Land Claims and Comanagement of Protected Areas in South Africa: Exploring the Challenges

Comanagement has recently become the most popular approach for reconciling land claims and biodiversity conservation in South Africa and beyond. Following the resolution of land claims on protected areas in South Africa, comanagement arrangements have been created between the relevant conservation a...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:

Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:	Environmental management (New York) Ročník 41; číslo 3; s. 311 - 321
Hlavní autor:	Kepe, Thembela
Médium:	Journal Article
Jazyk:	angličtina
Vydáno:	New York New York : Springer-Verlag 01.03.2008 Springer-Verlag Springer Nature B.V
Témata:	Agreements Aquatic Pollution Atmospheric Protection/Air Quality Control/Air Pollution Biodiversity collaborative management Community Conservation conservation areas Conservation biology Conservation of Natural Resources Earth and Environmental Science Ecology Environment Environmental Management fisheries forestry Forestry Management Government agencies Land claims Land reform Land tenure Mkambati National parks Natural resource management Natural resources Nature Conservation Property rights Protected areas Restitution South Africa terminology Tourism Waste Water Technology Water Management Water Pollution Control Wilderness areas South Africa Land claims Comanagement South Africa Conservation Mkambati
ISSN:	0364-152X, 1432-1009
On-line přístup:	Získat plný text
Tagy:	Přidat tag Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!

Popis
Shrnutí:	Comanagement has recently become the most popular approach for reconciling land claims and biodiversity conservation in South Africa and beyond. Following the resolution of land claims on protected areas in South Africa, comanagement arrangements have been created between the relevant conservation authorities and the land claimant communities who are legally awarded tenure rights to the land. However, it is doubtful that these partnerships constitute success for the former land claimants. Using the case of a “resolved” land claim in Mkambati Nature Reserve, Eastern Cape Province, as well as insights from comanagement literature, this paper identifies and discusses three key possible reasons for the unimpressive performance of comanagement in reconciling land restitution and conservation. The first one is the origins of the comanagement idea in the conservation of high value natural resources (e.g., fisheries, forestry), rather than in or including concerns for resource rights. The second reason is the neglect of key conditions for successful comanagement, as discussed in the comanagement literature. The final reason is the ambiguity in settlement agreements, including the use of terminology and concepts that reinforce unequal power relationships, with the state emerging as the powerful partner. This paper concludes that, unless there is a serious reassessment of the comanagement idea as a way of reconciling land reform and conservation, and a possible review of settlement agreements that have relied on comanagement, both the integrity of the “successful land claimant's rights” and that of conservation remain under threat.
Bibliografie:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-007-9034-x ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 ObjectType-Article-2 ObjectType-Feature-1
ISSN:	0364-152X 1432-1009
DOI:	10.1007/s00267-007-9034-x