Role of Place Attachment in Landscape Restoration

Role of place attachment in landscape restoration

A case study of landscape restoration in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa

‘’ It is a quality life, it is a beautiful place to live and it is quiet, peaceful. It is just me, what I like... I will not move or go to another place ever, no never. ‘’

Abstract This study explores the role of place attachment for public acceptance of landscape restoration projects in order to help reach globally set restoration goals. To reach this goal a case study on a landscape restoration project in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa, was conducted. The conceptual framework combines literature on place attachment and place attachment disruption to study how changes, due to the project, (do not) disrupt pre-existing attachments to place and the resulting behavioural response of the local farmers. The methods consist of fourteen interviews (eleven interviews with local people and four expert interviews), participant observations, and a literature review. The results give an overview of local people’s attachments to place and show strong attachments to place, the Baviaanskloof. The landscape restoration project hardly causes any disruption to these existing attachments, resulting in local peoples acceptance and support towards the project. Important for the public acceptance of the project were the cultivation of existing attachments, and a slow process with only small changes. The overall conclusion is that cultivating place attachment in a landscape restoration project can help to gain public acceptance and support towards landscape restoration projects.

Title: Role of place attachment in landscape restoration A case study of landscape restoration in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa Student: Glenn Potvliet Student number: 920528668020 Supervisors: Jessica de Koning & Susan Boonman-Berson Research group: Forest and Nature Policy group Course: FNP-80436 ECTS: 36 Date: 18-6-2015

Acknowledgements

There are some persons I have to thank, as without them I would not have been able to finish this thesis.

First of all I would like to thank my supervisors Jessica de Koning and Susan Boonman-Berson for their important feedback, helpful tips and their patience with me. Coming from more of a natural science background this road has been tough for me since I did not fully speak the 'social science language' yet. However, with their help and support I have been able to successfully complete this Master thesis and now better understand the world of social science.

Secondly, I would like to thank Commonland and Living Lands for providing me with the unique opportunity to be part of the inspiring Four Returns landscape restoration project. Thank you Commonland for supporting my trip to South Africa and thank you Living Lands for supervising me in South Africa. A special thanks to Justin Gird for your being my local supervisor and helping me prepare for my interviews with the local farmers.

Lastly, I would like to thank my girlfriend who has supported me 100% of the way. She did not only provide moral support, but also reviewed a lot of my work providing me with many helpful tips. Without her help I would not have been able to finish this thesis, therefore I thank her.

Glenn Potvliet

Preface

This thesis was conducted in cooperation with Commonland and Living Lands, which collaboratively work on a landscape restoration project in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa. Therefore, I will start off by introducing both Commonland and Living Lands.

Commonland Commonland is a Dutch organization that believes in the power of landscape restoration as a means of sustainable economic development. According to Commonland many small scale restoration projects exist but lack the necessary means to scale-up their practices because of a lack of funding. Commonland tries to help scale up restoration projects worldwide by involving investors, companies and entrepreneurs.

The mission of Commonland is '' to create an investable large-scale landscape restoration industry – aligned with international guidelines and policies – in close cooperation with experts and existing initiatives. Our approach is based on a sustainable business model, delivering 4 returns.'' (Commonland, 2015)

Inspired by the success of a landscape restoration project in China on the Loess Plateau, which showed that restoration can create improved livelihoods, water and food security, jobs, and a more sustainable economy, Commonland designed their sustainable business model.

Commonland's landscape restoration projects are based on business cases that deliver four types of return, namely return of inspiration, return of social capital, return of natural capital and return of financial capital. These business cases are used as tool to scale up restoration efforts and thereby contribute to the internationally set restoration goals like the Bonn Challenge.

Living Lands Living Lands is a South African non-governmental organisation working for the conservation and restoration of living landscapes. Living Lands believes that a living landscape consists of a variety of ecosystems and land uses, including ecological, agricultural, and social systems that are managed to function sustainably. In addition, living landscapes should ensure natural and cultural resources for future generations and be resilient for adaptation to climate change.

The vision of Living Lands is: ''Collaborations working on living landscapes''. (Living Lands, 2015)

Living Land aims to bring synergies and added value to the landscape through: • Promoting living landscapes • Mobilizing civil society for sustainability • Enabling and facilitating social learning processes • Fostering mutually beneficial partnerships and participatory networks

Table of Content

1. Introduction ...... 9 1.1 Background ...... 9 1.1.1 Landscapes ...... 9 1.1.2 Landscape desertification ...... 9 1.1.3 Landscape restoration ...... 10 1.2 Problem statement ...... 10 1.3 Research aim and research questions ...... 11 1.4 Outline of the report ...... 12 2. Theoretical framework ...... 13 2.1 Landscapes ...... 13 2.2 Place and place attachment ...... 14 2.2.1 Place ...... 14 2.2.2 Place attachment ...... 14 2.3 Place-Person-Process model ...... 16 2.3.1 Place ...... 16 2.3.3 Person ...... 16 2.3.2 Process ...... 17 2.4 Place attachment disruption ...... 18 2.5 Place attachment disruption model ...... 18 2.6 Conceptual model ...... 19 3. Methodology ...... 22 3.1 Qualitative case study ...... 22 3.2 Data collection ...... 23 3.2.1 Literature and documents review ...... 23 3.2.2 Participant observation ...... 24 3.2.3 Interviews ...... 24 3.3 Data analysis ...... 27 3.4 The Four Returns Project ...... 28 3.5 Study area ...... 29 4. Results ...... 30 4.1 Place: the Baviaanskloof ...... 30

4.1.1 Physical environment ...... 30 4.1.2 Social environment ...... 32 4.2 Place attachment: affective and cognitive attachment to the Baviaanskloof ...... 32 4.2.1 Attachments to the physical environment ...... 32 4.2.2 Attachments to the social environment ...... 37 4.3 Place attachment expression ...... 41 4.4 Five stages of response to the tourism business case ...... 44 4.4.1 Becoming aware ...... 44 4.4.2 Interpreting ...... 45 4.4.3 Evaluation: threat to place or place enhancement? ...... 48 4.4.4 Coping ...... 48 4.4.5 Acting ...... 49 4.4.6 Summary of five stages of response to the tourism business case...... 49 4.5 Consideration of place attachment in tourism business case ...... 51 4.5.1 Preparation work Living Lands ...... 51 4.5.2 Strategy behind the Four Returns Project ...... 52 4.5.3 Place attachment consideration in the tourism business case ...... 53 5. Discussion ...... 54 5.1 Discussion results ...... 54 5.2 Discussion theory ...... 56 5.3 Discussion methods ...... 58 6. Conclusion & recommendations ...... 59 Recommendations ...... 61 Bibliography ...... 64 Appendixes ...... 68 Appendix A1: Interview guide local farmers ...... 68 Appendix A2: Interview guide experts ...... 70 Appendix A3: Interview guide expert (core developer) ...... 71

List of figures Figure 1: Tripartite model of place attachment by Scannell and Gifford (2010)...... 15 Figure 2: Stages of psychological response over time to place change. A model by Devine-Wright (2009)...... 19 Figure 3: Conceptual model of place attachment disruption ...... 20 Figure 4: Four returns model of business cases by Commonland (Commonland, 2015)...... 28 Figure 5: Map research area from Crane, 2006...... 29 Figure 6: Map of the Baviaanskloof. Light yellow areas are farmland and green are formally protected areas or private nature reserves (Knight, 2012) ...... 31 Figure 7: Summary of five stages of response to the tourism business case...... 50

List of tables Table 1: Data collection ...... 23 Table 2: Design interviews Baviaanskloof residents...... 26 Table 3: Design expert interviews...... 27 Table 4: Overview of description of place, attachments to place and expression of place attachment...... 43 Table 5: Overview of local people’s vision on changes to the Baviaanskloof due to the tourism business case...... 47

1. Introduction

1.1 Background 1.1.1 Landscapes Landscapes have long been an interest of study and continue to be important for local and global politics and planning (e.g. Davenport & Anderson, 2005; van Oosten & Hijweege, 2012; Sayer, et al., 2013). Landscapes are shaped by the inhabitants who, over centuries, have lived their lives according to their individual and collective needs, as well as influenced by wider economic and political networks like value chains and regional political processes (van Oosten, 2013). Therefore, landscapes are part of local to global scales and include a wide range of stakeholders (van Oosten, 2013; Sayer, et al., 2013). Massay (2006) argues that landscapes can best be understood as temporary events, as an ongoing product of intertwining trajectories.

Landscapes also consist of multifunctional land-use systems, providing a diverse range of values, goods and services (van Oosten, 2013; Sayer, et al., 2013). They are described as a mosaic of different land-uses, land forms, and vegetation types that together form an overall landscape-level patchwork with internal coherence between the various components of a mosaic (van Oosten, 2013). Van Oosten & Hijweege (2012) add that mosaic landscapes reflect the biocultural diversity through the existence of multifunctional land uses ranging from ecologically protected to economically productive land-uses.

Landscapes are therefore often described as social constructions, as ''created by a human act of conferring meaning on nature and the environment, of giving the environment form from a particular angle of vision and through a special filter of values and beliefs'' (Greider and Garkovich, 1994, p.1). Landscapes form the realm of human-environmental interaction and reflect what cultural groups find proper and improper relationships between themselves and the environment (Greider & Garkovich, 1994). Multiple studies have shown that people can create a strong emotional attachment to landscapes or place (e.g. Davenport & Anderson, 2005; Brown & Raymond, 2007). Landscapes can give a sense of belonging, ownership and identity to the inhabitants (Taylor, 2008). However, the meanings of landscapes are continuously maintained, challenged and negotiated in landscape management and planning (Davenport & Anderson, 2005; Kong & Law, 2002).

1.1.2 Landscape desertification Worldwide we are dealing with large scale landscape desertification. About 41% of the earth's land surface is dryland, which is home to roughly 38% of the total global population (Reynolds, et al., 2007). Desertification is defined as ‘’land degradation in arid, semi-arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various factors including climatic variations and human activities’’ (Reynolds, et al., 2007, p. 847). Africa in particular is faced with severe desertification (Darkoh, 1998). In 2003 the United Nations Environment Program estimated that 500 million hectares of African lands are affected by land degradation. This includes two-thirds of the productive agricultural land (UNEP 2003, in Johnson, Mayrand, & Paquin, 2006). Human driven processes that cause desertification include over-cultivation, overgrazing, deforestation and poor irrigation practices (UNEP, 1992a, b and c in Darkoh, 1998). The increasing amounts of degrading landscapes cause major problems like droughts,

9 floods, food insecurity, loss of biodiversity, loss of organic matter, health issues and poverty (Ferwerda, 2012).

1.1.3 Landscape restoration Over the past four decades, several major efforts have been made to combat desertification. For example, in 1977 the United Nations Conference on Desertification was held which resulted in the Plan of Action to Combat Desertification. Then, in 1992, there was the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development which led to the establishment of the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (Darkoh, 1998; Reynolds, et al., 2007; Stringer, 2008). Next, the Bonn Challenge was launched in 2011 during a conference of the Global Partnership on Forest & Landscape Restoration. The Bonn Challenge is a global effort to restore 150 million hectares of the world’s degraded and deforested lands by 2020 (The Bonn Challenge, 2015). Lastly, during the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in 2012, the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) put forth the latest commitment to ecosystem restoration whereby countries will strive to achieve a Land Degradation neutral world. In the battle against landscape desertification the restoration of land and soil has been crucial. Consequently, landscape restoration has become an increasingly important topic in environmental politics.

Moreover, landscape restoration has recently also being recognized as an effective tool for restoring biodiversity and mitigating climate change (van Oosten, 2013). For example, the target of the Bonn Challenge to restore 150 million hectares of deforested and degraded land directly contributes to other conservation and climate change targets like: the goal to restore 15% of degraded ecosystems by 2020 by the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Call for countries to not just halt but reverse the loss and degradation of their lost forests by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (van Oosten, 2013).

A major challenge of landscape restoration programmes is that they require participation of stakeholders across multiple scales (Boedhihartono & Sayer, 2012; Van Oosten, 2013). Unfortunately, large scale restoration programmes in various parts of the world have received much critique from civil society. Public rejection of restoration programmes has happened in various parts of the world such as the Mediterranean basin, Scotland, the Uplands of Vietnam and the Loess Plateau in Northern China (Boedhihartono and Sayer, 2012). Boedhihartono and Sayer (2012) found that in order to avoid many problems and to increase the effectiveness of landscape restoration programmes they should be designed in ways that address the full range of interests and generate the support of civil society stakeholders whose lives will be affected by the programmes. One of the main challenges with landscape restoration programmes is thus to make the transition from globally set goals to local practices that are supported by the local people (van Oosten, 2012; Stringer, 2008).

1.2 Problem statement Since public resistance has been a common phenomenon in previous landscape restoration projects, it is important to explore ways to overcome or minimize civil society resistance in order to reach globally set restoration goals. Therefore, this thesis investigates the role of local people's sense of belonging, ownership, identity and emotional bond with their living environment for public acceptance and support towards landscape restoration projects. This bond between local people and their living environment is often referred to as place attachment (Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992; Brown and Raymond, 2007).

A landscape can represent a wide spectrum of meanings and emotions. For example, for some people a landscape or place might represent inspiration or beauty, while for others this same place resembles a location of economic transactions (Arefi, 2007). Place attachment can thus differ between groups or individuals. This variety of meanings is reflected in the landscape mosaic consisting of different land-uses, land forms and vegetation types (Greider & Garkovich, 1994; van Oosten, 2012). Landscapes are thus a reflection of the people who have given meaning to the physical environment and shaped them according to their values and beliefs. Moreover, people derive meaning from places and can incorporate them into their self-definitions (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983).

In landscape management and planning, these place meanings are constantly maintained, challenged and negotiated. Changes made to landscapes can therefore be a stressful experience for people and this can cause feelings of anxiety and loss (Devine-Wright, 2009). Moreover, even before actual modifications are made, people can experience stress from knowing that things are about to change and they try to make sense of these changes. Multiple studies have shown that when people feel that developments threaten their emotional bond with place they are likely to resist the upcoming developments, while if the developments enhance people’s relationship with place the developments are more likely to be seen as a positive change and this promotes participation (Brown & Perkins, 1992; Manzo & Perkins, 2006; Devine-Wright, 2009). Therefore, acknowledging the bond between local people and their living environment and understanding how changes to a landscape might threaten this people-place bond can help to promote public support and participation.

The attachment of local people with their living environment is thus likely to influence their behavioural response to landscape restoration programmes. Therefore, learning about the place attachment of local people and understanding local people's perceptions on the proposed landscape changes is important before any landscape restoration project is implemented. Doing so may help to avoid public rejections and help to gain support of civil society to future landscape restoration programmes.

1.3 Research aim and research questions This thesis looks at a new landscape restoration project located in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa. By means of this study I want to explore the role of place attachment for public acceptance of landscape restoration projects in order to help reach globally set restoration goals. To reach this goal the following research questions were made:

Research questions:

1. What are the meanings and emotions that local people attach to the Baviaanskloof, South Africa? 2. What are local people's perceptions on, and behavioural response to, the proposed changes to the Baviaanskloof, South Africa, by the landscape restoration project? 3. How does the landscape restoration project in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa, take local people's place attachment into account?

1.4 Outline of the report The following chapter, chapter 2, describes the theories and concepts that are used in this study to answer the research questions. Next, chapter 3 gives an overview of the methods that were used to collect and analyze the data. Thereafter, the findings of this study are outlined in chapter 4. Then, the results, theories, and methods that were used for this study will be discussed in chapter 5. Finally, the answers to the research questions as well as recommendations will be given in chapter 6, the conclusion.

2. Theoretical framework

This chapter will describe the theories, models and concepts that are used in this study. In the first paragraph the concept of landscapes will be outlined. Then, an overview of existing literature on the concepts of place and place attachments will be given in paragraph 2.2. After that, the place-person- process model by Scannell & Gifford (2010) that is used for this study will be described. Literature on the concept of place attachment disruption will be outlined in paragraph 2.4. Paragraph 2.5 will describe the place attachment disruption model by (Devine-Wright, 2009) that was used for this study. Lastly, a conceptual model will be discussed which summarizes all the concepts as operationalized for this study.

2.1 Landscapes According to Greider & Garkovich (1994, p.1) ‘’every river is more than just one river, every rock is more than just one rock’’. An open field may hold a different landscape for every person that is looking. A conservationist, for example, might want to form a particular piece of land into a protected area excluded for humans, while an urban architect might envision to build a new suburb on the same piece of land. A physical environment thus has the potential to embody multiple landscapes ranging from untouched natural landscapes to urban landscapes (Greider & Garkovich, 1994).

Greider and Garkovich (1994, p.1) define landscapes as ‘the symbolic environment created by a human act of conferring meaning on nature and the environment, of giving the environment definition and form from a particular angle of vision and through a special filter of values and beliefs’. The creation of landscapes thus involves humans who assign symbolic meaning to the natural environment and in most cases also form the landscape through their land use. According to Greider & Garkovich (1994) landscapes reflect cultural groups through the symbolic meanings that they represent, as well as give a reflection of what cultural groups define to be proper and improper relationships between themselves and the physical environment. Additionally, landscapes also provide meaning to people (Davenport and Anderson, 2005), as they can give people a sense of belonging, ownership and identity (Taylor, 2008).

Landscapes are thus social constructions by cultural groups who assign symbolic meanings to the physical environment (Greider & Garkovich, 1994). However, Stedman (2003, p.671) adds that although landscapes are social constructions, they are restricted by the physical characteristics of the land, ‘’although social constructions are important, they hardly arise out of thin air: The local environment sets bounds and gives form to these constructions.’’.

