跨境和平公园的包容性和可持续性的局限性:以津巴布韦大林波波跨境保护区的Sengwe社区为例

IF 1.3 Q2 ANTHROPOLOGY
S. Chiutsi, J. Saarinen
{"title":"跨境和平公园的包容性和可持续性的局限性:以津巴布韦大林波波跨境保护区的Sengwe社区为例","authors":"S. Chiutsi, J. Saarinen","doi":"10.1080/21681392.2019.1670703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transfrontier peace parks are seized with the challenge of creating a more inclusive and sustainable conservation agenda in the officially designated peaceparks in southern Africa. The quest for inclusivity and sustainability has witnessed sustained lobbying from the local communities calling for more meaningful involvement in the conservation and tourism industry value chain in the peaceparks. Against this background it is therefore imperative to understand the limits of inclusivity and sustainability in the peaceparks. This is important as this may help in gaining insights into improving stakeholder relations and to better manage expectations and perceptions of local communities affected by the establishment of the peaceparks. Understanding the limits of inclusivity and sustainability may help to develop beneficial stakeholder relations as positive relations have been understood to result in better biodiversity conservation and management strategies of the transboundary resources. This paper aims to share insights into the limits of inclusivity and sustainability of the GLTP focusing on the practical experiences of the local people in southeastern lowveld Zimbabwe. The study adopted a qualitative approach and leaned on the interpretivist research philosophy with major research participants drawn from the community members and key role players. A total of 180 community members drawn across the Sengwe community participated in the study. Research material was generated between October 2013 and April 2015. The results based on community interviews show that the stakeholder relations in the GLTFCA are currently strained and do not give the optimism and confidence to achieve meaningful inclusivity of the local communities and overall sustainability of the peacepark initiatives in southern lowveld Zimbabwe. The major challenges to inclusivity include poor governance, threats to livelihoods and negative stakeholder relations. Thus, there is a need to continuously review the governance processes, improve stakeholder relations and support community livelihood coping strategies in more tangible ways.","PeriodicalId":37966,"journal":{"name":"Critical African Studies","volume":"47 1","pages":"348 - 360"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The limits of inclusivity and sustainability in transfrontier peace parks: case of Sengwe community in Great Limpopo transfrontier conservation area, Zimbabwe\",\"authors\":\"S. Chiutsi, J. Saarinen\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/21681392.2019.1670703\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Transfrontier peace parks are seized with the challenge of creating a more inclusive and sustainable conservation agenda in the officially designated peaceparks in southern Africa. The quest for inclusivity and sustainability has witnessed sustained lobbying from the local communities calling for more meaningful involvement in the conservation and tourism industry value chain in the peaceparks. Against this background it is therefore imperative to understand the limits of inclusivity and sustainability in the peaceparks. This is important as this may help in gaining insights into improving stakeholder relations and to better manage expectations and perceptions of local communities affected by the establishment of the peaceparks. Understanding the limits of inclusivity and sustainability may help to develop beneficial stakeholder relations as positive relations have been understood to result in better biodiversity conservation and management strategies of the transboundary resources. This paper aims to share insights into the limits of inclusivity and sustainability of the GLTP focusing on the practical experiences of the local people in southeastern lowveld Zimbabwe. The study adopted a qualitative approach and leaned on the interpretivist research philosophy with major research participants drawn from the community members and key role players. A total of 180 community members drawn across the Sengwe community participated in the study. Research material was generated between October 2013 and April 2015. The results based on community interviews show that the stakeholder relations in the GLTFCA are currently strained and do not give the optimism and confidence to achieve meaningful inclusivity of the local communities and overall sustainability of the peacepark initiatives in southern lowveld Zimbabwe. The major challenges to inclusivity include poor governance, threats to livelihoods and negative stakeholder relations. Thus, there is a need to continuously review the governance processes, improve stakeholder relations and support community livelihood coping strategies in more tangible ways.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical African Studies\",\"volume\":\"47 1\",\"pages\":\"348 - 360\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical African Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2019.1670703\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical African Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/21681392.2019.1670703","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

