The limits of inclusivity and sustainability in transfrontier peace parks: case of Sengwe community in Great Limpopo transfrontier conservation area, Zimbabwe

Abstract

Transfrontier peace parks are seized with the challenge of creating a more inclusive and sustainable conservation agenda in the officially designated peaceparks in southern Africa. The quest for inclusivity and sustainability has witnessed sustained lobbying from the local communities calling for more meaningful involvement in the conservation and tourism industry value chain in the peaceparks. Against this background it is therefore imperative to understand the limits of inclusivity and sustainability in the peaceparks. This is important as this may help in gaining insights into improving stakeholder relations and to better manage expectations and perceptions of local communities affected by the establishment of the peaceparks. Understanding the limits of inclusivity and sustainability may help to develop beneficial stakeholder relations as positive relations have been understood to result in better biodiversity conservation and management strategies of the transboundary resources. This paper aims to share insights into the limits of inclusivity and sustainability of the GLTP focusing on the practical experiences of the local people in southeastern lowveld Zimbabwe. The study adopted a qualitative approach and leaned on the interpretivist research philosophy with major research participants drawn from the community members and key role players. A total of 180 community members drawn across the Sengwe community participated in the study. Research material was generated between October 2013 and April 2015. The results based on community interviews show that the stakeholder relations in the GLTFCA are currently strained and do not give the optimism and confidence to achieve meaningful inclusivity of the local communities and overall sustainability of the peacepark initiatives in southern lowveld Zimbabwe. The major challenges to inclusivity include poor governance, threats to livelihoods and negative stakeholder relations. Thus, there is a need to continuously review the governance processes, improve stakeholder relations and support community livelihood coping strategies in more tangible ways.