop objectives. All participants voluntarily agreed to participate. The subset of stakeholders who participated in the subsequent meetings represented academia, Etosha, traditional authorities, and the communities living outside communal conservancies.

Land use and land cover change scenario development

The scenario development process began with plenary presentations and discussions by the University of Namibia researchers about social-ecological interactions at the Etosha landscape and LULCC scenarios in Africa. Key definitions relevant to process, such as land use, land cover, scenarios, base year, time horizon, and the geographic scope, were co-established for boundary setting. Participants selected the time frame to represent past and present LULCC based on their memories of major LULCC events at the Etosha landscape. The years 1966, when the struggle for Namibia’s independence from South Africa started, to 2000, marked by the growth of conservancies, were selected to represent the past. The present was from 2000 to 2022, when the workshop was held. Following the boundary setting, participants broke into groups and discussed their perceptions of past and present LULCC at the Etosha landscape. Each group listed and ranked the key drivers of past and present LULCC. The groups then converged and harmonised their lists and ranks. They also developed a timeline of key LULCC events in the area. The exercises of past and present LULCC were done to prompt discussions that would inform the participants perspectives of future LULCC drivers and scenarios.

Development of future LULCC scenarios started with selecting 2030 and 2063 (aligning with the SDG and AU Agendas) as the time horizons for the scenarios. For each time horizon, participants discussed potential challenges for the Etosha landscape and the actions to be prioritised to ensure that biodiversity and societies are supported sustainably.

Three scenarios representing the current state of land uses at the Etosha landscape and two alternate land use states were developed in a plenary discussion. These scenarios were the following: a ‘business as usual (BAU)’ scenario focussed on conservation and development; a ‘conservation and livestock production’ scenario; and an ‘agricultural and livestock production’ scenario. Participants were divided into three groups. Each group had participants with different LULCC interests and developed the narrative for one scenario. For each scenario, participants discussed its drivers, LULCC expected in 2030 and 2063, where LULCC would happen, the likelihood LULCC, and the social-ecological implications of the expected change. A plausibility and consistency analysis for each scenario was then done in a plenary session. Each group presented their scenario narrative, and the other groups determined if the coherence, realism, and representation of the scenario were well captured (van't Klooster and van Asselt 2006). Participants then reassembled into their groups and harmonised their narratives. After developing the scenario narratives, each participant identified characteristics they desired for the Etosha landscape in 2030 and 2063.

Spatial modelling of future land cover change scenarios

The spatial scenarios reflecting the nature and extent of expected land cover change in 2030 and 2063 were developed using ESRI ArcMap 10.8 and RStudio Team (2019). Secondary datasets associated with LULCC in north-central Namibia were used in modelling the scenarios. These datasets included spatial layers of projected rainfall (Platts et al. 2015), elevation (Jarvis et al. 2008), human population (WorldPop 2013), distance to roads (SEDAC 2023), distance to croplands (Buchhorn et al. 2020), distance to built-up areas (Buchhorn et al. 2020), distance to mines (ESRI 2023), distance to irrigated areas (Enkono et al. 2013; Mendelsohn 2006; Togarepi et al. 2018), protected areas (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN 2018), Namibian farming and livestock systems (Mendelsohn 2006), livestock density (Robinson et al. 2014), and land cover (Buchhorn et al. 2020). The available current land cover map was for the year 2019 and served as the baseline map. Distances were Euclidean.

The datasets were clipped and rasterised, and their resolution harmonised to 100 m. The different units were reclassified to a standard scale representing participants’ views of expected land cover change in specific geographical areas. Composite indicators were developed for specific land cover categories under each scenario. The composite indicators were made by aggregating modifying layers and masking preventing layers (Capitani et al. 2016). The composite indicators were rescaled to show likelihood of change. To establish the extent of future land cover change, land demand for specific land uses under each scenario and time horizon was estimated from projected secondary data (Online Resource 4 Text S2). Participants’ perspectives on the percent likelihood of change for specific land cover classes under each scenario were employed to estimate the land demand likely to be met in 2030 and 2063. These land demand estimates were included in R to simulate land cover conversion. LULCC was simulated sequentially from forests to shrubland, grassland, cropland, built-up, and sparse vegetation, or bare land. Simulation considered human-driven changes and assumed human-driven pressure at Etosha would be experienced along the park’s land boundary.

Participants’ feedback on the simulated land cover change were an emphasis that under all scenarios, existing Namibian conservation policies would ensure the core area of Etosha is protected from future LULCC. The feedback also highlighted that livestock grazing was expected to continue in the future under all scenarios.

