Attitudes and opinions of local and national public sector stakeholders towards Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, Botswana

Abstract

Local and national public sector stakeholders are considered to be primary stakeholders and their knowledge and support for conservation initiatives of transfrontier parks are important for sustainable management of resources. Hence, it is critical to assess the attitudes and opinions of a major stakeholder group in order to establish partnerships between protected areas (PAs), adjacent communities and other management agencies. This study employed a qualitative inquiry to identify and assess factors that influence public sector stakeholder support for community-based ecotourism (CBE) development and for conservation of the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park (KTP). In-depth semi-structured interviews were used to solicit data from 15 local and national representatives who have worked or resided in the Kgalagadi region for a period of at least 6 months. Findings revealed variations in opinion between local and national representatives in relation to collaboration and partnership initiatives, conservation projects, park management, tourism development and park benefits to local communities. There was overall uncertainty with respect to the designation of the KTP, since it had generated unfavourable conditions for adjacent local people, local authorities and village leaders. Nearly all local representatives indicated an imbalance with regard to resident collaboration and partnership in KTP conservation-related projects, and the general management activities. The contentions included concerns about land ownership and control, human-wildlife interactions, perceptions about communication with park authorities, lack of transparency with respect to activities and inequality of park benefits. Two major policy concerns were a low level of community participation in park activities and a lack of collaboration and communication between management and residents.

Local institutions, actors, and natural resource governance in Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park and surrounds, South Africa

“…Our results are generally comparable with findings by Moswete et al (2012) on the Botswana side of the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park where adjacent local communities perceive lack and inequality of benefits from the park.…”

Use of the participatory approach to develop sustainability assessments for natural resource management

“…Resource management and sustainability assessment in such systems require strong communication (Upreti 2004;Angelstam et al 2013), planning, and collaborative learning among local stakeholders, researchers, policy-makers, and managers, using both qualitative as well as quantitative methods (Kates et al 2001;Berkes 2004;Angelstam et al 2013). However, expert-driven, top-down (traditional) approaches usually ignore these fundamental requirements in formulating natural resource policies Reed et al 2006;Balana et al 2010;Datta & Chatterjee 2012;Moswete et al 2012;Sutcliffe et al 2012). Expertdriven strategies rarely account for interference with social norms and practices, and impact to resource access necessary for local livelihoods Datta & Chatterjee 2012;Moswete et al 2012;Sutcliffe et al 2012).…”

“…However, expert-driven, top-down (traditional) approaches usually ignore these fundamental requirements in formulating natural resource policies Reed et al 2006;Balana et al 2010;Datta & Chatterjee 2012;Moswete et al 2012;Sutcliffe et al 2012). Expertdriven strategies rarely account for interference with social norms and practices, and impact to resource access necessary for local livelihoods Datta & Chatterjee 2012;Moswete et al 2012;Sutcliffe et al 2012). Furthermore, usually driven by the ecological, environmental, and social interests of small fraction of the society, expert-driven approaches tend to pay little, if any, attention to equity issues such as justice, poverty, and indigenous rights (Brosius et al 1998;Gibson 2006b;Khadka & Vacik 2012a).…”

“…Local stakeholders may hold different perspectives and opinions on the utility and success of sustainable development projects, and these differences indicate implementation weaknesses or limitations where the improvements expected by experts did not emerge (Datta & Chatterjee 2012;Moswete et al 2012;Sutcliffe et al 2012;Cosyns et al 2013).The diversity of terms used to refer to the process of local involvement (e.g., participatory monitoring and evaluation, stakeholderbased evaluation/stakeholder assessment, community monitoring/citizen monitoring; Estrella & Gaventa 1998) matches the wide variety of approaches and methodologies used in the process (Bell et al 2012), leading some to question the validity of the outcomes produced by it (Datta & Chatterjee 2012). Bell et al (2012) concluded that the most critical need in this area is to bring some structure to the methodology of the participatory approach, as methodological choices alone may greatly influence assessment outcomes.…”

Who views what? Impact assessment through the eyes of farmers, development organization staff and researchers

“…Other studies such as the one from Kent et al (2012) and Moswete et al (2012) confirm that a systematic examination of different stakeholders' perspectives can help to identify overlaps and gaps between stakeholders. For example, in our study, farmers attributing high importance to rodent control were reflecting their concern of njansang losses due to rodent damage, whereas experts had neglected this indicator.…”