Bibliography (page 4)

McNeely, Jeffrey A. "Protected areas and human ecology: how national parks can contribute to sustaining societies of the twenty-first century." In Conservation for the twenty-first century, edited by David Western, and Pearl, Mary C., 150-157. New York: Oxford University Press, 1989.

A good analysis of national parks and their functions and limitations. The author demonstrates that "biosphere people" - developed nations - and "ecosystem people" - or developing nations - both have ways of conserving nature that work effectively in their particular cultural and social contexts. The author also recognizes that the control of parks by a national authority and the boundaries of parks have traditionally encouraged an isolationist perspective that has been used in "the tropics" to keep the people from the resources and from sustainable livelihoods. McNeely calls for an emphasis on conservation as a primarily human problem, and suggests that national parks (and conservation policies in general) could incorporate more sustainable ethics of "ecosystem peoples" than they have traditionally.

Michael, Mark A. "International justice and wilderness preservation." Social Theory & Practice 21, no. 2 (1995): 149-176.

Claims in a philosophical piece that for international ecocentric protection to take place, wealth must be redistributed to Third World nations to make wilderness preservation plausible and fair. (Although he fails to mention that wealth should be redistributed based on how Third World peoples have been oppressed and dominated historically.)

Murphree, Marshall W. "Decentralizing the proprietorship of wildlife resources in Zimbabwe's communal lands." In Voices from Africa: local perspectives on conservation, edited by Dale Lewis, and Carter, Nick, 133-145. Washington, D.C.: World Wildlife Fund, 1993.

A good summation of the ways in which conservation schemes in Zimbabwe have involved or excluded rural communities and the majority of "the people" in the country. The author suggests that communal proprietorship of wildlife resources dominated precolonial conservation policies, a sustainable system that supported local consumption and survival that was severely disrupted by colonial land-management policies that confined communities to "native reserves." These destroyed the economic potential of the land, traditional land use policies, and created a rural understanding of nature as someone else's resource - the "white man's" - that should be resisted when possible. The national programs of WINDFALL and CAMPFIRE are reviewed by the author to show ways in which utilization of land and wildlife that provide economic incentives to the rural peoples to preserve the "resources" can restore a sense of communal proprietorship and can work on a sustainable, long-term basis (implemented at the national governmental level). WINDFALL largely failed, according to the author, because its attempts to provide for the local people in terms of meat and revenue largely failed, while CAMPFIRE embraced more fully the ideas of national cooperation with local communities, and turned policy theories into action in 1989, and has had great success allowing rural peoples to sustainably take control of their lives. However, CAMPFIRE has its problems as well - it has drawn three main lobbies of wildlife, agricultural, and resettlement agendas, and the direction that CAMPFIRE takes in response to these will prove decisive for conservation purposes. Also, individual households have not been involved enough in the proprietorship model, and in this sense a further devolution of bureaucratic authority and control is necessary. Although safari hunting is proving to be the most profitable system right now, other forms of conservation strategies must be experimented with to determine what works most effectively for the people and the land involved.

Netboy, Anthony. "Tourism and wildlife conservation in East Africa." American Forests 81, no. 8 (1975): 24-27.

Interesting as a reflection of the classic conservation mind-set of Western thought that emphasizes the importance of wildlife protection without considering the basic survival needs of East African peoples. Netboy recognizes the destructive results of colonialism without tying them to the poverty of the Third World at present. Whereas wildlife is seen as belonging to "mankind in general," the redistribution of wealth necessary to make that possible - and desirable for Africans - is not.

Norton-Griffiths, M. "Economic incentives to develop the rangelands of the Serengeti: implications for wildlife preservation." In Serengeti 2, edited by A.R.E. Sinclair, and Arcese, Peter, 588-604. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.

Argues convincingly that traditional eco-tourist protection plans fail to include indigenous peoples. To profit more completely from the land, they will turn to ranching and agriculture, which have adverse effects on protection but allow the people better standards of living. This can only be halted if the people - in this case the Maasai - are granted full compensation for non-development of the land.

Nzomo, Maria. "Policy impacts on women and environment." In Groundwork: African women as environmental managers, edited by Shanyisa A. Khasiani, 101-117. Nairobi: ACTS Press, 1992.

