Land-use change and social-ecological transformation in much of southern and eastern Africa is shaped progressively by various forms of conservation. Transboundary natural resource management (TBNRM), community-based natural resource management (CBNRM), and conservation on freehold farmland – all new forms of conservation gaining dominance since the 1990s – are embedded in discourses on future-making: they are meant to sustain biodiversity and provide significant carbon sinks mediating climate change. They are also thought to become the hubs for non-consumptive modes of land use and present new options for future rural livelihoods. Newly established conservation areas go along with new practices of inclusion and exclusion and are closely tied to global discourses on climate change, “green” development, and participation. Conservation efforts also entail visions of “healed landscapes” and “global heritages of untrammeled nature”, as scenarios of resilient rural social-ecological systems and models of successful commodification of natural resources in general and game in particular. Future-making in accordance with the scenarios of a future of probabilities and aspirations for a future of possibilities meet here. Comprehensive transformations of social-ecological systems are orchestrated by actors operating and strategising at different scales: international organisations (e.g. WWF, IUCN, as well as Earth Peoples, Conservation International), regional bodies (e.g. SADEC), national governments, rural elites, traditional authorities, councils of elderly people and smallholders take part in the establishment of new practices of engagement between humans and nature, resulting in processes of recoupling and decoupling of the social-ecological system. While in southern Africa these shifts towards a conservation-oriented mode of land use are mainly conditioned by peaceful interactions and provide new spaces for political participation and contestation, in eastern Africa violent conflicts between communities and between the state and various agents frequently go along with conservatory practices. “The war against poaching”, however, is significant in both settings, and the (illegal) commoditization of game and game products as well as surveillance by the state is stepped up.
Research Regions: Zambezi Region, Namibia and Kenya
Keywords: Social and Cultural Anthropology
How does the globally proclaimed greening of rural economies via conservation impact coupling processes in local social-ecological systems?
Do incomes from conservation lead to a de-agrarisation of rural economies (i.e. to a decoupling ) and what consequences does this have?
How are the benefits and costs of this social-ecological transformation shared?
What role do nonhuman actors play in co-determining shared futures, and how are their agencies understood, known and valued?
Qualitative ethnographic methods; structured and semi-structured interviews; household surveys; cognitive methods; cultural mapping; participatory observation; essay writing.
2018• Launch of the project, preparation of fieldwork
• Start of fieldwork in Kenya and Namibia, data collection and analysis
• CRC Retreat in Unkel
2019• Intense fieldwork in both countries
• Presentation of first results at the ECAS in Edinburgh
• Holding the workshop “Commodifying the ‘Wild’: Conservation, Markets and the Environment in Southern Africa”
• CRC Retreat in Kloster Steinfeld
2020• Fieldwork in Namibia (abruptly ended by the Covid-19 pandemic)
• Focusing on data analysis and publications
• Namibia Research Day in Basel
• Summer School in Bonn
(1) The conservation landscape and its environmental infrastructure in north-eastern Namibia has been shaped by the impact of administrative measures and the gradual decoupling of humans and wildlife in a vast wetland. The path towards today’s conservation landscape was marked and marred by the enforced reordering of human-environment relations. In Kenya, colonial and postcolonial governmental projects of conservation and development transformed forest landscapes, and still continue shaping their ecologies, the lives of their inhabitants and forest-people relations.
(2) Beyond conservation, cattle husbandry in the Zambezi Region is a project of the local population, being an expression of wealth and as a means of saving. At the same time, cattle can be used in farming activities, produce milk and meat for consumption and sale, and fulfil important social functions (i.e. bridewealth payments or cattle loans). However, the needs and practices of expanding cattle husbandry often conflict with the demands and challenges of conservation and conservation-related tourism.
(3) The travelling idea of conservation (and CBNRM in particular) is often detached from the lives of conservancy members who are confronted with the repercussions of conservation, such as human wildlife conflicts or past displacements. For most conservancy members conservation is by far not as relevant as other livelihood strategies, which raises the question to what extent community-based conservation, as practiced today, is a viable future option for many smallholders in the conservancies.
(4) In Baringo, despite rights that allow residents to use public forests in certain ways, they often feel cut off from the benefits of forest exploitation. In turn, some subsistence practices in the forest conflict with governmental conservation goals, in a highly politicized context.
(5) Communities that were displaced in the designation and making of a conservation landscape in the Zambezi Region complain about, protest against and legally contest their estrangement from their former homes that now have become protected areas. They are often relegated to supply cheap manual labour or engage in ‘cultural’ events to well-paying tourists who visit their former ancestral land, a region that is now inhabited by large herds of wildlife and where little or nothing reminds visitors of earlier inhabitants. In Baringo, former forest dwellers are claiming justice for historical evictions from forest areas by colonial and post-independence governments for conservation and exploitation purposes. We argue that conservation of biodiversity can only be successful if issues of past and present environmental injustices are addressed comprehensively.
(6) In Baringo, despite formal dispossessions of forest areas, local populations continue living with the forests. Extensive ecological knowledge and practices of care bind residents to the forest and structure the local economic and social life.
