Thesis (D.Admin.(Public Administration))--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Summary and abstract in English. Includes bibliographical references. Available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Within the broad field of global environmental history this master thesis analyses transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs) also known as 'peace parks', and explores how the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park (GLTP) has been envisioned, described, motivated and implemented. Using Actor-Network Theory and Framing Analysis, the thesis analyses how the idea of the GLTP and the critique against it has been framed over time through the analysis of official reports and academic research in combination with in-depth interviews with key actors. By approaching the topic of transfrontier conservation in a broad manner, and by incorporating a wide variety of sources, the thesis attempts to go beyond single explanations of the phenomenon and, instead, provide a more comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the transfrontier conservation idea linked to the GLTP and its history. The thesis shows that the rise of transfrontier conservation involves a complex network of actors, spanning over local-global and public-private scales. Integrated networks are formed between key actors including national governments and conservation authorities, donor agencies, NGOs – in particular the Peace Parks Foundation, and civil society. The GLTP has been framed as a way to achieve three main goals: biodiversity conservation, community development through ecotourism and public-private partnerships, and regional peace and security. The thesis shows that the framing has shifted over time, from a strict conservation focus to more inclusive approaches where social aspects are seen as increasingly important for the long term sustainability of TFCAs. But the idea that transfrontier conservation can resolve all regional problems, from political cooperation to wildlife management to local socio-economic development, is also contested in this study. The thesis illuminates a gap between official policy/management reports and academic studies related primarily to the role of community development in the framing and implementation of the GLTP. Despite various challenges that hinder the effective implementation of the goals and visions of the park such as wildlife crime, insufficient community involvement and problematic legal and policy arrangements, the thesis concludes that the GLTP represents an important contribution to global conservation commitments and needs to be viewed as a complex, long-term and constantly evolving project.

Conflict is inevitable but sustainable development is achievable. An analysis of the mix between development and conflict in two communities revealed the imperatives needed to strike a balance between conflict and sustainable development. While conflicts over natural resources are neither a new phenomenon nor are they inevitable, it is the approaches adopted to manage them that generate interests and makes a difference between peace and violence. Thus, conflicts associated with wilderness or TFCA development initiatives such as the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park (GLTP) have attracted significant interest from various stakeholders. While the GLTP is a flagship conservation initiative in Southern Africa designed to integrate different land uses for socio-economic development, it is littered with conflicts. Through documenting the experiences of two communities involved in development conflicts, a determination was sought to understand the efficacy of approaches used to manage the conflict. Using mainly questionnaires and personal interviews, perceptions and attitudes of key informants were solicited. Unresolved historical problems reincarnated to haunt current conservation projects as memories of unresolved past events reflected negatively on new related initiatives. Different approaches adopted in managing these conflicts resulted in significantly different outcomes. Local stakeholder involvements were inadequate, but were identified as pertinent to successful sustainable conservation and development. Unless local communities are assured of real benefits from new conservation initiatives it became evident that recurrent conflicts would be inevitable. The findings reveal that current conservation initiatives should be underpinned by emerging inclusivity theories in the conservation discourse. A broad range of stakeholders should embrace this new paradigm based on the philosophy that conservation efforts that exclude local communities are bound to be unsustainable. We found out that it is in the interests of all for policy makers to come up with policies that recognise the critical role local communities play, while subscribing to the regional and international standards for best practices in the conservation business.