Landscapes are important for many actors, all with their own views, across different scales, on how to use the land. On a local scale landscapes are important for food production, generating income and social-cultural identity, however, landscapes are also part of wider economic and political networks (van Oosten, 2013). Consequently, landscapes often become a mosaic of different land- uses, land forms, and vegetation types which together form an overall landscape-level patchwork (Guilmoure, 2008) that reflect a wide spectrum of meanings (Davenport and Anderson, 2005)

The symbolic meanings that form a landscape are constantly maintained, challenged and negotiated (Davenport & Anderson, 2005). This is in line with Massay's (2006) argument that landscapes can best be understood as temporary events, as a meeting of trajectories. Greider and Garkovich (1994) emphasize that what is important for any consideration of environmental change is the meaning of the change for those cultural groups that have incorporated that aspect of the physical environment into their definition of themselves.

2.2 Place and place attachment 2.2.1 Place The concept of place and the concept of landscapes share many similarities. The same way that the natural environment can be formed into landscapes through the assigning of symbolic meanings, spaces have to be assigned meaning in order to become place (Tuan, 1975). According to Tuan (1977), personal experiences are at the heart of place creation: ‘What begins as undifferentiated space becomes place as we get to know it better and endow it with value’ (p.6) Places become a centre of meaning, either for an individual or a group, constructed by experiences (Tuan, 1975). However, similar to landscapes, places are always emerging and will never become a finished product (Buizer & Turnhout, 2011). According to Buizer and Turnhout (2011) the symbolic meanings of places and landscapes, as well as the identities that they represent, can actively be strengthened through 'place making', a process of text, talk and things that actively promote a particular place.

Another similarity is that both landscapes and places consist of the physical environment, as well as the social environment (Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001). The physical environment consists of the natural and the build environment, while the social environment is the social setting in which people live and includes social relations (Scannell & Gifford, 2010). Additionally, both landscapes and places provide meaning for people as it becomes part of their identity (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983). Both landscapes and places can thus be seen as mirrors, their symbolic meanings reflect the identities of the people who formed them. Lastly, places and landscapes have no clear geographical boundaries and exist at different scales. According to Tuan (1975) places can range from a fireplace to cities, to the entire globe.

In conclusion, the concepts of place and landscapes are so similar that for this research they will be used as synonyms and both represent the geographical area of the Baviaanskloof. Landscapes and places do not exist without humans to assign meaning to them and humans forming them according to their own values and beliefs. This is how the bond between people and place grows.

2.2.2 Place attachment The bond between people and place has been a popular topic of study for different science disciplines. One of the most dominant concepts that describes the people-place bond comes from the field of environmental psychology, in which the people-place bond is referred to as place attachment (Brown & Raymond, 2007; Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). Another dominant concept comes from the field of human geography in which the concept of sense of place is mostly used (Tuan, 1975). However, there are more relating concepts that also deal with aspects of the bond between people and place like place identity (Proshansky, Fabian, & Kaminoff, 1983) and place dependence (Stedman, 2003; Williams & Vaske, 2003). According to Williams and Vaske (2003) the concept of place attachment is the environmental psychologist’s equivalent of the geographer’s concept of sense of place. In contrast, Hidalgo & Hernandez (2001)

14 and Scannell and Gifford (2010) argue that the concepts are used differently by different authors which have turned them into vague concepts, and that there seems to be no agreement regarding the name, definition, or methodological approach.

The common ground with regards to the concepts of place attachment and sense of place seems to be that they describe the bond between people and place as an emotional or affective bond between an individual and/or groups and a particular place (Low & Altman, 1992; Brown & Raymond, 2007; Williams, 1992; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). However, some authors have described the concept of place attachment as an umbrella for the concepts of place identity and place dependence (Brown & Raymond, 2007; Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001), while others use them as three different but related concepts (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001). Another difference in the definition of place attachment is that place attachment has been said to rely on social features (e.g. Woldoff, 2002), physical features (e.g. Brown & Raymond, 2007; Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001), or both (e.g. Hidalgo & Hernandez, 2001). Lastly, some definitions include aspects of affect, cognition, and behaviour, while others emphasize only one or two of these aspects (Scannell & Gifford, 2010).

Scannell and Giffored (2010) analysed many studies on the concepts of place attachment and sense of place (and other related concepts) in order to combine all the pieces of the puzzle into a framework that captures the full spectrum of place attachment. For my study it is important to get a complete understanding of the place attachment of the local people living in the Baviaanskloof and therefore my conceptual framework was based on the place attachment model from Scannell and Gifford (Fig. 1).

Figure 1: Tripartite model of place attachment by Scannell and Gifford (2010).

2.3 Place-Person-Process model The place attachment framework by Scannell and Gifford (2010) consists of three dimensions: place, process and person. The place dimension of place attachment emphasizes the characteristics of the place that people attach to, which include both physical and social elements of place. The psychological process dimension looks at the role of affect, cognition and behaviour regarding place attachment. Lastly, the person dimension splits the assigned meanings of place into individual or collective meanings. It should be noted that there is overlap between the three dimensions, but they are split up because each dimension emphasizes a different piece of place attachment.

2.3.1 Place The first dimension of place attachment is the place itself. What is it about the place that people attach to? As mentioned earlier, places consist of the physical environment and the social environment. The study by Hidalgo and Hernadez (2001) illustrated that people attach to both the social and physical dimension of place and that therefore both dimensions should be considered when measuring place attachment.

Attachments to the physical environment include attachments to the natural environment (e.g. mountains and lakes) as well as attachments to the build environment (e.g. buildings and streets) (Manzo, 2005). To measure the attachment to the physical environment two concepts have become dominant in the field of environmental psychology, namely place identity and place dependence (Brown & Raymond, 2007; Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). Place identity was defined by Proshansky (1978, p. 155.) as ‘’those dimensions of the self that define the individuals’ personal identity in relation to the physical environment’’. Place dependence is described as a functional, activity based attachment (Brown & Raymond, 2007; Williams, Patterson, & Roggenbuck, 1992; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). According to Brown and Raymond (2007) place dependence reflects the importance of the physical environment in providing specific conditions that support individual’s desired needs and goals.

According to Scannell and Gifford (2010) attachment to the social environment is about attachment to others who live in the place, to social relations and group identity. Social arena’s can facilitate social interactions with others which form an important part of attachment to the social environment (Woldoff, 2002). However, places can also symbolize group identities through spatial bonds (Lalli, 1992). Living in the same country or city, for example, makes people feel connected. Subsequently, people incorporate this connection into their identity.

Strength of attachment can be different at different place scales like home, neighbourhood or city (Tuan, 1974; Low & Altman, 1992 in Manzo & Perkins, 2006; Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001). The strength of attachment is also correlated to time of dwelling or residence (Brown and Perkins, 1992 in Devine-Wright and Howes, 2010). Place attachment is a dynamic phenomenon that grows and transforms through lived experience. The more time people spend at particular locations, the more experiences they have and the stronger the attachment becomes. However, strength of attachment does not reveal anything about the nature of the attachment. That is why it is important to understand the meaning of place.

2.3.3 Person The second dimension of the tripartite model of Scannell and Gifford (2010) is person. The central question of this dimension is: who is attached? According to Scannell and Gifford (2010) someone’s

16 place attachment is a mix of group/cultural shared meanings of place and individual meanings. Group or cultural meanings of place develop through shared historical experiences, values and symbols. Historically and religiously important places are for example places such as Mecca or Jerusalem, or on a smaller scale, churches or temples (Scannell and Gifford, 2010). Individual place meanings are acquired through important personal experiences with place like reaching a milestone, having an important realization or experiencing personal growth (Scannell and Gifford, 2010).

The meanings that people assign to places makes people feel connected or attached to their environment. In most cases this is a positive connection. A study by Manzo (2005), however, showed that people can also have a strong negative place attachment. A child that is subjected to domestic abuse, for example, can have a strong negative connection to home.

2.3.2 Process The last dimension, the psychological process dimension, helps to understand place meaning by looking at the role of affect, cognition and behaviour in place attachment.

Place attachment as affect is about the emotions that people associate with a certain place. Emotional connections with place can for example be expressed by individuals stating that they love or hate a place, or through statements like: ‘’This place makes me feel free or happy”. Emotions associated with place can range from love and happiness to fear, hatred and ambivalence, depending on the relationship someone has with that place (Manzo, 2006).

Place attachment also includes cognitive elements. According to Scannell and Gifford (2010) people’s knowledge, memories, beliefs and meanings that they connect to place make them personally important. When people experience places they build memories which create a connection between that individual and place. For example, the memory of where you met your significant other gives that place important meaning. According to Scannell and Gifford (2010) knowledge and beliefs about a place also contribute to someone’s personal connection to place. For example, knowing a lot about the history of a place is likely to give a place more meaning to an individual. Lastly, place attachment as cognition is about people constructing meaning and bonding to meaning. Tuan (1975) already stated that places are a centre of meaning constructed through experiences with place. The meaning of places can range from functional meanings as described in the definition of place attachment, as well as deep symbolic meanings when people incorporate aspects of place into their definition of self as described by the concept of place identity (Proshansky, 1978, p. 155)

Lastly, place attachment is manifested in behaviour of individuals towards their environment (Vaske and Kobrin, 2001; Wright, 2009; Manzo and Perkins, 2006). The behavioural aspect of place attachment is expressed through actions. A study by Vaske and Kobrin (2001) illustrated how people’s place attachment is correlated to environmental responsible behaviour. A study by Manzo and Perkins (2006) also showed how understanding people’s place attachment is important for community participation and planning. Other examples of behaviour that are correlated with a person’s place attachment are remaining at a particular place, moving out of a particular place, returning back to a place after absence, or taking part in place protective action (Wright, 2009; Manzo and Perkins, 2006).

2.4 Place attachment disruption As mentioned earlier, place meanings are constantly maintained, challenged and negotiated (Davenport & Anderson, 2005). When places are reconstructed this can cause a disruption to people’s place attachment (Brown & Perkins, 1992; Manzo & Perkins, 2006; Devine-Wright 2009; Devine-Wright & Howes, 2010). For people with a strong place attachment the transformation of place can challenge their own identities which are connected to the current place. The impact of change to place attachment has been labelled as place attachment disruption (Brown & Perkins, 1992; Manzo & Perkins, 2006; Devine-Wright 2009; Devine-Wright & Howes, 2010).

Disruptions to place can be characterized by extent, rapidity and control, and unfold over time as individuals make sense of what happened or what is about to happen (Devine-Wright, 2009). Disruptions may either be natural or human-driven. Examples of disruptive events are environmental disasters, crime, relocation or development projects (Manzo & Perkins, 2006; Devine-Wright & Howes, 2010).

According to Brown & Perkins (1992) disruptions unfold over time by three stages; the pre-disruption, disruption, and post-disruption stage. During the pre-disruption stage people can try to prepare for upcoming changes by trying to visualize the future. The second stage is the disruptive event itself. Lastly, during the post-disruption stage people either adapt their identity and make new attachments or may choose to detach themselves from that place, which normally causes feelings of grief (Scannell and Gifford, 2010; Devine-Wright, 2009; Manzo & Perkins, 2006).

However, according to Wright (2009) psychological disruption may already take place during the pre- disruptive phase. The landscape restoration project in the Baviaanskloof is in the preparation phase and is therefore in the pre-disruption phase. This is why the model by Devine-Wright (2009) was chosen as the best suitable model to analyse the disruption caused by the landscape restoration project.

2.5 Place attachment disruption model According to Devine-Wright (2009) psychological disruption may take place before actual changes have been made. The model he developed (Fig. 2) illustrates five stages of psychological response to upcoming place change over time. These stages include becoming aware, interpreting change, evaluating change, coping responses, and acting. The model is based on environmental psychology theory on place attachment combined with social psychological theory on social representations and identity (Devine-Wright, 2009). The model relies on disruption to place attachment that takes a considerable amount of time in order for people to go through the different phases.

During the first phase inhabitants living in a place that will undergo change become aware of the project. When people are aware, the next phase is interpreting the upcoming change. During this phase people strive to make sense of the upcoming change by a process of trying to make the unfamiliar familiar. According to Devine-Wright (2009) this process can be understood with social representation theory. He describes the process of familiarizing oneself with the unfamiliar is a process of anchoring (connecting new ideas to existing knowledge) and objectification (making concrete of abstract ideas). When people visualize how the upcoming changes will affect the physical and social environment of place, they will evaluate the outcomes of the project. How they evaluate the outcomes is likely to be influenced by their place attachment (Devine-Wright, 2009). During this phase people will evaluate the project either as enhancing or as a threat to their place attachment.

Based on this evaluation people will decide how to cope with the upcoming place change. This is the phase where people who evaluated the change as a threat may choose to deny that change is occurring or even completely detach themselves with the place (Devine-Wright, 2009; Masuda & Garvin, 2006). However, when the upcoming changes are perceived as enhancements to place they are likely to be accepted. Lastly, people may choose to take action. There are numerous ways in which people may choose to respond ranging from writing protest letters to supporting the project by active participation.

Figure 2: Stages of psychological response over time to place change. A model by Devine-Wright (2009). 2.6 Conceptual model The tripartite model of place attachment by Scannell and Gifford (2010) combined with the model of Devine-Wright (2009) forms the conceptual framework of this research. However, some adaptations to the original model of Scannell and Gifford (2010) were made resulting in the following conceptual model (see figure 3). The reason why I chose to rebuild the model by Scannell and Gifford (2010) is because, even though the model provides good insight in all the components of place attachment, the overlap between the three dimensions made it hard to combine it with the model of Devine- Wright (2009). Additionally, the overlap between the dimensions would make data analysis difficult. This conceptual model blends the theory and concepts behind place attachment (lacking a time dimension) with the concept theory on disruption to place attachment (which includes a time dimension).

I will start of by explaining how the p-p-p model of Scannell and Gifford (2010) was restructured for the use of this research. First of all, the dimension of place has remained completely the same. Place for this study is seen as the object of attachment consisting of the physical (natural and build) environment and the social environment (other people living in a place). The first change to the model by Scannell and Gifford (2010) has been the reconstruction of the process dimension. After studying the model by Scannell and Gifford (2010), it seems that the actual attachments to place consist of the elements affect and cognition, while the role of behaviour is described as an expression of attachment. ‘’The third aspect of the psychological process dimension of place attachment is the behavioural level, in which attachment is expressed through actions.’’ (Scannell and Gifford, 2010, p.4). Therefore, where originally affect, cognition and behaviour were put together into the dimensions of process, they are now split up into the components of ‘attachment’ and ‘expression’. Attachment thus contains affect and cognition, affect being the emotions tied to place and cognition being the meaning of place acquired through experiences (memories), knowledge and

19 beliefs about a place. Expression contains behaviour, and is defined as place related actions such as remaining closeness to place, moving away, coming back to place, or things like place supportive or place protective behaviour.

Figure 3: Conceptual model of place attachment disruption

Lastly, in this conceptual model the dimension of person may seem lost, but it is not. As mentioned earlier I think that the three dimensions as explained by Scannell and Gifford (2010) all emphasize important elements of place attachment, however I will argue that the dimension of person overlaps with the dimension of process. Based on the examples that Scannell and Gifford (2010) use to describe the dimensions of person and process, it seems that within the elements of affect and cognition there are cultural or group and personal aspects. For example, in the section of cognition (p. 3) Scannell and Gifford (2010) give examples of cognition on an individual level ‘’a favourite place may be a kind of place schema of place related knowledge and beliefs, which ultimately represents the special character of the place and one’s personal connections to it’’, as well as examples of cognition on a group level ‘’we are island people’’. The person dimension thus provides important understanding that a person’s place attachment consists of collective, cultural or group meaning as well as important personal meanings, however this division of collective and personal place meaning can be seen as sub-dimensions of affect and cognition. The understanding that attachments consist of personal and group meanings thus remains, however when studying place attachment it is hardly impossible to subdivide every found emotion or meaning into personal or group attachments.

Therefore, I chose to leave the person dimension graphically out of the conceptual model and also out of the analysis.

An important result of the reconstruction of the original model by Scannell and Gifford (2010) is that the model now contains a time dimension. The model starts with the concept of ‘place’ as the object of attachment. The second concept is ‘attachment’, which consist of affect and cognition. Together the concepts form ‘place attachment’ which is the affective and cognitive bond that is created with the social and physical environment. Lastly, there is the element of ‘expression’ which consists of behaviour. Adding the three elements together makes ‘place attachment expression’, which is behaviour that expresses a person’s affective and cognitive bond with the social and physical environment.

The place attachment disruption model by Devine-Wright (2009) is a useful addition that describes how upcoming changes to place can disrupt currently existing attachments (affect and cognition) to place, which can be expressed through place-protective or supportive behaviour. The model starts by a proposed or upcoming change to place. Then the five stages of the model by Devine-Wright (2009) follow, which are linked to the elements of place, attachment, expression. The first stage is becoming aware of upcoming place change. The second stage is interpreting how the place will be affected by the upcoming changes and is thus linked to the element of place. Thirdly there is the stage of evaluation. In this stage the interpretation of the upcoming place change is evaluated as either a threat or an enhancement to place based on existing attachments. Therefore, the stage of evaluation is linked to the element of attachment. The fourth stage is coping with the evaluation. This is an internal process which is not directly linked to any of the three elements. Last is the stage of acting, where individuals may show resisting or supporting behaviour towards the upcoming place change. This stage is linked to the element of expression, since part of place attachment expressive behaviour is place protective behaviour.

