1999
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2699.1999.00131.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The impacts of people and livestock on topographically diverse open wood‐ and shrub‐lands in arid north‐west Namibia

Abstract: fears of degradation in this area relate more to ideology than evidence. In particular, it is argued 1. It is generally considered that the open that factors conferring resilience and persistence on woodlands of north-west Namibia are experiencing both the environment and the regional herding widespread degradation due to over-use of resources economy are obscured by: (1) disregard for the by local herders.implications of spatial and temporal scale in 2. Data are presented regarding community interpretations o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
32
0

Year Published

2000
2000
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
2
32
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Degradation is common in the presence of key resources and water sources, which are considered a precondition for grazing under semiarid or arid condition (Fensham et al 1999, Bestelmeyer et al 2006. A typical example of a stable key resource is the forage available in wet meadows located within rangelands (Buttolph and Coppock 2004); in addition, local degradation typically occurs around water sources (Hanan et al 1991), settlements (Sullivan 1999), nomad tents (Evans and Geerken 2004), and stock posts (Zhao et al 2007). Although the presence of key resources or water sources may lead to degradation, this does not necessarily imply that the non-equilibrium concept per se is incorrect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Degradation is common in the presence of key resources and water sources, which are considered a precondition for grazing under semiarid or arid condition (Fensham et al 1999, Bestelmeyer et al 2006. A typical example of a stable key resource is the forage available in wet meadows located within rangelands (Buttolph and Coppock 2004); in addition, local degradation typically occurs around water sources (Hanan et al 1991), settlements (Sullivan 1999), nomad tents (Evans and Geerken 2004), and stock posts (Zhao et al 2007). Although the presence of key resources or water sources may lead to degradation, this does not necessarily imply that the non-equilibrium concept per se is incorrect.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In so doing, we show how local agro-ecological knowledge has permitted farmers to build enduring resilience to adverse climate impacts. We warn against, however, romanticisation: current farming practice is implicated in land degradation processes in North Central Namibia; although, we argue, to what extent remains unclear (Kreike, 2010;Newsham and Thomas, 2009;Sullivan, 1999).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…Nor does the report give much attention to abiotic drivers of landscape change. This is especially pertinent given work done in Northwest Namibia that re-examined claims to land degradation purportedly caused by livestock farming, and found little or no evidence to support them (Sullivan, 1999;Ward et al, 2000).…”
Section: Introduction Of the Donkey For Field Preparationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our thinking is shaped by three main influences. First, we draw on prior experience by one of us of measuring plants and vegetation assemblages in the course of quantitative ecological field research and multivariate statistical analysis Sullivan et al, 1995;Sullivan 1999). We combine this experience of abstracting, objectifying and quantifying entities of the natural world with an 'anthropology of nature' that highlights cultural differences in how naturesbeyond-the-human are understood and become known by people in diverse circumstances globally (Descola 2013;Kohn 2013;Sullivan, 2013aSullivan, , 2017b.…”
Section: Introduction[1][2]mentioning
confidence: 99%