<p>This dissertation explores local people's framing of externally driven biodiversity conservation approaches in the context of transfrontier conservation initiatives. It uses data from the Madimbo corridor, a specific locality within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area, situated to the northeast of South Africa along the South Africa-Zimbabwe boundary. It shows that livelihoods, historical experiences with external interventions and exclusion from policy-making processes and programme implementation influence local strategies for engaging with external interventions. Thus, an analysis of framing of external interventions at a local level should establish the following: the role of natural resources in sustaining local livelihoods / local historical experiences with an external intervention / iii) the nature of multi-level actor interactions from local resource dependent people, to national, regional and global actors involved in or affected by an intervention. The study uses a detailed case study of Bennde Mutale village to trace local people&rsquo / s ideas, ways of speaking and actions in response to the implementation of a large-scale transfrontier conservation initiative. The study finds that local livelihoods play a central role in local responses to the changes that transfrontier conservation bring upon people's lives. Many see further exclusion, while some also see and hope for a restoration of the socio-cultural border region. The globally significant biodiversity - to be conserved for &lsquo / future generations&rsquo / &ndash / at the same time constitutes the natural resources that sustain local people&rsquo / s livelihoods. Further, local livelihoods are more diverse than is commonly acknowledged in literature advocating for transfrontier conservation. This lack of acknowledgement of local diversification contributes to the main observation made in this study: that current processes of transfrontier conservation end up replicating and re-inventing the multiple forms of exclusion that have characterised state conservation practices for over a century. While transfrontier conservation enables the freer movement of wildlife, it in fact further constrains the movements of people whose mobility within less closely controlled border regions remains centrally important to survival. At the same time, state actors come into the area with contradicting and conflicting demands ranging from the beneficial advocacy role for land rights to the enforcement of conservation through fences and game rangers, experienced as a direct infringement on livelihood possibilities. The study concludes that there is a need to rethink transfrontier conservation interventions. The diversity of local livelihood approaches needs to be considered more centrally and clearer understanding needs to be developed of how the promises of opportunities, betterment of lives and increased human mobility actually unfold in practice. In order to succeed and deliver on site - not only to high-class tourists seeking to view unique biodiversity but to local people - transfrontier conservation efforts need to engage multiple actors directly from the ground up and throughout the process of policy-making, programme conceptualisation and implementation.</p>

<p>This dissertation explores local people's framing of externally driven biodiversity conservation approaches in the context of transfrontier conservation initiatives. It uses data from the Madimbo corridor, a specific locality within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area, situated to the northeast of South Africa along the South Africa-Zimbabwe boundary. It shows that livelihoods, historical experiences with external interventions and exclusion from policy-making processes and programme implementation influence local strategies for engaging with external interventions. Thus, an analysis of framing of external interventions at a local level should establish the following: the role of natural resources in sustaining local livelihoods / local historical experiences with an external intervention / iii) the nature of multi-level actor interactions from local resource dependent people, to national, regional and global actors involved in or affected by an intervention. The study uses a detailed case study of Bennde Mutale village to trace local people&rsquo / s ideas, ways of speaking and actions in response to the implementation of a large-scale transfrontier conservation initiative. The study finds that local livelihoods play a central role in local responses to the changes that transfrontier conservation bring upon people's lives. Many see further exclusion, while some also see and hope for a restoration of the socio-cultural border region. The globally significant biodiversity - to be conserved for &lsquo / future generations&rsquo / &ndash / at the same time constitutes the natural resources that sustain local people&rsquo / s livelihoods. Further, local livelihoods are more diverse than is commonly acknowledged in literature advocating for transfrontier conservation. This lack of acknowledgement of local diversification contributes to the main observation made in this study: that current processes of transfrontier conservation end up replicating and re-inventing the multiple forms of exclusion that have characterised state conservation practices for over a century. While transfrontier conservation enables the freer movement of wildlife, it in fact further constrains the movements of people whose mobility within less closely controlled border regions remains centrally important to survival. At the same time, state actors come into the area with contradicting and conflicting demands ranging from the beneficial advocacy role for land rights to the enforcement of conservation through fences and game rangers, experienced as a direct infringement on livelihood possibilities. The study concludes that there is a need to rethink transfrontier conservation interventions. The diversity of local livelihood approaches needs to be considered more centrally and clearer understanding needs to be developed of how the promises of opportunities, betterment of lives and increased human mobility actually unfold in practice. In order to succeed and deliver on site - not only to high-class tourists seeking to view unique biodiversity but to local people - transfrontier conservation efforts need to engage multiple actors directly from the ground up and throughout the process of policy-making, programme conceptualisation and implementation.</p>