3. Methodology

This chapter is dedicated to all the methods that were used throughout this research in order to reach the research aim and answer the corresponding research questions. In total this study took roughly seven months of which 3 months were spend in South Africa. The chosen methodology was based on philosophical and practical considerations, as well as personal preference. The first paragraph describes the methodological choices which led this to become a qualitative case study. Thereafter, the data collection strategies are presented in paragraph 3.2. The third paragraph explains the data analysis strategies that were used. Paragraph 3.4 provides context about the landscape restoration project that this used as case study. Finally, the last paragraph, is dedicated to the study area.

3.1 Qualitative case study For this research I chose a qualitative case study approach. According to Yin (1994, p. 13) a case study is ‘’an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident’’. The vague boundaries between phenomenon and context cause many more variables to be present then just the data points of interest. This is why a predetermined theoretical framework is required in order to guide the data collection and analysis. The theoretical building blocks that set the boundaries of this research are that of place attachment and place attachment disruption. Case study research can be done on one single case or multiple cases (Yin, 1994). This research focussed on a single case, namely, the development of tourism in the Baviaanskloof. The reasons why I chose for a single case study are the following.

First and foremost, I chose for a case study because of the type of research and the type of research questions. According to Yin (1994, p.6) a case study is best suited for explanatory research, which is often characterized by 'how' and 'why' research questions. This research is also explorative and the main goal of this study could be phrased as a 'how' question, namely, ‘how can consideration for place attachment possibly help gain public acceptance to landscape restoration projects?’. Additionally, according to Burns (1997, p.364) ‘’to qualify as a case study, it must be a bounded system, an entity in itself’’. The geographical setting of the Baviaanskloof made this the perfect location for a case study. The area is surrounded by nature reserve and only has two entrances. It takes roughly three hours by car from the centre of the Baviaanskloof to the nearest town, which makes the area extremely remote and a bounded system.

Case studies can be quantitative or qualitative (Yin, 1994, p.7; Kumar, 1999, p. 155). For this case study research a qualitative approach was chosen for the following reasons.

First of all, instead of focussing on the strength of people's place attachment, I was more interested in the personal stories that 'build' the local people’s feelings of attachment. This objective fitted best with a qualitative approach as Kumar (1999, p.14) argues that a qualitative approach ‘’emphasises the description and narration of feelings, perceptions and experiences rather than their measurement’’ Secondly, I wanted to understand and explain how farmers place attachment would (not) fit with tourism developments and how this would influence their attitudes towards the Four

Returns project. This required an in depth understanding of local farmers feelings, values, beliefs and experiences connected to the Baviaanskloof and their perceptions and attitudes towards the Four Returns project. This research aim also fitted best with a qualitative approach as Kumar (1999, p. 132) argues that the main focus in qualitative research should be to ‘’understand, explain, explore, discover and clarify situations, feelings, perceptions, attitudes, values, beliefs and experiences of a group of people’’. Finally, as mentioned earlier, the Baviaanskloof is a very remote place and consequently forms home to only a few farmers and a small black community. The limited number of people living in the Baviaanskloof made a qualitative approach more suitable then a quantitative approach.

3.2 Data collection Choosing the appropriate research methods for data collection is crucial for the quality of research. For case study research it is important to have multiple sources of evidence about the same phenomenon in order to converge this data in a triangulating fashion (Kumar, 1999, p. 5 and Yin, 1994, p. 13). The data collected in this study was done over a period of roughly three months. The data collection methods that were used for this study are literature and documents review, qualitative interviews, and participant observation, which will be explained in the following sections.

Table 1: Data collection

Data collected Sub-questions Literature and documents background for 1, 2 & 3 Literature on landscapes, landscape restoration, place, place attachment, place attachment disruption. Documents about Commonland, Living Lands, Baviaanskloof

Interviews 1, 2 & 3 1 Unstructured expert focus group interview 7 semi-structured interviews with local farmers (wives) 2 semi-structured interviews with communal farm shareholders 2 semi-structured interviews with local entrepreneurs 3 semi-structured expert interviews Observations Mostly question 3 5 days of participant observation, 12 observed interviews between experts and local farmers

3.2.1 Literature and documents review An essential part of doing research is the use of existing literature. Literature review has many different functions as it helps a researcher to familiarize him or herself with the available knowledge in the field of interest, it provides a theoretical framework for the study, it serves as a benchmark for comparing the results with other findings, and it helps a researcher to integrate his findings into the existing body of literature (Kumar, 1999, p.48; Creswell, 2009, p.25)

Literature review has also been a key component in this research. A combination of scientific articles and other internet sources were used to familiarize myself with the topic of landscape restoration in the Baviaanskloof and to develop a theoretical framework for this study. Literature review was also used for the selection of methods and for comparing the results of this study with those of other related studies. The scientific articles and book that are used in this study were found through the online library of the Wageningen University. Most of the case specific information was found in the databases of Commonland and Living Lands.

3.2.2 Participant observation The second type of research that was used in this study is participant observation. Observation methods in general are often used when part of the information is somewhat 'hidden' (Boeije, 2010). Participant observation is a research method in which the research gets in close interaction with the people or group which is being studied (Kumar, 1999, p. 157). Participant observation can either be quantitative or qualitative depending on how the information is recorded. Respectively, the information is either recorded using categories or on a scale, or in a descriptive format (Kumar, 1999, p. 157). Participant observation is mostly combined with more structured methods like interviews (DeWalt & DeWalt, 2011).

During my stay in South Africa I went on a five day field trip to the Baviaanskloof together with my local supervisor and the two business case developers. The full five day trip I was in close contact with the business case developers and joined them as they visited nearly every farm where they conducted interviews with the farmers and farmers’ wives on the current situation in the Baviaanskloof and their ideas for the future. In total, I observed 12 interviews of which I made field notes. This trip was the start of my data collection and provided information for the answering of many of the research questions. When observing the interviews I focussed specifically on the following points of interest for this study: What type of questions are being asked? Are the questions related to the concept of place attachment or the four types of return? How are the questions formulated? Does the interviewee mention anything related to their place attachment or feeling of place attachment disruption? Additional benefits of my role as participant observant were that I got introduced to the farmers and their wives, who I would interview a couple weeks later, and that I got the opportunity to conduct an unstructured interview with the business case developers which I will discuss in the next section.

3.2.3 Interviews Interviewing is a commonly used method for data collection in qualitative research and basically involves an interviewer who is asking questions to the interviewee(s) who answers them (Kumar, 1999, p. 176; Boeije, 2010). Interviews are especially useful to enquire in-depth knowledge on perspectives and experiences (Boeije, 2010). Interviews can range from being unstructured to fully structured and can be distinguished from one another by their flexibility. The more the interview is planned beforehand the more structured and less flexible the interview becomes (Boeije, 2010; Kumar,1999, p177). Unstructured interviews are completely free in terms of structure, contents, question wording and order. In contrast, structured interviews are the opposite and are completely standardized. In between unstructured and structured interviews lies a grey area which is called semi-structured interviews (Boeije, 2010; Kumar,1999). Interviews can also differ between being done one-on-one or with more than one respondent, in which case it is called a focus group. In total 15 interviews were conducted for this research, which were obtained during two field trips of three

24 and five days and one afternoon at my place of residence. One interview was an unstructured focus group interview and the others were one-on-one semi-structured interviews.

The unstructured focus group interview was conducted with the two business case developers, or 'experts'. According to Gubrium & Holstein (2002) the term 'expert interview' is used when the interviewees have expertise on a certain subject. This expert focus group interview was conducted in the car during the drive towards the Baviaanskloof. During this interview I gained valuable information about their vision on the history, current situation, and future of the Baviaanskloof, as well as their perspective on how the collaboration process between the involved stakeholders had evolved. The duration of the interview was about two hours and the interview was recorded with a voice recorder.

All interviews were semi-structured and conducted one-on-one, with exception of my local supervisor being present who would sometimes serve as a translator in case of a language barrier. Another reason why a local supervisor from Living Lands was present was to overcome possible trust barriers. Although the interview questions were well determined beforehand, the order and wording of the questions was quite flexible. Eleven out of the fourteen semi-structured interviews were held in the Baviaanskloof at the homes of the interviewee. Seven interviews were held with local farmers or their wives, two interviews with residents on a community farm, and another two with local entrepreneurs. Back at my place of residence two more interviews were conducted with the directors of Living Lands who both have worked in the Baviaanskloof for more than seven years. Lastly, a final expert interview was conducted back home in the Netherlands through Skype.

The duration of the interviews ranged from roughly 30 to 90 minutes. All interviews were recorded using a voice recorder, which allowed for a better focus on the interview since no notes had to be taken, as well as higher quality of the data compared with taking notes (Boeije, 2010). The interview guides can be found in Appendixes A1, A2, and A3.

3.2.3.1 Selection of interviewees The selection of interviewees was based on two key features. The interviewees had to either be a resident living in the Baviaanskloof or had to be closely involved in the development of the tourism business case. The selection of interviewees living in the Baviaanskloof was done in consolidation with my local supervisor from Living Lands who also acts as the 'landscape facilitator' for the organization. As landscape facilitator it is his job to regularly visit the Baviaanskloof and maintain a close connection with the people living there. The first priority was to speak with representatives of the privately owned farms. Based on the insight of the landscape facilitator I chose to conduct the interviewees mostly with the wives of the farmers because of multiple reasons. Firstly, the farmers are experiencing a though time as most of them are struggling to survive. This made talking about their lives and their future a sensitive issue which the wives are probably more willing to talk about. Secondly, the wives are more involved in tourism already which made them the right person to speak to about the impact of tourism expansion. Lastly, the wives simply had more time to engage in conversation. Also two local entrepreneurs were chosen as interviewee since they also came into contact with tourists and for the sales in their shops they rely mainly on tourists. In total there are four shops in the Baviaanskloof. The selection of the two chosen interviewees over the other two was based on their willingness to talk which I experienced during the previous trip. Lastly, two more

25 interviewees with community farm residents were selected to also learn about their perspectives on the development of tourism in the area.

The remaining three experts were chosen because of their expertise on the development of the tourism business case and work experience in the Baviaanskloof. The two directors of Living Lands were selected because they had the longest working experience in the study area and because they made the decision to engage in the collaboration with Commonland to collectively work on the Four Returns project. Lastly, the developer of the tourism business case was an obvious choice.

3.2.3.2 Interview design To structure the interviews two interview designs were made, one for the interviews with the Baviaanskloof residents and one for the interviewees with the experts on the tourism business case. Table 2 gives an overview of how the interview questions to the residents of the Baviaanskloof link to the theoretical concepts that were discussed in the previous chapter. The themes that were covered in the interviews with the residents of the Baviaanskloof were: place attachment, start of tourism in the Baviaanskloof and place attachment disruption. Table 3 gives an overview of the interview design for the experts on the tourism business case, which was structured by: experience in the Baviaanskloof, place attachment and development of the tourism business case.

Table 2: Design interviews Baviaanskloof residents.

Theoretical concepts Objective Question numbers Place attachment 1-8  Cognition Knowledge, memories, beliefs, meaning  Affect Emotions Start of tourism 9-11  First When did tourism start, by who, first impressions thoughts on tourism tourism Place attachment 12-17 disruption  Becoming Awareness Four Returns project aware  Interpreting Linking to four types of return  Evaluating Feelings about the project  Coping Coping with emotions  Acting Behavioural response to project

Table 3: Design expert interviews.

Theoretical concepts Objective Question numbers

Experience 1-4 Baviaanskloof  Personal Work experience, connection with connection the people Place attachment 5-7  Cognition What meanings does the Baviaanskloof hold to the locals?  Affect What emotional connections do the locals have with the Baviaanskloof? Development tourism 8-16 business case  Start of project Why tourism?  Impact Let them describe the Four Returns implementation Mentioning of place attachment disruption?

3.3 Data analysis Before qualitative data analysis can start the researcher needs to create structure to the disorder of the obtained information (Boeije, 2010). Getting the raw data ready for analysis requires the transcribing of voice recordings and taking out of confidential information that can identify the interviewees. Ones this preparation process is completed the data analysis can start.

The primary goal of data analysis is to link the collected data with the research questions. This is done by a process of segmenting and reassembling of the data (Boeije, 2010). According to Jorgensen (1989,p. 107) ‘’analysis is a breaking up , separating, or disassembling of research materials into pieces, parts, elements, or units. With facts broken down into manageable pieces, the research sorts and sifts them, searching for types, classes, sequences, processes, patterns or wholes. The aim of this process is to assemble or reconstruct the data in a meaningful or comprehensible fashion’’.

In order to prepare the collected data for analysis the field notes from the participant observations were transcribed into a word document and all the voice recorded interviews were transcribed. The data analysis was done with the qualitative data analysis program MAXQDA. The analysis consisted of several types of coding. Coding is the process of segmenting and reassembling the data (Boeije, 2010). First, a round of open coding was applied to the transcribed interviews and the written out field notes. Open coding is the process of carefully dividing the data into fragments which are compared among each other, grouping them into categories that deal with the same subject, and getting labelled with a code (Boeije, 2010). After that axel coding was used to determine relationships between categories and to make distinctions between main categories and subcategories. Finally, the data got reassembled in order to answer the research questions during selective coding.

3.4 The Four Returns Project Commonland and Living Lands are working together on a landscape restoration project in the Baviaanskloof catchment area in South Africa. The project was named 'The Four Returns' based on the Four Returns model from Commonland (Fig. 4). The goal of the Four Returns Project is to form partnerships between business, government and civil society in and around the Nelson Mandela Bay catchment area in order to strategically and collectively explore investments in restoring the resilience of degraded ecosystems (The Four Returns, 2014). At the heart of the project is the development of sustainable business cases which serve as tool to scale up existing restoration activities.

Figure 4: Four returns model of business cases by Commonland (Commonland, 2015).

Multiple potential business cases have been listed for the total Nelson Mandela Bay catchment area. In June 2014, an initiation workshop was held where the Four Returns model was explained to roughly 50 participants and where the potential business cases were discussed. As a result of the initiation workshop two specific business cases were chosen to start off with, and both are located in the Baviaanskloof.

Many of the mountain slopes in the Baviaanskloof have been degraded due to many years of overgrazing. The business cases located in the Baviaanskloof aim to restore the natural vegetation of the mountains. One business case aims to set up cooperate farming, while the other focuses on the possibilities for local farmers to make a switch from keeping livestock to tourism as key income driver. This study only looked at the tourism business because a switch from farming to tourism is more out of the comfort zone of the farmers and is therefore likely to cause a bigger disruption then to start farming cooperatively.

The goal of the tourism business case is thus to provide local farmers with an alternative source of income through tourism. The idea behind this switch to tourism as main source of income is that if the farmers gain more income through tourism, they keep less cattle. Keeping less cattle equals less pressure on the land and more room for restoration by Commonland and Living Lands. Additional to the return of natural capital in the form of restoration, the business case also aims to give return of inspiration, return of social capital and return of financial capital.

3.5 Study area The area of interest for this study, the Baviaanskloof, is located in the Eastern Cape of South Africa (Fig. 5). A large part of the Baviaanskloof is a nature reserve. However, within the reserve lays the Baviaanskloof Hartland, which is the farming area. The Hartland is where most of the inhabitants of the Baviaanskloof live.

The Baviaanskloof is a narrow valley of about 75 kilometres long surrounded by steep rock formations, green slopes and high mountain plains. The Baviaanskloof is a very secluded area. The only entry into the valley is via the Nuwekloof Pass in the West or the Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve in the East. The nearest town on the West side is 78 kilometres, an approximately one hour and twenty minutes’ drive across a good gravel road. On the East side it is 133 kilometres to Patensie, a roughly three and a half hour’s drive across a minor gravel road through a series of steep mountain passes.

Figure 5: Map research area from Crane, 2006.

4. Results

This chapter is dedicated to the presentation of the found results. The chapter is structured as follows: First the three components of the triangle in the conceptual model, place, (place) attachment, and (place attachment) expression, are described in paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3. Paragraph 4.1 presents more information about place, the Baviaanskloof. The findings regarding place attachment are presented in paragraph 4.2. In the following paragraph, place attachment expression findings are described. Paragraph 4.4 focuses on the findings regarding the five stages of disruption to place attachment from the conceptual framework. Lastly,in paragraph 4.5 the findings about how local people’s place attachment was taken into account in the development of the Four Returns project will be discussed. Be aware that some of the quotes are partially in Afrikaans. Quotes from a local responded are indicated with LR, while quotes from an expert are indicated with ER.

4.1 Place: the Baviaanskloof This paragraph gives a description of place, the Baviaanskloof, which forms the object of attachment. As described in the theoretical framework place consists of the social and the physical environment. The physical environment consisted of the natural and build environment, while the social environment is about the people that live in a place. The next paragraph, 4.2, will describe the meanings and emotions that the local people have assigned to the physical and social environment.

4.1.1 Physical environment The Baviaanskloof is a nature reserve in the Eastern Cape of South Africa which was declared a World Heritage Site in 2004 and is one of the richest plant regions in the world. The majority of land has been established as a wilderness area under Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency. The reserve contains a wide variety in ecosystems, including fynbos, grassland, succulent Karoo, Nama-Karoo, sub-tropical thicket and savannah. The Baviaanskloof is also home to a lot of wildlife species. As the name suggests, there are a lot of Baboons in the Baviaanskloof, but it also leopard territory. Within the reserve lays the Baviaanskloof Hartland. The Hartland is the farming area and is surrounded by nature reserve.