An excellent, concise analysis of environmental degradation, policy implementation, and the necessary role of women in designing any successful and lasting environmental conservation strategies in Kenya and in Africa in general. The author quickly recognizes that a discussion of the environment must include both the "natural" and the human (social) aspects of the term, especially in a consideration of conservation and degradation in Kenya (and in most of the Third World), because conservation and poverty (especially in colonial and postcolonial periods) have been intrinsically linked. Although national development plans included environmental conservation objectives from the 1960s to 90s, most of these have failed to manifest themselves in practice due to lack of funds, corruption at the state level, and a failure to recognize the connections between infrastructural dysfunction and environmental degradation. This failure is especially evident in consideration of the major target group dealing with environmental management - women - who have traditionally been ignored at all levels of the conservation process. As Nzomo observes clearly, women have historically been most involved in community initiatives, are primarily responsible for food production and marketing, are involved at all levels of educational training, and are primarily responsible for environmental resource utilization (both in positive terms and negatively). This last point is especially important because policy makers often fail to make the connection between women's poverty, gender inequality, and lack of adequate opportunities (economically, in food production, at national levels, etc.), and the resulting environmental degradation that they often, unintentionally contribute to as a result. Women have remained marginalized from control of productive resources and policy-making power at all sociopolitical levels, and Nzomo argues that this marginalization is directly responsible for much of the rural degradation of environmental resources. According to the author, women must be given greater opportunities, "alternative livelihoods," and involvement in direction of their own lives if effective mobilization of women and effective environmental management for most of the country is to emerge. Effective policy restructuring requires that women are involved at all levels of decision making, especially in the regions of agriculture, health, education, and technology. A much greater awareness of the connection between poor women and environmental degradation in the rural landscape is also necessary for effective environmental conservation strategies in Kenya to emerge, and women's traditional role in community initiatives should be fully supported and taken advantage of. Nzomo concludes by suggesting that these principles of policy restructuring are sensible and necessary because they allow for sustenance of the basic needs of the majority rather than the accumulation of wealth by the nation's top elites.

O'Connor, James. "Is sustainable capitalism possible?" In Is capitalism sustainable?, edited by Martin O'Connor, 152-175. New York: The Guilford Press, 1994.

A good theoretical analysis of the supposed "sustainability" of capitalism. According to the author's definition of "sustain" in relation to the preservation of global capitalist accumulation, the upholding of certain luxuries and ways of life for people, the subversion of people's sociocultural systems to wage and commodity forms, and especially in relation to the sustainability of biological and ecological processes, "the short answer to the question 'Is sustainable capitalism possible?' is 'No,' while the longer answer is 'Probably not.' Capitalism is self-destructing and in crisis; the world economy makes more people hungry, poor, and miserable every day; the masses of peasants and workers cannot be expected to endure the crisis indefinitely; and nature, however 'ecological sustainability' is defined, is under attack everywhere" (154). O'Connor defends this position by looking at a number of aspects of the controversy over issues of sustainable capitalism. He points out that the green and corporate understandings of sustainability are significantly different; while greens search for ways to sustain biodiversity in the context of a capitalist system, corporate leaders think in terms of sustaining profit margins and capital accumulation, regardless of the ultimate impact on the environmental resources involved. O'Connor also considers the first and second contradictions of capitalism suggested by Marxian theory (which refer to the commodification of labor and of nature respectively) in order to demonstrate the ultimately self-destructive tendencies of capitalism that are antithetical to its own socioeconomic sustainability, not to mention the sustainability of biodiversity and ecological processes globally. O'Connor concludes by suggesting that the exploitative and dominating tendencies of capitalism - especially played out in the relations between the "North" and "South" - are ingrained in the nature of capitalism itself, and as a result it is difficult to imagine that capitalism could provide a sustainable ecological model globally when it can not even provide a sustainable socioeconomic and ecological model for capitalist, overdeveloped powers in the world. In the last analysis, O'Connor suggests that if any kind of long-term ecological preservation and human justice are to take center stage as guiding ideologies, a kind of sustainable socialism must emerge out of collective efforts of group that stand in solidarity against impoverishment and degradation worldwide. Although O'Connor recognizes that this may be an unlikely scenario, he sees even less chance for an effective, long-term, sustainable approach to capitalism emerging.

Owen-Smith, Garth. "Wildlife conservation in Africa." In Voices from Africa: local perspectives on conservation, edited by Dale Lewis, and Carter, Nick, 57-69. Washington, D.C.: World Wildlife Fund, 1993.

