不平衡的捐赠参与和令人担忧的跨界保护方法

Lameck Kachena, S. Spiegel
{"title":"不平衡的捐赠参与和令人担忧的跨界保护方法","authors":"Lameck Kachena, S. Spiegel","doi":"10.4103/cs.cs_59_22","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mainstream environmental literature has often presented the initiation of transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs) in southern Africa as progress, obscuring the influences of geopolitics and capitalist power relationships that shape TFCA initiatives. Recognising the need to explore trajectories that threaten the very core of what TFCA approaches, in theory, stand for, we undertook an ethnographic study in the Chimanimani TFCA along the Zimbabwe-Mozambique border to examine outcomes of uneven funding commitments associated with geopolitics and neoliberal conservation initiatives. We discuss how on the Mozambique side, access to donor funding linked to neoliberal programming has been associated with unfulfilled promises of 'conservation-based enterprises' and the grabbing of livelihood resources, while constricted access to conservation funding has been instrumentalised as a rationale for coercive 'fortress conservation' approaches in Zimbabwe, shaping tensions between park authorities and buffer communities. Communities on both sides of the TFCA experience unintended socio-ecological trajectories associated with economic inequalities and systems of exploitation, in turn leading to fraught conservation in the TFCA. Considering how these inequalities in TFCA management have also been worsened by shocks, including extreme climatic events and the COVID-19 pandemic, we conclude that more attention is warranted to the impact of uneven donor engagement driven by neoliberal principles and geopolitics on conservation.","PeriodicalId":376207,"journal":{"name":"Conservation and Society","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Uneven Donor Engagement and Fraught Transboundary Conservation Approaches\",\"authors\":\"Lameck Kachena, S. Spiegel\",\"doi\":\"10.4103/cs.cs_59_22\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Mainstream environmental literature has often presented the initiation of transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs) in southern Africa as progress, obscuring the influences of geopolitics and capitalist power relationships that shape TFCA initiatives. Recognising the need to explore trajectories that threaten the very core of what TFCA approaches, in theory, stand for, we undertook an ethnographic study in the Chimanimani TFCA along the Zimbabwe-Mozambique border to examine outcomes of uneven funding commitments associated with geopolitics and neoliberal conservation initiatives. We discuss how on the Mozambique side, access to donor funding linked to neoliberal programming has been associated with unfulfilled promises of 'conservation-based enterprises' and the grabbing of livelihood resources, while constricted access to conservation funding has been instrumentalised as a rationale for coercive 'fortress conservation' approaches in Zimbabwe, shaping tensions between park authorities and buffer communities. Communities on both sides of the TFCA experience unintended socio-ecological trajectories associated with economic inequalities and systems of exploitation, in turn leading to fraught conservation in the TFCA. Considering how these inequalities in TFCA management have also been worsened by shocks, including extreme climatic events and the COVID-19 pandemic, we conclude that more attention is warranted to the impact of uneven donor engagement driven by neoliberal principles and geopolitics on conservation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":376207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation and Society\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_59_22\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_59_22","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

主流环境文献经常将南部非洲跨境保护区(TFCAs)的发起视为一种进步,掩盖了地缘政治和资本主义权力关系对TFCA倡议的影响。认识到有必要探索威胁到TFCA方法在理论上所代表的核心的轨迹,我们在津巴布韦-莫桑比克边境的Chimanimani TFCA进行了一项民族志研究,以检查与地缘政治和新自由主义保护倡议相关的不平衡的资金承诺的结果。我们讨论了在莫桑比克方面,获得与新自由主义规划相关的捐助资金如何与“以保护为基础的企业”的未实现承诺和对生计资源的掠夺联系在一起,而获得保护资金的限制已被用作津巴布韦强制性“堡垒保护”方法的理由,形成了公园当局和缓冲社区之间的紧张关系。TFCA两侧的社区都经历了与经济不平等和剥削制度相关的意想不到的社会生态轨迹,从而导致TFCA的保护问题令人担忧。考虑到极端气候事件和2019冠状病毒感染症(COVID-19)大流行等冲击加剧了TFCA管理中的这些不平等现象,我们得出的结论是,有必要更多地关注新自由主义原则和地缘政治驱动的捐助者参与不平衡对保护的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Uneven Donor Engagement and Fraught Transboundary Conservation Approaches
Mainstream environmental literature has often presented the initiation of transfrontier conservation areas (TFCAs) in southern Africa as progress, obscuring the influences of geopolitics and capitalist power relationships that shape TFCA initiatives. Recognising the need to explore trajectories that threaten the very core of what TFCA approaches, in theory, stand for, we undertook an ethnographic study in the Chimanimani TFCA along the Zimbabwe-Mozambique border to examine outcomes of uneven funding commitments associated with geopolitics and neoliberal conservation initiatives. We discuss how on the Mozambique side, access to donor funding linked to neoliberal programming has been associated with unfulfilled promises of 'conservation-based enterprises' and the grabbing of livelihood resources, while constricted access to conservation funding has been instrumentalised as a rationale for coercive 'fortress conservation' approaches in Zimbabwe, shaping tensions between park authorities and buffer communities. Communities on both sides of the TFCA experience unintended socio-ecological trajectories associated with economic inequalities and systems of exploitation, in turn leading to fraught conservation in the TFCA. Considering how these inequalities in TFCA management have also been worsened by shocks, including extreme climatic events and the COVID-19 pandemic, we conclude that more attention is warranted to the impact of uneven donor engagement driven by neoliberal principles and geopolitics on conservation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信