Dartmouth in Namibia ENVS 84 Final Reports 2018
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Dartmouth in Namibia Dartmouth College Environmental Studies Program Hanover New Hampshire USA October – November 2018 ii Table of Contents Connecting The Dots: A Mixed-Methods Analysis Of Social Networks And Community-Institution Relationships In The Kuiseb River Valley _______________________________________________ 1 ABSTRACT________________________________________________________________________ 2 INTRODUCTION ____________________________________________________________________ 2 METHODS ________________________________________________________________________ 3 DATA ANALYSIS ___________________________________________________________________ 8 RESULTS ________________________________________________________________________ 10 DISCUSSION _____________________________________________________________________ 23 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS _____________________________________________________________ 30 REFERENCES _____________________________________________________________________ 32 APPENDICES _____________________________________________________________________ 34 Habitat Selection By Livestock In The Lower Kuiseb River Valley _________________________ 50 ABSTRACT_______________________________________________________________________ 51 INTRODUCTION ___________________________________________________________________ 51 METHODOLOGY __________________________________________________________________ 53 RESULTS ________________________________________________________________________ 56 DISCUSSION _____________________________________________________________________ 64 CONCLUSION _____________________________________________________________________ 68 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS _____________________________________________________________ 68 REFERENCES _____________________________________________________________________ 69 APPENDICES _____________________________________________________________________ 71 Selling The Kids: Investigating The Potential Formalization Of The Livestock Market In The Topnaar Community _______________________________________________________________ 75 ABSTRACT_______________________________________________________________________ 76 INTRODUCTION ___________________________________________________________________ 76 METHODS _______________________________________________________________________ 77 RESULTS ________________________________________________________________________ 80 DISCUSSION _____________________________________________________________________ 88 RECOMMENDATIONS ______________________________________________________________ 90 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS _____________________________________________________________ 92 REFERENCES _____________________________________________________________________ 93 APPENDICES _____________________________________________________________________ 96 Factors Influencing !Nara Health And Distribution In The Lower Kuiseb River: A Pilot Study 101 ABSTRACT______________________________________________________________________ 102 INTRODUCTION __________________________________________________________________ 102 METHODS ______________________________________________________________________ 104 RESULTS _______________________________________________________________________ 108 DISCUSSION ____________________________________________________________________ 119 CONCLUSION AND FUTURE RECOMMENDATIONS _______________________________________ 122 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS _____________________________________________________________ 122 REFERENCES ____________________________________________________________________ 124 APPENDICES ____________________________________________________________________ 127 A Holistic Assessment Of Three Factors Limiting !Nara Fruit Productivity: Water, Herbivory, And Biodiversity ______________________________________________________________________ 138 iii ABSTRACT______________________________________________________________________ 139 INTRODUCTION __________________________________________________________________ 139 METHODOLOGY _________________________________________________________________ 141 DATA AND RESULTS ______________________________________________________________ 144 DISCUSSION ____________________________________________________________________ 148 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ____________________________________________________________ 150 REFERENCES ____________________________________________________________________ 151 VII. APPENDICES _________________________________________________________________ 153 iv Connecting the Dots: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Social Networks and Community-Institution Relationships in the Kuiseb River Valley November 12, 2018 Prepared by: Vignesh Chockalingam Alyssa Gao Rironderuapi Kavari Meghna Ray 1 Abstract Community-institution relationships are important both for the effective operation of institutions and wellbeing of communities. To determine if relationships between communities and institutions can promote progress and build resilience, we examined the ways in which Topnaar community members’ connections to different institutions affect their perceptions of and willingness to act in conjunction with these institutions. Our study also aimed to identify potential barriers to connectivity. Using social network, statistical, and qualitative analysis, we found that connections between communities and institutions significantly impact perceptions and collective action. Additionally, distinct subgroups exist within the network, impeding mutual understanding and coordinated action. Low network cohesiveness may stem from individuals’ tendency to interact with similar others, as well as the social distance between communities and institutions. Through our analysis, we discovered that the existence of a tie is not enough. Rather, it is more important for these relationships to facilitate knowledge exchange and a two-way flow of benefits. A strong social network can foster intergroup understanding, which establishes a foundation for the coordinated action necessary to achieve conservation and development goals. Introduction In the era of the Anthropocene, rural communities are most vulnerable to climate change as they are trapped between their dependence on increasingly scarce natural resources and international pressures to protect the same resources (Morton 2007, Van-vliet, 2010). Climate change is a “wicked problem,” one with non-linear patterns of change, frequent surprises, and no stopping rule or test for a solution; consequently, it does not lend itself to conventional management practices (Ludwig 2001, Young 2017). Rather, reducing vulnerability depends on the capacity of a system to be adaptable to change. Additionally, because climate change is not just a technical problem but also a social one, it cannot be separated from social justice issues and subsequently depends upon the involvement of all stakeholders – researchers, government institutions, and local communities (Ludwig 2001). Moreover, such social justice issues - namely in the equitable development of local indigenous communities, especially in light of colonial and neo-colonial legacies of oppression - are an end in themselves. Top-down approaches with command-and-control policies fail to provide effective solutions to dynamic and uncertain issues such as climate change and social inequality. Therefore, adaptive governance approaches that facilitate learning and involvement of local actors are necessary for managing systems in the presence of complexity and uncertainty (Chaffin et al. 2014). Institutions cannot function in isolation, and long-term co-management depends upon coordinated efforts; therefore, social networks are highly relevant because they foster commitment to common rules, facilitate information exchange, and increase willingness to engage in monitoring, sanctioning, and conflict resolution. (Gupta et al. 2010, Bodin & Crona 2009). The existence of bridging ties between different stakeholder groups is essential to establishing a common understanding (Crona & Bodin 2006). Strong intergroup relations, characterized by meaningful connections and positive perceptions, also create potential for collective action, which is key to adaptive co-management (Crona & Bodin 2006, Granovetter 1973). Therefore, connectivity and perception serve as two important intermediaries to collective action, especially in the context of institutions and communities working together. 2 Two related barriers to connectivity and collective action are homophily and psychological distance. Homophily is the preference for interacting with others who are similar in terms of gender, age, social status, education, and occupation, due to ease of communication and similarity in experiences (McPherson et al. 2001, Erikson 1988). Homophily leads to small, tightly integrated subgroups within a network, which limits access to and receptivity of outside sources of ideas (Ruef 2002, McPherson et al 2001, Erickson 1988). According to Construal-Level Theory, those who are socially or physically distant from an institution have high-level, abstract construals and thus will have a less positive perception (Trope et al. 2011). In order to overcome these barriers, there must be persistent and continuous interaction between the various institutions and local communities, as well as the development of new relational ties. Over time, these interactions will strengthen the social network, and foster collective action across subgroups. We assessed the importance of social networks in the Namib Naukluft