Deagrarianisation and forest revegetation in a biodiversity hotspot on the Wild Coast, South Africa
- Shackleton, Ross T, Shackleton, Charlie M, Shackleton, Sheona E, Gambiza, James
- Authors: Shackleton, Ross T , Shackleton, Charlie M , Shackleton, Sheona E , Gambiza, James
- Date: 2013
- Language: English
- Type: article , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/60984 , vital:27905 , doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076939
- Description: Deagraianisation is a worldwide phenomenon with widespread social, ecological and economic effects yet with little consensus on the local or higher level causes. There have been contested views on the causes and consequences of deagrarianisation on South Africa’s Wild Coast, which is an international biodiversity hotspot. Using GIS, household interviews and ecological sampling, we compared the perspectives of current and former cultivators as to why some have abandoned farming, whilst also tracking the uses and woody plant cover and composition of fields abandoned at different periods. The GIS analysis showed that field abandonment had been ongoing over several decades, with a decline from 12.5 % field cover in 1961 to 2.7 % in 2009. The area of forests and woodlands almost doubled in the corresponding period. There was a distinct peak in field abandonment during the time of political transition at the national level in the early 1990s. This political change led to a decrease in government support for livestock farming, which in turn resulted in reduced animal draught power at the household and community level, and hence reduced cropping. The study showed it is largely the wealthier households that have remained in arable agriculture and that the poorer households have abandoned farming. The abandoned fields show a distinct trend of increasing woody biomass and species richness with length of time since abandonment, with approximately three woody plant species added per decade. Most local respondents dislike the increases in forest and woodland extent and density because of anxiety about wild animals causing harm to crops and even humans, and the loss of an agricultural identity to livelihoods and the landscape.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Shackleton, Ross T , Shackleton, Charlie M , Shackleton, Sheona E , Gambiza, James
- Date: 2013
- Language: English
- Type: article , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/60984 , vital:27905 , doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076939
- Description: Deagraianisation is a worldwide phenomenon with widespread social, ecological and economic effects yet with little consensus on the local or higher level causes. There have been contested views on the causes and consequences of deagrarianisation on South Africa’s Wild Coast, which is an international biodiversity hotspot. Using GIS, household interviews and ecological sampling, we compared the perspectives of current and former cultivators as to why some have abandoned farming, whilst also tracking the uses and woody plant cover and composition of fields abandoned at different periods. The GIS analysis showed that field abandonment had been ongoing over several decades, with a decline from 12.5 % field cover in 1961 to 2.7 % in 2009. The area of forests and woodlands almost doubled in the corresponding period. There was a distinct peak in field abandonment during the time of political transition at the national level in the early 1990s. This political change led to a decrease in government support for livestock farming, which in turn resulted in reduced animal draught power at the household and community level, and hence reduced cropping. The study showed it is largely the wealthier households that have remained in arable agriculture and that the poorer households have abandoned farming. The abandoned fields show a distinct trend of increasing woody biomass and species richness with length of time since abandonment, with approximately three woody plant species added per decade. Most local respondents dislike the increases in forest and woodland extent and density because of anxiety about wild animals causing harm to crops and even humans, and the loss of an agricultural identity to livelihoods and the landscape.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
Land claims and the pursuit of co-management on four protected areas in South Africa
- Cundill, Georgina, Thondhlana, Gladman, Sisitka, Lawrence, Shackleton, Sheona E, Blorea, M
- Authors: Cundill, Georgina , Thondhlana, Gladman , Sisitka, Lawrence , Shackleton, Sheona E , Blorea, M
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/391223 , vital:68632 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.016"
- Description: Successful land claims on protected areas by previously disenfranchised communities often result in co-management agreements between claimant communities and state conservation agencies. South Africa, in particular, has pursued co-management as the desired outcome of land claims on its protected areas. We review four cases of co-management on protected areas in South Africa, and reflect on the appropriateness of the pursuit of co-management as the preferred outcome of land claims. Despite promises of pro-poor, democratically informed management, the practical experience of co-management has seen the continuation of the status quo in terms of conservation, with very few material benefits for claimant communities and limited sharing of responsibilities and decision-making functions. The findings underscore two deep challenges facing co-management in cases of land claims worldwide. First, during land claims negotiations in cases involving protected areas, the state cannot be expected to represent the best interests of its citizens (the land claimants), while simultaneously seeking to meet national and international obligations for protected area coverage. Second, the concept of democratic co-management may sit uncomfortably beside the realities of managing loss-making protected areas with ever-shrinking conservation budgets. Where co-management agreements have already been signed, ensuring that new landowners do indeed have a say in management should form the driving focus for co-management practice going forward.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Cundill, Georgina , Thondhlana, Gladman , Sisitka, Lawrence , Shackleton, Sheona E , Blorea, M
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: To be catalogued
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/391223 , vital:68632 , xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.05.016"
- Description: Successful land claims on protected areas by previously disenfranchised communities often result in co-management agreements between claimant communities and state conservation agencies. South Africa, in particular, has pursued co-management as the desired outcome of land claims on its protected areas. We review four cases of co-management on protected areas in South Africa, and reflect on the appropriateness of the pursuit of co-management as the preferred outcome of land claims. Despite promises of pro-poor, democratically informed management, the practical experience of co-management has seen the continuation of the status quo in terms of conservation, with very few material benefits for claimant communities and limited sharing of responsibilities and decision-making functions. The findings underscore two deep challenges facing co-management in cases of land claims worldwide. First, during land claims negotiations in cases involving protected areas, the state cannot be expected to represent the best interests of its citizens (the land claimants), while simultaneously seeking to meet national and international obligations for protected area coverage. Second, the concept of democratic co-management may sit uncomfortably beside the realities of managing loss-making protected areas with ever-shrinking conservation budgets. Where co-management agreements have already been signed, ensuring that new landowners do indeed have a say in management should form the driving focus for co-management practice going forward.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »