Suchergebnisse

Examines extent to which implementation of community-based natural resource management projects in the Kalahari Wildlife Management Areas is affecting the livelihood of rural populations within these areas. Projects involve game reserves for tourism purposes.

Natural resources and their contribution to livelihoods have been widely explored within rural contexts yet have received relatively little attention within urban contexts. However, natural resources can contribute significantly, if modestly, to urban livelihoods in a number of often 'hidden' ways. This paper explores these 'hidden' livelihoods using livelihoods frameworks to enhance our understanding of the dynamics of urban-based natural resource-related livelihoods, drawing principally on examples from southern Africa. The aim of the paper is to provide a better appreciation of ways in which urban natural resources are used to support urban livelihoods; to enhance understanding of the systems that govern access or tenure over these resources; and to encourage creative and innovative thinking about urban livelihoods and options for urban development policy.

This article examines the cross‐cutting debates of empowerment, vulnerability, sustainability and livelihoods within the local and global contexts relevant to the people of Okonyoka, a settlement of less than 150 people situated in the heart of Eastern Namibia's southern communal lands. Here, people are adapting their livelihoods flexibly in response to both environmental natural resource variability and to changes in social institutions and land use policies. Drought‐coping strategies, privatisation of the range through fencing and changes to social networks, all have both positive and negative impacts on people's everyday lives. Okonyoka is the first settlement to erect a community fence in Eastern Namibia's southern communal area, but surrounding settlements are impressed with the positive environmental and societal results and are planning to follow suit. Such fences can, however, inhibit neighbouring people's livihoods, particularly the poor or socially excluded, and can change long‐standing regional drought‐coping strategies. Though the policy context is dynamic and changing, such moves have the potential to radically change the landscape of communal areas.

This article examines the crosscutting debates of empowerment, vulnerability, sustainability, & livelihoods within the local & global contexts relevant to the people of Okonyoka, a settlement of less than 150 people situated in the heart of eastern Namibia's southern communal lands. Here, people are adapting their livelihoods flexibly in response to both environmental natural resource variability & to changes in social institutions & land use polices. Drought-coping strategies, privatization of the range through fencing & changes to social networks, all have both positive & negative impacts on people's everyday lives. Okonyoka is the first settlement to erect a community fence in Eastern Namibia's southern communal area, but surrounding settlements are impressed with the positive environmental & societal results & are planning to follow suit. Such fences can, however, inhibit neighboring people's livelihoods, particularly the poor or socially excluded, & can change long-standing regional drought-coping strategies. Though the policy context is dynamic & changing, such moves have the potential to radically change the landscape of communal areas. 2 Figures, 35 References. Adapted from the source document.

ABSTRACTThis article examines the problems of elite capture in community-driven development (CDD). Drawing on two case studies of non-governmental organisation (NGO) intervention in rural Mozambique, the authors consider two important variables – (1) the diverse and complex contributions of local elites to CDD in different locations and (2) the roles that non-elites play in monitoring and controlling leader activities – to argue that donors should be cautious about automatically assuming the prevalence of malevolent patrimonialism and its ill-effects in their projects. This is because the 'checks and balances' on elite behaviour that exist within locally defined and historically rooted forms of community-based governance are likely to be more effective than those introduced by the external intervener.