Thesis (MPhil)--University of Stellenbosch, 2011. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: There is a shift by conservation authorities in post-apartheid South Africa away from management
strategies based on law enforcement towards strategies aimed at facilitating local community
participation in the management of natural resources.
South African National Parks has established community forums in order to facilitate better
communication with the communities neighbouring it parks, especially around issues of natural
resource consumption. However, at its largest Park, the Kruger National Park, a pervasive
miscommunication between the Park and the communities appears to exist despite the ongoing
activities of its forums.
This study attempted to identify what miscommunication, if any, was occurring between three
groups of participants in the Conservation Discourse related to the Kruger National Park
environment. The participants were (i) South African National Parks (SANParks) conservation
managers, (ii) Kruger Park community outreach officials, and, (iii) members of local communities
settled on the borders of the Kruger Park. Specifically, the study was interested in how different
perceptions of various participants, who also represent different cultural communities, were
foregrounded in relation to different communicative goals.
It is suggested that an understanding of where the different Discourses diverge can help identify
where possible misunderstandings are occurring which may be resulting in communicative
problems.
My primary research questions were: (1) how do different communities of practice take part in and
construct Conservation Discourse related to the Kruger Parks conservation goals, in particular, those
related to the use of natural resources; and, (2) how do members of at least three interest groups
construct their own identities in relation to conservation matters in the course of various discursive
events where SANParks conservation programmes, particularly those related to the use of natural
resources, are topicalised.
My assumption was that the Parks conservation officers would have a common Conservation
Discourse, and that the local communities would have a common discourse but one which deviates
entirely from that of the Parks.
From 23 September 2008, I conducted three semi-structured interviews with the Parks conservation
officers, I was an observer of a Park departmental meeting as well as a Park Forum, and I conducted
a focus group with eight members from one of the local communities. This approach enabled me to
collect data from a number of different types of communicative events in order to collate a multidimensional
picture of the complete Discourse on Conservation.
A number of different Conservation Discourses were identified, some of which present significant
discrepancies, and which, as in the case of the two of the departments, may be contributing towards
what appears to be a serious breakdown in communication.
The communities show that while they are supportive of the populist concept of nature
conservation, they are completely unaware of the Parks conservation policies.
This lack of awareness indicates a failure of the existing communication between the Park and its
neighbouring communities despite the Park Forums having been set-up.
Finally, the different discourses also appear to be resulting in misunderstandings and feelings of
animosity between the different participants. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In post-apartheid Suid-Afrika beweeg bewaringsliggame weg van bestuurstrategieë wat op
wetstoepassing gebaseer is, na strategieë wat daarop gemik is om die plaaslike gemeenskap se
deelname in die bestuur van natuurlike hulpbronne, te fasiliteer.
Suid-Afrikaanse Nasionale Parke het gemeenskapsforums in die lewe geroep om beter
kommunikasie met die gemeenskappe wat aan sy parke grens, te bewerkstellig, veral rakende
kwessies rondom die verbruik van natuurlike hulpbronne. By die grootse Park, te wete die Kruger
Nasionale Wildtuin, kom dit egter voor asof miskommunikasie endemies is tussen die Park en sy
aangrensende inheemse gemeenskappe, ten spyte van die forums se aktiwiteite.
Hierdie studie het nagegaan watter miskommunikasie, indien enige, tussen drie groepe deelnemers
aan die Bewaringsdiskoerse rondom die Krugerpark, plaasgevind het. Die deelnemers was (i) Suid-
Afrikaanse Nasionale Parke (SANParke)-bewaringsbestuurders, (ii) Krugerpark Gemeenskapsuitreikbeamptes,
en (iii) lede van plaaslike gemeenskappe wat op die grense van Krugerpark gevestig is. Die
studie het spesifiek gekyk na hoe verskillende persepsies van die onderskeie deelnemers, wat ook
verskillende kulturele gemeenskappe verteenwoordig, in die diskoerse op die voorgrond geplaas is
afhangende van verskillende kommunikatiewe doelwitte.
Daar word voorgestel dat begrip van waar die verskillende diskoerse uiteenloop, kan help om te
identifiseer waar moontlike misverstande wat tot kommunikasie-probleme lei, ontstaan.
My primêre navorsingsvrae was: (1) hoe neem verskillende gemeenskappe wat rondom gedeelde
praktyke gevestig is deel aan Bewaringsdiskoerse wat die Krugerpark se bewaringsoogmerke (en
veral daardie oogmerke wat met die gebruik van natuurlik hulpbronne te make het) en hoe
konstrueer hulle daardie Diskoerse; en (2) hoe konstrueer lede van ten minste drie belangegroepe
hul eie identiteite vis à vis bewaringskwessies in die loop van verskeie diskursiewe gebeurtenisse
waar SANParke se bewaringsprogramme, veral daardie wat met die gebruik van natuurlike
hulpbronne te doen het, bespreek word.
My aanname was dat die Park se bewaringsbeamptes 'n gemeenskaplike Bewaringsdiskoers sou hê,
en dat die plaaslike gemeenskappe 'n gemeenskaplike Diskoers sou hê wat heeltemal van die Park
s'n verskil.
Ek het van 23 September 2008 drie semi-gestruktureerde onderhoude met die Park se
bewaringsbeamptes gevoer, ek was 'n nie-deelnemende waarnemer by een van die Park se
departementele vergaderings asook by 'n Park Forum, en ek het 'n fokusgroep met agt lede van een
van die plaaslike gemeenskappe gelei. Hierdie benadering het my daartoe in staat gestel om data
van verskeie tipes kommunikatiewe gebeurtenisse in te samel, om sodoende 'n multi-dimensionele
beeld van die volledige Bewaringsdiskoers saam te stel.
'n Aantal verskillende Bewaringsdiskoerse is geïdentifiseer, waarvan party noemenswaardige
diskrepansies toon en wat, soos in die geval van die twee departemente, moontlik bydra tot wat lyk
na 'n ernstige breuk in kommunikasie.
Die gemeenskappe toon dat, hoewel hulle die algemene konsep van natuurbewaring ondersteun,
hulle heeltemal onbewus is van die Park se formele bewaringsbeleid.
Hierdie gebrek aan 'n bepaalde soort bewussyn dui op mislukking van die bestaande
kommunikasiestrukture tussen die Park en aangrensende gemeenskappe, ten spyte van die instelling
van die Park Forums.
Uiteindelik blyk dit dat die verskillende Diskoerse ook lei tot misverstande en gevoelens van vyandiggesindheid
tussen die verskillende deelnemers.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/6534 |
| Date | 03 1900 |
| Creators | Curtayne, Carmen |
| Contributors | Anthonissen, Christine, University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. of Philosophy. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | en_ZA |
| Detected Language | Unknown |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | x, 79 p. : ill. |
| Rights | University of Stellenbosch |
Page generated in 0.0029 seconds