Cultural Values: a Forgotten Strategy for Building Community Support for Protected Areas in Africa

Download Cultural Values: a Forgotten Strategy for Building Community Support for Protected Areas in Africa

Post on 06-Jul-2016




0 download

Embed Size (px)


<ul><li><p> 800</p><p>Conservation Biology, Pages 800802Volume 15, No. 3, June 2001</p><p>Cultural Values: a Forgotten Strategy for Building Community Support for Protected Areas in Africa</p><p>MARK INFIELD*</p><p>African Wildlife Foundation, P.O. Box 10950, Kampala, Uganda</p><p>Since the 1980s, initiatives to encourage rural people tobecome an integral part of conservation efforts have at-tracted wide support (McNeely 1992; Ghimire 1994).Strategies for achieving this participation in Africa haveoften focused on the economic link between local com-munities and protected areas. The role of cultural valuesin building support for conservation has been noted (Mc-Neely &amp; Miller 1984; Brownrigg 1985) but has beenlargely ignored in practice. Interest has remained rhetor-ical, and few initiatives exist that actively seek to inte-grate values relevant to local communities into conserva-tion programs and the management of Africas protectedareas. This is perhaps surprising, because in the Westthe relationship between culture, history, conservation,and protected areas has been the subject of considerableresearch and scholarship (Nash 1982; Adams 1996; Neu-mann 1998).</p><p>The emphasis on economic incentives for conserva-tion stems, in part, from the linking of conservation anddevelopment (World Conservation Union et al. 1980;World Commission on Environment and Development1987; World Conservation Union 1991). Although pov-erty and environmental degradation often are closely re-lated, most of Africas protected areas do not and almostcertainly will not contribute significantly to reducing pov-erty. Conservation initiatives must recognize economicrealities. But the current focus on economic incentivesfor involving communities in conservation efforts re-sults, to a considerable extent, from the theory that mar-ket forces will conserve and protect the environment,lessening the need for government intervention. This as-sertion, a product of neoliberal economics, has stronglyinfluenced political and popular thinking in recent de-cades and has profoundly affected international develop-ment aid practices, including many internationally funded</p><p>conservation programs in developing countries (Struh-saker 1998). In poor countries, economic approachescan appear especially attractive, and their presentationas humanitarian in intention (Holdgate &amp; Munro 1995)has guaranteed them almost universal acceptance.</p><p>The intention to make wildlife and protected areaspay for themselves has stimulated a range of commu-nity conservation initiatives aimed at building a localconstituency for conservation. These include protected-area outreach programs with an emphasis on sharingrevenues, resources, and opportunities with local com-munities; collaborative management in which govern-ments and communities join to manage protected areasfor sustainable production; and community-based wild-life management aimed at economic development ratherthan conservation (Hulme &amp; Murphree 1999). Integratedconservation and development projects also attempt toreduce pressures on protected areas by supporting lo-cal economic development. Calculation of the monetaryworth of wildlife, nature, and landscape through contin-gent valuation methods also contributes to the commer-cialization of conservation and the downplaying of cul-tural values.</p><p>Despite the range of initiatives and investment of do-nor funds, it has proved difficult to provide tangible ben-efits from conservation to local communities in Africa.Although the political and economic regimes of manydeveloping countries aggravate the difficulties of chan-neling benefits to communities, most protected areas donot realize sufficient revenue to offset the costs to com-munities of retaining them (Mason 1995; Norton-Grif-fiths &amp; Southey 1995; Emerton 1998). Hundreds of Af-ricas conservation areas are unknown, inaccessible, andlacking in charismatic species or dramatic landscapes toattract tourists. Even where these exist in abundance(e.g., Ugandas Mgahinga Gorilla National Park), tourismrevenues are not sufficient to meet community demandsand management costs and to subsidize operations inother equally important, although less attractive, conser-vation areas (Infield &amp; Adams 1999). Although nature</p><p>*</p><p>Current address: 7, Warren Cottages, Station Road, North Chailey,East Sussex, BN8 4HQ, United Kingdom, email mark@infield.nuPaper submitted November 30, 1999; revised manuscript acceptedJuly 31, 2000.</p></li><li><p> Conservation BiologyVolume 15, No. 3, June 2001</p><p>Infield Cultural Values and Protected Areas</p><p>801</p><p>tourism earns substantial revenues for some of Africasprotected areas, few benefits trickle down to local com-munities. The competitive, entrepreneurial nature of thetourist industry is not conducive to the delivery of suffi-cient financial incentives to poor rural people livingaround Africas protected areas for these communitiesto choose conservation, ecotourism and donor projectsnotwithstanding (Hackel 1999).