Abstract
Drawing on the concept of technological mediation, this article examines the spatial politics of observation technologies and associated practices that have been used to monitor the movement of migratory wildebeests in the Serengeti from the 1950s until the 2000s. It shows that key technologies, and the types of research collaborations they sustained, mediated notably different normative ideas about human–wildlife interaction and the sharing of space in and around protected areas. During the 1950s and 1960s, observations of animal migration were conducted by airplane. Direct observation was characterized by the study of movement of migratory ungulates, such as the wildebeest, and humans across space in real time. Aerial observations depended on a close cooperation between scientists and park authorities, and on the knowledge and observational skills of game wardens. The experience of the movement of animals and people in real time allowed, to some degree, for experimentation with forms of human land-use. During the 1970s, many small-scale and short-term projects shifted the research focus toward data recording by camera. Aerial photographs created supposedly complete spatial overviews of inhabitation, which supported interpretations of spatial conflicts between humans occupying the park’s surrounding areas and animal populations inside the park. From the 1980s onward, computer technology allowed for long-term calculations of past and future trends in population densities of individual species. The understanding of the wildebeest as a keystone species and the Serengeti as a baseline ecosystem turned communities of local pastoralists and agriculturalists into a future threat. As observation technologies are here to stay, it remains important to pay attention to technologies’ potential roles in creating additional distances between researchers and research subjects. Historical insights, such as the ones presented in this article, can help reflect on how various forms of remote sensing may mediate normative views on human–wildlife interactions and consequentially affect local livelihoods.
Highlights
For many decades, the East African Serengeti has been a place of interest for local wildlife authorities, researchers, and international conservation organizations concerned with the negotiation of space for animals, humans, their movements, and their territorial claims
This article used the concept of technological mediation to investigate how different observation and monitoring techniques, the type of data they produced, and the type of expertise they required, led to different experiences of the Serengeti as a space shared by animals and humans
Examining scientific and technological approaches to monitor the movement of migratory wildebeests in the Serengeti from the 1950s until the 2000s, I have shown for three historical phases that key technologies and associated practices sustained particular forms of research collaborations and mediated different normative ideas on human–wildlife interaction and the sharing of space in and around protected areas
Summary
The East African Serengeti has been a place of interest for local wildlife authorities, researchers, and international conservation organizations concerned with the negotiation of space for animals, humans, their movements, and their territorial claims. Authors have rightfully pointed out how international conservation interests have been mobilized to justify continued foreign intervention after Tanzanian independence (Neumann, 1998; Schauer, 2018). This discourse on East African nature as world heritage in need of international protection and aid has been embraced by the Tanzanian government and wildlife authorities, too, which have used the spectacle of the Great Migration to buttress the country’s extensive wildlife tourism industry (Gardner, 2016; Lekan, 2020)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
