(community based strategies)”. The earlier exclusionary approaches to conservation (fortress conservation) were embedded in the assumption that conservation was a threat to human well- being and humans were a threat to biodiversity conservation. This approach alienated local people from protected areas and denied their rights to resources thereby undermining local livelihoods through “locked-in” patterns of resource use (Adger et al., 2005: 9). Brown (2002: 7) underscores that “this assumes a conflict between livelihood activities and biodiversity strategy”.
Adams and Hutton (2007) argue that the changes in the relationship between people and nature over the years are highly political, embracing issues of rights and access to land and resources, the centrality of the role of the State, the emergence of non-State actors (NGOs and the private sector), and the power of scientific and other understandings of nature.
Bryant and Bailey (1997: 6 cited in Foryth, 2008: 760) warn that the focus on social, economic and political aspects in relation to ecological/ environmental problems may result in a neglect of understanding environmental change in relation to natural and physical processes: “political ecologists tend to favour consideration of the political over the ecological…Yet greater attention by political ecologists to ecological processes does not alter the need for a basic focus on politics as part of the attempt to understand Third World environmental problems”. This position supports the adoption of an integrated, multidisciplinary approach discussed earlier and links, in part, to the stakeholder perspective discussed next which highlight the importance of focusing on differences.
According to Renard et al. (2001: 7):
Stakeholder approaches must be sensitive to the cultural context in which they are developed and applied. While the principles of participation are universal, the practice of participatory planning and management must take into account the values, communication patterns, knowledge and skills of all stakeholders.
There are many definitions of the word stakeholder. Freeman (1984) defines stakeholders as those with a vested interest in an organisational issue who can influence the manner in which it is formulated and resolved. However, the term stakeholder as referred to by Mitchell (2002) is broadly categorised as a person or group directly affected by or with an interest in a decision or having the legal responsibility and authority pertaining to a decision. On the subject of people or groups who might be affected by a decision, a distinction should be made between active and the inactive publics (Mitchell, 2002). Moreover, Mitchell (2002) contends that the active public is inclusive of those people who are organised into interest groups whereas the inactive public are those people who do not usually become actively involved in social or environmental issues.
Caffyn and Jobbins (2003) refer to the term stakeholder to include any individual or organisation with an interest in a particular area including government authorities, private businesses, local people and NGOs.
For the purpose of this study, a stakeholder is any party with an actual or potential interest in economic, social, cultural, political and environmental interest in the use of a resource. This also incorporates any individual, community, organisation or institution who can affect or be affected by changes in the status and usefulness of resources (Krishnarayan, 1998; Renard et al., 2001).
Allen and Kilvington (2001) refer to primary stakeholders as the immediate communities of interests and secondary stakeholders are the intermediaries in the process and are inclusive of government agencies and other institutional bodies who generally do not think of themselves as stakeholders due to them feeling that they own the process.
Friedman and Mason (2005) refer to stakeholder theory as being developed within organisational studies and focuses on strategic management within constituent-centred analysis. Stakeholder involvement creates many benefits such as environmental protection, a social license to operate, and opportunities for local community involvement, increased information and knowledge flows
and conflict mitigation (Parker and Khare, nd). According to Allen and Kilvington (2001), an important rule that must be adhered to when including key stakeholders is to question whose support will radically influence the success of the project. Zorn et al. (2001) mention that stakeholders will only feel a great sense of inclusion when they are involved in decision-making processes from the initial stages. A key component of the stakeholder theory is that people will protect what they perceive to be valuable (Honey, 1999). Therefore, Honey (1999) states that the local community is a key stakeholder who should be involved in decision-making process as this will enable them to uplift themselves from poverty-stricken conditions. Parker and Khare (nd) suggest that identifying and engaging stakeholders are two important issues crucial to sustainability. Renard et al. (2001) suggest that stakeholder approaches can be tailored to suite a variety of conditions and situations inclusive of conflict management, project and programme planning, strategic planning, institutional development process, communication and marketing.
