assessment of management

MIDLANDS STATE UNIVERSITYFACULTY OF ARTS Department of Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies Topic An assessment of the effectiveness of management approaches at World Heritage Sites in Zimbabwe with special reference to the Matobo Hills World Heritage Site By LINCOLN SABUDU R102026P A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies in partial fulfilment of the requirements of a Bachelor of Arts Honours Degree in Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies. SUPERVISOR: DAVISON CHIWARA (MA, PHD) 1 NOVEMBER 2013 MIDLANDS STATE UNIVERSITY APPROVAL FORM This serves to confirm that the undersigned read and recommended to the department of Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies at Midlands State University for acceptance of a dissertation by Lincoln Sabudu. Supervisor.............................................. ............................................... ............................... Signature Date Department Chairman.................................................. .......................................... Signature Date 2 ............................ MIDLANDS STATE UNIVERSITY RELEASE FORM Name of Student: Lincoln Sabudu Reg Number: R102026P Title of Dissertation: An assessment of the effectiveness of management approaches at World Heritage Sites in Zimbabwe with special reference to the Matobo Hills World Heritage Site. Department: Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies Programme: B. A Honours in Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and Museum Studies Permission is hereby granted to the Midlands State University to produce single copies of this dissertation to lend such copies for private, scholarly or research purposes only. Address 25 BURROWS CLOSE, OLD MARLBOROUGH, HARARE Cell 0733932522 Signed..................................................................... Date............................................................................. 3 DECLARATION I, Lincoln Sabudu declare that this dissertation is original work that has not been previously submitted to any other university. Signed by.................................................................................... Lincoln Sabudu (R102026P) Date………………………………………………………………. 4 5 . May their souls rest in peace. Two men who played a big role in my life as mentors and friends.DEDICATION I dedicate this dissertation to Damson “ dhama” Kasvosve and Christopher "gaza" Kasvosve. I also thank Mr Chiwara. Richard..ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My gratitude is extended to all the people I worked with at NMMZ and at the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management for their invaluable help. Special gratitude goes to my family members. all the others and most of all Tafadzwa Oliver Magaya for their support and prayers during “trying times”. my supervisor. William. 6 . Maximina. for his guidance and effort. Thank you for being patient and having given so much of your time to help me. Wilfred. Theresa. Chris and Shami. and the 2003 convention for the safeguarding of the intangible heritage. The assessment was conducted within a theoretical framework provided by the 1972 world heritage convention. The research used one such tool. by many heritage managers and the public that many world heritage places and sites are not achieving their management objectives and at times are losing the values that were the reason for their establishment (Hockings et al 2008:8). through the use of the enhancing our heritage management effectiveness assessment toolkit. The study ultimately recommends that management effectiveness assessment tools such as the enhancing our heritage toolkit be formally adopted and used in the management of the Matobo Hills World Heritage Cultural landscape. the enhancing our heritage toolkit to carry out the assessment. in recent years. in the policy environment within which the site is managed. in the management implementation systems and in the resourcing of site management. However shortcomings were established in the management and implementation processes used at the site. The research was inspired by the realisation. and to also reinforce where management has been effective. complimented by desktop survey to gather data. Many assessment tools have been produced for assessing management effectiveness at world heritage sites. and in the policy environment within which the site is managed. 7 . Key terms: Management effectiveness assessment. The research therefore recommends review and improvements in the nature and level of stakeholder engagement at the site. The assessment was so as to enhance management of the world heritage cultural landscape by establishing those aspects of management that are not working and to remedy them. An evaluation of the economy of management at the world heritage site was also carried out together with an examination of the efficiency of management processes at the site.ABSTRACT The purpose of the research was to assess the effectiveness of management approaches at World Heritage Sites in Zimbabwe with special reference to the Matobo Hills World Heritage Site. The research established the current status and context of management at the site and also assessed how appropriate the management planning systems used at the site are. The research established that the management planning systems at the site are generally adequate for the effective management of the world heritage area. The shortcomings were notably in relation to the stakeholder engagement and relationships. The research employed a descriptive research design and used questionnaires and interviews. management plan implementation and resourcing of management at the site. .........3.........1..........................................................................3 Enhancing our Heritage management effectiveness assessment system ............ 11 2................................................................................................................................................. xiii CHAPTER 1 ............................................1 Background of the study ............ 11 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................5 Significance of the study ................6 Scope of the study ...................................................... 9 1.................................................................................................................................................................. v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................... 5 1.............................................. 9 1............................ 11 2............1.............................................................................................. 17 2...................................................TABLE OF CONTENTS NOVEMBER 2013 .........2 Statement of the problem ......................ii APPROVAL FORM ............................. 3 1.................................................. 11 2.......1 Description of the area .............................................................2 Research questions .............................. 5 1........................................................ 5 1..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Development of management effectiveness evaluation ......................................4 Area of study ............................................................................. 10 CHAPTER 2 ........ 6 1............7 Limitations ........................................................... 11 2............................2............................................................................................................. iii DECLARATION ........................................................................... 4 1........................................4......................3 Aim .........................................................................................0 Introduction ....................8 Organisation of the remainder of the study ................................................................................................3........ 10 Chapter summary ............................2 The 2003 Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible heritage ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 1.......1 The 1972 World Heritage Convention ............. 5 1.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 Specific objectives ..............................xii LIST OF ACRONYMS .................................................................... iv DEDICATION ................................................................................1 Theoretical framework ............................................. 8 1........................... 1 INTRODUCTION .....................................2 Management effectiveness assessment ............................. 16 2......ii RELEASE FORM ............................................... 1 1...... 14 2...............................vii LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES................... 18 8 ............................................................................... vi ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................9 Definition of terms ..................................................................................................................... ............................................................. 30 3................................................................3 Sampling................................................... 30 Chapter summary ......... 31 4......................4 Ethical considerations ............................................ 28 3............................................ 29 3...................4 Context ................................................................................... 23 2.................................................................................................1.........................................4................................................................................................5 Research instruments......................1 Questionnaires ...............................................................2 Current management context and status of the site ............................... 25 2......................................... 32 Economic values .........1 Site values and management objectives ........................................................ 31 4........................4........................................... 35 9 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 27 3......5 Management planning systems ................................................1 Research design ............ 29 3.................................................................4........................................................1 Site values and management objectives .....................................................................2.............................................................................................................................. 31 4...................................................................... 20 2................... 27 3.......... 31 4.......6 validity and reliability ...................... 28 3.......................... 18 2.............. 32 4................................................................................................................................................................................ 27 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.......... 25 Chapter summary ..................................................................3 Identifying threats ............. 19 2.............. 31 4.............1 Questionnaires ................................. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................... 31 4..................................................................................................................................................0 Introduction ....................................................................................6 Management needs and inputs ................................................................................... 27 3............ 29 3....2...........................................5.................................................................................................................2 Relationship with stakeholders ................1............................................5.........................7 Management processes ...................................4 National context .................................................................................................... 30 CHAPTER 4 .............1............0 Introduction ..........................2 Interviews .................................................. 35 Bio-diversity values..............................................1 Response rates ................................................................................................ 24 2......................................2..................................................... DATA PRESENTATION..........................................1 Site values ......................................... 26 CHAPTER 3 ................4....................................................5............... 27 3............................................2 Interviews ........ 24 2.................3 Desktop survey .......2 Target population .............................. ............................. 55 Current management context and status of the site ....3................................................................................................2. 42 Planning context ......................................................................................................... 36 4......................................................... 43 4.1 Adequacy of primary planning document/management plan ....... 54 Summary ...................................2.1.......................................................................................4 Relationship with stakeholders..................4....5 Efficiency of management processes ........................................... 