Thesis (MSc)--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / Bibliography. Also available via the Internet.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / This dissertation explores local people's framing of externally driven biodiversity conservation approaches in the context of transfrontier conservation initiatives. It uses data from the Madimbo corridor, a specific locality within the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area, situated to the northeast of South Africa along the South Africa-Zimbabwe boundary. It shows that livelihoods, historical experiences with external interventions and exclusion from policy-making processes and programme implementation influence local strategies for engaging with external interventions. Thus, an analysis of framing of external interventions at a local level should establish the following: the role of natural resources in sustaining local livelihoods; local historical experiences with an external intervention; iii) the nature of multi-level actor interactions from local resource dependent people, to national, regional and global actors involved in or affected by an intervention. The study uses a detailed case study of Bennde Mutale village to trace local people's ideas, ways of speaking and actions in response to the implementation of a large-scale transfrontier conservation initiative. The study finds that local livelihoods play a central role in local responses to the changes that transfrontier conservation bring upon people's lives. Many see further exclusion, while some also see and hope for a restoration of the socio-cultural border region. The globally significant biodiversity - to be conserved for 'future generations' - at the same time constitutes the natural resources that sustain local people's livelihoods. Further, local livelihoods are more diverse than is commonly acknowledged in literature advocating for transfrontier conservation. This lack of acknowledgement of local diversification contributes to the main observation made in this study: that current processes of transfrontier conservation end up replicating and re-inventing the multiple forms of exclusion that have characterised state conservation practices for over a century. While transfrontier conservation enables the freer movement of wildlife, it in fact further constrains the movements of people whose mobility within less closely controlled border regions remains centrally important to survival. At the same time, state actors come into the area with contradicting and conflicting demands ranging from the beneficial advocacy role for land rights to the enforcement of conservation through fences and game rangers, experienced as a direct infringement on livelihood possibilities. The study concludes that there is a need to rethink transfrontier conservation interventions. The diversity of local livelihood approaches needs to be considered more centrally and clearer understanding needs to be developed of how the promises of opportunities, betterment of lives and increased human mobility actually unfold in practice. In order to succeed and deliver on site - not only to high-class tourists seeking to view unique biodiversity but to local people - transfrontier conservation efforts need to engage multiple actors directly from the ground up and throughout the process of policy-making, programme conceptualisation and implementation. / South Africa

Thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Technology in Environmental Health In the Faculty of Applied Sciences Department of Environmental and Occupational Studies At Cape Peninsula University of Technology, 2013 / Southern Africa region is experiencing a multiplicity of transfrontier conservation projects, which simply put in its metaphorical name ‘Peace Parks’. The rapid growth of transfrontier conservation areas present the fulfilment of a vision of a ‘boundless’ and ‘borderless’ Southern Africa, straddling geo-political boundaries of once colonially imposed cartography of sovereign statism. The ecological amalgamation of these vast conservation areas are underpinned by various social, political, ecological and economic fundamentals envisioned by governments in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region together with conservation partners to transform the life of people and enhance sustainable management of natural resources. The Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park (GLTP) that involves Mozambique, South Africa and Zimbabwe, was born out of this vision. Equally so, from its conceptualisation, the GLTP sought to achieve sustainable biodiversity and ecosystem conservation, promote economic growth, support rural development, be a building block for peace and regional economic integration. The planners also criticized inappropriate geo-political boundaries imposed by colonialism, which historically separated biospheres and the people of identical culture. The artificiality of boundaries, therefore, obstructed cultural links of communities and restricted wildlife migration as well. This affected natural dispersion of fugitive wildlife. Thus, the GLTP’s ambitious conservation plan address these issues. In so doing, the GLTP governance architecture as it stands today produced multi-level governance institutions whose approaches were found in this study to be at variance with local people’s livelihood expectations and conservation processes. It is in this view that this research sought to examine the impact of governance institutions on communities’ livelihoods and sustainable conservation of natural resources in the GLTP. Using various methods of empirical research such as interviews, household questionnaires, focus group discussions (including using the Schutte Scale), field observations and secondary data analysis, the researcher found that the current GLTP institutional configurations and its resource governance philosophy are at variance with local natural resource governance processes, and contradict local resource needs. Thus, there is inherent mistrust and conflict over skewed natural resource benefits. Most of them benefits accrue to government entities and the private companies that invested in tourism. Furthermore, it was found that the GLTP administrative governance architecture from the onset, presented complex competing environmental interests among conservation stakeholders against those of communities. The GLTP resource governance as it stands, is conspicuously not inclusive with the local communities playing a minimal role to leverage on the