Department of Philosophy
Permanent URI for this community
Browse
Browsing Department of Philosophy by browse.metadata.advisor "Anthonissen, Christine"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemConservation discourses related to natural resource use : local communities and Kruger National Park conservation officers Mpumalanga Province, South Africa(Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch, 2011-03) Curtayne, Carmen; Anthonissen, Christine; University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. of Philosophy.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: There is a shift by conservation authorities in post-apartheid South Africa away from management strategies based on law enforcement towards strategies aimed at facilitating local community participation in the management of natural resources. South African National Parks has established community forums in order to facilitate better communication with the communities neighbouring it parks, especially around issues of natural resource consumption. However, at its largest Park, the Kruger National Park, a pervasive miscommunication between the Park and the communities appears to exist despite the ongoing activities of its forums. This study attempted to identify what miscommunication, if any, was occurring between three groups of participants in the Conservation Discourse related to the Kruger National Park environment. The participants were (i) South African National Parks (SANParks) conservation managers, (ii) Kruger Park community outreach officials, and, (iii) members of local communities settled on the borders of the Kruger Park. Specifically, the study was interested in how different perceptions of various participants, who also represent different cultural communities, were foregrounded in relation to different communicative goals. It is suggested that an understanding of where the different Discourses diverge can help identify where possible misunderstandings are occurring which may be resulting in communicative problems. My primary research questions were: (1) how do different communities of practice take part in and construct Conservation Discourse related to the Kruger Parks conservation goals, in particular, those related to the use of natural resources; and, (2) how do members of at least three interest groups construct their own identities in relation to conservation matters in the course of various discursive events where SANParks conservation programmes, particularly those related to the use of natural resources, are topicalised. My assumption was that the Parks conservation officers would have a common Conservation Discourse, and that the local communities would have a common discourse but one which deviates entirely from that of the Parks. From 23 September 2008, I conducted three semi-structured interviews with the Parks conservation officers, I was an observer of a Park departmental meeting as well as a Park Forum, and I conducted a focus group with eight members from one of the local communities. This approach enabled me to collect data from a number of different types of communicative events in order to collate a multidimensional picture of the complete Discourse on Conservation. A number of different Conservation Discourses were identified, some of which present significant discrepancies, and which, as in the case of the two of the departments, may be contributing towards what appears to be a serious breakdown in communication. The communities show that while they are supportive of the populist concept of nature conservation, they are completely unaware of the Parks conservation policies. This lack of awareness indicates a failure of the existing communication between the Park and its neighbouring communities despite the Park Forums having been set-up. Finally, the different discourses also appear to be resulting in misunderstandings and feelings of animosity between the different participants.