49 4............................................................................................................................... 55 10 ....... 46 4..............................5....................................3 Appropriateness of planning systems at the world heritage area ..........................................................................................2 Budgets and funding ..........1............ 49 Management structures ..............5 The national context within which the world heritage area is managed ....................................................................................................................................................... 51 Research and documentation ...................................................................Scientific value ............................. 4.......................................... 50 Management plan implementation .....................................................2 Site design ...3...................................................................................................................................... 51 Conservation and management ............................................................ 52 Community participation ............................................................................................................. 43 Plan content ....................................... 36 4................................................... 45 National park ................................ 55 Values and management objectives ....... 48 4..........1................ 42 Decision making framework ....................................... 54 SUMMARY.................................... 47 4................................................................................................................ 54 Conclusions ......... 45 National monuments ................................................................................................... CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................ 49 Resource management .....................................................................................2 Management objectives ....................................4.................................2............1................................................................. 45 Buffer zone and boundaries ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Management needs and inputs ........ 39 4.. 41 4........................................................................ 47 4.................................................1 Management processes ..........................2..................................................3 Threats to the world heritage area‘s values ............................................................ 45 Multiple jurisdictions and stakeholders .......................... 53 Chapter summary ......... 53 CHAPTER 5 ...........................................................................................................................................................................1 Personnel .... 42 4. .......................................................... 57 Personnel ........................................................................................ 68 Appendix III .............. 57 Efficiency of management processes at the site ................................................................................... 55 Appropriateness of planning systems ............................................................... 58 Threats ........................................................................ 55 Stakeholder engagement .................................. 58 Recommendations ..................................... 69 Appendix IV ................................................................................................ 56 Adequacy of the management plan .... 58 List of references......................................... 56 Site design........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 57 Budgets and funding ......................................................................................................... 70 11 ..................................................................................................................................................... 67 APPENDIX II ........................................................................................... 57 Management plan implementation .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................Threats ........................................... 55 National context within which site is managed ................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 56 Management needs and inputs ..................... 61 Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................ .. 48 Figure 1The 6 management cycle elements according to the IUCN-WCPA framework ...... and the tools used…………………………………………………………………………………….......… 16 Figure 2A painted panel in the Matobo hills................ ...………………………………………………………………………………………………............….....2 Table 2Threats facing the Matobo hills and management Reponses……………………………….... 38 Table 3NMMZ and DNPWM personnel required and available at the Matobo hills…….........................LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table1Aspects of management assessed by the Enhancing our Heritage toolkit.................32 Figure 3 Relics of granaries in the Matobo hills .................................34 12 ...................………………………........................... NMMZ - LIST OF ACRONYMS National Museums and Monuments of Zimbabwe DNPWM - Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management 13 . The assessment system consists of twelve tools that assess the various components of the management of heritage sites so as to build a picture of how well the site is being managed and how well management goals are being achieved. the appropriateness of management planning systems. so as to plan and put in place necessary changes as efficiently as possible. The assessment system is based on the WCPA (World Commission on Protected Areas) management effectiveness framework. It is the product of a seven year long site based ―learn by doing‖ effort by a team of specialists with the participation of World Heritage Site managers from nine properties located around the world (Hockings et al 2006). It was originally developed for assessing the effectiveness of management at natural world heritage sites and other lesser protected areas. Assessment of management effectiveness at sites has been one important step in the process of improving management at these sites. are failing to achieve their management objectives and at times losing their values. This ensured that the toolkit is rooted in practical realities and the requirements of its end users. It assesses the current management status and context of the site.CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION In recent years heritage managers and the public have been increasingly concerned that protected areas. Various management effectiveness assessment tools have been produced and the concept of management effectiveness. despite its being a new concept has continued to develop on the international scene. including World Heritage Sites. the adequacy of resourcing of the site (economy of management). The Enhancing Our Heritage Assessment System is one such tool that has been produced for the purpose of assessing management effectiveness at sites. Such assessment involves assessing the status of current management at a site or protected area. to get a better understanding of what is working and what is not working. in conjunction with the IUCN (International Nature Conservation Union). This has made improving the management effectiveness of these protected heritage areas a priority throughout the conservation community (Hockings et al 2006:1). However it has been developed to apply to any heritage site (including cultural sites) and is adaptable to local contexts. through the World Heritage Centre. efficiency of management 14 . The toolkit for the assessment system was produced by UNESCO. Tool 2: identification of threats. Tool 6: site design assessment. Management effectiveness Tool 10: assessment work/site output indicators.outcomes of management. management processes. 3 .processes. if not none. 2 . and adequacy of resources available. Tool 4: review of the national context within which site is managed. 5 . assessment of results. Tool 3: assessment of relationship with stakeholders. However. 6 .Economy of Tool 7: assessment of management needs and inputs management.outputs of Tool 12: review of management effectiveness management and. of the various tools that have been produced for assessing management effectiveness have been used.Efficiency of Tool 8: assessment of management processes. 4 . The aspects of management assessed by the toolkit and the 12 tools in the toolkit that are used in the assessment of management effectiveness are outlined in the table 1 below:- Aspect of management Tool used assessed 1 . which is the ―enhancing our heritage‖ management 15 . This research therefore applies one such tool. in Zimbabwe very limited management effectiveness studies have been done at the World Heritage Sites in the country and very few. objectives. planning systems. Tool 9: assessment of management plan implementation. and management effectiveness based on the outputs and outcomes of management at the site.Appropriateness of Tool 5: assessment of management planning systems. based on :- Tool 11: assessment of outcome of management. Table1: the aspects of management assessed by the Enhancing our Heritage toolkit and the tools used.Current management Tool 1: identification of site values and management status/context. various assessment 16 . Brooks et al 2006. Assessments of management effectiveness have been carried out in thousands of areas with many international institutions such as the World Bank. adequate and appropriate resourcing and the timely implementation of appropriate management strategies and processes. threats and impact of all management activities (Margolis and Salafsky 1998. World Heritage Centre and the IUCN in the lead in promoting management effectiveness as an issue and providing technical development and support (Hockings et al 2008:8). Thus. weaknesses. However. This has resulted in work on management effectiveness increasingly becoming an important component of management at world heritage sites and other protected areas worldwide. 1. ICOMOS.1 Background of the study It has been noted worldwide that declaration of protected areas and world heritage areas does not always result in adequate protection. Management Effectiveness assessment has grown to become an important component of systematic preservation planning that is key in linking plan implementation and subsequent planning and budgeting (Satersonet al 2004. Hockings et al (2006) says that management effectiveness assessment helps promote adaptive management. Nolte et al 2010). The research however uses tools 1 to 9 of the toolkit due to limitations in time available. Margules and Pressey 2000). the Global Environment Facility. This realisation has led to the need to evaluate the effectiveness of management at these heritage areas be recognised increasingly in both the developed and developing countries (Hockings and Philips 1999. Ervin 2003a). The assessment is conducted within a theoretical framework provided by the 1972 world heritage convention. Hockings et al2006. Thus. to achieve this. it is unlikely to be fully achieved without an inquisitive and reflective management approach that seeks to understand the effectiveness of current management and how it can be improved. There has to be an understanding of the strengths. and the 2003 convention for the safeguarding of the intangible heritage.effectiveness assessment toolkit to assess management effectiveness at the Matobo hills world heritage site. improve planning and to promote accountability. through the use of the enhancing our heritage management effectiveness assessment toolkit. achieving effective management has been said to be a challenging task with Hockings (2006:1) saying that it requires adopting appropriate management objectives and governaning systems. assists in effective resource allocation and helps involve the community. been built around the application of the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas framework for assessing management effectiveness at protected areas and so presents an international standard for best practise. at the Serengeti national park in Tanzania. in broad terms. The ―enhancing our heritage‖ management effectiveness 17 . The toolkit has also.tools have been produced for the purpose of assessing management effectiveness at protected areas such as world heritage sites (Stem et al 2005). The enhancing our heritage toolkit is one such tool that has been produced for management effectiveness assessment. build consistency and protects protected area values (Hockings et al 2006:5). and very limited management effectiveness studies have been carried out formally at the world heritage sites in Zimbabwe.2 Statement of the problem The concept of management effectiveness assessment is still developing globally. 