The Political Economy of Environmental Conservation in Southern Africa

Africa remains the highest rural region with 61 percent of its population living in rural areas. Of course, rural poverty is not only rife in Africa but a global phenomenon. One fifth of the world’s population live in extreme poverty (Khan 2001). Two out of three people in rural areas are living in poverty ( Nucci et al 2020). The causes of such poverty are complex ranging from failures of governments, collapsing markets, institutional failure, and various ill-fated public policies. Other causes such as climate, especially droughts have also been explored by scholars like David Anderson (1984) and Tinashe Takuva (2021). Doomed and dangerous government policies have been accused of exacerbating the issue, by neglecting social and physical development through infrastructural development in rural areas.

Clearly, we really need to understand the roots of rural poverty to help address it. A detailed account of the causes of rural poverty has been grouped into three dimensions, economic, social, and environmental. On the economic side, rural areas have witnessed low productivity, lacked economic diversification, and limited access to markets. Socially, there has been exclusion, especially of women, to access land and other economic opportunities available for them to make a living (Suttie 2020).  Central to this workshop is the environmental dimension. The loss of biodiversity, climate change, droughts and environmental degradation have impacted agricultural production since most of the rural dwellers rely on subsistence farming (Mugandani 2012). Agriculture is the main source of income for the majority of rural poor ( UNDESA 2021). Thus it is imperative to examine how agrarian and environmental policies have impacted agriculture and development in the rural areas. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization reported that in Africa the number of rural poor has increased by 137 million in the period 1990 to 2015 (FAO 2021).  Thus 55 percent of the global poor are in Africa. 59 percent of such people live in fragile and vulnerable contexts due to climate and conflicts. While causes vary, the most striking characteristic is over reliance on natural resources at the expense of agricultural and rural investment. With most peasants across the globe heavily dependent upon their immediate environments for livelihoods it is important to understand how environmental and agrarian policies have shaped rural livelihoods.

For instance, Inspired by the need to defend against internal threats and outside censure, Rhodesia became a highly centralized and state-controlled economy between 1963 to 1979, especially after the Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in 1965. The economic policies adopted in this period were a reaction by the Rhodesia Front government to economic shocks caused by the dissolution of the Central African Federation (CAF) and the imposition of economic sanctions by Britain and the United Nations (UN) in 1965 and 1966 respectively. This is a well-trodden path, historiographically. But perhaps new ground can be broken by turning the same lens on environmental and agrarian policies. In 1966, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources drafted a blueprint to alter conservation and agriculture in the Tribal Trust Lands and Purchase Areas. Interest rates were increased for purchase farmers, development of irrigation schemes and small dam construction were stopped. More land was appropriated from both TTLs and purchase areas. For environmental conservation land inspectors, land development officers were appointed to manage soil erosion. District commissioners were mandated to strictly manage natural resources that lay in TTLs. They were integral to strategies adopted ‘in defense of white rule.’ The policies were in the best interest of the white minority rule.

These different shocks led the government to remodel the economy and have strict control of business, industries, agriculture, and conservation. The policies were racial and the implementation of the policies benefitted the white section of the society at the expense of peasants in TTLs. The environmental and agricultural policies had a negative impact on peasant livelihoods as they caused unbearable living conditions.

After independence in 1980, the African peasantry in Zimbabwe expected their lives to change. They had fought a white supremacist state in a brutal civil war. They had suffered and their land and livestock had suffered. They had been promised a socialist utopia. But suddenly the war was over, an all-African party was in power, and donations were pouring in from the West for rural development in the communal areas (former Tribal Trust Lands, TTLs) to improve technical skills, build dip tanks, and set up irrigation schemes. But this peasant paradise proved a mirage. It disappeared once they thought they were finally upon it.  This two-day workshop seeks to unpack how various environmental policies in Southern Africa impacted peasant livelihoods and rural development.

The guest speaker will give a keynote. Mentors will give lectures on the state of environmental history in Africa, current trends, and challenges. Participants will be given time to share their work and get feedback from colleagues and mentors. There will be a session on brainstorming challenges related to researching and publishing work related to environmental history.

Objectives

1. To trace the development of environmental history and conservation discourse in Africa.
2. How environmental conservation has impacted rural development and livelihoods.
3. Examine the relationship between environmental conservation and the development of rural agriculture and livelihoods.
4. Investigate the nexus between natural resource exploitation and natural resource conservation
5. To explore the relationship between environmental conservation and poverty.

Themes

1. Environmental Policy and Conservation
2. Environmental Conservation Financing
3. Agriculture, Land Policy and Conservation
4. Natural Resources and Conservation
5. Economic Development vs Environmental Conservation

Who Should Apply?

We encourage submissions from early career researchers (Masters and PhD students and postdoctoral fellows) working in social sciences disciplines relevant to the workshop themes.

Submission Instructions:

 Submit abstracts (250-300 words) and a short bio (100 words) by 10 September.

 Include your contact information (email address and institution ) in the submission.

For more information please contact event organiser Ashley Mutombe at ashelymutombe@gmail.com or Peter Uledi at peteruledy@gmail.com