Questioning conservation practice and its response: the establishment of Namaqua National Park

This article summarises research carried out in Namaqualand in South Africa that identifies the discrepancies between rhetoric and practices in conservation. The author points at an on-going conflict between conservation and redistribution of land, suggesting that powerful conservationists tend to win this competition.

The article underlines that apartheid resulted in Africans being dispossessed of land on a large scale and restricted to overcrowded reserves. Particularly, the resulting land dispossession in Namaqualand confined non-whites to mission stations, which acted as places of refuge. However, people continue to feel strongly about the loss of their ancestral land, and they are keen to increase their land base.

The article reviews the story of Namaqua National Park that was established in 2002. The paper demonstrates how the expansion of the park outcompetes land reform in the area by the conservation fund being willing to pay far above the market price, which resulted in remaining landless neighbouring communities as they are.

Although land redistribution may be understood from a developmental point of view, the paper highlights the strong opposition from conservationists to this direction. In this respect, the article finds the following:

• scientists and conservationists have for a long time maintained that livestock farming, as historically and currently carried out by the people in communal areas, is a threat to the environment
• livestock keeping represents a safety net against fluctuations in other incomes – as a ‘bank account’ that herders can dip into to make up for regular seasonal shortages or when other sources fail
• conservationists may find it legitimate to neglect principles of ethics and transparency in order to pursue their goals 
• this type of strategy may, however, in the longer term have adverse effects not only on local people’s livelihoods, but also on environments.