1. at Aldabra atoll in Seychelles and at the Greater St Lucia park wetlands in South Africa (Hockings et al 2006:67. Many conservation specialists and organisations have noted that there is need to strengthen the capacity and effectiveness of heritage and protected area managers by providing guidance. management effectiveness evaluation/assessment. Stoltonet al 2006). The enhancing our heritage toolkit has been said to help the achievement of this objective as it focuses on the need for adequate information and an adaptive approach to management which have been said to be ― key ingredients for successful world heritage site management‖ ( Hockings et al 2008:4). tools and information. according to Hockings et al (2008). With the tool. enables and supports an adaptive approach to management. It is thus an important heritage management tool that can greatly enhance heritage management if adopted by heritage managers. The enhancing our heritage toolkit has been widely used in Asia and in various Latin American protected areas. In Africa it has been successfully used as a management tool at Bwindi impenetrable forest in Uganda. The toolkit also supports the monitoring processes established in the World Heritage Convention by helping site managers with information on the condition and management of sites that is needed for periodic reporting and address issues identified in state of conservation reports (Hockings et al 2008:4). resulting in knowledge on the effectiveness of management at these sites being limited. 2028CB. Is the site currently adequately resourced? 5.45‘ S.1 Specific objectives 1.3. and at the Matobo hills world heritage site in particular. It extends from 28. According to the site‘s management plan (2004-2009). What is the current management context and status of the site? 2.4 Area of study The Matobo hills world heritage area lies 36 kilometres south of the city of Bulawayo in the Matebeleland south province of Zimbabwe. To establish the current management context and status of the site. thereby bringing the total area of the world heritage site to 3100 square km. 2028BC. 1. 1.3 Aim The research aims to carry out an assessment of management effectiveness for the Matobo Hills world heritage site using the ―enhancing our heritage‖ toolkit so as to ultimately enhance its management. What management planning systems exist and are they appropriate for the site? 3. 2028DA. 2028DB and 2028BD of the Zimbabwe archeological survey and surveyor general‘s office. 4. 3. What resources does the site require for effective management? 4.00‘ to 29. To evaluate the economy of management at the site.00‘ E and 20.25‘ to 20.3. To assess the appropriateness of management planning systems at the site. 1. The site is covered on map sheets 2028AD. 18 . the site‘s spatial extent is 2050 square km surrounded by a buffer zone that covers 1050 square km.assessment toolkit has not been used to assess management effectiveness at any of the world heritage sites in Zimbabwe. How efficient are the site’s current management processes? 1. To examine the efficiency of management processes at the site.2 Research questions 1. 2. which possibly dates back to the Iron Age. June is usually the coldest month with an average mean of 20. 19 . Criterion (vi) was due to the indigenous mwari religion which is centred on the Matobo hills.4 degrees Celsius. The area gives a vivid picture of how foraging communities lived in the Stone Age period and how the farming communities came to replace them through its rich archeological record and rock paintings.1 Description of the area The Matobo Hills was nominated as a cultural landscape and inscribed on the World Heritage list on 5 July 2003. the inscription was due to the fact that the Matobo Hills world heritage area has southern Africa‘s highest concentrations of rock art.6 degrees Celsius. Criterion (v) was due to the relationship and interaction between communities and the landscape that is shown by the rock art and the living religious traditions still associated with the hills. According to the site‘s management plan (2004-2009) the mean daily temperatures are comparatively high and the mean night daily range being as low as 8. The annual rainfall pattern for that area is uneven and normally totalling around 600 to 625 mm.5mm.25mm and the least rainfall is recorded in the July to September period which receives around 3. From April to June the area receives 30. Climate The site is in the semi-arid agro ecological zone 3 of Zimbabwe. (v) and (vi) of the World Heritage Convention.3 degrees Celsius. The winter period records the lowest temperatures with occasional guti(cold cloudy spells with drizzle). under the 1972 Convention on the Protection of the World‘s Cultural and Natural Heritage (Matobo hills world heritage list nomination dossier 2003). According to Tredgold (1956). The highest temperatures are recorded from September to November with October being highest with a monthly mean of 26. It was inscribed on the World Heritage List under criteria (iii). Water is said to be plentiful throughout the year because of the runoff from the granite hills. Under criterion (iii). and a mean minimum of 14. This religion.1. rainfall mostly falls between October and March with the period from January to march receiving the greatest amount of about 322 mm followed by October to December which receives around 232 mm.4.6 degrees Celsius and thus making the nights relatively cool. is the most powerful oracular tradition in southern Africa (Matobo hills world heritage site nomination dossier 2003). Garson 1995). The area. The augen gneisses cover most of the buffer zone. fauna and human communities for more than half a millennia. offered an ideal settlement setting and also provided raw materials for making hunting. The area has a very high diversity of vegetation types within a comparatively small area with soils from granite. gathering and food processing tools. The geology of the area is characterised by variations in rock composition. The lack of joints is attributed as being the major reason for the development of dwalas instead of castle kopjes (Matobo hills site management plan 2004-2009). according to the management plan (2004-2009). which clearly demonstrates the landforms influence on human settlement. as evidenced by the location of prehistoric settlements. The area is characterised by distinctive inselbergs and kopjes. according to Walker (1995). the cultural landscape is part of a granite complex which extents all the way to the Zimbabwe/Botswana border in the west whilst merging with the Mbalabala granite pluton in the east. These landforms and geological formations have from the past till present. The granite. The landscape is known for its distinctive geological formations and landforms which have been home to flora. has a great range of vegetation. Flora and Fauna The Matobo hills area. according to Nyathi (2013). despite having a few soil types.65 billion years old Matobo granite complex extends for about 2050 square kilometres and covers most of the world heritage site. The main rock type in the area is medium to course grained grey and black augen gneiss. These xenoliths range from 2 to 4 metres in length and are parallel gneissic foliation (Fountain 1981. influenced the nature of interaction between humans and nature. older granites and grandiosities are also found in the area.Geology According to the site‘s management plan (2004-2009). The area lies in the savannah biome under a climate generally too dry for Miombo woodland. Other rock types such as augen gneisses. 1982. has had over two hundred species of trees recorded. It has been placed in the broad Zambezianphytochorion under ―undifferentiated 20 . the 2. This variation has greatly influenced the landforms that characterise the area (Fountain 1982. The alignment in the densely porphyritic zones suppresses the creation of joints which are very influential in the development of certain topographies. Garson 1995). According to Garson (1995). grain size and grain alignment as the rock varies from medium to coarse grained rock with microlines as porphyroblasts or phenocrysts in the ground mass of quartz feldspar and biotite. 5 Significance of the study The research. the world heritage area falls under three types of land ownership. the rock shelters in the area go back as far as the later middle Pleistocene (700 000 to 125 000 BP). Evidence in the form of rock art and prehistoric stone tools from the early. middle and late Stone Age periods shows the area‘s history of human habitation and interaction with the environment. The three land ownership categories each have an act of parliament demarcating boundaries and controlling activities within. Cultural heritage According to Walker (1995). Thus it will aid site management by providing site managers with the necessary information for effective resource allocation. These are (1) state protected areas such as the national park. The management committee is a policy making body representing the interests of all stakeholders and is accountable to the stakeholders. (2) communal lands. Ephemeral pools in the hills support ephemeral vegetation whilst very drought tolerant flowering plants dominate vegetation on the rock domes (Matobo hills management plan 2004-2009). Management context According to the management plan (2004 – 2009). This placement has been despite its containing some afromontane elements. improvements and consolidation of management planning 21 . 1. The cultural history of the area also spilled into the 19th century. However a management committee representative of all the key stakeholders is in place so as to ensure an integrated management approach. The area also has Iron Age sites and sites where Iron Age deposits overlay the Stone Age deposits.woodland‖ by White (1978). also called commercial land. According to the Matobo hills management plan (2004-2009). The area is also home to a diverse range of faunal species ranging from the reptile family to the large herbivores such as the rhinoceros species (Dicerosbicornisand Ceratotherumsimum) (Matobo hills management plan 2004-2009). state land without individual tenure and (3) privately owned land with individual tenure. through assessing and reviewing the effectiveness of the management at the Matobo hills world heritage area provides a source of information necessary and a means for the implementation of adaptive management in practise at the world heritage area. the arrival of Nguni groups fleeing the mfecane is evidenced by several granaries in caves and rock shelters in the area. The assessment also provides a means and justification by which site managers can source aid and support from NGOs and other institutions as the research provides a reinforcement of site needs. The research area is also described in this chapter. The concept of management effectiveness assessment is still developing world wide.6 Scope of the study The research operates according to the parameters set by the world heritage convention through the enhancing our heritage tool kit. However. The research also presents a field test of a new management evaluation tool into the Zimbabwean context which would be very useful if adopted by management at the site. it also takes into consideration other relevant national and local regulatory frameworks. and limitations are also given in the chapter together with definition of key terms used in the research. Thus the research is mainly concerned with management at the site. and other factors that both directly and indirectly affect management of the site. Chapter 2 of the research presents the theoretical 22 . 1. The research thus benefits all stakeholders to the site through its enhancing management and protection of the site. 1. 1.systems and management processes and information about threats to the site. The significance of the study. A background of the study has been given. This presented one major limitation which is that of very limited literature on the subject. and relatively new in the Zimbabwean context. Another limitation of the study is that of the numerous stakeholders. Mostly the key stakeholders were interviewed and thus results can to a certain extent be said to be limited in accuracy.8 Organisation of the remainder of the study The study is organised into 5 chapters.7 Limitations The study was limited by the great extent of the cultural landscape which is 3100 square metres. followed by the problem statement and the aims and objectives of the research. The research also benefits site management by providing information on the condition and management of the Matobo hills world heritage site required by the established periodic reporting and monitoring requirements in the world heritage convention. its scope. The great extent of the research area thus limited the researcher‘s field visits to certain sampled areas of the site. Chapter 1 has introduced the research and the research area. It has highlighted and justified the need for an assessment of management effectiveness for the Matobo hills world heritage area so as to enhance its management and the protection of its values.9 Definition of terms Assessment It is the measurement or estimation of an aspect of management (Hockings et al 2006). especially the integration of design. Chapter 3 is a presentation of the research methodology employed in the research. which presents the theoretical framework within which the research was conducted. The chapter also described the research area and gave an overview of its components.framework which guided the research and reviews literature related to the study. 23 . and also reviews relevant literature that has been produced on the subject of management effectiveness assessment in relation to the research area. Chapter 4 of the research presents data gathered. chapter 2. and managed through legal or other effective means. Chapter summary This chapter has introduced the research and its aim and objectives. Adaptive management It is the incorporation of learning into management of world heritage sites. natural and cultural resources. The chapter presents the research design and the tools employed and how they were used in the research. Data collection procedures and administration are thus also presented. management and monitoring to test assumption in order to adapt and learn. Management effectiveness assessment It is an assessment of how well a protected area (world heritage site) is being managed. analysis of the data. 1. concludes it and offers recommendations. Protected area Land especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity. its interpretation and discussion. The chapter thus sets precedence for the next chapter. Chapter 5 of the research summarises the research. It focuses on whether the values of the site are being protected and whether agreed goals and objectives are being achieved (Hockings et al 2008:9). The chapter explores literature that has been produced so as to bring out the need and importance for management effectiveness assessments to be carried out at sites within the Zimbabwean such as the Matobo hills. and the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. As a result. in a framework guided by the World Heritage Convention.1.CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2. protection. The concept of management effectiveness assessment and its constituent assessment concepts are explored in relation to the enhancing our heritage management effectiveness assessment system. 