在纳米比亚的两种主要土地权属制度中,牧场变化及其潜在驱动因素是如何以及为什么不同的?

IF 1.2 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q4 ECOLOGY
Rangeland Journal Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1071/rj23007
Katja Brinkmann, Diego Augusto Menestrey Schwieger, Lena Grieger, Sara Heshmati, Markus Rauchecker
{"title":"在纳米比亚的两种主要土地权属制度中,牧场变化及其潜在驱动因素是如何以及为什么不同的?","authors":"Katja Brinkmann, Diego Augusto Menestrey Schwieger, Lena Grieger, Sara Heshmati, Markus Rauchecker","doi":"10.1071/rj23007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Rangeland degradation, with the loss of perennial grasses and shrub encroachment, negatively affects livestock production and reduces the drought resilience of commercial ranchers and pastoralists in drylands. This situation applies in Namibia, where few attempts have been made to investigate rangeland changes and shrub encroachment across the two major land-tenure systems in the country, namely, freehold and communal land. This study aimed to investigate the inter-relationships among rangeland changes, land tenure and management in Namibia within the past 55 years, by combining remote-sensing analysis, literature review, and interviews. Land-cover classification results revealed different trends in the two tenure systems between 1965 and 2020. Both were affected by shrub invasion. At the onset of the observation period, the percentage of grass-dominated savanna was higher on communal land. Whereas a linear increase in shrubland was observed after 1965 on communal land and on freehold land up to 2001, the shrub encroachment trend on freehold land reversed from 2011, mainly because of de-bushing measures. The most important drivers for rangeland changes and shrub encroachment were related to specific land-management practices and the historical and socio-economic contexts in which they occurred, including various policies associated with colonialism, fire suppression and overgrazing, combined with recurrent droughts. Although farmers on freehold land apply various strategies to combat shrub encroachment, the aftermaths of colonial policies and the issues of common-pool resource management have limited the options of those on communal land to implement such measures. The search for sustainable management options, thus, requires a deeper understanding of their potentials and shortcomings in both land-tenure types; such understanding could be acquired by considering local knowledge and past and current land-use practices. Management options that incorporate the numerous benefits of woody plants and the uses of shrubs hold promise for sustaining livelihoods in both land-tenure systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":20810,"journal":{"name":"Rangeland Journal","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How and why do rangeland changes and their underlying drivers differ across Namibia’s two major land-tenure systems?\",\"authors\":\"Katja Brinkmann, Diego Augusto Menestrey Schwieger, Lena Grieger, Sara Heshmati, Markus Rauchecker\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/rj23007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Rangeland degradation, with the loss of perennial grasses and shrub encroachment, negatively affects livestock production and reduces the drought resilience of commercial ranchers and pastoralists in drylands. This situation applies in Namibia, where few attempts have been made to investigate rangeland changes and shrub encroachment across the two major land-tenure systems in the country, namely, freehold and communal land. This study aimed to investigate the inter-relationships among rangeland changes, land tenure and management in Namibia within the past 55 years, by combining remote-sensing analysis, literature review, and interviews. Land-cover classification results revealed different trends in the two tenure systems between 1965 and 2020. Both were affected by shrub invasion. At the onset of the observation period, the percentage of grass-dominated savanna was higher on communal land. Whereas a linear increase in shrubland was observed after 1965 on communal land and on freehold land up to 2001, the shrub encroachment trend on freehold land reversed from 2011, mainly because of de-bushing measures. The most important drivers for rangeland changes and shrub encroachment were related to specific land-management practices and the historical and socio-economic contexts in which they occurred, including various policies associated with colonialism, fire suppression and overgrazing, combined with recurrent droughts. Although farmers on freehold land apply various strategies to combat shrub encroachment, the aftermaths of colonial policies and the issues of common-pool resource management have limited the options of those on communal land to implement such measures. The search for sustainable management options, thus, requires a deeper understanding of their potentials and shortcomings in both land-tenure types; such understanding could be acquired by considering local knowledge and past and current land-use practices. Management options that incorporate the numerous benefits of woody plants and the uses of shrubs hold promise for sustaining livelihoods in both land-tenure systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20810,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rangeland Journal\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rangeland Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/rj23007\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangeland Journal","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/rj23007","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

