This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
AbstractUsing the underpinnings of dispossession and social exclusion as the lens, this paper assesses how the government of Botswana (GoB) balances competing interests of conservation and tourism and how these have impacted the lives of indigenous communities. Relying on relevant literature, we analyse the intended and unintended consequences resulting from the government’s stance on conservation and indigenous communities’ rights to ancestral land and other resources. Results indicate that the rights of Basarwa to ancestral land and other resources within the CKGR have been negatively affected. However, the GoB believes the changes brought by conservation efforts that affected Basarwa’s lifestyles was essential to allow for the management of wildlife and the promotion of tourism. Despite the resultant international backlash and court cases devised to contest the GoB position, Basarwa remains disadvantaged and marginalised through land dispossession and exclusion to participate in tourism businesses. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.Keywords: conservation and development nexus; Central Kalahari Game Reservedispossession and social exclusionindigenous communities: sustainable tourism Notes1 See https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats1.htmAdditional informationNotes on contributorsMoren Tibabo StoneProf. Moren Tibabo Stone is an Associate Professor of Tourism Studies at the University of Botswana in southern Africa. His research interests are in protected areas and tourism, sustainable tourism development, ecotourism, nature-based tourism and rural community livelihoods dynamics. He is currently a Fulbright visiting researcher scholar at the University of Florida, USA.Lesego Senyana StoneDr. Lesego Senyana Stone is an Associate Professor in tourism management at the University of Botswana in the Department of Tourism and Hospitality Management. Her research interests are in sustainable tourism development with specific reference to nature-based tourism, community-based tourism and community participation in tourism.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stone et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: