Content
About this brief
Climate Action- Life on Land
- Reduced Inequality
- For policymakers
- South Africa
- Brief created: 2025
- Sign up
The Paradox of Environmental Conservation in South Africa: Marginalising Indigenous Sustainability Practices and Ideologies
Brief about:
Journal Article (2024)
Written by:
Investigates the paradox of environmental conservation in South Africa, where indigenous sustainability practices and ideologies are marginalized, and the narrative of ‘white conservationists’ versus ‘black destruction’ is critiqued.
In South Africa, environmental conservation efforts are marked by a paradoxical dynamic. Poor and marginalized communities are often scapegoated for ecological destruction, despite their interactions with nature being driven by survival needs in resource-dependent areas with minimal state support. For instance, the 2021 Cape Town fire, which caused extensive damage including 1 billion ZAR (approximately 60 million USD) to the University of Cape Town, saw a black homeless man, Frederick Mhangazo, initially blamed for arson. This incident highlights how poverty is criminalized, with marginalized individuals often unfairly portrayed as threats to the environment. Historically, colonial and apartheid policies severed the connection of black South Africans to their land, disrupting indigenous sustainability practices such as using cow dung for energy. Despite being most affected by environmental degradation, these communities are often associated with pollution, while corporations causing greater harm evade accountability through greenwashing.
The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) of 1998, amended in 2003, aims to protect the environment but often marginalizes indigenous groups. Indigenous actors, crucial for cultural and spiritual practices, are sidelined in conservation strategies, which are predominantly shaped by Western concepts and led by white individuals. This exclusion is evident in statements like that of SANParks spokesperson Merle Collins, who emphasized legal actions against indigenous people using natural sites for cultural reasons. The historic view of Africans as uncivilized persists, polarizing environmentalism and alienating black communities. Despite the rise of black participation in environmental justice, resources and power remain concentrated among white conservationists, who prioritize complex strategies over the needs of the poor.
Key findings
- The narrative of 'white conservationists' versus 'black destruction' undermines effective environmental conservation in South Africa.Evidence
The 2021 Cape Town fire incident, where a black homeless man was initially blamed for arson, illustrates how marginalized communities are scapegoated for environmental issues. Charges against him were eventually dropped, highlighting the criminalization of poverty.
What it meansThis narrative perpetuates racial stereotypes and ignores the systemic issues driving environmental degradation, hindering inclusive conservation efforts.
- Indigenous sustainability practices rooted in African cosmologies like ubuntu offer alternative conservation approaches.Evidence
Ubuntu, emphasizing communal responsibility and respect for nature, contrasts with Western conservation strategies. It views harming nature as harming oneself, promoting harmony with the environment.
What it meansIntegrating ubuntu into conservation could foster more inclusive and culturally relevant environmental strategies.
- The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) often marginalizes indigenous groups in conservation efforts.Evidence
NEMA is used to criminalize indigenous practices, as seen in SANParks' stance against cultural use of natural sites. This reflects a continuation of colonial and apartheid-era exclusions.
What it meansRevisiting NEMA to include indigenous perspectives could enhance its effectiveness and fairness in conservation.
- Corporations evade accountability for environmental damage through greenwashing, while marginalized communities are unfairly blamed.Evidence
Mining communities in Mpumalanga, despite being affected by coal pollution, are often associated with causing it, while corporations obscure their environmental impact.
What it meansAddressing corporate accountability is crucial for equitable environmental conservation.
Comments
You must log in to ask a question
Are you a researcher looking to make a real-world impact? Join Acume and transform your research into a practical summary.
Already have an account? Log in
Discover more
The Paradox of Environmental Conservation in South Africa: Marginalising Indigenous Sustainability Practices and Ideologies
Cite this brief: Shange, Nombulelo Tholithemba. 'The Paradox of Environmental Conservation in South Africa: Marginalising Indigenous Sustainability Practices and Ideologies'. Acume. https://www.acume.org/r/the-paradox-of-environmental-conservation-in-south-africa-marginalising-indigenous-sustainability-practices-and-ideologies/
Brief created by: Dr Nombulelo Tholithemba Shange | Year brief made: 2025
Original research:
- Shange, N. T., ‘The Paradox of Environmental Conservation in South Africa: Marginalising Indigenous Sustainability Practices and Ideologies’ 12(4) (pp. 183–189) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envjus.2024.1341. – https://jep-journal.com/ausgabe/enacting-the-future-environmental-activism-worldwide/the-paradox-of-environmental-conservation-in-south-africa-marginalising-indigenous-sustainability-practices-and-ideologies-essay/
Research brief:
Investigates the paradox of environmental conservation in South Africa, where indigenous sustainability practices and ideologies are marginalized, and the narrative of ‘white conservationists’ versus ‘black destruction’ is critiqued.
In South Africa, environmental conservation efforts are marked by a paradoxical dynamic. Poor and marginalized communities are often scapegoated for ecological destruction, despite their interactions with nature being driven by survival needs in resource-dependent areas with minimal state support. For instance, the 2021 Cape Town fire, which caused extensive damage including 1 billion ZAR (approximately 60 million USD) to the University of Cape Town, saw a black homeless man, Frederick Mhangazo, initially blamed for arson. This incident highlights how poverty is criminalized, with marginalized individuals often unfairly portrayed as threats to the environment. Historically, colonial and apartheid policies severed the connection of black South Africans to their land, disrupting indigenous sustainability practices such as using cow dung for energy. Despite being most affected by environmental degradation, these communities are often associated with pollution, while corporations causing greater harm evade accountability through greenwashing.
The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) of 1998, amended in 2003, aims to protect the environment but often marginalizes indigenous groups. Indigenous actors, crucial for cultural and spiritual practices, are sidelined in conservation strategies, which are predominantly shaped by Western concepts and led by white individuals. This exclusion is evident in statements like that of SANParks spokesperson Merle Collins, who emphasized legal actions against indigenous people using natural sites for cultural reasons. The historic view of Africans as uncivilized persists, polarizing environmentalism and alienating black communities. Despite the rise of black participation in environmental justice, resources and power remain concentrated among white conservationists, who prioritize complex strategies over the needs of the poor.
Findings:
The narrative of ‘white conservationists’ versus ‘black destruction’ undermines effective environmental conservation in South Africa.
The 2021 Cape Town fire incident, where a black homeless man was initially blamed for arson, illustrates how marginalized communities are scapegoated for environmental issues. Charges against him were eventually dropped, highlighting the criminalization of poverty.
This narrative perpetuates racial stereotypes and ignores the systemic issues driving environmental degradation, hindering inclusive conservation efforts.
Indigenous sustainability practices rooted in African cosmologies like ubuntu offer alternative conservation approaches.
Ubuntu, emphasizing communal responsibility and respect for nature, contrasts with Western conservation strategies. It views harming nature as harming oneself, promoting harmony with the environment.
Integrating ubuntu into conservation could foster more inclusive and culturally relevant environmental strategies.
The National Environmental Management Act (NEMA) often marginalizes indigenous groups in conservation efforts.
NEMA is used to criminalize indigenous practices, as seen in SANParks’ stance against cultural use of natural sites. This reflects a continuation of colonial and apartheid-era exclusions.
Revisiting NEMA to include indigenous perspectives could enhance its effectiveness and fairness in conservation.
Corporations evade accountability for environmental damage through greenwashing, while marginalized communities are unfairly blamed.
Mining communities in Mpumalanga, despite being affected by coal pollution, are often associated with causing it, while corporations obscure their environmental impact.
Addressing corporate accountability is crucial for equitable environmental conservation.