The Baviaanskloof forms a river valley between the Kouga and Baviaanskloof Mountains. The river is vital for farmers, communities and nature in the valley. Moreover, the water supply from the river is crucial for Port Elizabeth, the largest city in the Eastern Cape which is located further downstream. Downstream, the Baviaanskloof River merges with Kouga River and runs into the Kouga Dam, which provides irrigation water for citrus farming and drinking water for the fast growing metropolitan area of Port Elizabeth

In the mid to late 18th century European farmers settled in the valley. Men and nature have long lived in balance with each other in the Baviaanskloof. The local communities have learned to adapt to the incidental flash floods and dry periods. However, this balance became disturbed in the 1950s. During that time, farmers invested in goats and sheep for about a century because of the high wool prizes. Additionally, supported by the South African government, little streams and the river were canalized in the last decades with the goal to improve agricultural production on the valley floor. These land-

30 uses seemed to be improvements at the time, but led to large-scale environmental problems (Oude Munnink & de Vries, n.d.).

As a result of many years of overgrazing by goats and sheep the slopes and highlands of the Baviaanskloof vegetation disappeared and fertile top-soils were washed away. In combination with the canalization of the rivers, the riverbeds and small-scale wetlands eroded and the groundwater level dropped with a few meters. Consequently, the water retention capability of the land was reduced dramatically, leading to less reliable water availability in dry periods, on which people and nature in the Baviaanskloof are highly depend. The insecure water availability in the dry periods is a plague to local farmers. The degraded lands have made farming in the Baviaanskloof extremely difficult (Oude Munnink & de Vries, n.d.). The farmers have seen their income from farming decrease over the years till the point where some are struggling for survival.

‘’So what is effectively happening is the farmers are slowly going bankrupt because it is getting impossible to maintain a profit margins. Operating costs are higher, live is just generally more expensive. Cars, fuel are more expensive and profit stays the same’’ ER2

Unviable farms have been turned into formal protected areas. In 2012, only 20 operational farms were left in the Baviaanskloof (Fig. 6). One of the farms that went bankrupt has been turned into a communal farm which is managed by 75 former disadvantaged people. Most of the farms still hold cattle like sheep, goats or ostriches and produce vegetable seeds.

Figure 6: Map of the Baviaanskloof. Light yellow areas are farmland and green are formally protected areas or private nature reserves (Knight, 2012)

The people living in the Baviaanskloof have come to the realization that the landscape has to be managed more sustainable. In fact, some farmers have almost completely stopped their farming practices and are now focussing on restoring and conserving their land. However, these farmers are currently still the exception to the rule.

‘’so this is …. farm, he is not doing any cash crops any more…. He is really the pioneer farmer for restoration‘’ ER1

As an alternative form of income, tourism has become a viable option for the farmers over the last years. During my visits to the Baviaanskloof I found that every farm has at least some form of accommodation, shop, or activity to gain some extra revenue from tourism.

4.1.2 Social environment The Baviaanskloof offers home to only a few cultural groups. First of all there are the white farmers. Some of the farmers grew up in the Baviaanskloof, however, most of them grew up in neighbouring cities and moved to the Baviaanskloof in later stages of their lives. Also living in the Baviaanskloof are two black communities (I prefer not to use the term ‘black’ community, but this is necessary for clarity sake as we will later also speak about ‘sense of community’, which refers to the relationship among the farmers in section 4.2.2.1.). The unemployment rate among the black communities is very high. The community members that do have a job work for the white farmers. Lastly, tourist can be considered part of the social environment even though they only stay for short periods of time. There is little to say about the social environment of the Baviaanskloof without jumping ahead to the relationships among the farmers, between the farmers and the community, and relationships with the tourists which will be discussed in paragraph 4.2.2.

4.2 Place attachment: affective and cognitive attachment to the Baviaanskloof This paragraph focuses on the attachments of the local people to the physical and social environment of the Baviaanskloof. As defined in the theoretical framework place attachment is the cognitive and affective bond between people and place. On an affective level people may for example love, enjoy, fear, or hate a place. Cognition is about thoughts, about knowledge, memories, beliefs and meanings of a place. It is important to remember that place attachment can also be or contain negative thoughts or feelings. The mixture of positive and negative place based meanings and feelings make someone’s place attachment. First the findings about the attachments to the physical environment will be outlined and thereafter the findings regarding the social environment.

4.2.1 Attachments to the physical environment

4.2.1.1 Natural environment Roughly the first half of the interviews that were conducted with the local people focussed on the meanings and emotions attached to the Baviaanskloof. When I asked the locals ‘what is it like living in the Baviaanskloof’ one of the things that every respondent mentioned was their positive attachments to the natural environment in general. Being outdoors in the natural environment is an important part of living in the Baviaanskloof. All the interviewees mentioned that they enjoy and love the natural environment and they consider it to be wild and beautiful.

‘’…that is the asset of this place, it’s the natural beauty, nothing else can really replace that‘’ LR6

Even though the Baviaanskloof is considered an area of wilderness and is home to a dangerous predator, the leopard, the local people seem consider the outdoors safe and provides them with feelings of freedom. Two interviewees specifically mentioned this perception of safety and feeling of freedom in nature.

‘’ …you can walk into the felt. There is nothing that is bugging you. We have been living here and asking the community, so studied the socio-economic … church council, so I made a profile of the community and in the 300 years they have been living here there has never been a leopard attack on anybody, and in 300 years there have only been 2 snake bites’’ LR6

Moreover, as explained by the theory on place attachment, people can also incorporated places into their definition of self, in their identity. Multiple interviewees made statements which showcased that they feel like their sense of self is connected to the natural environment.

‘’it doesn’t matter where I go here, if I go … and take photos. It doesn’t matter where I go, I am just so happy to be there. Also when people go into the Zand Vlakte kloof they just see an amazing natural wonder and we realize I am part of it’’ LR6

‘’For example coming from George now, you come over some mountain passes the feeling of coming into the Karoo, it is just more my territory. There is something that I feel very strongly drawn to in this area‘’ LR4

In general the bond between people and the natural environment is very positive. On a cognitive level the local people belief that the Baviaanskloof is wild, beautiful, and safe. Additionally, for some local people the natural environment has become a part of their sense of self. The affective bond is one of love, joy and feelings of freedom.

Next, I will describe specific features of the natural environment that came up during the interviews and how these features are part of the affective and cognitive bond with the natural environment.

The most dominant feature of the natural environment in the Baviaanskloof is the mountain ranges that stretch out as far as the eye can see. The two mountain ranges surrounding the valley of the Baviaanskloof Heartland offer an impressive sight to say the least. The mountains have been the grazing grounds for the cattle held by most farmers, which resulted in degraded mountain slopes. Even though the mountains in the Heartland area contain signs of degradation due to overgrazing, they are highly appreciated by all the local interviewees. The local people clearly enjoy the mountain ranges of the Baviaanskloof as a beautiful far sight, but also for activities like hiking or climbing.

‘’as a child I used to climb the mountains and enjoy the beautiful view’’ LR2

One interviewee even mentioned how he feels more affection for the mountains then for the people, which illustrates the importance of the physical environment as object of attachment. During my visit to this respondents’ farm he proudly pointed out to me how a certain rock formation behind his farm was shaped like a crocodile, and told me how he had walked and climbed those mountains many times.

‘’… I love rocks more than people. ….So I think that remoteness is the first thing that I love about this place and the second thing is the rocks, absolutely beautiful rocks’’ LR7

What is interesting is that two of the experts expressed how they also used to think that those mountains were beautiful, but that their knowledge of the state of degradation changed their perspective on the mountains. This shows how cognition is important for how people value something, in this case if they consider the mountains to be beautiful or not.

‘’When I had my family around and they don’t have an eye for the ecology then they don’t see the degraded land as a degraded land and they still see a beautiful mountain. But as soon as you point out to people this is that and this see this and they know the story they will see it as well’’ ER3

The mountains thus hold many positive attachments. On a cognitive level they contain many positive childhood memories, they are considered a beautiful and wild far sight, and they offer a place of recreational activities like hiking and climbing as well as functional meaning as grazing grounds for cattle. On an affective level do the local people hold nothing but love for the mountains.

Another feature of the natural environment that also came up during three out of eleven interviews with the local farmers was the river. The Baviaanskloof River is vital for farmers, communities and nature living in the valley. On the road through the reserve to the Baviaanskloof Heartland the river crosses the road a couple of times. After some heavy rain the river can then completely swallow parts of the road making it impossible to cross. Besides the functionality for the agriculture the river also offers a place for relaxation and swimming.

‘’we do it many times. Yesterday we have been here in Grootkloof and we had a swim, let’s say eight kilometres from here, in the Kloof with clean water so we had a swim here, we enjoyed the nature’’ LR9

On a cognitive level does the river thus hold functional meaning for agriculture and recreational meaning as place of relaxation and swimming. The affective bond is mostly that of joy, even though the river can sometimes cause problems by flooding the road.

Also mentioned by three interviewee’s specifically were the open fields. Between the mountains there are some pieces of open fields. These fields are mostly enjoyed for activities like braaïng (sort of barbequing that is South African tradition), hiking, or horseback riding.

‘’.. the kids also love it to braai in the felt’’ LR10

Cognitively, the fields mostly hold recreational meaning. Affectively, the fields provide the local people with feelings of joy.

The last specific feature of the natural environment that was mentioned by one interviewee was the Sewefontein Wild Fig Tree Forest. The Wild Fig Tree Forest is the only small forest in the Baviaanskloof and is located on Sewefontein, the communal farm managed by the former disadvantaged people in the Baviaanskloof. The interviewee mentioned how he likes to come to this forest to relax and listen to the birds.

‘’and sometimes on the Sunday at 3 or 4 o’clock I come sit here, at Wild Fig Forest and listen to the birds, like the nature. Sometimes I’m alone and I sit here. And I check out all the beautiful things’’ LR3

Besides the recreational function does the forest also function as an attraction for tourist who can make guided tours through the forest. Cognitively, the Wild Fig Tree Forest thus holds meaning as a place to relax as well as serve as a tourist attraction. The affective bond is again positive, one of love and joy.

The natural environment is thus heavily valued for its beauty, wildness, and recreational activities for personal enjoyment, but it has also other functional meanings. With the upcoming tourism the natural beauty of the landscape has also gained additional important meaning as tourist attraction and thus a source of income. With the decreasing income from farming, the people of the

Baviaanskloof are starting to realize how they are becoming more dependent on the natural environment as tourist attraction.

''it is the natural capital of this place that is what generates the income for everybody'' LR6

To summarize, the natural environment is loved and enjoyed by all local people mostly for recreational purposes. The local people consider it to be wild and beautiful, but also safe. For some of the respondents it also became clear how they felt that their identity was connected to the natural environment. The overall affective bond to the natural environment is that of love, joy and freedom. Specific features of the natural environment that people enjoy a lot are the mountains, the river, the fields, and the fig forest. Some of the experts had a different view on the natural environment. Their knowledge of the degraded hills made them no longer beautiful in their eyes. Additionally, the natural environment has also gained new important functional meaning as the people start to realize how the natural environment serves as important tourist attraction.

4.2.1.2 Build environment Also part of the physical environment is the build environment like buildings, streets, etc. The build environment reflects the transformation of the landscape through the specific set of filters and beliefs of the people living there. Attachments were found to the following specific features of the build environment: the farms (home + farmland) and the main road that passes through the Baviaanskloof.

The build environment of the Baviaanskloof is characterised by the farms. In 2010, only 20 operational farms were left in the Baviaanskloof Heartland. Without a doubt do the farms contain the strongest attachment regarding the build environment. The farms hold a wide variety of meanings and emotions, both positive and negative. As mentioned in the description of place, some of the current farmers grew up living on the farm, while others grew up outside of the Baviaanskloof. The ones that grew up outside the Baviaanskloof already used to visit the farms regularly as a child on holidays. The many fun childhood memories of vacations on the farm have made the farms personally important to the farmers.

‘’…we used to go camping in the mountains and the first years we would explore the farm really intensive. Go to the Fynbos or spend there like a day or two with my cousins and my dad. Get a feel for the mountains. So we explored… But on holidays we also worked. My dad is like very, he is not one to sit around the house, so we would be helping out were we could. So that is our type of holiday. And swimming in the dam. And mountain bike there. A lot of good memories. And we also used to play with the local kids. They would come here and spend the whole day. Maybe 5, 6 years old. We would play rugby or tennis’’ LR4

The farmers and famer’s wives spoke with such pride over their farms, and I found it absolutely intriguing to hear all their stories. Often the farm has been in the family for many years and are therefore considered family heritage.

‘’Their connection to the land is being a farmer and being depended on the land and being there already for so many generations and they feel so much pride to keep their land in their family’’ ER3

The fact that the farm has been a family heritage piece makes the farmers speak about the farms with tremendous pride on the one hand, but on the other also with a tone of seriousness. Even

35 though tourism is upcoming in the Baviaanskloof, most farmers are still dependent on their farms as main source of income. The management of the family farm therefore comes with feelings of great responsibility.

''…the responsibility, realizing that it’s a living farm and you have the power to influence things and if you don’t nothing happens. Very simple things. If there is no management here and if you don’t get up at 6 o clock in the morning and you are not there to lead your team of farm workers, it’s not like they don’t want to work, but if there is good management and good leadership things can get done and you can turn things around'' LR4

Unfortunately, due to the financially hard times many farmers in the Baviaanskloof face are uncertain if they will be able to pass the farms on to their children. The idea of possibly not being able keep the farm in the family weights as a heavy burden on the farmer’s shoulders. Associated with the farms are thus also feelings of fear.

‘’I saw farmers cry in front of me that they were afraid that they couldn’t give the land to their son’’ ER3

In addition to the financial battle for survival there is a sincere fear among the farmers that a change in political leadership may cause them to lose ownership of their farms.

‘’and then you also have the problem or possibility that they are going to expropriate farmers that you must give up 50% to your workers for free, they don’t buy it from you. It is a new legislation coming in’’

To which I ask ‘’50% of what?’’

‘’of your property, and you must give it to your farm labourers. We are not getting compensated for it. …So everybody is thinking is the same thing going to happen as happened in Zimbabwe?’’ LR6

The farms are thus incredibly important to the farmers. It is family heritage and they many childhood memories make them personally important. However, the farms are ultimately most important to the local people because they define who they are, farmers.

‘’and that is a general sense it’s his space his heritage, his right. And for a lot of the guys it is just part of their identity. So if you take their farm away and you take their identity as a farmer away. As a person a lot of these guys would feel really lost. So there is a huge emotional aspect of process that were are entering as outsiders’’ ER1

On a cognitive level, the farms thus hold both positive and negative meanings. First of all, many happy childhood memories are associated with the farms. Secondly, the farmers are dependent on their farms as a source of income. The difficult financial times make farmers also speak of their farms as a burden, as a battle for survival. Thirdly, the farms are considered a piece of family heritage. Lastly, the farms reflect who the people are that live in the Baviaanskloof, farmers, and are therefore an important part in their definition of self. On an affective level do the childhood memories provide feelings of happiness and joy. The struggle for survival however, makes the farms feel as a heavy burden, as something negative. The fact that the farms are family heritage gives both feelings of

36 tremendous pride and joy, as well as sadness and fear that they might not be able to pass the farm along to their children.

The main road that passes all the way through the Baviaanskloof is also an important feature of the build environment that holds a variety of meanings and emotions. To refresh your memory, there is only one road in and out of the Baviaanskloof. It goes straight from one end of the Valley to the other. The road is maintained by the municipality. Some parts of the road are impossible to cross without a 4x4 vehicle. Speaking from personal experience, after rainfall the road can be swallowed by the streams and river. Two main perspectives on the road became clear out of the interviewees. The first perspective is that the road is a problem. The road is already in bad shape which makes it difficult for the farmers to export their good to the markets outside the Baviaanskloof. If the road continues to degrade if will form a tremendous hazard and possible the end of business. This fear was specifically mentioned by three interviewees.

‘’it’s very tough to live in the Baviaans. The more you live here the more you realize that. Because from the smaller things from having a chocolate your favourite one to a big thing like your pomp breaks, and the small little piece you need to fix it requires 3 hours to get it and sometimes you might have to wait like a week or two. That is the biggest thing.. that is why the farmers work really really hard here and sometimes for so little pay. Because it’s tough, it’s like the road is very difficult to just like.., you know, you have been in and out here. That is the way it is. So things happen really slowly'' LR4

The second perspective is that the road is vital for the upcoming tourism business. One of the head runners in tourism mentioned how the road is the main tourist attraction. Tourists love the adventurous road and crossing it with a 4x4 vehicle. This vision was supported by two interviewees.

‘’if you take this part of course you have your adventure tourists, I would say 80% of all tourist visiting the Baviaanskloof is adventure tourist. They come in to drive the road with their motor bikes or they come to hike or something like that. The road is the number 1 attraction. Not the wilderness stuff, the road is the number one adventure’’ LR6

Cognitively, the road through the Baviaanskloof is believed to be a problem and threat to business, as well as a source of business. The affective bond is one of fear and frustration on the one hand, and content on the other hand.

4.2.2 Attachments to the social environment An attachment to the social environment is about attachment to other people, to social relationships. Just like attachments to the physical environment, attachments to the social environment consist of cognition and affect. Also, attachments are not always positive, but can also be negative. As already mentioned, the Baviaanskloof form home for only two ‘social groups’ the farmers and the black communities. Additionally, tourist can be considered part of the social environment. First the relationship among the farmers will be outlined in section 4.2.2.1. Thereafter, the relationship between the farmers and the black community will be presented in section 4.2.2.2. Lastly, the relationships with the tourists are presented in section 4.2.2.3.