An excellent consideration of the "passions and prejudices" that have historically shaped conservation policies and dynamics in Africa. The author traces conservation through traditional African practices and into the colonial era to demonstrate that a certain degree of harmony between indigenous peoples and wildlife allowed for the precolonial survival of both, while European contact led to massive changes that were largely responsible for the environmental degradation and conservation policies needed today. The author makes an analogy between precolonial Africa and preindustrial Europe to demonstrate the ways in which wildlife and land were set aside as "royal preserves" for wealthy Europeans that formed the foundation for tourist-based conservation schemes of parks and reserves shaped around aesthetic beauty (based on the American model) that predominate today. European considerations of Africa as their property were used to separate Africans physically and culturally from their livelihood, and European preoccupations with hunting "game" (another "royal" attitude and luxury) and introduction of firearms were directly responsible for the decimation of wildlife species. European systems of single-use (ranching, agriculture, etc.) also led to significant land degradation, and this led to some colonial officials' alarm over this loss (of property, not a potential resource), and resulting conservation policies designed for the use of Europeans. The racist and heavy-handed policies led to native resentment and prejudice that continues today (and was a significant attitude used in the drive towards independence), and has been significant in current conservation failures. Parks and reserves were also placed in economically nonviable areas, and wildlife outside was considered colonial property. These attitudes and actions have significantly effected postcolonial conservation schemes. Besides preservationist models of parks and reserves, game ranching has become popular (though it is generally controlled by whites and not blacks even today), and hunting is accepted as an economic option, echoing largely of colonialism. Little has changed today, as black Africans see little or none of the profits from these activities, are not involved in policy decisions, and thus are often (at best) indifferent to conservation. The author stresses that the alienation of rural blacks from the continent's wildlife by Eurocentric legislation during the colonial era is the "greatest single threat" to preservation. The people must be involved in the conservation process, must reap the tangible benefits of it, should be encouraged to approach it at least partly through traditional practices, and must be funded in their endeavors by wealthy nations, if the wildlife is truly a global heritage (and as a payback for centuries of exploitation).

Parkipuny, Moringe S. Ole, and Berger, Dhyani J. "Maasai rangelands." In Voices from Africa: local perspectives on conservation, edited by Dale Lewis, and Carter, Nick, 113-131. Washington, D.C.: World Wildlife Fund, 1993.

A thorough analysis of the historical relationship between the Maasai and the conservation process in Kenya and Tanzania, which has primarily led to the exclusion and the exploitation of the Maasai in both countries in colonial and postcolonial contexts. The encroachment of agriculture and peasant communities, and parks and reserves as islands of wildlife preservation, have severely limited Maasai land. The loss of land, of grazing options, etc. can be traced to dislocation of the Maasai from traditional grazing land by European colonizers, the formation of parks and reserves, the disregard for Maasai lifestyles, and the setting aside of preferred land for settlers, all of which have continued in the postcolonial era, and which are leading to a disintegration of traditional Maasai lifestyles (as they seek agriculture, etc. for supplements to survival and as privatization is encouraged over communal lifestyles). The changes in pastoralism that have been forced on the Maasai, the failure of Kenyan alternative schemes of conservation, and the lack of funding have all led to conservation disasters and increasing environmental degradation that require communal strategies, involvement of the Maasai, and more serious consideration of traditional practices that work if the rangelands - and the Maasai - are to be preserved. The devastation resulting from wheat-growing (in Narok, for example) and the inefficiency of single-use, cattle grazing rather than combined cattle-wildlife grazing are cited as examples of ways in which the rangelands continue to suffer from Eurocentric mismanagement and lack of Maasai involvement.

Perkin, Scott. "Multiple land use in the Serengeti region: the Ngorongoro Conservation Area." In Serengeti 2, edited by A.R.E. Sinclair, and Arcese, Peter, 571-587. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.

Basically, multiple land-use has good theories but has failed to involve local people and problems at all; land has been fairly well-protected but people have been losing out severely. The idea of multiple land-use has potential, though, especially as population increases make national park models untenable.

Rawls, John. "The problem of justice between generations." In Thinking about the environment: readings on politics, property, and the physical world, edited by Matthew Alan Cahn, and O'Brien, Rory, 104-111. Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe, 1996.