跨界和平公园面临着在南部非洲官方指定的和平公园制定更具包容性和可持续性的保护议程的挑战。为了追求包容性和可持续性,当地社区不断进行游说,呼吁更有意义地参与和平公园的保护和旅游业价值链。因此,在这种背景下,必须了解和平公园的包容性和可持续性的局限性。这很重要,因为这可能有助于深入了解如何改善利益攸关方关系,并更好地管理受建立和平公园影响的当地社区的期望和看法。了解包容性和可持续性的局限性可能有助于发展有益的利益相关者关系,因为人们已经认识到,积极的关系会导致更好的生物多样性保护和跨界资源管理战略。本文旨在以津巴布韦东南部低地地区当地人的实际经验为重点,分享对GLTP的包容性和可持续性局限性的见解。本研究采用定性研究方法,以解释主义研究哲学为基础,主要研究对象为社区成员和关键角色参与者。共有180名来自senwe社区的社区成员参与了这项研究。研究资料生成于2013年10月至2015年4月。基于社区访谈的结果表明,GLTFCA中的利益相关者关系目前很紧张,对实现当地社区的有意义的包容性和津巴布韦南部低地和平公园倡议的整体可持续性没有乐观和信心。包容性面临的主要挑战包括治理不善、生计受到威胁以及与利益攸关方的消极关系。因此,有必要不断审查治理过程,改善利益相关者关系,并以更切实的方式支持社区生计应对战略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The limits of inclusivity and sustainability in transfrontier peace parks: case of Sengwe community in Great Limpopo transfrontier conservation area, Zimbabwe
Transfrontier peace parks are seized with the challenge of creating a more inclusive and sustainable conservation agenda in the officially designated peaceparks in southern Africa. The quest for inclusivity and sustainability has witnessed sustained lobbying from the local communities calling for more meaningful involvement in the conservation and tourism industry value chain in the peaceparks. Against this background it is therefore imperative to understand the limits of inclusivity and sustainability in the peaceparks. This is important as this may help in gaining insights into improving stakeholder relations and to better manage expectations and perceptions of local communities affected by the establishment of the peaceparks. Understanding the limits of inclusivity and sustainability may help to develop beneficial stakeholder relations as positive relations have been understood to result in better biodiversity conservation and management strategies of the transboundary resources. This paper aims to share insights into the limits of inclusivity and sustainability of the GLTP focusing on the practical experiences of the local people in southeastern lowveld Zimbabwe. The study adopted a qualitative approach and leaned on the interpretivist research philosophy with major research participants drawn from the community members and key role players. A total of 180 community members drawn across the Sengwe community participated in the study. Research material was generated between October 2013 and April 2015. The results based on community interviews show that the stakeholder relations in the GLTFCA are currently strained and do not give the optimism and confidence to achieve meaningful inclusivity of the local communities and overall sustainability of the peacepark initiatives in southern lowveld Zimbabwe. The major challenges to inclusivity include poor governance, threats to livelihoods and negative stakeholder relations. Thus, there is a need to continuously review the governance processes, improve stakeholder relations and support community livelihood coping strategies in more tangible ways.
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
Critical African Studies
Critical African Studies Arts and Humanities-Arts and Humanities (all)
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Critical African Studies seeks to return Africanist scholarship to the heart of theoretical innovation within each of its constituent disciplines, including Anthropology, Political Science, Sociology, History, Law and Economics. We offer authors a more flexible publishing platform than other journals, allowing them greater space to develop empirical discussions alongside theoretical and conceptual engagements. We aim to publish scholarly articles that offer both innovative empirical contributions, grounded in original fieldwork, and also innovative theoretical engagements. This speaks to our broader intention to promote the deployment of thorough empirical work for the purposes of sophisticated theoretical innovation. We invite contributions that meet the aims of the journal, including special issue proposals that offer fresh empirical and theoretical insights into African Studies debates.
×
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