24 . The World Heritage Convention focuses on the tangible dimension of heritage whilst the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage complements the world heritage convention by focussing on the intangible dimension.1 Theoretical framework 2. presentation and transmission to posterity of cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal value (Rossler 2002:10). The research was conducted under a theoretical framework provided for by the 1972 World Heritage Convention.0 Introduction This chapter presents the theoretical framework under which the research was conducted and reviews literature relevant to the research subject. The research also falls within a theoretical framework guided by this convention through its using the enhancing our heritage management effectiveness assessment toolkit. The research thus uses this convention as one of its benchmarks for measuring or establishing best practises in the management of world heritage sites in Zimbabwe. 2. The theoretical framework employed thus means that the research therefore covered both the tangible and intangible aspects of heritage which are both manifest at the Matobo Hills World Heritage Site.1 The 1972 World Heritage Convention The 1972 World Heritage Convention‘s sole purpose is to ensure the identification. the toolkit measures management effectiveness at world heritage sites based on standards set by the world heritage convention. through the enhancing our heritage management effectiveness assessment toolkit. conservation. The toolkit was designed with world heritage properties in mind. Paragraph 96 of the World Heritage Convention says that the protection and management of world heritage properties should ensure that the outstanding universal value, the conditions of integrity and/or authenticity at the time of inscription on the world heritage list are maintained or enhanced in the future. This calls for the effective protection of values for which the property was established to the greatest extent possible. Ensuring or enhancing the effectiveness of management at the world heritage properties, is one way through which the outstanding universal values of a property and its conditions of authenticity and integrity are protected and preserved (Hockings et al 2008:8). Assessing the effectiveness of management has been one way of improving and/or enhancing effective management of world heritage sites. This is because the current status and management of a property is assessed, to understand better what is and what is not working so as to efficiently plan any necessary changes. Paragraphs 97 and 98 of the World Heritage Convention state that world heritage properties should have adequate long-term legislative, regulatory, institutional and/or traditional protection and management to ensure their safeguarding. Paragraph 98 says that the legislative and regulatory measures at national and local levels should assure the survival of the property and its protection against development and change that may negatively impact the outstanding universal value, or the integrity and/or authenticity of the property. It is in line with this requirement that the research, through the enhancing our heritage toolkit‘s tool 4, reviews the national and international context within which the Matobo hills world heritage site is managed. The tool helps understand how national and international policies, legislation and government actions affect the site (Hockings et al 2008:12). This assessment thus helps determine whether national and international regulatory frameworks for site management and protection are adequate, and also how best to go ahead where they are not adequate. It also assesses how relevant heritage legislation/s affects site management. It then assesses the property‘s standing within broader government policy, the nature and context of site management in relation to international conservation conventions and treaties the government has signed up to. The government‘s capacity to fund site management is also assessed to determine its willingness and ability to do so. 25 Paragraphs 99 and 100 of the World Heritage Convention state that delineation of boundaries is an essential requirement in the establishment of effective protection of nominated properties. These boundaries should be drawn to ensure the full expression of the outstanding universal value and the integrity and/or authenticity of the property. The boundaries should include all areas and attributes which are direct tangible expressions of the site‘s outstanding universal value. Paragraphs 103 and 104 then state that an adequate buffer zone should be provided. These site design issues are also aspects covered in the research as the enhancing our heritage toolkit‘s tool 6 assesses the design of the world heritage site to examine how its size, location and boundaries affect its ability to safeguard and maintain its values (Hockings et al 2008:40). Paragraph 108 of the World Heritage Convention states that properties should have an appropriate management plan or other documented management system which should specify how the outstanding universal value of the property will be preserved. Paragraph 109 states that the purpose of the management system is to ensure the effective protection of the property to posterity. An effective management system, according to paragraph 110, depends on the type, characteristics and needs of the site. It is in line with this requirement that the research assesses the appropriateness and adequacy of management systems used at the world heritage site. The toolkit assesses the management context of the site and so identifies the site‘s characteristics and needs. It also assesses the adequacy and appropriateness of management planning systems at the site, the nature of management needs and inputs at the site, and the adequacy and appropriateness of management processes at the site (Hockings et al 2008:18). Paragraph 111, in recognition of the diversity that usually characterises site stakeholders, states those common elements of an effective management system could include a thorough shared understanding of the property by all stakeholders and the involvement of these stakeholders and partners in management. The research thus reviews the relationship between stakeholders and site management at the Matobo hills using tool 3 of the toolkit. The paragraph also states that it can also include the allocation of necessary resources and capacity building in terms of site management. The research assesses the current resourcing of the site in relation to optimum resourcing levels for effective site management. 26 However alone, this convention has some practical flaws that have made it inadequate for the protection of heritage, especially in sub Saharan Africa. Munjeri (2009:21) says that the convention has been criticised for being purely materialistic and ―monumentalistic‖ in its consideration of heritage and being exclusively focussed on the tangible heritage (Matsuura 2004). Munjeri (2004:19) has also criticised the convention for its separation of nature and culture in its definitions. Such a situation has been said to, in the words of Mazrui (1986), to demolish an important sociological triangle, between humanity, nature and the spiritual realm. Munjeri (2004) says that when the convention was crafted, ‗monumentality‘ and ‗aesthetic heritage‘ where the major focus. This resulted in the non-monumental heritage, which is what is important in sub Saharan Africa‘s communities, being overshadowed or ignored. The research therefore also employs a theoretical framework guided by the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage. 2.1.2 The 2003 Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible heritage The convention complements the World Heritage Convention and allows a holistic approach to heritage management that fills a gap that had been created in the World Heritage Convention‗s primary focus on tangible heritage (Matsuura 2004). Article 1 of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage states that its purpose is to safeguard the intangible cultural heritage, ensure respect for the intangible cultural heritage of the communities or individuals concerned, raise awareness at the local, national and international levels of the importance of the intangible cultural heritage. It thus, in the words of Munjeri (2004:21) prevents human kind‘s intangible heritage from ‗disappearing‘. Article 2 of the convention defines ‗intangible cultural heritage‘ as ―… practises, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills as well as instruments, artefacts, objects and cultural spaces associated with the communities, groups and individuals that identify it as part of their cultural heritage. According to Keitumetse (2006), the key word in the convention is ‗safeguarding‘, which is defined as the measures aimed at ensuring the viability of the intangible cultural heritage. This includes the identification, documentation, research, preservation, protection, promotion, enhancement, transmission as well as revitalisation of the various aspects of such heritage. Keitumetse (2006) says that the intangible cultural heritage referred to by the convention is that manifested as performing arts, knowledge and practises concerning nature and the universe, social practises, rituals and festive events. The convention is thus used in the research as a theoretical benchmark, or standard of best 27 practise in the effective management of the intangible cultural heritage at the Matobo hills world heritage site. Article 12 of the convention calls for the drawing up of inventories, by state parties, of the intangible cultural heritage present in their territories as a means of ensuring identification of this intangible cultural heritage for purposes of safeguarding it. In line with this, the research reviews the extent to which that values (intangible values in this case) of the world heritage property have been identified, and to what extent they are addressed and linked to management objectives of the property. Article 13 of the convention states that for the purpose of safeguarding and promoting intangible cultural heritage, a general policy aimed at promoting the function of the intangible cultural heritage within the society, and at integrating the safeguarding of such heritage into planning programmes should be adopted by state parties. The research therefore also assesses the adequacy and appropriateness policy environment within which values of the site, including the intangible values, are managed at the site using tools 4 and 5. The article also calls for the fostering of scientific, technical and artistic studies as well as research methodologies with the aim of effectively safeguarding the intangible cultural heritage. The convention also calls for the adoption of appropriate legal, technical, administrative and financial measures aimed at safeguarding and transmitting this intangible cultural heritage whilst also ensuring access to this intangible cultural heritage. This is also in line with the research which assesses the appropriateness of legal, technical, administrative and financial mechanisms in place at the Matobo hills world heritage site. Article 14 of the convention calls for education of the community, awareness raising and capacity building in the community and heritage managers aimed at promoting and safeguarding the intangible cultural heritage. Article 15 states that communities, groups and individuals should participate in the management. 28 According to the framework. management begins with understanding a site‘s context. mostly based on the IUCN-WCPA protected area management effectiveness assessment framework. The six elements in the framework are context. The six elements are shown in figure 2 below:- Figure 1: the 6 elements of the management cycle according to the IUCN-WCPA framework (Hockings et al 2010). Hockings et al 2006. planning. the site‘s stakeholders and the management and political environment.2. It then progresses through to planning: establishment of vision. management objectives and the strategies to conserve the site‘s values and reduce the threats it faces. management goals. money and equipment to work towards achievement of the 29 .2 Management effectiveness assessment Management effectiveness assessment is defined as the assessment of how well protected areas are being managed. The framework follows the principle that good management should follow a cycle with 6 distinct stages (Hockings et al 2006:11. It also involves allocation of inputs(resources) of staff. or whether they are protecting their values and achieving site management goals and objectives (Hockings et al 2006). inputs. Many assessments have been carried out using a variety of methods. its values. It has become a more prominent feature of protected area management over the past decade (Hockings 2003. Leverington et al 2010:7). outputs and outcome. threats that it is facing and the opportunities that exist. Leverington et al 2008). process. However. for example in Brazil (Mackinnon and Mackinnon 1986) and in Costa Rica (Cifuentes et al 2000) where assessment systems focussed on the management processes and technical capacity of protected areas. The whole process eventually produces outputs that result in impacts or outcomes. It also involves implementation of management actions according to accepted management processes. The work made few efforts to look at all aspects of site 30 .objectives. However the focus was on enhancing the management of biodiversity in protected areas. the initiative was focussed on biodiversity. and little if not on cultural aspects at all. Thus. With the recognition of the critical role that management needed to play in securing biodiversity values within protected areas. These 6 elements reflect three ‗themes‘ of management which are design (context and planning). Narkami 2006. individual studies on management effectiveness of protected areas have been undertaken for more than 20 years. Much of the initial work on management effectiveness evaluation took place in Latin America. and there was little attempt at involving stakeholders or at considering the social impacts of protected areas. Leverington et al 2010. the framework is not in itself a specific management effectiveness assessment methodology. to assess management effectiveness.2. 