Results

Timeline of key events that shaped land use and land cover change at the Etosha landscape

The timeline spanned 1966 to 2022, following participants’ input. Key LULCC events identified included droughts in 1996, 1997, 2015–2016, and 2018, floods in 2009–2010 and 2018–2019, the expansion of communal conservancies from the 1990s, and the 1991 First National Land Reform Conference (Fig. 2). The conference influenced land redistribution, imposed a cap on privately-owned land, and introduced land tax. Several legislation milestones were captured: the 1975 Nature Conservancy Ordinance which governed the establishment of protected areas and formalised wildlife utilisation principles; the 1996 Community Based Natural Resources Management (CBNRM) Policy which allowed the formation of communal conservancies and granted communities the right to use natural resources; the 2001 Forest Act which classified forests along with their governance; the 2002 Communal Land Reform Act which established Communal Land Boards, allocated rights to communal land and recognised traditional authorities in land governance; and the 2009 National Policy on Human Wildlife Conflict Management, which established a compensation criteria for human-wildlife conflicts.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Timeline of key environmental (green colour), and social-economic and political (yellow colour) events that shaped land use and land cover change at the Etosha landscape from 1966 to 2022

Full size image

Past and present land use and land cover change drivers, future challenges, and proposed actions for the Etosha landscape

Past (1966–2000) LULCC drivers, from the most to the least influential, include government policies, climatic variability, natural resource availability, and urbanisation. Present (2000–2022) LULCC drivers, in order of influence, are growth of conservancies and wildlife-based tourism, natural resources governance, human-wildlife conflicts, veld fires, human population growth, climate change, and agricultural expansion.

In 2030, challenges expected for the Etosha landscape include encroachment into Etosha’s land border due to population growth and land use change, human-wildlife conflicts, insufficient stakeholder coordination in land management, and uncontrolled bush fires. Proposed actions include coordinated land use plans, provision of financial and personnel resources for fire management, and decentralised governance (Online Resource 2 Table S2). In 2063, challenges are anticipated from climate change, wildlife crimes associated with inadequate implementation of policies, and lack of diversity in tourism. Suggested actions for these challenges include legislation enforcement, decentralised governance that is monitored and evaluated, climate change adaptation, addressing wildlife crimes, and diversified tourism.

Future land use and land cover change scenario narratives and maps

Business as usual scenario

The BAU scenario is driven by the infrastructure expansion, urbanisation, policies maintaining conservation area integrity, lack of integrated management of natural resources, and land degradation. The scenario safeguards grazing refuges and improves socio-economic development (Table 1; Online Resource 3 Text S1). It is challenged by increasing human population in conservancies, insufficient crop production, bush encroachment, and weak enforcement of conservation legislation. Climate change exacerbates human-wildlife conflicts and diminishes forage and agricultural output. From 2019 to 2030, agricultural areas expand by 9%, predominantly near existing cropland and settlements, built-up areas expand north of Etosha and near irrigation and mining sites, and grassland and forests decrease by 4% and 2% (Fig. 3). From 2030 to 2063, grasslands and forests decline by 8% and 7% and shrubland and cropland expand by 2% and 22%. Cropland expansion occurs in designated areas like the Etunda Green Scheme. Community forests are shielded from conversion, except in encroached areas. Livestock grazing expands near Etosha increasing human-wildlife conflicts. The BAU scenario prioritises conservation in Etosha and the conservancies.

Table 1 Aspects of future land use and land management for the Etosha landscape under the business as usual, conservation and livestock production, and agricultural and livestock production scenarios. Etosha represents Etosha National Park
Full size table
Fig. 3
figure 3

Projected land cover change (km2) for the Etosha landscape from the current (2019) land cover (a) to future (2030 and 2063) land cover under the 'business as usual' scenario (b and c), 'conservation and livestock production' scenario (d and e), and 'agricultural and livestock production' scenario (f and g)

Full size image

Conservation and livestock production scenario

This scenario is driven by legislation supporting conservation, the wildlife economy, and natural resources availability. The scenario strengthens revenue streams and improves production to avoid overutilization of resources. It is challenged by climate change, population growth pressures, and bush encroachment. Enforcement of land use plans is prioritised, existing arable lands are earmarked for food production and climate change mitigation and adaptation co-benefits are optimised (Table 2).