4.2.2.1 Relationship among farmers Everywhere I went I came across the same story, the people living in the Baviaanskloof feel like they are part of a tight community. This sense of community is definitely something that the people in the Baviaanskloof have come attached to, something that adds value and meaning to their lives. The fact that someone’s says that they feel part of a group implicates that on a cognitive level they feel that this community represents part of themselves.

‘’it is really, I enjoy it because I like to be in a natural environment but I think in the time that I have been here I also became quit integrated into the community and that’s also quit a nice experience for me, because it is very different living in a rural community compared to when you come from a city, where I come from. I find people have much more of a sense of community here than in the city so I like that’’ LR5

And later adds:

‘’I just feel because growing up in a city I never really got to understand what community is all about you know, and then coming here I have learned a lot more about that, I learned how people work together here and how they help each other out in tough times and when they got problems they get together and talk about it, about their problems together, and that’s really nice. In the city you can live next door to someone for 20 years and don’t even know their names you know, so it is a totally different vibe and I like that a lot’’ LR5

According to multiple respondents, the isolation and remoteness of the Baviaanskloof heavily contributes to this sense of community. Because of the isolation people are more reliant on each other for help which has created a very collaborative and forgiving environment. For most of the interviewees it became clear that the sense of community provides a feeling of connection, trust, and intimacy which are affective attachments.

‘’this is a really special place, because it is so isolated it is challenging but it is also what people like about this place. So it is also another thing, you can go to another rural area in the country and you still won’t find such a solid kind of community as you find here, because of the isolation’’ LR5

Some interviewees would even describe their neighbours as extended family. There exists a very strong feeling of familiarity and trust with each other. As described in the literature, the stability and familiarity with places can contribute to a general sense of wellbeing, this is also the case for these following interviewees. They describe how their relationship with their neighbours provides them with feelings of safety, peace and in general just add to the emotional well being. These are examples of how affect is manifested in the relationship among the farmers.

‘’ …the people know each other. It’s like one big family, some people you like others you don’t just like in your own family. There is a consistency a stability and security, and I am not talking about safety issues, but I am talking about the emotional, mental security’’ LR6

To which she adds:

‘’you can be who you want to be here, you can be a natural person. I grew up with social norms and values and very strict, and I was in a girls school and I was prepared for anything in life. And here I

38 could … but I could still be myself. I don’t have to impress anybody, I am not interested in doing that. And this place allows you to be a relaxed person and that is wonderful‘’ LR6

To conclude, the relationship among the farmers is a very positive one. On a cognitive level they feel a strong sense of community and everyone feels part of this community. These social relationships also provide the local farmers with feelings of trust, safety, peace on an affective level and thus provide important meaning and value to their lives.

4.2.2.2 Relationship between farmers and black community In the previous section ‘relationships among farmers’ a lot was mentioned about a ‘sense of community’ or a ‘tight community’. This ‘community’ refers to the other farmers, and not to the ‘black community’, who also live in the Baviaanskloof.

The relationship between the farmers and the black community is an interesting one and holds many more different perspectives than the relationships among the farmers. During my informal interview with two experts, they already mentioned how apartheid was still present in Africa in general and how the inequity causes tensions. This sense of apartheid also still exists in the Baviaanskloof. This sensitive piece of history cause a mixture of beliefs and feelings about the relationship the farmers have with the collared community.

‘’there is a lot of guild and fear and distrust, and I think I also realized that from the farmers that if they really had to make things fair they would in the same position these guys are, which is a lot worse. But also the knowledge that they are living right next to these people and sooner or later things are going to have to be made right otherwise there will be problems‘’ ER1

This sense that apartheid is still present in the Baviaanskloof got confirmed by different local interviewees. The most important thing that came out of the interviewees regarding the relationship between the farmers and the community is that many farmers feel there is a disconnection, a barrier between them and the community. Even though not mentioned by the farmers, this vision of ‘us’ versus ‘them’ probably also contributes to the strong sense of community among the farmers. The first quote is from one of the farmers, and the second quote comes from a former disadvantaged person living on a communal farm.

‘’I am white. The white collared issue is still very big in the kloof. There will always stay a difference. But I have been talking to the people in the kloof. We are not that different, but its stays a whole thing.. Also living in the kloof…. I am just a normal person in the kloof. I am exactly the same as them. So understanding where they are coming from…‘’ LR7

‘’ ...my dream is that my people come together with white people and black people, and all sit around the table, that is my dream. And my dream for all of us in the Baviaanskloof, is that we are together. And I like it very much to communicate with white people, black people, that is my dream. And my dream is that my main point is that my dreams for the Baviaanskloof is that we must come together. All the people here in the Baviaanskloof here come together and take hands and say you are my friend‘’ LR3

Only one interviewee was held with a former disadvantaged local, so I cannot make any generalizations, but it is interesting how this individual’s perspective is that he would love to bridge the gap and build a more positive relationship with the farmers.

From the interviews it also became clear that there are different perspectives on how to deal with the sense of apartheid. Some of the farmers clearly believe that something should be done about the inequity between them and the collared people, and were thinking of ways to support the community.

‘’.. but then you have to ask yourself why people drink as well, and really dig deep. And that differs at an individual level as well. And I believe we need a counselling event, and you can’t expect a farmer to counsel all its workers. So I think there is a need for something like… something needs to happen. There is something really not right. I think it goes throughout the country as well ‘’ LR4

Others claim that the relationship between them and the black community used to be great, but that the community is to blame for a worsening relationship

‘’when I started up here we knew all the collared people and everyone. It was wonderful. And they protected their own workplace. If there was people coming in here they said listen: this is our job here and our place to stay and we had a really good relationship. And that is worrying us all that that is defiantly changing. That is not very nice. All the people always tell that we have a wonderful relationship with the workers in the area. All the farmers have wonderful relationship with the workers. The workers grew up on the farm and stayed there for …. And it’s not a problem to. But all these cousins and all the people coming in. Some people they moved to town, but there is no work there. So they think there is work here. And it’s definitely turning relationships upside down and It’s a shame. I think it was really something special in the area, that the relationship between the farmers and the workers, it was really something to admire‘’ LR10

To conclude, on a cognitive level it is clear that most people think of the relationship between the farmers and the collared community as ‘us’ and ‘them’. There is a range of perspectives on willingness to help support the community and to bridge the gap. On an affective level there seem to be mixed feelings as well, maybe some feelings of guild, distrust, and unhappiness. The relationship between the farmers and the black community is thus mostly negative, but also negative feelings connected to place are part of someone’s total place attachment.

4.2.2.3 Relationship between farmers and tourists Even though not permanently present in the Baviaanskloof, the social interactions with tourists have become part of local farmers place attachment. While some farmers purely engage with tourist because they are depended on the extra income, others have come to appreciate having tourists come around. The farmers that have come to like the company of tourists are mostly the ones that have been doing tourism the longest in the Baviaanskloof. From this next quote it becomes clear how dealing with tourist took some getting used to, but is now something that some farmers really enjoy.

‘’..and you know, he really enjoys the contact with the people, it is funny, you wouldn’t say that when we started right in the beginning, he wasn’t interested in people and suddenly when they came here it all became bigger and bigger and he had to and now it is so nice for him and people like his company because he can be funny.... it is part of us and we are very proud of the Makkedaat caves’’ LR9

Moreover, one interviewee mentioned that his interactions with tourists makes his residence in the Baviaanskloof worthwhile and would feel to lonely without the tourists that come to visit, it should be noted though that this vision is an exception.

‘’the social interactions with the tourists are also very important to me, it can get quite lonely here. Without the tourists I would probably not stay here’’ LR4

For the farmers that enjoy the social interactions with tourists, tourist add positively add to their place attachment.

4.3 Place attachment expression According to the literature, people express their place attachment through actions like remaining at-, coming back to-, or moving away from a certain place. Additionally, the strength of an individual’s place attachment is correlated with the time of residence and attachment. Moreover, place attachment can also be expressed through place protective or supportive behaviour.

Since strength of attachment is linked to time of residence one of the opening questions of the interviews was ‘‘how long have you been living here?’’. Most people had been living in the Baviaanskloof for about 10 to 20 years. There were a few who had lived there for 20+ years, and a few that had lived there for less than 10 years. What was interesting to see is how the interviewee that had just moved to the Baviaanskloof mentioned that if she has time off, she likes to go visit her friends in other parts of the country. This shows that even though she obviously feels very strongly drawn to the Baviaanskloof by moving there, she still has strong attachments to social relations elsewhere. This next quote is partly in Afrikaans.

‘’dan zou ik naar George toe gaan, of Stellenbosch. Ehm.. ja. I’ll make a plan to go to George or Stellenbosch to see my friends and stuff, so ja. If I am off I will do it‘’ LR8

Another interviewee also mentioned how she had her husband were almost forced to move out of the Baviaanskloof simply because they could not afford to live there anymore. Instead of moving out they choice instead to rent part of a farm to be able to continue living in the place they love.

‘’we farmed there for the first 4 years and then the interest rate was really high it was like …% and he had lots of … on the farm. So right when we decided to move this place became available for rent, so we started renting it. We didn’t want to move out of the valley because we love living here‘’ LR11

They have been renting this farm for 13 years now. However, they have eventually chosen that they still want to move out of the Baviaanskloof, not because they don’t love it anymore, but because they miss that feeling that their house is will never be fully theirs. This suggests that the lack of ownership inhibited the process of fully incorporating the farm into their sense of self.

‘’we can’t afford the property here.. We don’t really want to move out, but we just want something to call our own‘’ LR11

However, these first examples are the exceptions. When asking all the other interviewees ‘’would you ever consider leaving this place?’’ they all responded with absolutely not! They really feel very strongly connected and attached to the Baviaanskloof. Most of them cannot vision themselves living

41 anywhere else. Overall the local people love their lives in the Baviaanskloof, for better or worse, this is their home which resembles who they are and they express this by never wanting to leave.

‘’...what I can tell you, I like Sewefontein, that was my born place, I die here, not further then Sewefontein‘’ LR3

‘’it is a quality life, it is a beautiful place to live and it is quiet, peaceful. It is just me, what I like. ...I love living here. I will not move or go to another place ever, no never‘’ LR1

Notice the part of the second quote ‘’it is just me’’, which ones again illustrates how this person’s sense of self is tight to the Baviaanskloof.

Place supportive behaviour in the form of environmentally responsible behaviour was also found. Some of the farms had a sign at the gate saying ‘leopard friendly farm’. The leopard is a threatened species and lives in the Baviaanskloof. The farmers were having troubles with the leopard because it would feed on their cattle. Therefore, the leopard used to be shot if it was seen on farmland property. However, many of the farmers in the Baviaanskloof have come to the realization that the leopard is threatened and a beautiful animal and should be protected. Many farmers have chosen not to shoot leopards anymore on their land and they show this with their sign hanging at the gate saying leopard friendly farm. Moreover, two farmers have completely stopped or drastically reduced their amount of cattle to support the restoration of the degraded mountain slopes. These two farms are also the ones who started tourism in the Baviaanskloof.

‘’he was always a conservationist, he was a conservationist farmer. We still farm but not much, because we not have a sustainable income‘’ LR6

Investment in tourism as alternative source of income can thus be seen as place supportive behaviour because it helps to conserve and restore the natural vegetation.

To summarize paragraphs 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 an overview is given in table 4. In the table, positive attachments and expressions of place attachment are illustrated by a plus sign, and negative attachments and expressions of place attachment are illustrated with a minus sign.

Table 4: Overview of description of place, attachments to place and expression of place attachment. A + means a positive contribution to or expression of place attachment, a – means a negative part of place attachment or negative expression of place attachment.

Place Attachment Expression Natural environment Cognition: +Moving to the (general) + Beautiful, wild, recreation, tourist attraction, Baviaanskloof part of identity Affect: + Remaining in the + love, joy, happiness Baviaanskloof Mountains Cognition: +hiking, camping, mountain biking - Moving out of the Affect: Baviaanskloof + love, joy, happiness River Cognition: + Leopard friendly farms + Swimming Affect: + Reducing farming + Love, joy, happiness activities Fields Cognition: + Hiking, horseback riding, braaïng + Investing in tourism Affect: + Love, joy, happiness Wild Fig Forest Cognition: + Bird watching, relaxing Affect: + Love, joy, happiness Build environment Farms Cognition: + Farmers identity, childhood memories, family heritage - Struggle for survival, big responsibility Affect: + Joy, happiness, pride - Sadness, fear Road Cognition: + Tourist attraction - Problem, threat to business Affect: + Content - Frustration, fear Social environment Relationship among farmers Cognition: + Tight community, shared interest/identity, extended family Affect: + Trust, safety, peace Relationship between Cognition: farmers and black community - Apartheid, barrier, us vs. them, worsening working relationship + Willingness to help community Affect: - Guild, distrust, unhappiness Relationship with tourists Cognition: +/- Social interaction Affect: +/- (un)happiness

4.4 Five stages of response to the tourism business case In this paragraph I will present the findings about the five stages of response to the tourism business case. The five stages of the model were: 1) becoming aware of proposed or upcoming place change, 2) interpreting how these changes would affect the current place, 3) evaluating, based on existing cognitive and affective attachments whether these changes would be place enhancing or a threat to the place, 4) coping, here an individual may chose to ignore, accept or reject the place changes, and 5) acting, where an individual can show supportive or resisting behaviour towards the upcoming place changes. As a reminder, in my conceptual model I link stage 2, interpreting, to the triangle element of place, since an individual is envisioning what the place would look like after the proposed place changes. Stage 3, evaluation, was linked to the triangle component of attachment, since the evaluation of the place change is based on the existing cognitive and affective attachments to place. Finally, stage 5, acting, is linked to the triangle element of expression since, place supportive or protective behaviour is described as an expression of someone’s place attachment.

4.4.1 Becoming aware Living lands has been working in the Baviaanskloof for over seven years. During this period they have build close connections with the farmers. For the Four Returns Project Living Lands is working in collaboration with Commonland. To initiate the Four Returns Project and introduce the different business cases, an initiation workshop was held in June 2014 where the Four Returns model was explained to roughly 50 participants, under which many farmers from the Baviaanskloof. The initiation workshop has thus been the start of the project, however, also after the workshop have there been follow up fieldtrips to the Baviaanskloof by Living Lands and the business case developers. Most likely, did the farmers become aware of the tourism development plans either during the initiation workshop or the follow up fieldtrips.

Before I dive into my findings I should note that I was not allowed to directly ask ‘when did you first hear about the Four Returns project or tourism business case’. Instead, to find out about when people first became aware of the project I asked the interviewee’s ‘are you aware of any efforts to future develop tourism in the area?’ This gave many different responses.

One interviewee mentioned how she has been getting help from a trust, which was not related to the Four Returns. She seemed to have no idea about any other tourism development plans for the area.

‘’Yes, I had support to set up my shop and the restaurant. Some sort of trust‘’ LR2

Another interviewee’s mentioned that as long as he can remember Living Lands have been promoting the Baviaanskloof as tourism destination. It came across as if the recently new developments regarding the tourism business case were nothing new.

‘’I remember Living Lands coming here already put the Baviaanskloof on the map as something to look at. So it was a bit of advertisement of its own. So it started with them already. I read of tourism of the Baviaanskloof before I came here‘’ LR7

Only a couple seemed to differentiate the recent developments due to the Four Returns project from previous work that Living Lands and other organizations have been doing in the area. These interviewees either mentioned the initiation workshop as the first time they heard about the project or one of the personal meetings with the main developers of the business cases during one of their field trips to the Baviaanskloof.

‘’…I think at the workshop. I might have met …., not …., … I met for the first time at the workshop. But …. came here a couple of weeks before the workshop. And the four returns is a brand new project right? ….There was a lot happening at that workshop, there were different discussions and things. I wasn’t really part of the restoration and tourism and talk about permaculture.. it was very broad workshop. At the workshop we covered tourism but we didn’t go into depth in any of them‘’ LR4

The lack of awareness came as a surprise to me since the core developer of the tourism business case and myself had visited most of the interviewee’s only a couple of weeks earlier to talk about the project. There seem to be only two likely explanations for the lack of awareness, either the people truly forgot our visit or the message did not get across, or the people want to ignore the project because they feel threatened by it. This last theory was put forth by one of the farmers wives who has been really involved with the project. She mentioned that:

‘’if people say they don’t know about the tourism development plans it is because they feel threatened by the developments’’ LR6

4.4.2 Interpreting For the people that answered earlier that they had no clue about the tourism development plans I had to remind them of our earlier visit and about what had been discussed during our visit, before asking future questions about how they vision the outcome of the project. However this did suggest that they had not given the developments any further thoughts, which makes it difficult to answer how they evaluated the project, how they coped with the project and if they have acted because of the project.

Since the goal of the project is to deliver the four types of return (inspiration, social capital, natural capital, and financial capital) I used these to help structure the findings about the interpretation of place changes due to tourism development.

4.4.2.1 Return of inspiration Return of inspiration as defined by Commonland is about ‘’hope, positive outlook on the future, meaningfulness’’ (Commonland, 2015). Some of the responses that I got to the question ‘’what do you think will change around here if tourism would further develop?’’ fell under this category.

There was a shared vision among all the interviewees that the development of tourism is necessary for their survival in the Baviaanskloof, even though the level of excitement to work with tourist differs a lot. The vision of more tourists coming to the Baviaanskloof thus provides the local people with hope that they can continue living there. Even though the idea of tourism gives these people hope for survival and thus a ‘better’ outlook on the future, this return of inspiration is quite weak.