2. based on this frame work. Thus. appropriateness/adequacy (inputs and processes) and delivery (outputs and outcomes) (Stolton and Dudley 2004. especially by NGOs. The enhancing our heritage toolkit is one such tool. focussed exclusively on biological conditions in the protected areas. the above mentioned six elements have to be assessed and this gives a relatively comprehensive picture of management effectiveness. a flurry of interest in assessing management effectiveness using more rigorous approaches was created. but provides a consistent basis for developing assessment systems without trying to impose a standard methodology. Hockings et al 2006). as noted by Leverington et al (2010). many different assessment tools have been produced so as to improve the monitoring of management effectiveness (Stolton and Dudley 2004).1 Development of management effectiveness evaluation According to Hockings et al (2006:2). In these initial assessments. as in the case of that by the country side council of Wales in the UK (Alexander and Rowell 1999). Other initiatives. the efficiency of management processes. a range of assessment systems have emerged. However. These have been grouped into a number of groups.3 Enhancing our Heritage management effectiveness assessment system This system applies to world heritage sites and other lesser sites. an overall framework should be developed within which a number of different approaches may fit into. mostly drawing on the WCPA framework and focus has been broadened with some of the systems also covering other values other than biodiversity. It gives a picture of the whole management setting 31 .4 Context Assessment of context is important as it gives the relevant background information about a site and its management. 2. from management approaches to the final outcomes of management (Hockings et al 2006:2). However the research is concerned with the group with site-level assessments from which the Enhancing our Heritage assessment system used for the research is drawn from. and the collective management effectiveness at a site based on the outputs and outcomes of management. The assessment system utilises 12 tools to assess a site‘s management context. Thus. which is needed in order to effectively plan and implement management. It has also been designed to be adaptable to all sites (including cultural sites) and is adaptable to local contexts (Hockings et al 2006). A taskforce was established to look at management effectiveness. the appropriateness of planning systems. the economy of site management. with development in technical expertise and experience. but all the values at sites and protected areas. This led to the development of the six part WCPA assessment system initially published in Hockings et al (2000). This led to the decision that instead of developing one assessment system. according to Hockings et al (2006:6) this all changed with a resolve at the IV Venezuela world parks congress where there were calls for more attention to be given to the subject.management. and to also direct and focus an assessment on the most important aspects of management (Hockings et al 2006:13). 2. There are four major aspects that form the foundation of context assessment. The extent to which site values are linked to management objectives ultimately determines the extent to which resources will be allocated to the protection of these values. According to Hockings et al (2008) the protection of these values should be at the heart of site management and should be reflected in the site‘s management objectives. They link management effectiveness and site context and evaluated the adequacy of this relationship. (2) threats to the site. Hockings et al 2006:13). Ndoro (2006:62) reinforces this belief as he says that an empathetic understanding of the values at a site minimises the risk of 32 . 2. This view is reinforced by Munjeri (2002) who says that the sustainability of heritage is hinged upon the identification of the principal values either individually or in combination. This is one reason why management effectiveness assessments are an important necessity at world heritage sites. be planned and implemented carefully and adequately.1 Site values and management objectives Identification of site values is the first step in assessing management effectiveness. It is therefore clear that it is important to identify site values and assess the extent to which they have been linked to management objectives.4.and status of a site. This view is supported by Ionita (2011:22) who calls for management of protected areas to be context oriented and integrate the full diversity of local values and stakeholder knowledge and skills. Management objectives are meant to protect the values at a site. This view is echoed by Hockings et al (2006) who state that the values are the reason for the establishment of a protected area or site. Identification and understanding of these values helps inform the management effectiveness assessment as these values are used to select indicators that will provide indicators that are used to assess the extent to which site objectives are maintained (Hockings et al 2008). (3) relationships with stakeholders and (4) the national context within which the site is managed ( Hockings et al 2008:8. Effective management has to be based on a thorough understanding of the conditions unique to a site. include regular monitoring that leads to changes in management as required. These are (1) site values and management objectives. through adaptive management. can be achieved. which is the primary legal instrument for managing cultural heritage in Zimbabwe. include traditional systems as part of management and also involve many stakeholders and landowners over multiple jurisdictions. It was in line with this philosophy that during the colonial period. effective management includes engaging with stakeholders who influence the site‘s values. was inherited from a colonial philosophical legacy that effectively aimed at alienating the local communities from their heritage. local 33 . The assessment revealed that the cultural values of the site had been neglected. Involvement of local communities is very crucial in large scale lived-in landscapes that have multiple stakeholders.management decisions that may destroy or diminish the values attached to the site. which are in the category within which the Matobo hills falls. Mackinnon (2001) shares the same view as he says that conservation of sites can only be sustainable if local communities become an important part of site conservation efforts and benefit from those efforts. which has led to the state based legal systems predominating and marginalising community based legal systems (Mumma 2005).4. At Aldabra atoll in Seychelles the enhancing our heritage toolkit was used to assess management effectiveness. between the community traditional legal systems of management and the modern state management systems. for a site‘s values to be identified there is need for an all-inclusive process that involves all stakeholders so that all the varying perspectives can be made to converge on one correct position which is consensually arrived at in conditioning relationships (Munjeri 2002). The NMMZ act.2 Relationship with stakeholders According to Hockings et al (2008:28). However. Effective stakeholder engagement can also be a solution to the problematic competition for legitimacy. presents challenges that can only be answered through partnerships and flexibility in management(Buggey and Mitchell 2002). Assessing management effectiveness is one way through which partnership/cooperation and flexibility. This is because conservation of such cultural landscapes. The view is echoed by Hockings et al (2006:18) who says that effective management includes effective partnership and engagement with stakeholders. This means that other parties other than site management have to be involved in site management and management evaluation to gain additional perspectives on the world heritage site and its management. 2. have been said to be typically complex. As a result the participation and engagement of stakeholders has been sought after and its integration into planning systems has become a popular endeavour (Stringer et al 2007. balanced and negotiated so as to achieve consensus. Ndoro and Pwiti 2001). The multiple stakeholders and jurisdictions that characterise the Matobo hills make its management a complex endeavour. a framework for communication. integration of relevant and complete information which is owned or managed by different stakeholders can help achieve this. conflict detection and resolution (Ionita 2011:24. considering that the country has signed up to the world heritage convention which calls for the inclusion and participation of local communities in site management. According to Ionita (2011:22). and with what impact. such as the Matobo hills. This calls for comprehensive identification and knowledge of the context of the site. and embraces a diversity of knowledge and values. so as to increase the information on which management decisions are based. Environmental problems. affecting multiple actors and agencies and to be multi scale and so. The research 34 . This raises questions as to how this legislation is being used. demand transparent decision making that is flexible to change. This same legislation is still being used to day. in protected areas and sites that is. Thomas and Middleton 2003:55). This therefore makes assessment of management effectiveness a necessity at the Matobo hills as the assessment also assesses the appropriateness of local community engagement at the site.communities were alienated from sites. Effective stakeholder engagement in management of protected areas has also been said to enable divergent interests and opinions to be discussed. in Reed 2008). cited in Ionita 2011:22). The need for an assessment at the world heritage site is strengthened further by scholars such as Chipunza (2009) and Pwiti (1996) who say that the NMMZ has applied the legislation at sites without due regard for the ―very ethno-systems involved in the production of heritage that the act claims to protect. Effective stakeholder engagement is therefore an important means of developing effective management linked to a site‘s context and based on sound management decisions (Ionita 2011). which were placed under national parks or national museums (Chipunza 2009. Pwiti and Ndoro 1999. It is thus. Knowledge from different domains has been said to be another means of answering some of today‘s complex problems (Stoll-Kleeman and Welp 2008. one should note that there are various challenges to stakeholder engagement that may make effective management of a site problematic. Katsamudanga 2003:3. Therefore. Open discussion may be seen as a threat to one‘s authority. Ionita (2011) cites Reed (2008) as being of the belief that even though arguments for participatory conservation have been supported with examples of success. Munjeri 2002). Thus. This view is also echoed by the view that the approach for managing intangible values is one that empowers stakeholders with direct responsibility over it. despite having accepted a policy of transparency and communication. they may resist supplying all required information to interest groups. the premise of participatory approaches and stakeholder engagement however has potential benefits that outweigh the costs. This is very important considering the numerous stakeholder conflicts that have characterised management of the site since its inscription on the world heritage list (Makuvaza and Makuvaza 2012). since the survival of such values is ― contingent upon cultural traditions and contemporary needs of stakeholders (Buggey 2000:24. However.therefore aims to provide information as pertains to the level and nature of stakeholder engagement at the Matobo Hills World heritage site and thereby providing a means by which it could be improved and consolidated. establish the rules of engagement and identify the relevant players (Hockings 2008. understanding their relationship to a site and its values and a consideration of the level of their participation should be part of context assessment as its level of effectiveness ultimately also influences the effectiveness with which the site is managed. Some scholars have even raised doubts about the applicability and viability of the concept of stakeholder involvement. with society and stakeholders being so diverse. these stakeholders have to be critically identified so as to level the playing field. and with there being challenges to stakeholder engagement for purposes of management. Mansuri and Rao (2008) cited in Ionita (2011) conclude that the ‗naive‘ application of these contextual concepts like participation and empowerment actually contributes to poor design and implementation. The 35 . many of these pragmatic claims can be disputed since they are rarely tested. Though uncertain. As a result some stakeholders are unwilling to support wider participation and thus. identification of stakeholders. Ndoro 2003:81). and protected areas can only be successfully if managed effectively. tourism and the provision of tourism related infrastructure. The Matobo conservation society. a group of exfreedom fighters carried out some illegal ceremonies at the site.4. at the early stages of planning so that appropriate management responses can be implemented. in its 2012 newsletter has noted that invasive species such as lantana camara have become a major threat in the cultural landscape.3 Identifying threats According to Alexander (2008). 