Citation: Devereux, E.J.,(2023), “Wilderness Policy & National Identity”, EcoFoodDev, https://www.ecofooddev.com/wilderness-policy-amp-national-identity/
Featured image: Savanna landscapes, Kruger National Park. Photo by author.
As discussed in the previous blog https://www.ecofooddev.com/conservation-policy-the-idea-of-wilderness/, early (19th/20th century) conservation policy focused on the idea of a “pristine”, untouched wilderness. In the United States, The Wilderness Movement was founded in the 19th century, and formed a model for conservation, being led by figures such as John Muir. Their guiding force was natural beauty and spiritual value, while the central tenet of their movement was that humans had a negative impact on the landscape, that wilderness was a way to escape the trappings of civilization (Kalamandeen & Gillson, 2007).
The first Wilderness Act was established in the United States in the 1960s. This led to the so-called “fortress” model of global conservation which separated culture and people from wilderness. This approach is increasingly being called into question, and the input of indigenous peoples is being advocated for (Saarinen, 2016). Wilderness protection and consumption of natural resources were part of early conservation policy, with a clear struggle between wilderness as a place of beauty, and practical considerations regarding utilization of resources. The consumption strand of conservation policy developed into scientific considerations of wilderness (tied up in biodiversity management) (Kalamandeen & Gillson, 2007). Added to this is the prior mentioned role of tourism, and inclusion of that economic element into wilderness policy.
More recent international policy instruments for the establishment of wilderness areas and their protection include UNESCO’s ‘Man and the Biosphere’ (MaB) Programme, which sought to establish a protected network of “Biosphere reserves”. The objectives of the program were to conserve biological diversity for the future, establish ecological research, and facilitate education and training. With regards to the human element of wilderness, the Convention on Biological Diversity recognizes the role of traditional knowledge and lifestyles in the management of biodiversity and sustainability (Kalamandeen & Gillson, 2007). The European Union’s Natura 2000 is a network promoting the protection of nature, consisting of terrestrial and marine protected areas, designated under the Birds, and Habitats Directives.
Yellowstone National Park & The Role of Wilderness in US Identity Construction following the American Civil War
As previously discussed, a foundational element of pioneer North American National Identity is the idea that America emerged from the wilderness, in a short space of time, and that the pioneers had crafted civilization from a savage, inhospitable landscape. The American frontier represented the line between civilization and the wild- which was conquered by the clearing of trees, animals, and people. Hence, Cronon (1996) describes the idea of the frontier as “sublime” and loaded with cultural symbolism. Nash (1976) argues that the sentiment of national pride which arose from such conquering of the frontier is one of the factors that led to the creation of Yellowstone National Park. The last remnants of the frontier that pioneers conquered must be conserved in order to pay tribute to, and underline and memorialize, the trials undertaken in the creation of the new American nation.
Yellowstone was created on March 1st, 1872, with thanks to The Wilderness Movement, and promised to preserve wilderness and scenery for the American public to enjoy- unaffected by humans- in their “natural condition” (Nash, 1976; Kalamandeen & Gillson, 2007). At this point in American history, Yellowstone also mirrored the identity of the nation, by being a departure from traditional, ordered, landscaped gardens previously created for public consumption. The new, industrial, greatly expanded, democratic America that just emerged from the Civil War entrusted the land to the people (albeit with the expectation that private ownership would follow), and this new park was public, instead of the preserve of the elite (Nash, 1976). Of course, the caveat was that only some were privileged enough to travel and enjoy their time in this way. However, this notion of identity was an invention, as the American frontier had been inhabited for thousands of years prior to colonization by European settlers. This new vision of national identity underlined yearly at Thanksgiving, omitted the genocidal nature of the nation’s birth.
The fallacy of an unoccupied land. This 19th century wood engraving shows Pilgrims slaughtering the Pequots. smithsonianmag.com
SANParks Kruger National Park & The Role of Wilderness in South African Identity Construction
The Yellowstone model of park creation and the Wilderness Movement in the US greatly influenced protected area establishment and management worldwide. Kruger Park (KNP) in South Africa was formed in 1926 based on Yellowstone National Park. A foundational action in the creation of the park was the removal of the Makuleke people (Kalamandeen & Gillson, 2007). South African identity construction is fraught with complexity, racism and oppression, and Kruger Park has been used over many decades to reinforce power hierarchies, and to attempt to break them down. The changing political landscape in South Africa has been echoed in its wilderness and in its flagship national park. KNP has had to deal with its difficult postcolonial legacy while at the same time focus on conservation and maintenance of a mosaic of habitats across a vast landscape.