‘’I am not much of a people person, I don’t like dealing with tourist all day. I would actually prefer to …. before doing that, but because tourism is here and it’s a fairly easy trait to do, I do it’’ LR11

However, there also were three interviewees who clearly stated that they actually really enjoy tourism and love the idea of increasing tourism in the Baviaanskloof. Tourism provides an important sense of meaningfulness to their lives, either through social interactions with the tourists or by contributing to the household income.

‘’ you know what I like, I like the tourism, I only got 2 cottages but before that we were quite secluded, and he was farming and I was keeping the house and you didn’t have a purpose and now with the cottages, and the tourists.. when I cook a meal for them, they appreciate it, now you also do something‘’ LR1

‘’ik zal baye blij zijn als meer toeristen komt. Ik zal mij 100% inzetten als toeristen naar de Baviaanskloof kom. 100%, want ik heb een passion for tourists. More than that, I give a 110%. I give my life for tourists because I like it very very much‘’ LR3

4.4.2.2 Return of social capital Another thing that most of the local people thought the tourism business case would bring, or at least hope it will bring is more jobs for the black community. The reasoning is that currently most of the accommodations are run by the farmers themselves, but an increase in tourists would make it impossible for the farmers to run by themselves and would need more help from the community.

‘’I guess from a local community point of view I hope he starts creating more real jobs for them having good field guides there is a good opportunity to do that. Not just housekeepers, but actually engaging with the guests. I think that’s something that is lacking at the moment. Most of the host are the farmers and the farmer’s wives. I think local people should start doing activities or rough lining or horseback riding or cooking, there should be more engagement with the local people. Whatever it is, there is potential for that as well‘’ LR4

However, one interviewee also mentioned how she was afraid that further tourism development would negatively affect the relationships with the neighbours. In section 4.2.2 it became clear that the farmers feel like a very tight group. This interviewee mentioned how the small tourism developments over the year, previous to the Four Returns Project, have already weakened this bond a little bit. She is afraid that an increase in tourism might further damage the sense of community among the farmers. Tourism is a very demanding business she says and she already feels that over the last years the contact with the neighbours has become less because of it.

‘’that is the only thing, the little negative thing of the tourists because when we came here it was much more quiet then now, because there were not so many tourist and visitors here. ...so we as a group of Baviaanskloof people do not visit each other anymore so often, because we are all busy... So that is the only negative thing that is busy happening in the Baviaanskloof. Because we who stayed here haven’t got the connection anymore as it was in the past. You visit them, but not so often anymore. And you speak to them on telephone but it is a little bit different, that I should say is a negative part of tourists in the Baviaanskloof‘’ LR9

4.4.2.3 Return of natural capital Only two out of eleven local interviewee’s mentioned on their own how the tourism development plans could have a positive impact on the natural environment.

‘’I think at the end the farming stuff can be a bit greener. If the pressure is off the financial ...the income from tourist is not enough yet, not at all. But if you change you can double it. But if I double the beds that I have now I can’t take double the guests in. but if you can double the beds I can still handle it. That would make a huge difference at the farming. …less animals and less pressure on water… you can farm more only on the land and irrigate that‘’ LR10

‘’...If tourism income increases here first the farmers won’t have to farm anymore. …because they are not making money with farming anyway. So they will stop that, which means there would be more water flowing into the Kouga Dam which will water security for people in Port Elizabeth, that’s a huge thing. And then also because of all the labour problems everything happening, they won’t need to have so many livestock on their farm and the overgrazing will stop, because they will make their money for tourist‘’ LR6

Others I had to ask ‘’do you also think it might affect the landscape?’’ to which often the response was ‘’no’’. Moreover, one interviewee thought that the tourism developments would negatively impact the landscape by an increase in litter. It seems that the message of the link between the tourism development plans and the goal of restoration has not come across for many of the locals, or they choose to ignore it.

4.4.2.4 Return of financial capital Out of all responses to the question ‘’What would change here if tourism would further develop?’’ one message became utterly clear, the main focus of tourism for the local people is the increase in income, as without more income, most farmers will probably not survive much longer.

‘’income, income will make a huge difference. Absolutely a big thing‘’ LR6

4.4.2.5 Summary of returns The visions on changes in place due to tourism development are summarized in the table below (see table 5). Positive points are indicated with a plus, negative perspectives are indicated with a minus.

Table 5: Overview of local people’s vision on changes to the Baviaanskloof due to the tourism business case. Positive perspectives are indicated with a plus, negative perspectives are indicated with a minus.

+ A chance for survival + More jobs for + A chance to restore + More income + Meaningfulness by collared community the vegetation contributing to income +/- Increased social - Possibly more interaction with rubbish tourists (pos. & neg.) - Possibly worsening relationships among farmers

4.4.3 Evaluation: threat to place or place enhancement? So, based on the (mis)match between the perspectives on the tourism developments and local people’s existing attachments to place, how did they evaluate the project? I found that there are basically two ways that people approach the idea of more tourism. The first view is that development of tourism it is necessary but they would rather not have it and don’t like it so much. Reasons that people do not like the idea of further tourism development are possibly worsening social relationships among the farmers and the perspective of more rubbish. Worsening relationships is a treat to the current social environment, while the increase in rubbish would threaten the natural environment.

‘’if they can survive from tourism some of them would not want to do because they prefer their privacy, others would want to do because is just so much benefits not to farm‘’ LR6

‘’in the first ten minutes you can see if people want to talk to you or want to be on their own. On the one hand I am afraid we are going to sit there every night till 10 o clock‘’ LR11

The second view is that development of tourism is actually an enhancement to the Baviaanskloof. That the benefits go beyond just the financial side of things, beyond just survival. As shown earlier, to some tourism is an enhancement to their lives by providing meaningfulness, social interactions with the outside world in an otherwise very excluded area, and a chance to restore the vegetation because there could be fewer cattle on the mountain hills. These people thus evaluate tourism as an enhancement of both the social and the natural environment of the Baviaanskloof.

‘’...it is good because you meet so many people from so far, so yes, it is definitely a good thing that is busy happening in the Baviaanskloof’’ LR9

‘’…for me it’s fatally, fatally important that tourism should develop here and increase‘’ LR6

4.4.4 Coping Since some farmers were not aware of the Four Returns Project it is difficult to answer how they are coping with it. However, for the ones that were aware of the project and have clearly given it further thought this is possible.

I think the best way to describe how people who are aware are coping with the plans to further develop tourism in the area is acceptance. The local people seem to have accepted the idea that this is probably the best way forward even though some might not like it because of reasons mentioned in the previous sections. For the people who in a perfect world would rather not increase tourism, money ultimately is the deciding factor for the acceptance of the project.

‘’I would rather not have the people, but I got to have the money. And things are going to grow anyways and I can choose to grow with it or stay behind and stand on the side line‘’ LR7

However, the level of acceptance currently only goes so far. One thing that at this point defiantly seems of the table is to give up farming all together. The attachments and personal identity tied to farming is something that they cannot give up yet.

‘’but you know, I think, it will never be only a tourism area, because the people that are staying here are people from the farm, they are farmers and I don’t think they will ever stop and only working with tourists‘’ LR11

This also becomes prevalent out of what this interviewee’s mentions. She and her husband are some of the head runners in developing tourism and reducing their farming activities. Even though they are hardly farming anymore, her husband does not like it when someone says that they are no longer farming.

‘’...so we don’t farm anymore but I get in trouble with my husband when I say that we don’t farm anymore‘’ LR 11

To conclude, the people that are aware of the project seem to have accepted the idea of investing in further development of tourism in the area as long as their identity as farmers stays cultivated. The farmers have accepted it either because they feel like tourism is really an enhancement to place or because of the much needed money.

4.4.5 Acting No signs of place protective behaviour were found during my visits, however out of the interviews with the experts it became clear how in earlier stages of the project Living Lands and the business case developers did receive a lot of resistance. Initially, there were ideas to operate more collectively which was received with strong rejection by the local people.

‘’in the end I think it a question of control. And there is where the priority of the farmer is, he wants control over his land. Whether its tourism or farming. That is just something you shouldn’t temper with, and try to take away. So we experienced a lot of resistance on ideas like consolidating all the land into one big nature reserve‘’ ER1

Also part of the tourism development plans in an earlier stage was to introduce more wildlife in the area. Also this idea was strongly rejected by the farmers because they do not want to give up their feeling of safety and freedom to be outdoors without risking an attack by for example a buffalo. This next quote comes from one of the business case developers who told me about one of his experiences with one of the farmers. The farmer explains to the expert how ideas like introducing wildlife clashes with their place attachment to feel free and safe outdoors.

‘’he just took me through a process to help me understand that for example they don’t want to transform the heartland into a massive nature reserve and introducing buffalo breeding and rhino breeding programs. And he says it will never work there because he doesn’t want to compromise the freedom to walk on his land‘’ ER1

At this stage there are only signs of supportive behavior towards the project. These signs are the active participation of some of the local people in workshops organized by Living Lands, and local people already preparing or thinking of new ways to expend their tourism businesses.

4.4.6 Summary of five stages of response to the tourism business case In this section I will give a graphic summery of the response from the local people to the proposed place changes caused by the tourism business case (figure 5).

• Some people seem unaware of the Four Returns Project

Becoming • Others became aware during the Initiation workshop held by Living Lands aware

+ A chance for + More jobs for + A chance to + More income survival community restore the Interpretation + Meaningfulness +/- Increased social vegetation interaction with - Possibly more by contributing to tourists (pos. & neg.) rubbish income - Possibly worsening relationships among farmers

• About half seem tourism development as neccesary but is not to happy about it

• The other half think tourism development would be an enhancement to the Evaluation Baivaanskloof

•The general way to cope with the Four Returns Project is acceptence, as long as the local people can maintain their identity as farmers Coping

•In early stages of the project the local people rejected and protested against some proposed changes like sharing land and the introduction of dangerous wildlife

Acting •Now there seems to only be supportive actions like active participation in meetings and planning of new tourist accomodations and activities

Figure 7: Summary of five stages of response to the tourism business case.

4.5 Consideration of place attachment in tourism business case Paragraphs 4.2 till 4.4 were about the perspective of the local people on the landscape and on the tourism development plans. This paragraph is written from the perspective of the experts from Living Lands and Commonland, as well as my personal evaluation of the Four Returns Project.

Since the Baviaanskloof is a biodiversity hotspot, the unsustainable farming practices had already attracted the attention of other nature conservationist organizations in the 80’s. These other organizations have tried several intervention strategies, one of the most radical interventions being the proposition of farmers and other people living in the Baviaanskloof to move out of the area. These interventions, who clearly had no consideration for the place attachment of the local people, where received with harsh resistance. These clashes caused troublesome relationships between farmers and local inhabitants and nature conservationists (Oude Munnink & de Vries, n.d.).

In the following sections I will describe how place attachment was taken into consideration in the Four Returns Project, and specifically in the tourism business case.

4.5.1 Preparation work Living Lands Before Commonland got involved with working in the Baviaanskloof, Living Lands had been working there for over 7 years. The work of Living Lands in the Baviaanskloof has been vital as preparation for the Four Returns project.

Living Lands have what they call a ‘landscape mobilizer’, a person that goes into the Baviaanskloof on a regular basis and other operational areas to build good connections with the local people. This function used to be done by Marijn Zwinkels, who is one of the creators and directors of Living Lands. Marijn used to drive every second week to the Baviaanskloof to speak with the landowners in order to build and maintain a close relationship with them. Currently the function of landscape mobilizer is fulfilled by Justin Gird. I found this job critically important with regards to taking local people’s place attachment into consideration in landscape planning. By visiting the Baviaanskloof regularly Living Lands really good a ‘feel’ for the landscape and the people. It enables Living Lands to understand the landscape from the perspective of the local people, to understand what the local people are attached to and why certain things carry such a strong attachment. Understanding the landscape from the local people’s perspective is vital for making landscape interventions that ‘fit’ the landscape.

‘’I was the landscape mobilizer speaking to the landowners. I did a lot of one on one interviews in the area with the farmers. I know them all very well and know their wives and children‘’ ER3

Moreover, Living Lands has succeeded to make the farmers of the Baviaanskloof realize that the way they have been farming for many years is unsustainable. It has been a long process, but through constant communication with the farmers they now also acknowledge that things need to change. This mindset switch within the farmers has been vital preparation for the start of the Four Returns Project in collaboration with Commonland.

‘’then we realized for the famers to do this is kind of a big thing and first we need to make sure that they want it. So then we were engaging a lot with the farmers, a lot of interactions and eventually they saw the benefits and they also saw that the way they are farming now they are farming backwards and they need to make a switch to a more sustainable development‘’ ER3

4.5.2 Strategy behind the Four Returns Project After Living Lands had successfully convinced the farmers that things needed to change, Commonland offered a helping hand. Commonland has more of an economic approach and so together Commonland and Living Lands started the Four Returns Project that use sustainable business cases to transform the landscape. Living Lands academic and local knowledge of the landscape has been very important for the selection of business cases that have to fit the landscape. The tourism business case is very suitable for the Baviaanskloof for two reasons. First of all, it fits the physical landscape because the Baviaanskloof is a beautiful, wild, biodiversity hotspot and thus forms a natural tourist attraction. Secondly, tourism was already upcoming in the Baviaanskoof, a development that was started by some of the local farmers themselves. The selection of tourism as business case therefore builds on previously existing attachments and developments.

Another important strategy with regards to considering local people’s place attachment in the project has been a bottom-up approach. This approach is based on the philosophy that any intervention in a landscape should be driven by the people who live and work on the land. In practice this bottom-up approach was realized through constant engagement with the local people, for example through workshops and regular field trips into the Baviaanskloof. During these fieldtrips the landscape mobilizer from Living Lands introduced Commonland’s business case developers to the local people. According to the developers this trust building was vital, as the people from the Baviaanskloof are somewhat sceptical of outsiders coming in.

‘’after I came to the kloof a few times with Justin, and Justin is a really important ally for us, because he represents Living Lands directly. The farmers like him very much, and he has been working successfully with them to get the conservancy going. …he was really successful with his engagements with the farmers. So he has got a trust relationship with them. I have got a farming background, not really, but Justin is just one of them. He is really one of them‘’ ER1

The business case developers seemed aware of their position as outsiders in the eyes of the local people, as well as that their work would put the local people through a psychological and emotional process of disruption. The developers used the field trips to build trust with the local farmers, and to get a good sense of the landscape in order to develop the business cases. Moreover, one of the developers even mentioned that he finds it really important to be part of the disruption process caused to the local people and to sense if the local people are ready to undertake the next steps.

‘’...I guess it is like all over the world but especially in South Africa you can’t move ahead if you don’t consider the psychological process. And obviously we are not psychological experts, but at least you have to acknowledge that these are major limiting or enabling factors that you have to incorporate in your strategy‘’ ER1

To which I ask: ‘’is that what these trips are about for you?‘’

‘’it really is. So it obviously to really get a sense of the environment and to visually see what you are working with. That helps us to develop better business cases, more creatively. The other side is to be part of the mental process that the guys are going through to prepare for change‘’ ER1

4.5.3 Place attachment consideration in the tourism business case As described in the methodology, currently two business cases are in progress within the Four Returns Project and this study specifically focussed on the tourism business case. Therefore, I conducted an interview with the core developer of the tourism business case to find out how and if he consciously took into consideration local people’s place attachment.

To see if and how the developer had incorporated local peoples place attachment into the business case I asked him what the business case would look like in practice. First of all he mentioned that there is a problem in the Baviaanskloof that currently most tourists are only staying one or two nights. His goal, he says, is to make the tourist stay for three or four nights. By doing so, the cleaning costs would remain the same and the profits would increase significantly. He also mentioned that the current prices that are being charged for accommodations is way too low, but that no one dares to put his or her prizes up. Therefore, he will advice everyone to collectively increase the prices to also increase the profit that the farmers gain from tourism. Additionally, he advices to implement seasonal prices, which should also help increase profits. Next, he explained that the current marketing is very old-fashioned and unclear. Where now every accommodation has its own website, he advices to build one comprehensive website that shows all the accommodations of the whole Baviaanskloof. Lastly, he advices to promote package activities to showcase the activities that tourist can undertake and promote longer stays.

It became clear to me that he had developed the business case purely from an economical perspective, not consciously taking place attachment in consideration. However, in this case it seems like the two go hand in hand. In practice, the business case advices very small changes for the local people, like building a better website, and implementing seasonal prices, nothing like a big five star hotel or anything. This is also something he emphasized during his field trips to the Baviaanskloof that the changes would be small.

To summarize, place attachment was taken into consideration in the Four Returns Project by the preoperational work from Living Lands, the selection of business cases that fit the landscape, the bottom-up strategy of the Four Returns Project, and the minimal changes that the tourism business case tends to bring. If we compare the level of support from the farmers to the tourism business case with the previous harsh resistance to other proposed interventions in the area, I think it is fair to say that the consideration for farmers place attachment into the Four Returns Project has definitely helped to gain the acceptance of the farmers to the project. That being said, it is difficult to make exact statements about how many people support the tourism business case based on these considerations of place attachment.

5. Discussion

The purpose of this research has been to explore the role of place attachment for public acceptance of landscape restoration projects. This chapter looks back and reflects on the found results, theories, and methodology that were used in this study. First the results that were found in this study will be discussed in paragraph 5.1. Then, I will reflect on the theories that were used for this study and the conceptual framework. In the last paragraph, the methods are discussed.

