CONSERVATION'S CHANGING ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE
2.4 ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE AND CONSERVATION
Thus far, this review has focused on the nature and development of organizational culture research without being very specific to its connection and relevance to the conservation sector. This section narrows the focus to review literature that has applied a cultural perspective to strategy in conservation management specifically. For conservation organizations, the recognition of organizational culture is still in its infancy, and this is demonstrated by a dearth of empirical studies on the subject as discussed earlier. And yet, claiming that culture lies at the heart of the conservation sector, its organization,
performance, innovations, and responsiveness to societal and policy imperatives cannot be discounted without sufficient consideration.
The conservation literature is characterized by statements, which although often not empirically based and could be called mere conjecture in some cases, demonstrate a growing recognition of the importance of organizational culture and its related aspects in the current challenges facing conservation. For example, Rogers et al. (2000) and Gunderson et al. (1995) have made direct reference to traditional 'command and control' bureaucratic style of management as a barrier to adaptive management8. Gunderson et al.
observed that most of the organizations in their study demonstrated "recalcitrance or inertia ... and the almost pathological inability to renew or restructure" (1995: 495). A related observation posits, "entrenched bureaucracies are characteristically resistant to change and unable to respond to challenges because the system discourages innovation or other behavioural variance. Individuals and organizations are unable to adapt to new ways of thinking, functioning and structuring which institutionalising an adaptive approach demands" (Rogers et al. 2000: 506).
Arguably, culture, in its many forms, features in a surprisingly varied range of contexts relating to the historical and current developments in the conservation sector. There are some aspects that would qualify as 'conservation sector cultural elements' in the way conservation has for long been conceived and practised. For example, since the early days, conservation has been an activity associated largely with the public service ethos. It was a pre-eminent example of a public good - a consequence of which was that it was characterized by special regulatory provisions in all it did and stood for. Conservation was typified by steady, often clearly spatially defined spheres of activity that were for the larger part buttressed by regulation. It was long understood to be an endeavour whose goals could only be realized by enforcing strict control of spatially designated places - protected areas. Stringent regulation ensured that market forces were kept on the periphery while conservation processes were inclined towards narrowly defined objectives focusing on the threat of species loss.
Adaptive management fits this discussion given that change and continuous learning underpin it.
Institutionally, conservation was characterized by insularity and deeply developed cultures arising from a unique mix of individual, national and professional influences.
These characteristics, which were at the core of conservation, had implications in many arenas including policy development, political/public participation, financial support and conservation programme implementation. Various aspects of the conservation business model - whether funding, policies, stakeholder engagement or indeed the management of protected areas are increasingly open to the changes under way in the external environment at local, national and global levels. Related to changes brought about by environmental developments is the anxiety on how conservation organizations are performing in the wake of these changes:
Without doubt conservation as practiced in Africa is more sophisticated now than it was twenty-five or even five years ago. The question is whether the refinements represent changes in the basic attitudes and values of conservation, or simply the application of modern techniques to old-fashioned ideas - a new coat of paint slapped onto old. If that is the case, eventually, the cracks will show through (Adams and McShane 1996: xviii-xix).
The above quotation speaks to the point of the enduring nature of certain values and beliefs, or simply organizational culture in the conservation sector. Nevertheless, the sector is undergoing a paradigm shift which is in turn leading to a redefinition of some of conservation's cultural attributes: from preservation to conservation and sustainable use;
from guaranteed public funding to business principles, outsourcing, and economic empowerment; from fences and fines to incentives and individual responsibility; and from an exclusive and an adversarial stance to that of partnerships with different stakeholders and the building of constituencies. The conservation sector is indeed undergoing a cultural re-orientation. Conservation organizations are responding in different ways including expanding access to benefits, expanding protected areas, fostering partnerships, effecting cost-recovery, outsourcing and commercializing and addressing issues of transparency and accountability in their governance, both at the protected area and organizational levels.
Recognition of organizational culture in the conservation sector has also come in the form of broader proposals for enhancing conservation practice9 (Moote et al. 1994;
Machlis 1994). However, these proposals have generally lacked an explicit treatment of organizational culture. This is a serious limitation to understanding conservation challenges vis-a-vis change and strategy. Therefore, a compelling need exists to understand how conservation organizations are dealing with entrenched beliefs and practices, or simply culture, to adapt to changing realities. Engaging culture, however, requires that in addition to the earlier emphasis on the technical imperatives that have historically predominated in the conservation sector, we need to draw attention to the significance of the broader environment in which conservation agencies exist, and the trade-offs they have to make to ensure their relevance and survival. This view is premised on the understanding that conservation agencies, like any organization, are entities with a purpose. That purpose, in turn, determines what they set out to do, but what they actually do and how they do it is influenced by a number of external and internal forces, including the environment and the history of the organization (Figure 2.1).
External influences
Attitudes
Stated values
Conservation Agency events (Past, present & anticipated)
t ZZ
Assumptions Practices
Norms & Values
Artefacts Climate
Organizational behaviour
Performance
Internal influences
Beliefs
Management style
As judged from different perspectives or in terms of contextual relevance as informed by policy, financial, political &, societal realities.
Figure 2.1 Interaction of external and internal influences in shaping organizational culture in conservation agencies
It is also important to point out that organizational culture within conservation in southern Africa is not a subject that has received attention. The references given here refer to models have been developed in the American context, and therefore, their application to southern Africa might be questionable.