Addressing Trade-offs: Experiences from Conservation and Development Initiatives in the Mkuze Wetlands, South Africa

Abstract

Present-day conservation policies generally include the aim to integrate biodiversity conservation and local development, and describe this as a win-win solution that can satisfy all interests. This is challenged by research claiming that many efforts fail to match practice to rhetoric. South Africa has made strong commitments to fulfill the dual goals of conservation and development, and the iSimangaliso Wetland Park is promoted as an example of this. We explore present and potential outcomes of conservation and development interventions in a community bordering the Wetland Park through the perspective of different stakeholders, with the aim of uncovering opportunities and risks. In terms of improving local livelihoods as well as involvement in conservation, the success of the studied interventions varied. Local communities may accept restrictions on resource use as a result of realistic and fairly negotiated trade-offs, but if perceived as unjust and imposed from above, then mistrust and resistance will increase. In this area, collaboration between conservation organizations and the local community had improved, but still faced problems associated with unequal power relations, unrealistic expectations, and a lack of trust, transparency, and communication. As unsustainable efforts are a waste of funds and engagement, and may even become counterproductive, policy visions need to be matched by realistic allocations of staff, time, funds, and training. At the national and international level, the true cost of conservation has to be recognized and budgeted for if efforts at integrating conservation and development are to succeed.

National parks and environmental justice: Comparing access rights and ideological legacies in three countries

“…According to Walker and Bulkeley (2006: 658), "assessing what constitutes just access and just protection carries additional conceptual and practical challenges", and involves the complexity of scale and spatial interconnectedness (MacDonald 2005;Holifield et al 2009). At issue is not whether trade-offs are made or not, for example between access and conservation, but rather to what extent conflicts of interest are acknowledged, recognised and dealt with in participatory and transparent ways (Dahlberg & Burlando 2009), and not hidden within unrecognised legacies of past ideologies.…”

“…However, recent IUCN publications stress the need for more profound changes, and to link conservation efforts directly to the broader agenda of sustainable land use by acknowledging the importance of equity and environmental justice (Adams & Jeanrenaud 2008;Kothari 2008). While recognising that revisions of policies and strategies have had positive impacts, many studies still conclude that changes on the ground are often either lacking, too limited or misdirected (Brechin et al 2003;McShane & Wells 2004;Dahlberg & Burlando 2009;Zachrisson 2009a). …”

The impacts of tourism on two communities adjacent to the Kruger National Park, South Africa

“…Around the Kruger Park, the need for jobs vastly exceeds the opportunities available in tourism (Rademan, 2004;Makamu, 2005;Anthony, 2006). The resulting inequality in income distribution can foster differential access to environmental resources (Adger et al 2002) and opportunities to benefit from Park tourism.Unmet expectations can affect trust relations and may lead to conflict and alienation as locals feel they are missing out on the perceived employment benefits offered by national parks (Dahlberg & Burlando, 2009). …”

‘The Mkuze River it has crossed the fence’ (1) – communities on the boundary of the Mkuze protected area

“…As was reiterated by Dahlberg and Burlando (2009) decoupling the work on conservation and development goals is unrealistic. Moreover, a top-down buy-out could have negative consequences in the long-term economic development of local rural communities.…”