The excerpt from A Theory of Justice considers the implications of "justice between generations," which Rawls argues, demands that "each generation must not only preserve the gains of culture and civilization, and maintain intact those just institutions that have been established, but it must also put aside in each period of time a suitable amount of real capital accumulation" (105). Rawls stresses that "capital" involves not only "factories and machinery" (107), but also culture, knowledge, and, in this case, natural resources and environmental splendor. Furthermore, "saving" this capital can take many forms (i.e. in relation to the environment this might involve national parks, sustainable resource utilization, etc.). Rawls makes the point that any conception of justice must consider the issue historically, over time. In particular, a just society must include saving capital so that future generations can benefit from the freedom that these savings represent. Rawls also stresses that "a high material standard of life" (108), and saving for "various grand projects" (106), is not necessary to provide for the basis of a just society, as justice entails working "in free association with others... to achieve this state of things great wealth is not necessary. In fact, beyond some point it is more likely to be a positive hindrance, a meaningless distraction at best if not a temptation to indulgence and emptiness" (108). (...What would Rawls have to say about these luxuriant and exploitative tendencies, short-term goals, and lack of long-term, sustainable planning, especially for "the poorest peoples," in capitalist societies like our own? Is America a "just society" by Rawls' standards?...)

Ribeiro, Silvio, and Wrenfelt, Birgitta. "A socio-ecological proposal to link North and South." In The future of progress: reflections on environment and development, edited by Edward Goldsmith, Khor, Martin, Norberg-Hodge, Helena, Shiva, Vandana, & others, 166-170. Foxhole, Dartington: Green Books, 1995.

A brief piece that effectively focuses on the European values of dominion and domination that have effected massive colonial and postcolonial impoverishment and degradation of people and the environment throughout the world. The authors correctly state that the South will never be able to "duplicate the development pattern established by the North because the world system, based on domination, continuously acts to perpetuate the inferior position of the developing world" (166). The authors argue that for problems of social and environmental justice to truly be solved, a "new concept of reality" is necessary that is not based on domination and dominion (as is the global capitalist system today), but rather on the interconnectedness of human beings as a part of the natural world. The authors make a good point in suggesting that the ecological crisis must be viewed not only in light of ecosystems but also human, social systems as well; both are threatened by increasing environmental degradation and are intrinsically related to each other in a consideration of degradation and impoverishment.

Rodney, Walter. How Europe underdeveloped Africa. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: Howard University Press, 1981.

One of the classic texts on colonialism and neo-colonialism in Africa; an excellent and blistering account of Third World underdevelopment, exploitation, and oppression in Africa. Approaching the subject from a Marxist perspective, Rodney argues forcefully that European and American involvement in Africa has been, first and foremost, based on a continuing relationship of dependency and domination. This relationship - repeated on other continents throughout the world - has allowed Europe and America (the latter especially after WW II) to develop more quickly and progress technologically and economically at the expense of Third World development, autonomy, and self-sustainability. A key to Rodney's analysis is contained within his Marxist approach, which compels him to argue that capitalist ascendancy in Europe and America has been made possible by the subjugation and enslavement of peoples throughout the rest of the world. However, Rodney does not follow up on this point to suggest clearly that these exploitative relationships are inherent in capitalist dynamics (although Marx certainly held to this point). Rodney's analysis is also problematic in two other respects: he tends to glorify the successes and capacities of African peoples (e.g. African nations were not purposively involved in the slave trade but were drawn into it unwittingly); and he looks to socialism as the answer to Africa's ills, although this "answer" has yet to pan out for Third World nations as the globalization of capitalism continues. Nevertheless, Rodney's account of African relations with Europe and America is powerfully damning and accurately traces the oppressive dynamics between North and South that are generally glossed over in international political and economic considerations. Rodney considers African domination and exploitation with a level of thoroughness - in terms of education, trade, agriculture, politics, slavery, etc. - that leaves little doubt as to the validity of his overall argument; the colonization of Africa by Europe was an intensely degrading and destructive process, and ultimately, "the only positive development in colonialism was when it ended" (261). However, as Rodney unmercifully documents, the neo-colonial and capitalist involvements in Africa have only perpetuated colonial attitudes, ideologies, and relationships: although colonial armies, settlers, and administrators are no longer physically present in Africa, the impact of (primarily American-led) structural adjustments, World Bank funding, and the manipulation of African elites and officials have continued to reinforce a significant relationship of dependency, domination, and African impoverishment.

Go to Bibliography, page 5...

(Return to Table of Contents)

Send comments to: emmons@lclark.edu