Abstract
The rise in poaching of iconic species such as rhino and elephants in protected areas has led to militarization and securitization as conservation strategies. The idea of these strategies is to minimize the impacts of poaching and/or combat wildlife poaching in protected areas. However, militarization and securitization as conservation strategies use force to achieve conservation goals with negative consequences on the lives and livelihoods of local communities, particularly those bordering protected areas. This study aimed to evaluate the consequences of militarization and securitization as conservation strategies on local people living adjacent to the Kruger National Park (KNP). The main objectives of this study were to evaluate the social impacts of militarization and securitization on local communities in Justicia and Huntingdon and to examine the attitudes of local communities towards these processes. To achieve these objectives, interview-administered questionnaires and observations were used as the main data collection techniques both in Justicia and Huntingdon on the KNP border. The questionnaires consisted of both open- and closed-ended questions. The respondents in the study area were selected using systematic random sampling. The closed-ended questions were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 25 for Windows (IBM SPSS Inc, Chicago, USA) at a 5% significance level. The open-ended questions were analyzed using thematic content analysis, a qualitative analytic method of “identifying, analyzing, and reporting patterns (themes) within data”. Field observations helped to corroborate the results from the questionnaires. The results showed that local communities neighbouring the protected area are criminalized as poachers. Thus, local communities are abused, harassed, detained, and tortured by security, rangers, and military personnel to uncover evidence of wildlife crime. In addition, helicopters are flown close to the ground, and roadblocks are also set up in search of wildlife parts. The study also found that local people who are found inside the park are killed even though ‘shoot to kill’ is not the accepted policy in South Africa. This is a violation of the human rights of those who are suspected to be poachers because they are denied the legal process to prove their innocence. These practices have resulted in local communities having negative attitudes towards conservation and park authorities. The lack of benefits to local communities and the fact that they are marginalized/not involved in conservation activities has also contributed to these negative attitudes. Instead of bridging
xii
the gap between protected areas and local communities, the introduction of militarization and securitization as conservation strategies is merely increasing the gap. Militarization and securitization as conservation strategies thus reinforce fortress conservation that happened during the colonial and apartheid era. Thus, green violence in the name of conservation that is currently happening in the study area mimics violence that happened during the colonial and apartheid era. The study concludes that these conservation strategies (militarization and securitization) are not sustainable. To ensure that the conservation of biodiversity is sustainable, the study recommends that local communities should be involved and empowered, they should be treated as neighbours and not as poachers and those in conservation management should respect human rights and dignity.