Development visions, livelihood realities – how conservation shapes agricultural value chains in the Zambezi region, Namibia

Abstract

In the Zambezi region, seemingly unrelated political visions propagate two development paths: nature conservation to promote tourism and Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM), and agricultural intensification. This study examines the unintended interrelations between these top-down visions by linking upgrading possibilities in agricultural value chains (AVC) with livelihood strategies of farmers from a bottomup perspective. The results are based on qualitative field research that explains the how and why of the emergence of multiple rural development trajectories. We operationalise upgrading as actual and aspirational hanging in, stepping up and stepping out strategies. Findings show that although farmers envision stepping up their agricultural activities to better position themselves in AVCs, they remain in a strategic hanging in or downgrading state due CBNRM-related institutions. Concluding, we propose implications for CBNRM that synthesise competing development visions with actual livelihoods realities through the acknowledgment of small-scale agrarian systems rather than the crowding out of such. KEYWORDS CBNRM; agricultural value chains; livelihood strategies; conservation; Namibia Namibia's Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila expresses the ambitious goals set by the Namibian national government for economic development in the northeastern strip of the country, Zambezi region, both in the tourism and agricultural sector. These two economic development pillars are manifested in the Fifth National Development Plan (NDP5), which defines political goals to for the years 2017-2022. The modernisation of the agricultural sector is intended to improve small-scale

Path Formation and Reformation: Studying the Variegated Consequences of Path Creation for Regional Development

“…First, its economy is mainly based on two sectors: agriculture and tourism (Hulke, Kairu, and Revilla Diez 2020). Although economic activities such as timber export, fishing, and logistics exist on a limited scale, the region is traditionally characterized by small-scale crop farming and cattle herding for subsistence use (Mendelsohn 2006).…”

“…Medium and large-scale irrigation schemes, so-called Green Schemes, ought to realize this vision by including smallholders as outgrowers. However, so far only one Green Scheme has been established in the Zambezi region, which employed six permanent farmers in 2019 (Hulke, Kairu, and Revilla Diez 2020).…”

“…• Introduction of newly demanded crops and quality standards zoning process was dominated by the conservancy management, local elites, the government, and international NGOs that often favored the interests of tourism businesses and wildlife rather than those of smallholder farmers (Lenggenhager 2018;Hulke, Kairu, and Revilla Diez 2020). Although residents participate in the planning process of a new conservancy, these outcomes indicate that their needs are not considered in the actual implementation of a conservancy in the long run.…”

Rural Aspirations: Reflections for Development Planning, Design and Localized Effects

“…Often, protected areas were established across communal lands with a strict zoning plan defining which landuse is allowed and affects e.g. farmers in their daily practices and thus livelihood strategies (Hulke et al 2020). In all cases, political aspirations are meant to create opportunity spaces for the locals.…”

Do Tar Roads Bring Tourism? Growth Corridor Policy and Tourism Development in the Zambezi region, Namibia

“…Today, 54% of the Zambezi region is protected to varying degrees, including national parks, communal conservancies, a state forest, tourism priority areas and wildlife corridors (own calculation). Continuing a strong critique of earlier conservation approaches, these policies are not undisputed: research has revealed discontent among smallholder farmers regarding harvest losses caused by wildlife, residents claim the distribution of conservancy income does not reach individual households and that the designation of areas for tourist activities negatively affects agriculture (Hulke et al 2020).…”