Vintage KNP poster. AP Cartwright’s book ‘Spoor of Blood’ https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2020-01-14-eden-lost-and-regained-how-one-man-saved-the-kruger-national-park-from-being-lost-forever/
Kruger National Park is incredibly biodiverse, characterised by its heterogeneous landscape of unique and varied habitats across a Lowveld savanna biome. However, due to the shadow of colonialism on its history, the wilderness of Kruger Park has been seen through the lens of colonial images of Africa. Throughout apartheid, politicians used the landscape of Kruger to weave a story (parallel to the American pioneer story) as their South African creation myth, designed to legitimize the political system in place. Old Boer politicians such as Hertzog, Smuts, and others encouraged a frontier narrative where voortrekker pioneers conquered the bushveld, and all shared in the new national identity based on the conquest of wilderness, ignoring the existence of the indigenous peoples, who were simply part of the inhospitable landscape (Moore, 2015).
In the past, Kruger Park was sold as a means to enter the wilderness and get back to a “real” Africa, on a landscape arguably more constructed by postcolonialism than by natural processes. Today, Kruger Parks Scientific Division does excellent work regarding the current management of the park, its ecosystems, and integration of local knowledge, that will be revisited in a separate blog.
Combining the social and physical constructions of wilderness will enable better food security policy and management creation, and sustainable resource utilization. More management of our natural systems is required in the face of climate change, not less, especially as human action has impacted almost all of Earth’s ecosystems. We must be particularly aware of the wilderness needs of developing nations, who may for example have energy and economic needs that can be met by exploiting their natural resources and wild habitats. In order to protect remaining wilderness areas, global understanding of wilderness needs must be established. As Cronon summarizes: “if living in history means that we cannot help leaving marks on a fallen world, then the dilemma we face is to decide what kinds of marks we wish to leave.”
References cited
- Basso, K.H., 1996. ‘Wisdom sits in places: Landscape and language among the Western Apache.’ UNM Press.
- Cronon, W., 1996. ‘The trouble with wilderness: or getting back to the wrong nature.’ Environmental History, 1(1), pp.7-28.
- Devereux, E.J., 2021. ‘Crop Cultivation’s Astonishing Age: 10,000 Years of Change.’, From Farm to Fork: The Ecology of Eating, http://www.ecofooddev.com/category/the-archaeology-of-farming-old-solutions-to-modern-problems/ Accessed: 08.06.2021.
- IUCN. 1994. The World Conservation Union Guidelines for protected area management categories. Gland, Switzerland
- Kalamandeen, M. and Gillson, L., 2007. Demything “wilderness”: implications for protected area designation and management. Biodiversity and Conservation, 16(1), pp.165-182.
- Kruger, S.C., Rusworth, I.A. and Oliver, K., 2011. ‘The verification of wilderness area boundaries as part of a buffer zone demarcation process: A case study from the uKhahlamba Drakensberg Park World Heritage Site.’ In In: Watson, Alan; Murrieta-Saldivar, Joaquin; McBride, Brooke, comps. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Ninth World Wilderness Congress symposium; November 6-13, 2009; Merida, Yucatan, Mexico. Proceedings RMRS-P-64. Fort Collins, CO: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. p. 190-195. (Vol. 64, pp. 190-195).
- Lee, J.R., Raymond, B., Bracegirdle, T.J., Chades, I., Fuller, R.A., Shaw, J.D. and Terauds, A., 2017. ‘Climate change drives expansion of Antarctic ice-free habitat.’ Nature, 547(7661), pp.49-54.
- Moore, S.A., 2015. The” world’s biggest zoo”? Elephants, ecological change, and the contested legacies of conservation in the Kruger National Park (Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon).
- Nash, R., 1976. ‘The value of wilderness.’ Environmental Review: ER, 1(3), pp.14-25.
- Saarinen, J., 2016. ‘Wilderness use, conservation and tourism: what do we protect and for and from whom?.’ Tourism Geographies, 18(1), pp.1-8.
- Tilley, C., 1994. A phenomenology of landscape: places, paths, and monuments (Vol. 10). Oxford: Berg.
- Walker, B. and Sinclair, A.R., 2003. The Kruger experience: ecology and management of savanna heterogeneity. Island Press.
- Wall-Reinius, S., 2012. Wilderness and culture: Tourist views and experiences in the Laponian World Heritage Area. Society & Natural Resources, 25(7), pp.621-632.
- Zoderer, B.M. and Tasser, E., 2021. ‘The plurality of wilderness beliefs and their mediating role in shaping attitudes towards wilderness.’ Journal of Environmental Management, 277, p.111392.