</p><p>Linking conservation with development to create eco-nomic benefits may lead to uses of protected areas andlands around them that are incompatible with conserva-tion (Wells et al. 1992; Noss 1997). Economics can aseasily work against conservation as for it. ZimbabwesCAMPFIRE program, one of Africas best-known commu-nity wildlife management projects, stimulates agricul-tural development as landowners choose to invest earningsfrom wildlife in expanding their farms (Murombedzi1999). Demands for resources or revenue are likely toincrease as human populations and expectations in-crease, pressuring conservation authorities to increaseproduction. If greater earnings can be achieved by com-promising conservation objectives, communities may ar-gue for this (Hackel 1999) and may be supported by gov-ernments.</p><p>That democratic advances will promote conservationis uncertain (Midlarsky 1998; Hackel 1999). Indeed, asdemocratic institutions strengthen, support for wildlifeconservation may become a political liability, and com-munities antagonistic toward protected areas may findstronger political support. Many of Africas protected ar-eas will need determined government support if theyare to survive. The shaky foundations on which commu-nity support for them is being built must be strength-ened. Designing and managing protected areas to reflectvalues relevant to local and national communities as wellas to perform conventional conservation functions willhelp governments explain support for protected areas totheir people.</p><p>Are there other ways Africas governments can justifyto a largely unsupportive populace the conservation ofwildlife and protected areas? Managing them to reflectlocally important cultural values may help. Work inNamibia ( Jones 1999), Tanzania (Kangwana &amp; Ole Mako1998), and elsewhere suggests that culture can provideincentives for communities to conserve wildlife. Culturecan be thought of as systems of symbols (Ingold 1992).People live in environments imbued with symbolic sig-nificance because landscapes are cultural constructions,not simply biological diversity or physical terrain (Greider&amp; Garkovich 1994; Neumann 1998). Different peoplesperceive nature through different values that influenceboth intrinsic preferences and ways of </p><p>interpreting</p><p> it,to oneself and others (Ingold 1992). Recognizing valuesin nature as . . . changeable, even arbitrary (Peterson1999) may allow the development of more flexiblethinking about protected-area management.</p><p>Resources within Ugandas Mount Elgon NationalPark, for example, have an irreplaceable role in the livesof surrounding </p><p>Bagisu</p><p> communities, but regulationsprevent legal access to them. Smoked bamboo shoots(</p><p>Arundinaria alpina</p><p>) are essential to biannual circum-cision ceremonies, powerful spiritual events for the </p><p>Bag-isu</p><p> people. You [park authorities] can take away what-ever you like, but you cant take away our [bamboo](Scott 1998:49; quoting a local government official). An-cient trees (</p><p>Podocarpus</p><p> spp.) mark the sites for theseceremonies. In another example, the Bagisu place specialbeehives in the forest during periods of social crisis. Rit-ual harvesting of the honey by clan elders perpetuateslinks with tribal ancestors because spirits are believed tocontrol the bees. Allowing or even promoting these ac-tivities could create a powerful link between the Bagisuand the park.</p><p>Providing access to protected-area resources is oftendiscussed in economic terms (Wild &amp; Mutebi 1996). Morepowerful incentives might be created, however, if accesswas presented and understood in cultural terms. For ex-ample, the diverse cuisines of many West African culturesmake wide use of wild foods, both animal and plant,which are increasingly restricted to protected areas. Em-phasizing the link between conservation and the contin-ued availability of these food items might stimulate localand national interest in protected areas and conservation.Much poaching in protected areas is driven by economicneed. Some, however, certainly stems from cultural needs.Demands by Zulus to hunt in South Africas Central Com-plex Reserve had cultural origins (Infield 1986), demon-strating their continued interest in the traditional annualhunts of the chiefs and their warriors.</p><p>A recent examination of community conservation inAfrica led to the conclusion that . . . only a vast im-provement in the lives of rural Africans will ultimatelyproduce a more secure future for the continents wild-life (Hackel 1999). This is unlikely to be achieved soonand not before many of Africas protected areas fall be-fore demands to realize promised economic returns. Butit is not only through economic contributions that wild-life and protected areas can have value for local people.Promoting conservation in the context of local culturewould endow protected areas with significance that anemphasis on biological diversity, landscape, or econom-ics does not. Promoting cultural values would also pro-vide a counterbalance to economic pressures on pro-tected areas. This is not to suggest that culture is static,but if conservation is about managing change in dy-namic systems (Adams 1996), then evolving cultures canalso find reflection in protected-area management. Theneed for protection will not disappear, but managingprotected areas to reflect local values may help buildsupport for and reduce resistance to them and allowgovernments to justify and explain conservation interms that have real meaning to local communities.