abundant natural resource for to support local livelihoods. One thing that came out clearly from the research is that they are not included to participate in conservation of the GLTP natural resources. This study therefore argues that there is potential to jeopardize prospects for the GLTP to achieve its objectives of sustainable conservation, promoting rural development and reduction of rural poverty. Empirically, it was also confirmed that the GLTP is at cross-purpose with the expectations of the communities. Local participation in sustainable conservation is consequentially subdued and weak. Perhaps, if the lofty aims of the GLTP are to be achieved, this study noted that the local people prefer the natural resources governance, conservation decision-making processes and conservation stakeholder relationships to be fair and acceptable to a cross-section of stakeholders. This includes ascertaining broad participation of the local people in conservation and environmental decision-making as crucial ingredients in guaranteeing local livelihoods and motivating communities to support conservation initiatives through use of wildlife proceeds for the development of communities. In addition, a concern was raised that powerful state agencies and conservation organisations are at the fore in defining institutional processes and resource governance systems with no regard to the local institutions. Thus, the envisaged win-win situation in conservation to transform rural communities is far from being realised. The GLTP governance structure forecloses the local people from participation. Consequently, local conservation morale and collaboration has adversely diminished, with overt preponderance of multi-level institutional processes over local processes in terms of natural resource management. This has tended to marginalise local institutions and prevent the local people from complementing conservation efforts. Manifestly, there is deep-seated livelihood insecurity, local environmental conservation marginalisation. This led the study to question the sustainability of the GLTP considering its exclusionary governance approach when dealing with communities. Another major concern is that planning of eco-tourism projects are paternalistically government led processes and exclusively private sector driven than being community oriented. Concerns arise that the much-lauded and publicized promise of eco-tourism benefits to the communities, have not materialised in the last ten years since the GLTP establishment in 2002. This has led local communities to question the GLTP’s economic benefits and impact on their lives. Instead of working with communities as equal stakeholders, the GLTP governance architecture has isolated them from playing an effective collaborative role in conservation and reaping of benefits. It was observed that the attendant GLTP governance trajectories reflect a narrow web of contesting conservation interests at variance with communities’ expectations. The heavy-handed administrative role of multi-level institutions and that of conservation agencies, have therefore, not fostered synergies for local residents’ participation in the management of natural resources. The elusiveness of the GLTP governance therefore puts it far from ensuring that the local people are part of conservation processes, hence falling short of capturing local contributions and local buy-in. Such governance injunctions complicate guaranteeing equal opportunity of resource access and equity, and it is less enabling for communities to hold together, cooperate and collaborate in conservation. Perhaps, an ideal situation would be to have a resource governance system that prevents the ‘tragedy of the commons’ and at the same time preventing the ‘tragedy of the local common man’. In this regard, this research made proposal in chapter 8, suggesting a synergised governance, decision-making and an a cocktail of an amalgam economic framework that can be adopted to solve the problems identified. These frameworks enable local people’s resource rights to be realised and the fusion of local expectations for conservation sustainability. This study aimed at examining the GLTP governance process impact on Makuleke and Sengwe communities in terms of their livelihoods, local participation in natural resource conservation and participation in natural resource decision-making process in the governance of the GLTP.

Thesis (MScAgric (Conservation Ecology and Entomology)--University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / This study assessed (a) the inclusion of local communities in the process of the establishment and management of Parque Nacional do Limpopo (PNL); (b) local community resources use practices, livelihoods strategies, land resources use and ownership and institutional arrangements at the grassroots; and (c) attitudes and perceptions of local communities towards the park and its implications for the sustainability of the park. The study shows that local stakeholders were left out in the planning and implementation processes of the park, which was through top-down approach. There was a lack of involvement of local communities and co-ordination with local stakeholders concerning on-the-ground activities. Local community participation occurs through consultation, thereby depriving primary stakeholders of any decision-making power. However, the study notes that the ongoing interaction between the park management, community advocacy organisations and local communities in the park represents a positive step towards the evolving practice of participatory governance of the protected area. It is also shown that local communities have diverse livelihood strategies, including subsistence agriculture, livestock herding, forest products harvesting, small businesses, handicrafts and cash remittances by migrate labourers. It is worth noting that land and forest resources use constitutes the foundation of their livelihood strategies. Local communities considered land to belong to traditional land chiefs who head local socio-cultural and political organizations in rural areas. They allocate land and control access to natural resources. Other community members asserted that the land belongs to the respective families that inherited and use it. The legal framework in Mozambique authorises the establishment of new institutions at the grassroots. This overlaps with the pre-existing traditional institutions in the rural areas, resulting in power conflicts and in some cases disruption of local institutions for governance ...