Furthermore, the scale of the issue or initiative to which they are applied can vary greatly from global to local (Renard et al., 2001).
Freeman (1984) identified seven broad stakeholder categories: owners, employees, suppliers, customers, the financial community, activist groups and the government. For the purpose of this study the stakeholders are identified as: the local community, tour operator, visitors, Park personnel and Park owner. By rating stakeholders in relation to frequency as well as type and amount of attributes, managers will be able to prioritise stakeholders and efficiently distribute resources (Friedman and Mason, 2005). Simmons and Eades (2004) mention that the stakeholder perspective on organisations has increased in popularity and currently represents mainstream system of organisational complexity which is stakeholder management. Renard et al. (2001) assert that within the wider participatory process, stakeholder approaches have their particular function and they should not be expected to deliver more than what they are intended.
Simmons and Eades (2004) suggest that the stakeholder approach identifies the political dimension of appraisal by recognising potential conflicts of interest, together with the need to achieve adequate compromise between different stakeholder constituencies. An important assumption prevalent in the development literature is related to the concept of community in that interests, experiences, needs and expectations are often simplified as homogenous among a given group of people (Renard et al., 2001). Furthermore, Agrawal and Gibson (1999) and Brosius et
al. (1998) suggest that many authors have cautioned that communities are rarely consistent and homogeneous units. In practice this is far more complex and the methods used in stakeholder identification and analysis must accept and reveal this complexity by identifying and analysing the many differences which exist among social groups and sectors (Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2000; Leach et al., 1999). Renard et al. (2001: 7) declare:
Stakeholder approaches can be tailored to a wide range of conditions and situations, including conflict management, project and programme planning, strategic planning, institutional development processes, and communication and marketing...
Participatory processes are by their very nature transforming: they address issues of power, decision-making, access to resources and legitimacy. This means that throughout the life of a participatory management intervention, the relations and dynamics among and between the various interest groups or stakeholders are likely to change, and this will in turn affect the social and institutional context of the intervention. These approaches provide a baseline that can help managers understand the changes that are taking place and how these changes are influencing and affecting the management process.
In the mid-1980s, the concept of ecotourism began to take hold in eastern and southern Africa, thus the stakeholder theory was extended to include environmentally sensitive, low-impact, culturally sensitive tourism that also assisted in educating visitors and local community members (Honey, 1999).
3.9.1 Stakeholder analysis
Simmon and Eades (2004) refer to the versatility of stakeholder analysis as a method of organisational enquiry that is applied in disciplines of economics, ethics, marketing and management systems. Conducting a stakeholder analysis is a useful manner of discovering the roles of different stakeholders involved in an institution or programme (Sousa and Quarter, 2004). Furthermore, Rockloff and Lockie (2004) describe stakeholder analysis as making issues much more visible and provide clarity in the ways in which the multiple values and objectives of stakeholders converge. Haberberg and Rieple (2001) declare that organisations have a number of stakeholder groups that influence and are influenced by them; the process and outcome of these relations impact on specific stakeholders and the organisations; and stakeholder perspectives have value for organisational strategy and effectiveness.
Grimble and Chan (1995) refer to a key strength of a stakeholder analysis is that it provides a systematic approach for assessing the relative importance of particular stakeholders to the survival of an institution. Stakeholder analysis is used to inform the design and implementation of management as a process to facilitate the inclusion and cooperation of stakeholders (Bouton and Frederick, 2003; Brugha and Varvasovszky, 2000). Zorn et al. (2001) refer to a stakeholder analysis which is initially conducted to identify the relevant groups in a Park’s area of co- operation, their interests and the nature of resources. Allen and Kilvington (2001) refer to stakeholder analysis as the process of identifying key stakeholders, an assessment of their interests and the ways in which those key stakeholders are affected by riskiness and viability. It also contributes to identifying the goals and roles of stakeholders, and by assisting to formulate appropriate forms of engagement with these stakeholders (Allen and Kilvington, 2001).