5.1 Discussion results In this paragraph some of the found results are discussed and compared with relating literature. I will discuss the results in the same order as presented in the results chapter, starting with results about place attachment (expression) and thereafter discussing the results regarding the perceptions on the tourism business case.

The findings about place, the social and physical environment of the Baviaanskloof, are hard to compare to other studies since every place is unique. However, the findings on place can be compared with literature on landscapes. Landscapes were described as a social construction from a particular set of values and beliefs (Greider & Garkovich, 1994), as mosaic of different land-uses (van Oosten & Hijweege, 2012) important to different actors across different scales (van Oosten, 2013). This vision of landscapes fit well with the findings from this study. The physical landscape consists of two major land-use patches, the protected nature reserve and the farmlands. These different land- use patches reflect the importance of the landscape to different actors across different scales, namely, the landscape is important conservation ground for the regional government and also important to the local people who have been farming there for multiple generations. Unfortunately, the history of farming is also reflected on the mountain slopes which have become degraded due to many years of overgrazing. Moreover, landscapes were described as temporary events (Massay, 2006), and landscape planning as an act of maintaining, challenging and negotioan of landscape meanings (Davenport & Anderson, 2005). This vision is also supported by the results because the Four Returns Project is a process through which new landscape meanings are negotiated, namely, the shift in meaning from farmland to tourism desitation.

Next, I will discuss the results regarding place attachment. The first interesting finding was that the local people were attached to both the physical and social environment. This is in line with the study by Hidalgo & Hernandez (2001) who also argue that places consist of both the physical and social environment and that they both form objects of attachments. What was interesting though is that it seemed like people from the Baviaanskloof where just as attached, if not more attached, to the physical environment then to the social environment. This is in contradiction with the findings from Hidalgo & Hernandez (2001), as their study revealed that people are stronger attached to the social environment. Since the Baviaanskloof is part a world heritage site and a protected nature reserve, it only seems logical that people living in the Baviaanskloof love the physical environment at least as much as the social environment. It should be noted however, that I did not measure the strength of attachment on a measurable scale. Different then the results from Hidalgo & Hernandez (2001), my results suggest that the strength of an individual's attachment to the social or the physical environment is likely to be place and person dependent.

Another finding from this study is that the farmers living in the Baviaanskloof form a tight community together. When we compare this result with other studies this strong sense of community can be explained by the studies of McMillan and Chavis (1986) and Nasar and Julian (1995). According to McMillan and Chavis (1986) and Nasar and Julian (1995) there are two types of communities being communities connected through lifestyle and common interest, and communities of place. Communities connected through lifestyle can live separately from each other but for example share the same religion, whereas members of a community of place are connected through geographical location. The farmer’s community of the Baviaanskloof seems to be both a community of shared lifestyle and a community of place. The shared lifestyle and interest in this sense is farming and the place is the extremely excluded Baviaanskloof. Because the farmer’s community is a community of interest and a community of place, this explains the strong sense of community that was found during this study.

The results regarding the expression of place attachment were basically as expected. Almost all the interviewee’s stated that they want to keep living in the Baviaanskloof for the rest of their lives because they love it there. This is in line with the literature on place attachment by Hidalgo & Hernandez (2001) the desire to remain closeness to a place is the core of place attachment. Additionally, my results also showed that length of residence is important for the bond. New people seemed less attached then the inhabitants that have lived there longer. This is in line with the study by Tuan (1975).

The second part of the results focussed on the five stages of response to place change due to the development of the tourism business case. The first interesting finding here was that many people in the Baviaanskloof seemed unaware of the project or did not interpret it as something different then the past work by Living Lands in the Baviaanskloof. At first I was surprised by this lack of awareness, however it later turned out to be part of the strategy behind the Four Returns Project. Living Lands and Commonland purposely do not use words like ‘business case’ in conversations with the farmers to speak about the project. The whole strategy behind the Four Returns Project; the bottom-up approach, slow and small changes, and strategic communication seems to be a good strategy to cultivate place attachment and avoid local people from feeling threatened by developments as has been common in other development projects (Devine-Wright, 2009 & Masuda & Garvin, 2006). Instead of feeling threatened by the developments the farmers evaluated the tourism business case as necessary or enhancing for the Baviaanskloof.

Based on the stories, literature and document I had gathered about the Baviaanskloof, I expected to find more resistance towards the idea of developing tourism, since tourism is completely different then farming. It was only after I found out that tourism had already been introduced in the Baviaanskloof many years ago and that every farm is already somehow involved in tourism, it made sense that the project was accepted. I think that over the years, the farmers have come to realize that where they live is really special and the natural beauty of the area is something that tourists want to see. Therefore, the business case also matches well with the landscape.

The model from Devine-Wright (2009) predicts that is the place changes are evaluated as an enhancement the corresponding actions will be that of support for those changes. In line with the model, I also only found supportive behaviour towards the tourism business case in the form of active participation in workshops and meetings. This supports previous research that also illustrated

55 that there is a relationship between place attachment consideration and civil society participation in development projects (Manzo & Perkins, 2005; Vaske and Kobrin, 2001; Payton, Fulton, & Anderson, 2005).

Lastly, even though not the focus of this research, the results of this study suggest that there is a relation between trust in management agencies and their understanding of local people’s place attachment. In this study I found that the local people strongly trust Living Land’s landscape mobilizer whose job is to make regular visits to the Baviaanskloof to connect with the local people. The regular visits of the landscape mobilizer have given him a good ‘feel’ for the landscape from the perspective of the local people, which hypothesizes that this understanding of local people’s place attachment could be an important reason why they trust him and Living Lands in general regarding their work in the area. This hypothesis is supported by the study of Payton, Fulton & Anderson (2005) who’s study on influence of place attachment and trust on civic action came to a similar hypothesis, namely: ‘’Further, a positive relationship between emotional place attachment and individual trust indicates that increasing place attachment was associated with increasing individual trust. This finding supports the hypothesis that place attachment can facilitate the development of interpersonal trust.‘’ Payton, Fulton, & Anderson, 2005, p. 525. Little is known about the relationship between trust and place attachment and this hypothesis could be studied in further research.

5.2 Discussion theory This paragraph reflects upon the use of theory as explained in the theoretical framework. In chapter 2 I already explained my choices for the adoption of the model by Scannell and Gifford (2010), therefore I will now only focus on the benefits and constrains of the conceptual model that was created for this study.

The conceptual framework that was created for this study combined the model by Scannell and Gifford (2010) and the model on psychological response to upcoming place changes by Devine- Wright (2009) in order to study the evaluation and behavioural response to upcoming place changes due to the Four Returns Project. The most important modification to the model of Scannell and Gifford (2010), and other place attachment models, is that this model added a time dimension or linearity.

I will start off by comparing this conceptual model with a very popular sense of place model by Jorgensen & Stedman (2001) and showing how this model contirbutes to a more in-depth attitude based analysis of place attachment. The model used by Jorgensen & Stedman (2001) use the umbrella term sense of place to cover the elements of place identity (relation between self and place), place attachment (emotions), and place dependence (functional attachment). The way that they measured sense of place is by surveying lake property owners of a certain area, using four statements for each element (identity, attachment, dependence) that the respondent had to answer on a scale from fully disagree to fully agree. An example of such question would be ‘’Everything about my lake property is a reflection of me’’ (Jorgensen & Stedman, 2001, p. 241). The benefit of this approach is that you can easily survey large groups of people and end up with a measurable strength of attachment. However, the drawback is that you do not gather the information about why someone for example feels that his or her lake property reflects their own identity. In Jorgensen & Stedman’s (2001) reflection on their attitude based sense of place model, they acknowledge this limitation of their model and suggest that future research could try to get a better over-all evaluation

56 of the setting, description of cognitions about the setting, and behavioural intentions associated with the place. The conceptual model of this study does exactly this. The linear elements of place, (place) attachment, and (place attachment) expression, allows for a very structured and in-depth analysis. A researcher can come to a new location and first observe and learn as much as possible about a place, or in, Jorgensen and Stedman’s (2001) words ‘get an over-all evaluation of the setting’. Then, when the researcher conducts interviews with the inhabitants he or she learns about the meanings and emotions that are tight to the specific features of place (description of cognitions about the setting). Ones place attachment is understood, certain behaviours like place supportive or place protected actions can also be understood (behavioural intentions associated with the place). Additionally, I believe that analyzing place attachment through this structure would allow landscape planners to predict which landscape modifications would likely be met with resistance and why.

The secondly benefit of the added time dimension to place attachment is that it allowed for the combination of models on place attachment with models on place attachment disruption. The order of the elements of place, (place) attachment, (place attachment) expression fitted well with the five stages of psychological response to place change. The model therefore proved very suitable to study how upcoming landscape changes would (not) disrupt pre-existing place-bases meanings and emotional attachments, and explain behavioural actions to a landscape modification project.

Another benefit of this model is that it incorporates both positive and negative meanings and emotions connected to place, while many other models purely look at the positive connection. I believe that both positive and negative meanings and emotions should be understood to have a full understanding of someone’s place attachment.

One thing about the conceptual framework that did not fit perfectly to the case was the linear nature of the Devine-Wright (2009) which suggests that people go through the steps one by one and only one time. As a result of the Four Returns Project following a bottom-up approach, the business cases are more of a negotiation over a longer period of time. Every time that information or new changes were proposed, people could cycle through the steps of becoming aware, interpreting, evaluating, coping, and acting. The linearity of the model is probably more suitable for top-down landscape interventions. However, even with top-down interventions it could be that people recycle through the steps when for example new information becomes available through media.

Also, I would like to reflect back on the triangle of my conceptual model with the elements of place, attachment, and expression. One of my critiques to the model by Scannell and Gifford (2010) has been the overlap between the dimensions of person, place and process. In my conceptual model I tried to reduce this overlap by making the new structure of place, attachment, expression. I chose to define place as the object of attachment consisting of the social and physical environment and separated it from attachment, affect and cognition. This definition of place without affect and cognition is contradictory with the concept of place as described as centres of meaning by for example Tuan (1975). The benefit of less overlap in the model due to the deconstruction of ‘place attachment’ into the elements of place and attachment outweighed the small mismatch in definition with other literature on place.

Lastly, it should be noted that people's place attachment can also change because of new experiences with a place, or through changes in the way that people vision themselves, which can

57 change their relationship with place. This however, falls outside of the goal of this research and conceptual framework.

Overall I believe that this model is suitable to study the psychological response to any upcoming place change in relatively small communities.

5.3 Discussion methods In this final paragraph I will reflect on the methodological choices and how they might have affected the results of this research. I will start off with one possible critique on this research, namely this is a single case study research. For general critique on case study research I refer to Flyvbjerg (2006) and because I have already explained the choice for a case study research in the methodology, I will purely focus on why I have chosen for a single case study and the impact this choice has had on the results. Secondly, I will discuss the selection of respondents and the impact of this for the results.

One may argue that a single case study research is weak and that multiple cases studies would have been better because it allows for comparison between the results. In theory this might be true, however in research one also has to deal with practical constrains. The use of multiple case studies simply was not feasible because of several reasons. First of all, studying another landscape restoration project would most likely have taken me to another part of the world which cost both a lot of time and money, which are limited for a master thesis. Secondly, and more importantly, studying multiple cases within the time limited of several months would have resulted in less in depth understanding of each case which is in contrast with the goal of this research, which is to get an in depth understanding of the place based meanings and emotional attachments and the impact on place attachment due to the landscape restoration project. Therefore, a second case would not have been in line with the goal of this research. Lastly, this study introduced a new model to study place attachment disruption caused by upcoming changes. The explorative nature of this research to test this model was another reason to use a single case study.

Another methodological choice that has to be discussed is the selection of interviewee's. Most of the interviewee's that were conducted with the local people of the Baviaanskloof were farmer’s wives, and only a couple of farmers. The choice to interview primarily women had multiple reasons, the most important one being the willingness to be interviewed. However, I do believe that the lack of men interviewee's has had an impact on the results. On the one hand I think that women in general are more open to talk about their emotions and feelings then men are, which I think was positive with regards to learning about their place attachment. On the other hand, the women in the Baviaanskloof are also the ones which are generally more involved in the tourism. The lack of men interviewee's could therefore have given a misrepresentation of the general sense of acceptance and willingness to participate in further tourism development. Ultimately, the men do the most farming and therefore the fear of losing their identity as farmers might be stronger for the men than for the women.

6. Conclusion & recommendations

In order to help achieve restoration goals, the aim of this research was to explore the role of place attachment for public support to landscape restoration projects. This thesis looked at a landscape restoration project located in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa. The restoration project is based on two sustainable business cases. One business case focuses on farmers working more cooperatively, the other business case focuses on the possibility for farmers to switch to tourism as main source of income. The focus of this research was on the business case that tries to make a switch from farming to tourism as key income driver. To study this landscape restoration project, three research questions were made which will be answered below.

1. What are the meanings and emotions that local people attach to the Baviaanskloof, South Africa?

To answer the question of what meanings and emotions are attached to the Baviaanskloof, I will first recap on what the place looks like. The Baviaanskloof is a World heritage site consisting of a protected nature reserve and the Baviaanskloof Heartland, which is the valley and farmland where the people live. The natural environment of the Baviaanskloof is characterised by the wide mountain ranges with many different types of vegetation. Unfortunately, many mountain slopes in the Heartland are degraded due to many years of overgrazing, leading to increased floods and droughts. The build environment is characterised by the farms and the main road that can take you from one end of the Baviaanskloof to the other. Regarding the social environment, the Baviaanskloof is only home to two social groups, the white farmers and the two black communities. Unfortunately, most farmers are fighting for survival as their farming practices are decreasing in value year after year. The farmers now seek alternative forms of income from the upcoming tourism in the area.

Strong attachments where found to both the physical and the social environment. All the local people love and enjoy the natural environment for its beauty, wildness, and recreational purposes. Specific features of the natural environment that held important meanings were the mountains, the river, the fields and the wild fig forest. Also, the farmers start to realize how they are dependent on the natural environment since it serves as a tourist attraction. Additionally, some people feel like their sense of self is connected to the natural environment.

The attachment to the build environment consisted of more mixed meanings and feelings, both positive and negative. The farmers hold many positive childhood memories to the farms, but the farms are also business which the they are dependent on, therefore holding important economical meaning that has to be approached rationally. Also, the farms are considered family heritage. The hard financial times make the farmers also speak of the farms as a burden and big responsibility. Additionally, the farms are very important to the local people because they are part of their identity as farmers. Attached to the farms are thus both feelings of joy, happiness and pride, as well as sadness and fear that the farmers might not be able to pass the farm on to their children.

Attachments to the social environment consisted of relationships among the farmers and relationships between the farmers and the black community. The farmers feel like they are part of a

59 strong community that helps and supports each other. The relationship between the farmers and the black community is less positive. Apartheid is still present which causes more tension between the farmers and the community members. Some farmers believe that there is need for more support towards the community, others are less willing to support the community because of worsening work relationships.

Expressions of place attachment where found in the forms of people moving to the Baviaanskloof and planning to remain in the Baviaanskloof for the rest of their lives, as well as, pro-environmental behaviour like protecting the leopard and reducing the amount of cattle held to stimulate restoration.

2. What are local people’s perceptions on, and behavioural response to, the proposed changes to the Baviaanskloof, South Africa, by the landscape restoration project?

A couple of months after the initiation workshop of the Four Returns Project, I went to the Baviaanskloof to speak to the local people about their perceptions on the tourism business case. Most people became aware of the tourism development plans during the initiation workshop or during one of the field trips to the Baviaanskloof by the business case developers where they spoke one on one with the farmers. However, some local people seemed to be unaware of the tourism development plans. The lack of awareness makes it difficult to draw strong conclusions about local people’s perceptions on the business case, because they have not given the project much thought.

One thing that all the farmers agreed upon was that the further development of tourism in the Baviaanskloof would provide much needed extra income and would thereby increase their chances of survival. Also, most farmers thought that tourism would bring more jobs for the community. Only two out of eleven locals however, mentioned how the development of tourism would allow for more restoration in the area, which indicates that the link between the business case and restoration is not clear to everyone.

Some farmers enjoy having tourist come over, while others do not like the social interaction with the tourists so much. Therefore, about half of the farmers evaluate the business case as an enhancement for the Baviaanskloof. The other half evaluates the developments as a necessity for survival, but dislikes the idea of engaging with the tourists and giving up part of their privacy.

The general way of coping with the tourism development plans is acceptance, as long as the local people feel like they can maintain their identity as farmers. I believe that since tourism has already slowly been developing in the Baviaanskloof over the last 15 years, people have gotten used to the idea that tourism will be part of the future of the Baviaanskloof. Tourism is not something completely new anymore to the farmers, and the tourism business case is simply trying to take tourism to the next level by making some small changes. Therefore, the disruptive effect of the tourism business cased is minimal.

Currently, there is only supportive behaviour towards the business case by means of actively participating in meetings and workshops.

3. How does the landscape restoration project in the Baviaanskloof, South Africa, take local people's place attachment into account?

The work by the local NGO, Living Lands, in the Baviaanskloof prior to the start of the Four Returns Project has been crucial with regards to incorporating local people’s place attachment into the project. The extensive work by Living Lands in the Baviaanskloof has given them in-depth understanding of the landscape from both an academic and a local perspective. This understanding of the landscape allowed for the development of two business cases that fit well within the landscape and the local people. Additionally, Living Lands has been successful in building trust with the local people and have made the farmers realize that their current farming practices are unsustainable and that things have to change.