2. The natural processes include erosion. They also note that the environment has been greatly and negatively altered in the communal lands of the world heritage area. Butchart et al 2010. Ndiweni and Nyathi (2003) have noted that poaching and vandalism have been on the increase in the Matobo hills. These threats usually have a complex cause-impact relationship which has to be understood if appropriate 36 . This has resulted in degradation and destruction of many of these protected areas (Liu et al 2001. This is a situation that has been noted all over Africa. which the local community saw as desecrating the values of the site. They also noted the political environment being another aspect that has threatened cultural heritage in the Matobo hills world heritage area. drought and wild fires. Poaching within the national park area has also been another problem that has existed for years now. accelerated or human induced deforestation human caused veld fires and graffiti. Many world heritage sites are faced by a variety of threats and there has been growing evidence of breakdown in critical values (Fischer 2008. natural processes and human activities pose the major threats to the cultural landscape‘s values. These threats have to be identified. The ex-freedom fighters have also in the past threatened to dig up Cecil John Rhodes‘ grave and send his remain s to Britain. conservation management specifically involves managing risk and threats. exfoliation of rock surfaces. According to the management plan (2005-2009). as its heritage is faced by many threats that range from population pressures to outright vandalism and looting (Eboreime 2009:1). Dudley et al 2004).research therefore aims to also enhance management by assessing stakeholder engagement in management of the World Heritage Site. Stolton and Dudley 1999). In 2012. in terms of their type and level. Reduction and elimination of these threats is thus an important part of effective world heritage site management. The dominant human activities that threaten the cultural landscape include agricultural practises. Munjeri 2005).4 National context In order to place the management of a site into context.5 Management planning systems According to Hockings et al (2008:34). Assessment of the national context also helps overcome the problem noted by Eboreime (2009:2).management responses are to be implemented. world heritage sites with established and current management plans are likely to be more successful and effective in terms of management. Hockings (2008) further says that effective management plans also 37 . Thus. The laws have also been said have originated with a focus on the physical aspects of sites. with rules and regulations prescribed to distance people from the site (Ndoro 2001. Thus the threats facing the site have to be identified if the effectiveness of management at the site is to be assessed and enhanced. 2. both the tangible and intangible aspects have to be fully considered and assessed. Pwiti and Ndoro 2005. 2. policies have to be assessed for adequacy. The research therefore assesses management effectiveness at the site within a theoretical framework that covers both the tangible and the intangible. He states that the laws and policies fail to address contemporary issues such as poverty. whether they are being fully implemented in practise and the relationship with institutions supporting the management of the site has to be reviewed. In order to enhance the management of such heritage as the Matobo hills. employment. whereby in most African countries the out-dated laws and policies have failed to meet and cope with the contemporary realities of developments and value systems at sites. The NMMZ act presents a good illustration of this fact as fines stipulated in the act have not been reviewed and are still in the abandoned Zimbabwe dollar currency.4. Effective management plans give direction to site management and link site values to management objectives. Hockings et al (2006) believes that it is important to know if the local and national governments are supportive of the world heritage site and the degree to which relevant legislation and other government policy is helping to protect values. land use and rights or they are in conflict with other stakeholder and community values and rights. Such plans also direct work activities and focus work on achieving management objectives. In the assessment. the implementation of management plans for sites should also be assessed. The research therefore aims to assess the level and nature of implementation of the management plan in relation to the effectiveness of the whole management regime at the site. Hockings et al (2006:20) then says that for management to be effective. Management cannot be effective if the management plan is not fully implemented. and the impacts of this lack on the protection of the site‘s values. 38 . are linked to budgets and available resources and have measureable and achievable targets. This would therefore enable the identification of areas where implementation has been lacking. All these aspects should be assessed. especially when one considers the situation at the Matobo Hills World Heritage area where the management plan is out-dated.6 Management needs and inputs Repeated assessments.. have come to find that servicing all their sites and protected areas to a desirable level is not economically possible. even in the wealthy countries. Therefore. manpower.involve stakeholders in site management. at world heritage sites and protected areas around the world. which would enhance attempts to service sites to the most desirable level possible. However to estimate if resources are adequate. The plan should also provide a plan of how this desired future will be achieved (Leverington et al 2010). Lillo et al (2004) however says that some management institutions. Thus it is important to assess the adequacy of planning systems at a site so as to enhance the site‘s management by ensuring that all management planning gives an adequate planning framework that ensures that the site‘s values are effectively protected. Effective management plans should provide a sound decision making framework that presents picture of the site‘s desired future. equipment. 2. have shown that the level of resourcing disposable for site management often has an impact on management effectiveness at the site (Hockings et al 2008).. The management committee at the site has also been alleged to have failed to implement the same out dated management plan during its stipulated lifespan (Makuvaza and Makuvaza 2012). an assessment has to first determine what is needed for adequate management. the adequacy of resources has to be assessed. Estimation of needs enables the identification of shortfalls in resources (funds. the level of resources required the extent to which resources are available and whether the available resources are being used efficiently are issues that have to be considered.) in relation to management objectives. including those that are well planned and resourced.7 Management processes All world heritage sites and protected areas. Assessment of management effectiveness can help improve management processes. and hence help improve the effectiveness of the whole management regime at a site (Hockings et al 2008). Chapter summary This chapter presented the theoretical framework within which the research operated. The next chapter focuses on presenting the research methodology that was employed in the research. The chapter also reviewed literature that has been produced on the concept of management effectiveness and other constituent subjects and themes relevant to the study. 39 .2. It highlighted sections of the 1972 world heritage convention and the 2003 convention for the safeguarding of the intangible heritage that are used by the research as benchmarks or standards for best practise in site management. need efficient and sound management process for them to have management that is effective (Hockings et al 2006). This is because.CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3. the case study approach helps explain or to assess and evaluate phenomena. The design allows for a process or phenomenon to be investigated using a combination of data collection tools (Hussey 1997. However.1 Research design A research design has been defined as a work plan for a research and is used to as a guide in in data collection and analysis. as stated by Gall et al (1996:549). The research aimed at getting in depth information and views on the management of the site that could only be delved into more accurately through qualitative means. quantitative approaches were also used in the calculation and presentation of aspects such as response rates.0 Introduction This chapter presents the research design. The research design employed qualitative approaches to gathering and analysing data. The chapter also presents the target population for the research. It ensures that the data gathered enables the research question to be answered. 3. methodology and tools that were employed in the research and how they were applied. 3. in combination with relevance to the research process (Truckman 1972). Creswell. The design was appropriate as the research focused on the Matobo Hills as the case study site for the assessment of the effectiveness of management approaches at world heritage sites in Zimbabwe. The hypothesis was that the informants that were interviewed and questioned represented and gave a picture of the whole stakeholder population at the world heritage site. The target population for the research comprised of 40 . but with a logical problem (Yin 1989:29). It aims at employing economy in procedure. and hence it deals not with a logistical problem.2 Target population Target population has been defined as the entire group from which a research aims to extract information from( Cohen et al 1994). 1994:12). The research employed a descriptive research design that used the case study research method. This was so that perspectives and views form all levels of management could be obtained and also so that the information could be compared for purposes of getting better insight and ensuring as much validity as possible. For all the other stakeholders the research targeted two informants randomly. That made a sample of 12 individuals.3 Sampling Dunne (1995) has defined sampling as the selection of a smaller group so that it represents a larger group or population. 41 . The individuals from the organisations were selected based on the level of involvement or engagement in the management of the world heritage area. 3. staff from the national parks and wildlife authority of Zimbabwe‘s Bulawayo offices and from the site. visitors.staff from the Natural History Museum in Bulawayo and from the world heritage area. academics who have researched and worked on the world heritage area. and for conduct at such places as the National Parks and Wildlife Authority camp at Maleme and at the Natural History Museum in Bulawayo. The researcher also had to respect the issue of confidentiality where informants requested anonymity. The researcher also had to follow all the rules and regulations pertaining to the site. From the organisations/entities identified as having key management function in the world heritage area (NMMZ and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management). The research targeted 2 individuals from each of the groups identified as being the target population.4 Ethical considerations All data gathering from employees of NMMZ and the Parks and Wildlife Authority was done with the express permission of the relevant institutional authorities. local communities and commercial tourism business operators with a stake in the world heritage area. the research employed purposive sampling as one informant was selected from the organisation‘s management while the other was selected from middle level employees based at the site. 3. The informants were fully informed of the purpose of the study and how the information they gave would be used. 42 . However. namely NMMZ and the national parks and wildlife authority. adapted from the assessment toolkit was also administered to two officials each from NMMZ and ZIPWA for them to fill in. based on performance rating. An interview guide was crafted but in the interviews the researcher would follow up on notable points raised by informants and requiring further explanation. A worksheet for identification of threats to the site‘s values. the first questionnaire was designed for the key management entities in the world heritage site. 3.1 Questionnaires Questionnaires adapted from the enhancing our heritage toolkit were used to gather data. for them to answer in relation to other stakeholders in the same group.3. This was meant to gather in depth information on management of the site. These questionnaires were administered to key informants from NMMZ and from the National parks and wildlife authority. other relevant informants such as academics.5. To further eliminate bias. Thus. in line with the toolkit used for the research. This was so as to get the in depth opinions and views of informants which could not be captured by the questionnaires or by desktop survey alone. and also in the conventional ‗fill-in‘ questionnaire basis. without key management functions in the world heritage area. This was then complimented with space where the respondent could further comment and explain their answer. All the questionnaires crafted had 4 possible answers for each question.2 Interviews The research also employed interviews to gather information pertaining to the context within which the site is managed. the first questionnaire was also given to other stakeholders. Two other questionnaires were also adapted from the toolkit for assessing management planning and management process systems at the site.5 Research instruments 3. who have done research on the site.5. were also targeted so as to get an even broader picture of the context within which the site is being managed. This questionnaire was employed both on interview basis. Staffs from NMMZ and the National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority were the major focus of these interviews. This was so as to eliminate bias. The second questionnaire was designed for the other stakeholders without key management functions in the world heritage site. This ensured that the gathered data was in depth and gave more insight and answers into issues asked. Two questionnaires were developed to assess the level of stakeholder engagement at the site. 43 . Chapter summary This chapter presented the research methodology that was used in the research. 