(7) Intimate relations between people and natural environments are determining in the negotiation of future conservation and livelihoods. In Baringo, Kenya, forest histories are reappropriated in political claims. In these struggles, the role of traditional authorities regains significance and cultural identities are being reframed.
Bollig, M. (forthcoming). Future Conservation in Africa: Conserving what, and for whom, and how to do it? In: Greiner, C., van Wolputte S., & M. Bollig (eds) Future Africa. ECAS 9. Leiden. Brill.
Greiner, C, Vehrs, HP & Bollig, M 2021, ‘Land-use and Land-cover Changes in Pastoral Drylands: Long-term Dynamics, Economic Change, and Shifting Socioecological Frontiers in Baringo, Kenya’, Human Ecology, DOI
Mosimane, A., Matengu, K. & M. Bollig (forthcoming). Traditional authorities, conservation and commodification of the wild: a Namibian perspective. A Namibian perspective.
Bollig, Michael (2021). Materiality, inequality, and future‐making as focal points of future engagement of economic anthropology with climate change. Economic Anthropology 8:180-182. (Contribution to the Forum “What does economic anthropology contribute to the understanding of climate change?). DOI
Bollig, Michael (2020). Shaping the African Savannah: From Capitalist Frontier to Arid Eden in Namibia. Cambridge University Press. Link.
Bollig, M. & H.P. Vehrs (2020). Abundant herds: accumulation, herd management and land-use patterns in a conservation area. Pastoralism: Research, Policy and Practice. Vol 10. Link.
Bollig, M. (2019). The Anxieties, Thrills, and Gains of Rarity and Extinction: From Discourses on Remnant Fauna to the Globalized Protection and Marketing of Endangered Wildlife in Namibia’s “Arid Eden”. In S. Gänger & M. Bollig (eds). Forum: Commodifying the “Wild”: Anxiety, Ecology and Authenticity in the Late Modern Era. Environmental History 24 (4). Link.
Casimir, M., H.-P. Vehrs (2019). Commenting on the article: Comparative Study of Pastoral Property Regimes in Africa Offers No Support for Economic Defensibility Model, published by Moritz, M., Gardiner, E., Hubbe, M. und A. Johnson. In: Current Anthropology. 60(5): 609-36.
Bollig, M. (2018). Themenheft "Naturschutz - Teilhabe und Konflikte." Geographische Rundschau 70 (12), darin: Naturschutz und Naturschutzgebiete weltweit: Chancen und Herausforderungen" (p.4-9) und "Gemeinschaftsbasierter Wildschutz in Nord-Namibia" (p.30-37).Link
Bollig, M. (2018). Afterword: Anthropology, Climate Change and Social-Ecological Transformations. Sociologus 68:85-94. Link.
Basukala, A. K., Vehrs, H.-P., Bollig, M., Greiner, C., Thonfeld, F. (2019). Spatial-temporal analysis of land-use and land-cover change in East Pokot, Kenya. Documentation, ZFL, Bonn, Germany. DOI: 10.5880/TRR228DB.2
Basukala, A. K., Vehrs, H.-P., Bollig, M., Greiner, C., Thonfeld, F. (2019). Dataset: Spatial-temporal analysis of land-use and land-cover change in East Pokot, Kenya. CRC/TRR228 Database (TRR228DB). DOI: 10.5880/TRR228DB.1
Kalvelage, L, Bollig, M, Grawert, E, Hulke, C, Meyer, M, Mkutu, K, Müller-Koné, M, Revilla Diez, J 2021, ‘Territorialising Conservation: Community-based Approaches in Kenya and Namibia’, Conservation and Society, Access Link.
Vehrs, HP 2022, 'Pokot Pastoralism: Environmental Change and Socio-Economic Transformation in North-West Kenya', James Currey, Future Rural Africa Series, Access Link.
Vehrs, HP, Kalvelage, L, Nghitevelekwa, R 2022, 'The Power of Dissonance: Inconsistent Relations Between Travelling Ideas And Local Realities in Community Conservation in Namibia's Zambezi Region', Conservation & Society, [Epub ahead of print], Link to preprint.
Outlook for phase II (2022 - 2025)
A04’s activities in phase II start off from the assumption that the combination of a comparative approach, a strongly interdisciplinary agenda and an in-depth ethnographic focus dealing with multispecies assemblages (WP 6-8) will contribute to a fuller understanding of future-making via conservation in the 21st century. We seek to examine how human livelihoods, social institutions, imaginaries, and attitudes change under new socio-ecological conditions of conservation Humans are excluded from conservation areas, or land use is reduced to provide space for refaunation. Migration corridors for large ungulates are kept free of human habitation and occasionally wildlife is introduced into some areas that often have been bare of wildlife for decades. At the same time, these emergent conservation landscapes are vulnerable: global climate change endangers species compositions and enforces extinction, and important diseases and invader species threaten the “authenticity” (however such authenticity is defined) of ecosystems. We further intend to focus more on multi-species assemblages – as it is such assemblages that conservation strategies directly address. Each assemblage is comprised of a loose multi-scalar network consisting of different species populations, environmental infrastructures and technologies, human actors, and organizations.