Another important strategy behind the Four Returns Project that has helped to incorporate local people’s place attachment into the project has been the bottom-up approach. Using a bottom-up approach allowed for a negotiation of new landscape meanings versus a plan that forces new landscape meanings. Also, the business case developers were aware that the business cases are an emotional disruptive event for the local people.

Lastly, the tourism business case only proposes small changes such as: building a better website, collectively raising the prices of tourist accommodations and incorporating seasonal prizing. The small changes prevent the farmers from feeling overwhelmed and being completely out of their comfort zone. The slow changes and cultivation of local people’s place attachment into the tourism business case has defiantly been beneficial for the acceptance and support towards the project.

If we compare the level of support from the farmers to the tourism business case with the previous harsh resistance to other proposed interventions in the area, I think it is fair to say that the consideration for farmers place attachment into the Four Returns Project has definitely helped to gain the acceptance of the farmers to the project.

Finally, I like to make a main conclusion about the role of place attachment for the public support to landscape restoration projects. The results from this exploratory case study research indicate that indeed the cultivation of place attachment into a landscape restoration project can help to gain public acceptance and support towards the project. If this study has shown anything, it is that landscape restoration practice is much more than an ecological act, it is also an act of negotiating new meanings to a landscape which is a physiological disruptive process. As Greider and Garkovich (1994) already concluded, it is important for any consideration environmental change to understand the meaning of the change for the cultural groups that have incorporated that aspect of the environment into their definition of themselves. Understanding and cultivating the place-based meanings and emotional ties to the landscape in landscape restoration projects can help reach global set restoration goals by preventing public resistance as has been common in landscape restoration projects in the past.

Recommendations First of all, I would recommend Commonland to continue with the development of business cases that cultivate local people’s place attachment in order to increase chances of public acceptance and support for their landscape restoration projects. To do so, I recommend to always partner up with local organizations like Living Lands that have a good understanding of the landscape, both

61 academically and from the perspective of the local people. The benefits of the partnership with Living Lands include the already established trust with the local people and development of business cases that build on existing developments in the area, cultivating pre-existing attachments. In other words business cases that fit the landscape.

To Living Lands I recommend the following:

 Keep monitoring the perceptions of local people towards the Four Returns Project and use these insights on place attachment to possibly overcome resistance, if resistance is met in the future.

To monitor the perceptions towards the project, I recommend to maintain the regular field trips to the Baviaanskloof at least once a month, and keep up the farm to farm visits to talk about people’s vision on how things are developing. Also, I would communicate to the farmers that if they at any point feel that the tourism developments are going in the wrong direction that they can contact Living Lands landscape mobilizer either by phone or by email. If it turns out that multiple people are unhappy with a certain development without a clear explanation, I recommend looking back at the found attachments to try and explain and overcome this resistance. For example, part of the initial tourism business case was to introduce more wildlife in the Baviaanskloof, which the farmers where not happy about. The resistance could be explained by looking at the farmers place attachment, namely that the farmers do not want to give up their feelings of safety and freedom to be outdoors.

 Use place attachment insights in future engagements with people in other areas.

I recommend Living Lands whenever they engage with new people in a new area to use the conceptual place attachment expression model. Start off with observing the natural and build environment as well as the people that live there. Then when engaging with the people, learn about what the place means to them, what emotional value specific features of place carry. This can either be done through interviews or larger group discussions. Next, try to cultivate the found attachments into the goals that you as Living Lands want to achieve in the area. I believe that this is currently already done quite well by the landscape mobilize, however the conceptual model might provide a nice structure to analyze new areas and new people.

 Communicate clearly to the farmers that the goal of improving tourism is to provide them with an alternative source of income, thus expecting a reduced amount of farming in return.

What I found was that currently only two out of eleven interviewee’s where clear about the idea that in return for the help they get in upgrading their tourism businesses it is expected that they reduce their amount of cattle to give room for restoration. Since the final goal is to restore the landscape I recommend that this goal should be communicated clearly to the farmers. The way I recommend doing this is, ones the business case is completely worked out, to organize another workshop where the concrete tourism development plans can be explained to the farmers, as well as, where the expected return from the farmers can be reemphasized for this professional help. If this return is not communicated clearly at this important check point, it might cause problems later on if farmers are not willing to reduce their farming causing Commonland not to reach their restoration goal.

The results of this study suggested that when development organizations invest in understanding local people’s place attachment this helps with building trust. Currently there is little knowledge

62 about this possible link and I would therefore recommend the academic world to do further research on the role of place attachment in trust building. I hypothesize that this link could work as follows: understanding someone’s place attachment involves understanding how someone’s identity is connected to place. Therefore, by learning about someone’s place attachment you automatically also learn a lot about this person. If someone feels like he or she is understood, this builds trust in the other person.

Bibliography Arefi, M. (2007). Non-place and placelessness as narratives of loss: Rethinking the notion of place. Journal of Urban Design , 179-193.

Boedhihartono, A. K., & Sayer, J. (2012). Forest Landscape Restoration: Restoring What and for Whom. In J. Stanturf, D. Lamb, & P. Madsen, Forest Landscape Restoration (pp. 309-232). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.

Boeije, H. (2010). Analysis in Qualitive Research. Londen: Sage.

Brown, B. B., & Perkins, D. D. (1992). Disruptions in place attachment. In I. Altman, & S. M. Low, Place Attachment (pp. 279-304). Springer Us.

Brown, G., & Raymond, C. (2007). The relationship between place attachmetn and landscape values: Toward mapping place attachment. Applied Geography , 89-111.

Buizer, M., & Turnhout, E. (2011). Text, talk, things and the subpolitics of preforming place . Geoforum , 530-538.

Burns, R. B. (1997). Introduction to Research Methods. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire.

Commonland. (2015, 04 12). Retrieved 04 15, 2015, from Commonland: http://www.commonland.com/

Crane, W. (2006). Biodiversity Conservation and Land Rights in South Africa: Whither the Farm Dwellers? Stellenbosch: University of Stellenbosch.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage.

Darkoh, M. B. (1996). The Nature, Causes and Consequences of Desertification in The Drylands of Africa. Land Degradation & Development , 1-20.

Darkoh, M. B. (1998). The Nature, Causes and Consequences of Desertification in The Drylands of Africa. Land Degradation & Development , 1-20.

Davenport, M. A., & Anderson, D. H. (2005). Getting From Sense of Place to Place Based Managment: An interpretive Investigation of Place Meanings and Perceptions of Landscpe Change. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal , 625-641.

Devine-Wright, P. (2009). Rehtinking NIMBYism: The Role of Place Attachment and Place Identity in Explaning Place-protective Action. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology , 426-441.

Devine-Wright, P., & Howes, Y. (2010). Disruption to place attachment and the protection of restorative environments: A wind energy case study. Journal of Environment Psychology , 271-280.

DeWalt, K. M., & DeWalt, B. R. (2011). Participant Observation: A Guide for Fieldworkers. Altamira Press.

Ferwerda, W. (2012). Nature Resilience. Rotterdam School of Managemetn, Erasmus University ia.aw. IUCN Commission on Ecosystem Managment .

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five Mistunderstandings About Case-study Reserach. Qualitative Inquiry , 219- 245.

Gilbert, N. (2008). Researching Social Life. Londen: Sage.

Greider, T., & Garkovich, L. (1994). Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Environment . Rural Sociology , 1-24.

Gubrium, J. F., & Holstein, J. A. (2002). Handbook of Interview Research: Context and Method. Sage.

Guilmoure, D. (2008). Understanding the Landscape Mosaic. In J. Rietbergen-McCracken, S. Maginnis, & A. Sarre, The forest landscape restoration handbook (pp. 39-48). Taylor & Francis.

Hidalgo, M. C., & Hernandez, B. (2001). Place Attachment: Conceptual and Emperical Questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 273-281.

Johnson, P. M., Mayrand, K., & Paquin, M. (2006). Governing Global Desertification: Linking Environmental Degradation, Poverty and Participation. Ashgate Publishing Limited.

Jorgensen, B. S., & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of Place as an Attitude: Lakeshore Owners Attitudes Toward Their Properties . Journal of Environmental Psychology , 233-248.

Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies. Newbury Park: Sage.

Kong, L., & Law, L. (2002). Introduction: Contested Landscapes, Asian Cities. Urban Studies , 1503- 1512.

Kumar, R. (1999). Research Methodology: a step-by-step guide for beginners. Londen: Sage.

Lalli, M. (1992). Urban-related identity: theory, measurement and empirical findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 285-303.

Living Lands & COMMONLAND. (2014). THE FOUR RETURNS.

Living Lands. (2015). Retrieved 04 15, 2015, from Living lands: http://livinglands.co.za/

Low, S. M., & Altman, I. (1992). Place Attachment. Springer US.

Manzo, L. C. (2005). For better or worse: Exploring mulitple dimensions of place meaning. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 67-86.

Manzo, L. C., & Perkins, D. D. (2006). Finding Commond Ground: The Importance of Place Attachment to Community Participation and Planning. Journal of Planning Literature , 335-350.

Massay, D. (2006). Landscape as a provocation: Reflections on Moving Mountains. journal of Material Culture , 33-48.

Masuda, J. R., & Garvin, T. (2006). Place, Culture, and the Social Amplification. Risk Analysis , 437- 454.

McMillan, W. D., & Chavis, M. D. (1986). Sense of community: a definition and theory. Journa of community Psychology , 6-23.

Nasar, L. J., & Julian, D. A. (1995). The psychologial sense of community in the neighborhood. Journal of American Planning Association , 178-184.

Oude Munnink, J., & de Vries, J. (n.d.). A living landscape for the Baviaanskloof.

Payton, M. A., Fulton, D. C., & Anderson, D. H. (2005). Influence of Place Attachment and Trust on Civic Acition: A Study at Sherburne National Wildlife Refuge. Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal , 511-528.

Proshansky, H. M. (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior , 147-169.

Proshansky, H. M., Fabian, A. K., & Kaminoff, R. (1983). Place-Identity: Physical World Socialization of the Self . Journal of Environment Psychology , 57-83.

Reynolds, J. F., Smith, D. M., Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Mortimore, M., Batterbury, S. P., et al. (2007). Global Desertification: Building a Science for Dryland Development. Science , 847-851.

Sayer, J., Sunderland, T., Ghazoul, J., Pfund, J.-L., Sheil, D., Meijaard, E., et al. (2013). Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. PNAS , 8349-8356.

Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2010). Difining place attachmetn: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 1-10.

Stedman, R. C. (2003). Is It Really Just a Social Construction? The Contribution of the Physical Environment to Sense of Place . Society & Natural Resources: An international Journal , 671-685.

Stringer, L. C. (2008). Reviewing the Interantional Year of Deserts and Desertification 2006: What contribution towards combating global desertification and implementing the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification? . Journal of Arid Environments , 2065-2074.

Taylor, K. (2008). Landscape and Memory: The Right to Landscape: Contesting Landscape and Human Rights.

The Bonn Challenge . (n.d.). Retrieved 04 12, 2015, from The Global Partnership on Forest and Landscape Restoration: http://www.forestlandscaperestoration.org/topic/bonn-challenge

The Bonn Challenge. (2015). Retrieved 04 12, 2015, from The Global Partnership on Forest and Landscape Restoration: http://www.forestlandscaperestoration.org/topic/bonn-challenge

Tuan, Y.-F. (1975). Place: An Experiental Perspective. Geographical Review , 151-165.

Tuan, Y.-F. (1977). Space and place: The perspecitve of exprience. Minneapolis: University of Minneapolis Press.

Tuan, Y.-F. (1974). Topophilia: A study of environmental perception, attitudes and values. New York: Columbia University Press. van Oosten, C. (2013). Restoring Landscapes-Governing Place: A Learning Approach to Forest Landscape Restoration. Jouran of Sutainable Forestry , 659-676. van Oosten, C., & Hijweege, W. L. (2012). Governing biocultural diversity in mosic landscapes. In B. Arts, S. van Bommel, M. Ros-Tonen, & G. Verschoor, Forest-people interfaces: Understanding community forestry and biocultural diversity (pp. 211-222). Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Vaske, J. J., & Kobrin, K. C. (2001). Place Attachmetn and Environmentally Responsible Behavior. The Journal of Envirionmental Education , 16-21.

Williams, D. R., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The Measurement of Place Attachment: Validity and Generalisability of a psychometric appraoch. Forest Science , 830-840.

Williams, D. R., Patterson, M. E., & Roggenbuck, J. W. (1992). Beyond the commodity Metaphor. Leisure Sciences , 29-46.

Woldoff, R. A. (2002). The Effects of Local Stressors on Neighborhood Attachment. Social Forces , 87- 116.

Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Reserach: Design and Methods. Sage.

Appendixes

Appendix A1: Interview guide local farmers Introduction

Hi I am Glenn, I spoke to you on the phone earlier if I could come by. Do you maybe have some time to answer some questions? It shouldn’t take more than an hour.

The reason why I am here to speak with you today is because I like to understand local people’s vision on the development of tourism in the Baviaanskloof. However, before we go into that I would like to ask you a some questions about your live in the Kloof.

If it is alright with you I would like to record our meeting so that I can listen to it later since I can’t remember everything. I can promise you that as soon as I transcribe it I will immediately delete the recordings and you’ll stay completely anonymous. At the end there is time for you to ask me questions if you like.

General & place attachment questions

1. How long have you been living in the Baviaanskloof? a. If not grown up here  where did you used to live? 2. Do you like living here? Why? 3. Could you shortly describe what it is like to live/grow up here? (probe questions) a. What is the lifestyle like? b. What are the people like? c. Social environment? d. What does a normal day of your live look like? 4. Could you tell me a little bit about what businesses you are running? (probe questions) a. How long have you been doing this for? b. What products (crops, cattle, tourism) 5. What do you like to do when you are not working? a. Where do you do that? b. How often do you do that? c. What do you like most about that? 6. What are your personal goals for say the next 5-10 years? 7. How well does the Baviaanskloof provide you with the means to achieve those goals? a. How well does the physical environment and location support this? b. How well does the social environment support this? 8. What are the things about the Baviaanskloof that you are most attached to? And why?

Now I would like to talk to you a little bit about the development of tourism in the Baviaanskloof

Questions on five stages of psychological response to place change

9. When do you think tourism started in the Baviaanskloof? 10. Who were the ones that started it?

11. What were your first thoughts on tourism? 12. Are you aware of any efforts to make the tourism here a little better? a. Yes  When did you first hear about this and from whom? b. No  remember the workshop/Don visiting... 13. What do you think will change around here if tourism gets a little better? (probe questions) a. how will it affect people’s outlook on the future? b. how will it affect social networks (jobs, crime, communication, people)? c. how will it affect the landscape? d. how will it affect people’s financial situation\business? 14. How will these changes affect you? 15. How do you feel about these changes? 16. How do you plan to deal with these upcoming changes? 17. Have you already undertaken any actions as with regards to these upcoming changes?

Closing questions

18. Do you have any questions that you would like to ask me? 19. Is there anything else you think is important that we have not discussed yet?

Thank you for your time and participation!

Appendix A2: Interview guide experts Introduction

Hello, thank you for taking the time to answer some questions for my research. I would like to ask you some questions about your experiences in the Baviaanskloof and your vision on the development of the tourism business case in the Baviaanskloof if that is oke?

General questions

1. What is your connection to the Baviaanskloof? (work or otherwise related) 2. How long have you been working in the area? 3. Can you shortly describe what your work was about? 4. How many times have you visited the area?

Questions on place attachment

5. What comes to mind when you think about the Baviaanskloof? 6. What do you think people value the most about living in Baviaanskloof? And why? 7. What do you believe to be the most important features of the Baviaanskloof that attracts tourists? a. Physical & social

Questions tourism business case

8. When did you get involved in the development of tourism-business cases? How? 9. Can you shortly describe the tourism business case? a. How was business case was set up? b. When did this start? c. Why tourism? d. Who were people that initiated the development of a tourism business case? 10. Who do you believe are currently involved in the project and how? 11. Do you feel like the project takes into account the things that people value most about living in the Baviaanskloof? If so, how? 12. What will the implementation of the tourism business case look like in practice? 13. Do you think that the project will affect the Baviaanskloof and the lives of the people living their? And how? a. how will it affect people’s outlook on the future? b. how will it affect social networks (jobs, crime, communication, people)? c. how will it affect the landscape? d. how will it affect people’s financial situation\business? 14. What do you consider to be the pros and cons about the tourism-business case? 15. How have the local farmers responded to the project? 16. Did you encounter any struggles or difficulties regarding the development of the tourism business case?

Closing questions

17. Anything else you think is important that we have not discussed yet?

Appendix A3: Interview guide expert (core developer) Introduction Thank your taking the time to answer some questions about the tourism business case.

Baviaanskloof field trips 1. What are your objectives during field trips to the Baviaanskloof? (probe question) a. Leon also mentioned that he felt like part of his job was to guide the people through change, what is your outlook on that? 2. What where some of the most important experiences during your field trips? 3. Based on your experiences, what do you think people value most about their lives in the Baviaanskloof?

Business case 4. How far are you in the development? When must it be finished? 5. What will the business case look like in practice? 6. Can you explain why you chose for this approach versus for example going for more mass tourism? 7. What will be the returns and for whom? 8. Reactions of people (support/resistance)? a. If resistance -> why do you think that is?

Baviaanskloof future 9. How do you see the future Baviaanskloof regarding the balance farming/tourism?

Closing question 10. Anything you like to add that we haven't discussed?