Land cover change from 2019 to 2030 represents a 7% expansion of agricultural and built-up areas and a 4% and 0.3% loss of grasslands and forests. Shrubland expansion, occurs north of Etosha. In 2063, there is a 10% and 4% loss of grassland and forests and a 14% and 18% increase in agricultural and built-up areas. Agricultural expansion occurs near existing farms and southeast of Etosha (Fig. 3). Herbivore-driven shrubland expansion (2.4%) remains higher than in the BAU scenario (1.5%) which has lower animal density. Areas prioritised for conservation include the Etosha, the buffer zone, forests, and conservancies. Encroachment onto protected areas is minimised. Designation of livestock grazing areas considers water and forage availability and market proximity.

Agricultural and livestock production scenario

This scenario is driven by agricultural expansion, environmental degradation of key resources areas, and climate change impacts. The scenario relies on rainfall-dependent smallholder food production and improved market access. It is challenged with balancing agricultural production and conservation, crop failures, reduced forage, human-wildlife conflicts, and a lower wildlife-based tourism economy (Table 2).

By 2030, a 6% forest loss is anticipated, which is higher than the “conservation and livestock production” (0.3%) and BAU (2%) scenarios. Loss of natural vegetation occurs in densely populated areas, along roads, in conservancies, irrigated areas, and wetter areas. These areas contrast those from the other scenarios, where loss of natural vegetation is expected near existing cropland and irrigation sites. Between 2030 and 2063, grasslands and forests decline by 8% and 10% (Fig. 3). Areas used for extensive livestock grazing and those governed by traditional laws prohibiting non-livestock-based land uses are protected. Encroachment on to protected areas increases human-wildlife conflicts. The challenge of balancing agriculture and conservation slows tourism development. Conservation continues in Etosha and conservation efforts target poaching hotspots.

Desirable futures for 2030 and 2063

According to the frequency of mentions of characteristics of futures for the Etosha landscape desired by the participants, highly desired characteristics in 2030 include coordinated land use plans that integrate all stakeholders (25%), environmental integrity (23%), abundant biodiversity (20%), human-wildlife coexistence (11%), and a thriving and equitable wildlife-based tourism economy that is beneficial to the communities (11%). Adequate water infrastructure for people and livestock (4%), fighting wildlife crimes (4%), complete electric fencing of Etosha (2%), and sustainable agricultural production (2%) are also desired. In 2063, desired characteristics featured environmental integrity (33%), human-wildlife coexistence (19%), well-managed biodiversity (15%), implementation of zoning (11%), thriving wildlife economies (9%), climate change interventions (6%), lack of wildlife crimes (4%), and food security (3%). Increased biodiversity, recovery of endangered species (e.g. rhinoceros), protection of wildlife habitats, and the elimination of wildlife crime are desired for effective management of biodiversity. In 2063, participants emphasised improving Etosha’s management for year-round water availability, incorporating traditional knowledge in land management, enforcing land use policies, and diversifying tourism to benefit all Namibians. Strategies proposed to address human-wildlife conflicts in 2063 include well-distributed watering points for animals, fair compensation for wildlife losses, respect for core wildlife areas in conservancies, and prevention of encroachment onto buffer zones.

Discussion

Our research provides novel insights from diverse stakeholders on plausible LULCC trajectories for the Etosha landscape in the near (2030) and distant (2063) future. These insights depict the prioritisation of conservation and development under a BAU scenario, efforts to strengthen conservation initiatives while addressing bush encroachment and climate change under a conservation and livestock production scenario, and an expansion of smallholder farming and natural resources utilisation in key resources areas under an agricultural and livestock production scenario. Livestock keeping is expected to continue in all scenarios. However, management measures for climate change impacts, human population growth pressures in key resource areas, and natural resources use by each scenario will determine where degradation and human-wildlife conflicts will be experienced. Results from this study have relevance to other African and global drylands. Drylands cover over two-thirds of Africa’s land surface and are increasingly vulnerable to climate change and environmental degradation (AGNES 2020a). The Etosha landscape’s communal conservancy system represents a model for balancing conservation, livelihoods, and resilience. Other dry countries may refer to this model to comply with their sustainability goals. Our results highlight potential challenges to be anticipated and mitigated.

Participants’ perception of the dominant role of wildlife-oriented land uses in the future and their expression of a thriving and equitable wildlife economy as a desirable characteristic are related to Namibia’s growing body of community-based legislation since the mid-1990s. Consequently, communal conservancies rose to 86 by the end of 2022 (covering 165,000 km2) and the wildlife economy, in particular photographic tourism and hunting (Naidoo et al. 2016), contributed an estimated N$ 13.47 billion (~ €680 million) to Namibia’s net national income between 1990 and 2022 (MEFT and NASCO 2023). Studies on Africa’s wildlife economy (Habumuremyi and Snyman 2023) indicate that southern African countries rank highly in wildlife assets and management (e.g. South Africa, Namibia, and Zimbabwe) but face challenges in investment safety and ease of business (e.g. Mozambique and Zimbabwe). For the region, a future with thriving wildlife, connected habitats, and elimination of wildlife crimes requires sustainable resource use (SDG target 15.1), diversified tourism (SDG target 8.9), strengthened cultural heritage (SDG targets 11.4), and inclusive, decentralised governance (AU-Agenda 2063 priority area 12).