牧场退化,随着多年生牧草和灌木侵蚀的丧失,对牲畜生产产生负面影响,并降低了旱地商业牧场主和牧民的抗旱能力。这种情况也适用于纳米比亚,该国几乎没有尝试调查该国两种主要土地保有制度,即永久业权和公有土地的牧场变化和灌木侵占情况。本文采用遥感分析、文献综述和访谈相结合的方法,探讨了纳米比亚近55年来牧场变化、土地权制和管理之间的相互关系。1965 - 2020年,两种权属制度的土地覆被分类结果呈现出不同的变化趋势。两者都受到灌木入侵的影响。在观察期开始时,公共土地上以草为主的稀树草原比例较高。自1965年以来,公共土地和永久业权土地上的灌木数量呈线性增长,但自2011年以来,永久业权土地上的灌木入侵趋势发生了逆转,这主要是由于采取了清除灌木的措施。牧场变化和灌木侵占的最重要驱动因素与具体的土地管理做法及其发生的历史和社会经济背景有关,包括与殖民主义、灭火和过度放牧有关的各种政策,以及经常性干旱。虽然永久业权土地上的农民采用各种策略来对抗灌木的侵蚀,但殖民政策的后果和公共资源管理问题限制了公共土地上的农民执行这些措施的选择。因此,寻求可持续的管理办法需要更深入地了解这两种土地保有类型的潜力和缺点;这种了解可以通过考虑当地知识以及过去和现在的土地使用做法来获得。结合木本植物和灌木利用的诸多好处的管理办法有望在两种土地权属制度中维持生计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How and why do rangeland changes and their underlying drivers differ across Namibia’s two major land-tenure systems?

Rangeland degradation, with the loss of perennial grasses and shrub encroachment, negatively affects livestock production and reduces the drought resilience of commercial ranchers and pastoralists in drylands. This situation applies in Namibia, where few attempts have been made to investigate rangeland changes and shrub encroachment across the two major land-tenure systems in the country, namely, freehold and communal land. This study aimed to investigate the inter-relationships among rangeland changes, land tenure and management in Namibia within the past 55 years, by combining remote-sensing analysis, literature review, and interviews. Land-cover classification results revealed different trends in the two tenure systems between 1965 and 2020. Both were affected by shrub invasion. At the onset of the observation period, the percentage of grass-dominated savanna was higher on communal land. Whereas a linear increase in shrubland was observed after 1965 on communal land and on freehold land up to 2001, the shrub encroachment trend on freehold land reversed from 2011, mainly because of de-bushing measures. The most important drivers for rangeland changes and shrub encroachment were related to specific land-management practices and the historical and socio-economic contexts in which they occurred, including various policies associated with colonialism, fire suppression and overgrazing, combined with recurrent droughts. Although farmers on freehold land apply various strategies to combat shrub encroachment, the aftermaths of colonial policies and the issues of common-pool resource management have limited the options of those on communal land to implement such measures. The search for sustainable management options, thus, requires a deeper understanding of their potentials and shortcomings in both land-tenure types; such understanding could be acquired by considering local knowledge and past and current land-use practices. Management options that incorporate the numerous benefits of woody plants and the uses of shrubs hold promise for sustaining livelihoods in both land-tenure systems.

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
Rangeland Journal
Rangeland Journal 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
14
审稿时长
>36 weeks
期刊介绍: The Rangeland Journal publishes original work that makes a significant contribution to understanding the biophysical, social, cultural, economic, and policy influences affecting rangeland use and management throughout the world. Rangelands are defined broadly and include all those environments where natural ecological processes predominate, and where values and benefits are based primarily on natural resources. Articles may present the results of original research, contributions to theory or new conclusions reached from the review of a topic. Their structure need not conform to that of standard scientific articles but writing style must be clear and concise. All material presented must be well documented, critically analysed and objectively presented. All papers are peer-reviewed. The Rangeland Journal is published on behalf of the Australian Rangeland Society.
×
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