</p></li><li><p> 802</p><p>Cultural Values and Protected Areas Infield</p><p>Conservation BiologyVolume 15, No. 3, June 2001</p><p>Acknowledgments</p><p>I thank W. Adams and three anonymous reviewers fortheir helpful comments. I gratefully acknowledge thesupport of the British Department for International De-velopment, the Zoological Society of London, the Afri-can Wildlife Foundation, and the School of DevelopmentStudies of the University of East Anglia.</p><p>Literature Cited</p><p>Adams, W. M. 1996. Future nature: a vision for conservation. EarthscanPublications, London.</p><p>Brownrigg, L. A. 1985. Native cultures and protected areas: manage-ment options. Pages 3344 in J. A. McNeely and D. Pitt, editors.Culture and conservation: the human dimension in environmentalplanning. Croon Helm, Dover, New Hampshire.</p><p>Emerton, L. 1998. The nature of benefits and the benefits of nature:why wildlife conservation has not economically benefited commu-nities in Africa. Community conservation in Africa: principles andcomparative practice. Discussion paper 7. Institute for Develop-ment Policy and Management, University of Manchester, Manches-ter, United Kingdom.</p><p>Ghimire, K. B. 1994. Conservation and social development: one orboth? A study based on an assessment of panda reserves in China.Discussion paper. United Nations Research Institute for Social De-velopment, Geneva.</p><p>Greider, T., and L. Garkovich. 1994. Landscapes: the social construc-tion of nature and the environment. Rural Sociology </p><p>59:</p><p>123.Hackel, J. D. 1999. Community conservation and the future of Africas</p><p>wildlife. Conservation Biology </p><p>13:</p><p>726734.Holdgate, M., and D. A. Munro. 1995. Limits to caring: a response.</p><p>Pages 147149 in D. Ehrenfeld, editor. Readings from conservationbiology: the social dimension. Society for Conservation Biology andBlackwell Science, Cambridge, Massachusetts.</p><p>Hulme, D., and M. Murphree. 1999. Communities, wildlife and thenew conservation in Africa. Journal of International Development</p><p>11:</p><p>11285.Infield, M. 1986. Improving local support for African conservation ar-</p><p>eas. Monograph 8. Institute of Natural Resources, University of Na-tal, Pietermaritzburg, Republic of South Africa.</p><p>Infield, M., and W. M. Adams. 1999. Institutional sustainability andcommunity conservation: a case study from Uganda. Journal of In-ternational Development </p><p>11:</p><p>305315.Ingold, T. 1992. Culture and the perception of the environment. Pages</p><p>3956 in E. Croll and D. Parkin, editors. Bush base: farm forest: cul-ture, environment and development. Routledge, London.</p><p>Jones, B. T. B. 1999. Policy lessons for the evolution of a community-</p><p>based approach to wildlife management, Kunene Region, Namibia.Journal of International Development </p><p>11:</p><p>295304.Kangwana, K., and R. Ole Mako. 1998. The impact of community con-</p><p>servation initiatives around Tarangire National Park, Tanzania(19921997). Community conservation in Africa: principles andcomparative practice. Discussion paper 16. Institute for Develop-ment Policy, Manchester University, Manchester, United Kingdom.</p><p>Mason, P. M. 1995. Wildlife conservation in the long-termUganda as acase study. M. S. thesis. Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom.</p><p>McNeely, J. A., editor. 1992. Parks for life: Report of the IVth WorldCongress on national parks and protected areas, Caracas. IUCN,Gland, Switzerland.</p><p>McNeely, J. A., and K. R. Miller, editors. 1984. National parks, conser-vation and development: The role of protected areas in sustainingsociety. World Congress on National Parks, Bali, Indonesia. Smith-sonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C.</p><p>Midlarsky, M. I. 1998. Democracy and the environment: an empiricalassessment. Journal of Peace Research </p><p>35:</p><p>341361.Murombedzi, J. C. 1999. Devolution and stewardship in Zimbabwes</p><p>CAMPFIRE programme. Journal of International Development </p><p>11:</p><p>287294.Nash, R. 1982. Wilderness and the American mind. Yale University</p><p>Press, New Haven, Connecticut.Neumann, R. P. 1998. Imposing wilderness: struggles over livelihood and</p><p>nature preservation in Africa. University of California Press, Berkeley.Norton-Griffiths, M., and C. Southey. 1995. The opportunity costs of biodi-</p><p>versity conservation in Kenya. Ecological Economics </p><p>12:</p><p>125139.Noss, A. J. 1997. Challenges to nature conservation with community</p><p>development in central African forests. Oryx </p><p>31:</p><p>180188.Peterson, A. 1999. Environmental ethics and the social construction of</p><p>nature. Environmental Ethics </p><p>21:</p><p>339357.Scott, P. 1998. From conflict to collaboration: people and forests at</p><p>Mount Elgon, Uganda. World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzer-land, and Cambridge, United Kingdom.</p><p>Struhsaker, T. T. 1998....</p></li></ul>


View more >