Under unsustainable LULCC and climate change pressures, communal conservancies may support mixed land uses and rural livelihoods by adopting practices that halt land degradation and preserve biodiversity. However, as envisioned by participants, expansion of the conservancy model should prioritise poverty alleviation through equitable sharing of wildlife benefits at individual level (Luetkemeier et al. 2023), decentralised governance of wildlife resources, and reduced human-wildlife conflicts through fair and less bureaucratic compensation processes for wildlife damage (Stoldt et al. 2020; Kansky 2022).

Regarding fair distribution of wildlife benefits, all wildlife revenue from Namibian communal conservancies is retained by the communities (Nelson et al. 2020). However, much of the funds are allocated to institutional operations (Kalvelage et al. 2023) and benefit a small elite (Stone et al. 2020). Similar challenges occur in Zambia and Zimbabwe, where governments control and distribute wildlife revenue (Milupi et al. 2019; Sibanda et al. 2021). As fair distribution of wildlife revenue remains a challenge for southern Africa despite the progress the region has made in community-centred conservation (Stone et al. 2020), further efforts should ensure local institutions manage wildlife revenue to benefit all community members, especially those bearing the cost of coexisting with wildlife.

In Namibia, there is a mismatch between national and local governance models (Mbidzo et al. 2021). Our findings suggest that coordinated governance is a key dimension in future LULCC scenarios and community-led land management should align with local needs while integrating national policies. This entails devolving governance to local communities and addressing existing challenges of devolved governance in southern Africa. These challenges include power imbalances between conservancy leadership and communities in Namibia, weak integration of traditional institutions into legal frameworks in Namibia (Nelson et al. 2020), and insufficient involvement of communities in wildlife management in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Malawi (Milupi et al. 2019; Cassidy 2020; Stone et al. 2020). Accordingly, devolved governance of wildlife should provide communities with use and ownership rights, which facilitates devolved governance in practice.

Livestock keeping remains northern Namibia’s most widespread land use despite growing wildlife enterprises and ongoing rangeland degradation (Gbagir et al. 2019). Its dominance is projected to continue in future. Across African drylands, pastoral and agro-pastoral livestock systems support over 270 million people (AGNES 2020b) and under future climate projections, livestock growth may lead to overutilization of resources and the conversion of grassland to shrubland (Bloemertz et al. 2018). Participants noted that under the BAU and ‘agricultural and livestock production’ scenarios, water and pasture scarcity may cause short-term livestock movements from drier areas to areas with lower grazing pressure. Addressing resource scarcity requires locally tailored management plans for short- and long-term environmental challenges. This includes our participants’ suggestion for the national government to incorporate views from traditional authorities in demarcating future livestock grazing areas and in establishing seasonal water points to avoid disrupting traditional grazing systems (Coppock et al. 2022).

Grassland to shrubland conversion, largely projected north of Etosha, follows ongoing trends (Irob et al. 2022). Under diverse scenarios, the livestock farmers’ interests (as opposed to those of wildlife conservancies) (Stoldt et al. 2020) could be protected by preserving healthy grasslands adjacent to Etosha and within conservancies (MEFT and NASCO, 2023). This aligns with participants’ recommendations to enforce land use zoning, address climate change impacts, and coordinate grazing management between communities, traditional authorities, and the government. Such approaches are transferable to other drylands in Tanzania (Kimaro and Treydte 2021), Zimbabwe (Musakwa et al. 2020), and Botswana (Basupi et al. 2017) that are challenged by bush encroachment.

Future agricultural expansion is expected due to population growth, increasing food demand, and improved road connectivity. Namibia’s climate projections are however unfavourable for agriculture. Under these conditions, sustainable agricultural production (GBF target 10) and climate change interventions (SDG target 2.4) would be required to prevent system collapse and food insecurity. Scenario projections of the expansion of irrigated agriculture in densely populated areas of north-central Namibia reflect global trends where 60% of irrigated agriculture occurs near densely populated urban areas (d’Amour et al. 2016). Participants anticipated further agricultural expansion near irrigation sites east of Etosha, aligning with national commitments to large-scale irrigation (Röder et al. 2016) to boost domestic food production (Liehr et al. 2017). Irrigation might be a better climate change and water scarcity adaptation strategy for drylands despite the infrastructural costs and operation complexities involved (Amjath-Babu et al. 2016). However, irrigation projects should be environmentally sustainable, efficient in conserving water and enhancing food security, and community inclusive to prevent degradation that is associated with food production in African drylands (Darkoh 2003).