Zorn et al. (2001) state that those designing a stakeholder analysis should consider human factors including demographics, geographic location, “sense of place”, values and interests of the stakeholders generally associated with the area of co-operation. Friedman and Mason (2005) and Mitchell et al. (1997) discuss the issue of power which represents the stakeholder’s ability to resolve issues or influence decision-makers. Power can also manifest itself through physical force; financial and material resources such as money, goods or services; and symbolic resources through prestige or status. Additionally, Renard et al. (2001) also state that power relations in these societies (the occasional users, the illegal harvesters and migrant workers) will give prominence to some stakeholders and their needs, frequently at the expense of women, poor people and marginal social and economic sectors. Bouton and Frederick (2003: 298) state:
Categorising stakeholders by their level of interest and power to influence helps determine their relevance to a management policy or plan. Analysis of their level of understanding about the issue and what they stand to gain or lose upon implementation of the project also helps identify and focus educational efforts.
Overall, stakeholder analysis facilitates implementation of resource-related projects in a culturally informed context, and increases the potential for equitable and efficient conservation and management of the resource.
A stakeholder analysis is generally the first step in developing relationships necessary for the success of a participatory project or policy (Allen and Kilvington, 2001). Furthermore, Renard et al. (2001) suggest that when identifying stakeholders specific methods must therefore be geared
towards the identification of the less apparent among the relevant stakeholders and these methods include observations, interviews with key informants, and informal discussions as well as the use of local and popular knowledge. When there are issues dealing with conflict over resource access and rights stakeholder analysis can be used to assist to find common ground for negotiating and recognising the value of cooperation (Rockloff and Lockie, 2004). Stakeholder analysis assists project initiators to determine their social environment in which they can operate (Allen and Kilvington, 2001).
3.9.2 Tourism stakeholders
Getz (1986) proposes that there are several approaches which exist for tourism planning research. However, most recommend involvement of stakeholders in the process (Hall, 2000;
Priskin, 2003; Murphy, 1985). There are many benefits from stakeholder involvement as well as an enhanced understanding of tourism, implementation of plans and desirable outcomes for the tourism destination (Backman et al., 2001; Haywood, 1988; Sautter and Leison, 1999). Grey (1989) emphasises that collaboration is a process where a group of stakeholders connect in an interactive process to explore, discuss and solve a problem. This process encourages face-to-face discussions from which partnerships and mutually acceptable plans can develop (de Araujo and Bramwell, 2002; Selin, 1999).
Processes of community participation and the unequal relationships between stakeholders have been discussed in the tourism literature (Jamal and Getz, 1995; Marien and Pizam, 1997;
Richards and Hall, 2000). Backman et al. (2001) affirm that planning for nature-based tourism is complicated since stakeholder groups may have overlapping and conflicting interests. For example, Priskin (2003) refers to some stakeholder groups who are more interested in environmental protection than profit maximisation. Jamal (2004) declares that nature is often viewed differently by the many stakeholders and the issue of conflict amongst various groups can be traceable to such differences. Protected area managers and policy-makers have been turning towards more participatory and all-encompassing forms of management to replace conventional top-down governance (Innes and Booher, 1999; Westley, 1995). A substantial body of inter-organisational research refers to collaboration strategies as being effective in environments which are characterised by interdependence, complexity and uncertainty (Jamal, 2004). In addition, Jamal (2004) states that destination planning in protected areas with gateway
communities and other communities bordering the Park are complex domains where planning can be characterised as a political activity subjected to diverse and possible divergent interests and values. Jamal (2004) identifies Park planners and administrators at the Parks Canada Agency that are responsible for managing the ecological needs of the Parks, the political issues connected with these attractive tax revenue generators, the needs of tourists, recreationalists and the tourism industry. Caffyn and Jobbins (2003) affirm that stakeholder interactions need to be more transparent, meaningful and set within more balanced power relations and better communication systems.