Local community reaction to the 'no-take' policy on fishing in the Tsitsikamma National Park, South Africa

被引:44
作者
Faasen, Helena
Watts, Scotney
机构
[1] Univ Stellenbosch, Fac Agrisci, Conservat Ecol & Entomol Dept, ZA-7602 Matieland, South Africa
[2] Univ Stellenbosch, Conservat Ecol Dept, ZA-7600 Stellenbosch, South Africa
关键词
age; education; ethnicity; gender; illegal fishing; residence status; wealth;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.06.026
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Fishing in the Tsitsikamma National Park has officially been halted since 2001. However, the desire to fish in the Marine Protected Area remains high among the local communities in Tsitsikamma. This has led to illegal fishing practices in the park. Consequently, the reaction of the local communities was measured using semi-structured questionnaires, informal interactions, personal observations, and through a key informant workshop that was organized in the Tsitsikamma National Park. It was found that responses from local communities to fishing within the park were defined by their residence status, ethnicity, gender, income, and educational level. There is a general understanding by local communities that the purpose of the Tsitsikamma National Park is to conserve nature within its boundaries. However, there is a mismatch in the understanding of the term 'conservation' between the local communities and conservation officials of the South African National Parks (SANParks). Local communities consider conservation to include sustainable utilization while conservation officials from the practice pursue absolute protection of the marine fisheries resources. The majority of local communities in Tsitsikamma resent this SANParks 'no-take' policy on fishing. They would like access to the fisheries resources in the Tsitsikamma National Park for both subsistence and recreational purposes. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:36 / 46
页数:11
相关论文
共 57 条
[21]   Local communities and protected areas: Attitudes of rural residents towards conservation and machalilla national park, Ecuador [J].
Fiallo, EA ;
Jacobson, SK .
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, 1995, 22 (03) :241-249
[22]  
FLINTAN F, 2003, IIED WILDLIFE DEV SE, V174
[23]  
Ghimire K., 1997, Social Change and Conservation: Environmental Politics and Impacts of National Parks and Protected Areas
[24]   The impact of wildlife-related benefits on the conservation attitudes of local people around the Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania [J].
Gillingham, S ;
Lee, PC .
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION, 1999, 26 (03) :218-228
[25]  
GRAHAMKORDICH K, 2003, LOCAL PERCEPTIONS TU
[26]   Community conservation and the future of Africa's wildlife [J].
Hackel, JD .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 1999, 13 (04) :726-734
[27]  
Hanekom N., 1997, Koedoe, V40, P37
[28]   Assessing the perceived utility of wood resources in a protected area of Western Tanzania [J].
Holmes, CM .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2003, 111 (02) :179-189
[29]  
Holmes T N., 2007, Contribution of the participatory forest management (PFM) intervention to the socio-economic development in the Southern Cape forests: A retrospective approach
[30]   Back to the Barriers ? Changing Narratives in Biodiversity Conservation [J].
Hutton, Jon ;
Adams, William ;
Murombedzi, James .
FORUM FOR DEVELOPMENT STUDIES, 2005, 32 (02) :341-370