3. and for conduct at such places as the National Parks and Wildlife Authority camp at Maleme and at the Natural History Museum in Bulawayo. the chapter provides the setting for the next chapter. With that. The researcher also had to respect the issue of confidentiality where informants requested anonymity as called for by Smith (2003). The integrated management plan for the site for the year (2005-2009) was also thoroughly reviewed. such as the Matobo conservation society. The informants were fully informed of the purpose of the study and how the information they gave would be used.3. This was so as to get a broad picture of management at the site with full consideration of the activities of stakeholders.5.6Ethical considerations All data gathering from employees of NMMZ and the Parks and Wildlife Authority was done with the express permission of the relevant institutional authorities as called for by Sales and Falkman (2000). chapter 4. It also presented other aspects related to methodology employed. which presents the data gathered and its analysis. Other literature and publications related to the site that have been produced were also thoroughly consulted and reviewed. Management and other activity reports from NMMZ and the National Parks and Wildlife Authority were also consulted together with reports from other organisations and institutions with a stake in the site. The researcher also had to follow all the rules and regulations pertaining to the site. The Midlands State university library and the Natural History Museum‘s library proved to be invaluable sources of literature.3 Desktop survey Related literature and reports were thoroughly reviewed. 2 Interviews Interviews were successfully carried out with employees from NMMZ.0 Introduction This chapter presents the data that was gathered using the methods given in the previous chapter 3. 4. two academics. 5 were successfully interviewed.2 Current management context and status of the site Hockings (2006:12) has explained management context as being where management is in terms of managing a site.1. threats it faces nature and levels of stakeholder engagement and the national policy environment within which the site is managed.1. The response rate is also presented and explained. 4. giving an 83% response rate for the interviews. significance and management objectives of the site. This gave an 80% response rate on the questionnaire survey.1 Response rates 4. two national parks and wildlife officers. The chapter also analyses the gathered data and discusses it. Of the targeted ten informants. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Questionnaires Questionnaires were successfully administered to NMMZ‘s heritage manager (natural history museum). 8 questionnaires were successfully answered and returned. It focuses on establishing the values. officers from the National Parks and Wildlife Authority.CHAPTER 4 DATA PRESENTATION. Of the targeted 6 officials. two tourism operators and to two members of the local communities met at Maleme rest camp. 4. 44 . and with academics who have worked on the site. a tour guide from NMMZ. The data is interpreted both quantitatively and qualitatively so as to give it meaning. especially when one views the sunset.2. Figure 2: A painted panel in the Matobo hills (adapted from Hubbard 2006) 45 .2. An official from the national parks who was interviewed said that the vegetation and wildlife complimented the beautiful landscape and should be preserved.1. presents a breath taking view which many have referred to as being ―beautiful‖.4.1 Site values Aesthetic value The two officials from NMMZ concurred in their belief that the cultural landscape. especially the hills.1 Site values and management objectives 4. The world‘s view area presents one place where the aesthetic value of the world heritage area is emphasised. The landscape has many rock art sites with art executed with varying styles and themes that all contribute to the aesthetics of the world heritage area. Cultural and historic values All the officials interviewed from NMMZ and DNPWM said that the area was of significant cultural and historic value. Hubbard (2006) has referred to the rock art as being as being a depiction or manifestation of the complex religion of late Stone Age hunter gatherers and hence loaded with meaning and emotion that goes beyond simple aesthetics. 46 . The hills also provided refuge during the first Chimurenga. The academic said that the area had more than 3500 recorded rock art sites. comm). supported by officials from NMMZ who said that individually the rock art has been projected to reach millions. The officials said that Zimbabwe tradition dry stone walling and remains of iron smelters are also found in the area. Stone Age sites According to two NMMZ officials and an academic that were interviewed. the area has an abundance of sites from the Stone Age period that are mostly found within rock shelters. The view was supported by an academic interviewed who has worked in the area and published literature about the world heritage area. The official said that the art is attributed to both the hunter gatherers of the late stone and the farming communities. Iron Age sites Two NMMZ officials that were interviewed said that the world heritage area also has a lot of evidence of occupation and interaction with people from the Iron Age period. and a portal to our past Chikwiramakomo (2013 pers. Historical value The world heritage area has been said to be a repository of our history as Zimbabweans. This was further. In the 1830s Shona ethnic groups that were displaced by Nguni groups fleeing the mfecane took refuge in the hills. The interaction between humans and the hills that resulted due to these conflicts left behind relics that can now be seen today in many different forms such as the iron smelting furnaces and numerous granaries found in the hills. The informants said that the sites are an invaluable source of information about the stone inhabitants of the region and the development of human culture that has proved important to archeologists and historians. Intangible heritage and living traditions The area is home to sacred traditional shrines. Cecil John Rhodes‘ and Allan Wilson‘s graves. The area has historically commemorated places and spaces such as the Rhodes indaba site where the rebelling Ndebele chiefs and Rhodes negotiated peace during the first liberation war. These include king Mzilikazi‘s. Wirirai and Manyanga. represent the authority of God (Mwari/Mwali) (Hyland and Umenne 2006:4: Nyathi and Ndiweni 2005). Dula. NMMZ officials that were interviewed said both local people and others from various areas around the country converge on these shrines to 47 . These shrines. Ntunjambila. Zhilo.Figure 3: Relics of granaries in the Matobo hills (adapted from the Matobo hills management plan for 2004-2009) The area also has a strong history as a platform and means through which black Zimbabweans resisted colonisation and oppression during the colonial period (Ranger 2000). These shrines include Njelele. according to the African traditional religion indigenous to the area. The world heritage area contains burial sites of important figures that played an important part in the country‘s history. These sacred areas have taboos that are associated with them which control access and restrict certain behaviours from visitors and set guidelines for conduct. They said that the employment being provided by NMMZ did not benefit the whole community but o0nly the few who got jobs and their families (Primrose Ngulube 2013 pers. The world area is also home to a diverse population of wildlife which survives or flourishes due to the World Heritage area‘s protected area status. The ecologist said that the area contains critical ecosystems and species. Economic values According to the interviews carried out with officials from NMMZ and DPWM the world heritage area contributes to the economy locally and nationally. the area is very valuable as a means of preserving biodiversity. The Njelele has areas that are considered to be sacred and hence not to be tempered with in any way. According to a DNPWM ecologist resident at Rhodes Matopo national park. The world heritage area also contributes to the national economy through tourism as it attracts a diverse range of visitors. They said that the numerous caves and the vegetation (especially in 48 . 1999). The world heritage area is also a source of employment to locals as some of them are employed by the various stakeholders and business entities operating in the area. some of which are endangered. Bio-diversity values The Matobo hills area has had over two hundred species of trees recorded which is a very high diversity of vegetation types within a comparatively small area (Nyathi. The Parks and Wildlife Authority also employ local community members. especially from NMMZ activities at the site. They also benefit through the sale of thatching grass harvested from the national park core area. One example is that of the swampy areas which were used to determine whether rains would fall or not (Ranger. the local community benefit from sale of curios to tourists who visit the world heritage area.pray for rain and to ask for protection and good health. Red clothes and paraphernalia and metal gadgets are not allowed at some of the shrines (Primrose Ngulube 2013 pers. comm). comm). 2013). both local and international. Locally. DNPWM officials interviewed said that the World Heritage Area is home to a diverse range of fauna. Members of the local community however said that they did not benefit in any substantial way from the site. Most of the security and tour guiding personnel employed by NMMZ are members of the local community. Table 3 below shows the threats 49 . These threats endanger the sustenance of the integrity and authenticity of the values attached to the site. followed by natural processes as presenting the biggest threat to the values of the site. zebra. tourism awareness. These headings are conservation and management. promotion and visitor management. Giraffe.2. All informants that were interviewed and who answered questionnaires in relation to management objectives. One official from DNPWM said that the management objectives in the plan are grouped into five headings. 4. to predators such as the leopard and raptors such as the black eagle to small invertebrates such as the rock scorpion (Hadogenes troglodytes)(Matobo hills management plan 2004-2009). research and documentation.2. Management at the site has thus been effective in linking the world heritage area‘s values to the site‘s management plan. All the informants that were interviewed concurred that the management objectives for the site were appropriate. and community co-operation and participation.1. In order to reach this goal the world heritage site has management objectives that have been established in its management plan. This greatly increases the chances of the site‘s values being effectively protected. sable and wildebeest are also found in the Matobo hills world heritage site. Faunal species range from the large herbivores such as the rhinoceros species (Dicerosbicornisand Ceratotherumsimum).2 Management objectives The long term goal of site management plans and activities at the world heritage area is to ensure a sustainable future for the cultural landscape. 39 snake and 15 fish species. 4. According to Nyathi (2013) the world heritage area has 88 mammal. and thus showed that the management objectives are clearly and effectively linked to the long term vision of management and if effectively implemented. and this reflects the view by Hockings et al (2008) that the management objectives of a site should reflect the site‘s values.the national park area) offer a diverse source of habitats for the animals. Management is thus effective in this respect.1. He said that this fragmentation of task and function helped in the focussing of management efforts. believed. would ensure the effective management and protection of the site‘s values to posterity. 175 bird.3 Threats to the world heritage area’s values Interviews conducted pointed to human activities. C Visitors/tourists P Lack of sufficient visitor management mechanisms Aesthetic value (rock art). (NMMZ) Employment of site custodians and tour guides.Graffiti Need for building materials and fence posts C Critical animal habitats. C Cultural heritage (rock art). (NMMZ) 50 .that are threatening the site. Scientific value (medicinal plants). (NMMZ) Erection of barriers in some of these sites. (NMMZ) Routine inspections and removal of graffiti. Threats Values threatened Current Major causes or of threat potential threat (C or P) 1. and impacts of the threats and management responses that have been made by site management. major causes of the threat. Aesthetic value C Clearing land for settlement C Cutting down of trees for curio carving Biodiversity (the diverse plant life in the cultural landscape). the values threatened.Human induced deforestation (in the communal lands). 