Human-wildlife conflict is expected to increase under the BAU and ‘agriculture and livestock production’ scenarios, due to human encroachment in wildlife areas and weak implementation of land use zoning in conservancies (Kansky 2022). Growing wildlife numbers (Stoldt et al. 2020), expanding conservation land use (Gbagir et al. 2019), climate change impacts (Carpenter 2022), and human population growth will add pressure on the remaining communal land. Thus, Namibia’s National Policy on Human Wildlife Conflict Management will remain important for navigating land use challenges. Participants noted that interventions such as wildlife translocation and fencing often redistribute conflict hotspots and fragment wildlife populations (Turner et al. 2022). Successful interventions must collectively consider the biophysical, social, and political factors associated with human-wildlife conflicts (Jiren et al. 2021) and prioritise fair compensation. At local scale, compensation policies must be consistent in what they advocate and how they are implemented (Kansky 2022). This is crucial as coexistence will always involve conflicts, and policy frameworks must identify tolerable conflict thresholds.

This study provides understanding of the interactions between future LULCC, environmental degradation, and human-wildlife conflicts in a multiple-use landscape. However, certain limitations exist. The workshop engaged farmers and livestock keepers near the workshop venue but experienced travel, time, and cost constraints in bringing those from the western part of the study area to the venue. Consequently, nine participants had interest in natural resources management and some participants working with communities and development worked with approaches aiming to preserve nature. To address this, telephone conversations after the workshop with two farmers and livestock-keepers from the western part of the study area and literature on Namibian farming, livestock, and irrigation systems (Enkono et al. 2013; Mendelsohn 2006; Togarepi et al. 2018) supplemented the workshop information. The farmers and livestock-keepers provided information on the nature, locations, and implications of anticipated future LULCC at the Etosha landscape, which together with the literature informed land cover change modelling and discussion. The Kesho scenario framework used in this study foresees that participants provide narratives on why, where, what type, and how much LULCC is expected. These can be retrieved through telephone conversations and translated into spatial and quantitative rules for the model.

It was also challenging to explicitly integrate global and continental climate change scenarios with local land cover change models due to spatial and temporal inconsistencies. This limitation was mitigated using projected climate data and future land demand estimates. Finally, scenario projections carry uncertainties as rare, impactful events are difficult to predict. By exploring alternative LULCC futures, this study provides insights on achieving sustainability targets while minimising degradation. These insights can stimulate further discussions on LULCC futures for the Etosha landscape, and other African drylands, or to propose alternative futures for comparative reflection. Also, given that some participants in this study were government officials, researchers, and conservation practitioners who generally hold power in conservation landscapes (Shackleton et al. 2022), future scenarios development can address power dynamics by capturing local community visions more explicitly. Such multi-scale participatory processes will help ensure that high-level conservation and development plans are informed by local realities and produce meaningful impacts at the community level.

Conclusion

Our study illustrates how place-based visions for the future, combined with LULCC data and models, can inform the link between land use, policies, and global sustainability targets. Through three near (2030) and far (2063) future scenarios, the nature and extent of LULCC are determined. Under the BAU scenario, conservation in protected areas and development are prioritised. However, this scenario fails to implement land use plans properly and experiences population growth pressures and environmental degradation in conservancies. In the conservation and livestock production scenario, wildlife conservation land use is anticipated to dominate, supported by pro-conservation policies and tourism growth. The scenario follows land use zoning, though areas supporting high wildlife and livestock numbers are challenged by shrubland expansion. In the agricultural and livestock production scenario, farms expand near existing settlements, water bodies, and irrigation sites, and human-wildlife conflict hotspots emerge where wildlife and farm interactions are not well managed. Livestock keeping is expected to continue under all scenarios, with viable grazing areas dependent on watering points, forage availability, and governance by traditional and government institutions. Desirable futures with connected habitats and well-planned agricultural and settlements areas are seen possible through sustainable food production, inclusive governance, climate change interventions, and reduced human-wildlife conflicts. These local-scale insights contribute to implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework, SDG and AU Agenda 2063. The LULCC scenarios inform sustainable land use planning and management in dry multiple-use areas, both in the near and far future.