2. management response Limiting number of rock art sites open to the public to a few select monitored sites. Aesthetic value (rock art. (PWMA) CAMPFIRE projects (Matobo and Umzingawne rural district councils) District environmental action plans (Umzingwane rural district council) Elimination of the alien species where possible (resource wise) through use of chemicals and manual methods (DNPWM). scenery provided by the flora). 51 Patrols in the national park core area (PWMA) Erection and maintenance of fences (for example the ongoing whovi wilderness fencing project).Soil erosion Cultural heritage (rock art). C Aesthetic values (trees) C Aesthetic value C Biodiversity C P Human induced fires Absence of reliable boundary fence for the national park core area Socioeconomic challenges Agricultural practises Human induced deforestation 6. . educational value of the cultural resources i9n the landscape…). eucalyptusa) Authenticity of cultural areas and the whole world heritage area C Hydrological ecosystems and critical habitat systems C Animal movements leading to spread of seeds. and other species for food).Encroach-ment of Invasive alien species (lantanacamarra. Natural dispersion of seeds. P Natural phenomena Fauna P Animal habitats P Scientific value (medicinal plants.Poaching 5. P Fauna (especially the rhinoceros species for their horns.Fire 4.Table continued 3. The situation is worsened by the absence of an integrated disaster management plan linked to the management plan. From interviews conducted. Matobo and Umzingwane rural district councils and representatives of local chiefs. The management committee has been said to have failed to work together in aligning the interests and needs of the different stakeholders.1. 4.2. DNPWM officials especially pointed out fire guard management as being one of their conservation activities whilst NMMZ pointed out condition surveys and inspection. Zimbabwe tourism authority. The management committee is meant to be a policy making body representing the interests of all the stakeholders.4 Relationship with stakeholders The management committee for the world heritage site comprises of key stakeholders of the cultural landscape. the committee is meant to ensure synergy between stakeholders in the management of the world heritage area.and others). Biological integrity (displacement of indigenous tree and grass species). These are NMMZ. the situation is different on the ground. The table 3 shows that there is a tendency by site management to concentrate more on current threats that are threatening the site and note the potential threats. Table 2: The threats facing the Matobo hills and management Reponses. Mafela trust. However. According to the heritage manager from NMMZ there are no mechanisms in place specifically designed to find solutions and resolve conflict if it were to arise between stakeholders and site management. P Planting of indigenous tree species in critical condition areas (DNPWM). However. This perpetuates the cycle of threats as the managers of the site constantly have threats to deal with. Thus the operational basis of the relationship between stakeholders at the world heritage can be said to be dysfunctional. the site managers from NMMZ and DNPWM insisted that they did carry out preventive conservation in their conservation activities. 52 . DNPWM. the local community member said that if that was not the case then why was NMMZ ―not doing any visible things in the area that could give testimony to their using revenue generated the right way‖. the implication being that revenue was being embezzled. The local community also feel that some of the stringent laws governing the way they harvest resources from the world heritage area. The local community member also said that they would only be convinced otherwise if they were involved in the financial management of revenue generated by NMMZ at the cultural sites. such as thatching grass and wood for curios. The local community has also accused NMMZ of failing to do their moral obligation of repairing local roads leading to the sites under their management. they could not afford to relax any laws. the local communities generally distrusted management institutions in the world heritage area especially the above mentioned three who tax the local communities for the resources that they benefit from the world heritage area. Officials from DNPWM interviewed also said that despite there being a need for a functional relationship between stakeholders. should be relaxed. The suspicions are further given weight by recent newspaper stories in the local media.The relationship is antagonistic especially between the local communities and those stakeholders with a legally based operational stake in the world heritage area such as the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority. 53 . According to these officials. Officers from DNPWM suspect that some of the fires that at times threaten the world heritage area are caused by other stakeholders involved in poaching of wildlife. in the best interests of the site. DNPWM and NMMZ. On the other hand officials from NMMZ and DNPWM said that. A local newspaper. the local communities have especially complained over the operating fees they are charged by the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority for them to be able to sell curios. TheZimbabwean of October 19 2013. Upon being asked to explain the reasons for the suspicions. A local community member interviewed said that there was a general belief among the local community that revenue generated from entry fees by NMMZ was being ―diverted to other uses‖ or that ―abafanabemuseumbayaginyaimali” (Ndebele for ― the guys from the museum are stealing money‖. especially with the current increase in poaching in the country. carried a story headlined ―Poachers‘ fire devastates Matopos‖ in which local resettled farmers are alleged to have killed hundreds of wild animals and a lot of vegetation while poaching wild game. The stakeholder consultations carried out in the drawing up of the integrated management plan for the site were effective. This was in line with Paragraph 111of the World Heritage Convention which calls for a thorough shared understanding of the property by all stakeholders and the involvement of these stakeholders and partners in management. However the NMMZ act (25:11) has flaws when it comes to the protection of intangible heritage. The legislation was born from a 54 . and inclusive of most of the stakeholders‘ needs and interests. Key among their complaints was the issue of relaxation of rules and regulations pertaining to the harvesting of wood for curio carving as regulated by the forestry act. the local communities were effectively and sufficiently consulted in management planning but not in the implementation of the plan and its current review.2. It is therefore clear that the basis for stakeholder engagement and relationships was sound and effective. However. The problem was however seen in the implementation of agreed actions and plans as the management set up failed to function fully and united.1. They were satisfied with the level to which their concerns and interests were taken into consideration. The relationship between stakeholders and management was thus characterised by mistrust and discontent and ultimately has proved dysfunctional. the legislations under which they operate are generally adequate for the preservation of values. It is thus clear that the creation of a management committee representative of all stakeholders and answerable to them was a good step in the direction of effectively managing the world heritage area. not all stakeholders. However they were disappointed in that some of the promises they were given were not kept. Thus management was effective in the planning and consultation process but failed in the implementation phases. and to the greatest extent effective and an important step in the direction of effective management.5 The national context within which the world heritage area is managed According to officials from NMMZ and DNPWM. According to an NMMZ curator from the Natural History Museum in Bulawayo. were involved in the implementation of agreed management actions. 4. especially the local community.A local community member interviewed said that they were happy that they were consulted when the management plan for the site was drawn up. This raises the dangers of future lack of critical communication which may lead to failure to detect and resolve conflict between stakeholders. The enforcement of these two legislations. The government also has a national heritage committee to oversee and review heritage matters on behalf of government. This implies that the danger of the out-dated laws and policies continued failure to meet and cope with contemporary issues such as poverty and conflict with other stakeholder values may continue and endanger the values 55 . This implies that the policy is not at all being used. The policy aims at protecting intangible heritage and at remedying the shortcomings of the NMMZ act. complimented by various other legal frameworks has to the greatest extent helped preserve the site‘s values. DNPWM and NMMZ have only been able to fund their operations through donations and entry fees. NMMZ has drafted a policy on intangible heritage in order to cater for this flaw. the 50 member committee has been said to be powerless and thus has been ineffective. institutional protection and management to ensure their safeguarding. regulatory. none of the officials from NMMZ that were interviewed had the policy. However. the heritage manager from NMMZ said that there was conscious attempt to integrate site conservation into other government policy especially when it comes to land resettlement. integrity and/or authenticity. This is reflected in the country‘s being signatories to international conventions that aim for the protection of the site‘s values. In relation to government policies. These funds do not fund the management of the world heritage area. Chief among these conventions is the World Heritage Convention and the Convention on Biological Diversity.colonialist ideology that only focused on tangible heritage. the Zimbabwean government provides grants for NMMZ and DNPWM for salaries. Paragraphs 97 and 98 of the World Heritage Convention also state that world heritage properties should have adequate long-term legislative. It is thus justifiable to say that the local context within which the site is managed is to the larger extent not effective with shortcomings in policy. However. This falls in line with paragraphs 97 and 98 of the World Heritage Convention which calls for legislative and regulatory measures at both local and national level that assure the survival of the property‘s values. The country is also a signatory to various international conventions which aim for the protection of values found in the Matobo hills world heritage site. However. The policy has however not been fully formalised and is not in operation. the NMMZ act 25:11 and the Parks and Wildlife act 25:11. In terms of government funding. the management plan for the site provides a sound decision making framework. all the informants agreed that policies in the plan are inadequate or incomplete in many respects. All the interviewees agreed that the plan explicitly articulates and establishes a clear understanding of the desired results of management. there was no effort to align the various legislative instruments that are operational in the world heritage cultural landscape. The management plan for the site thus presents an adequate decision making framework that greatly helps towards the attainment of effective management of the world heritage site. the heritage manager from NMMZ says that there has been no monitoring of the implementation of the management plan due to the non-functioning of the management committee.1 Adequacy of primary planning document/management plan Decision making framework According to the responses obtained from interviews conducted and questionnaire surveys carried out. They also agreed that the plan expresses the desired future for the site in a way that can assist management of new management issues and opportunities as they come along. review and adjustment of operational plans and management actions. This presents a serious problem for the present and in the future if the monitoring and implementation processes are not reviewed and improved. Officials from NMMZ and DNPWM concurred that the management plan provides a clear. According to an official from NMMZ. 4. However. It was effectively crafted so as to guide decision making and resultant management action.3. He says that there is no management framework that defines who does what. how resources are acquired and how revenue is 56 . explicit and appropriate process for monitoring. However the international context is adequate and can be a vehicle for the adequate and effective protection of the site‘s values if the local context were to be improved. Planning context In terms of the policy environment for management of the site.of the site. Site management has only been ineffective in the monitoring of the implementation of the plan.3 Appropriateness of planning systems at the world heritage area 4. According to a curator from NMMZ and the permits officer from DNPWM Bulawayo. There was also general agreement that the plan is outcome driven rather than issue driven. the problem has been in the 57 . Informants from NMMZ stated that the management actions specified in the plan can be understood clearly and also provide a useful basis for developing integrated operational plans such as budgets and work programmes. They fall in line with Paragraph 108 of the World Heritage Convention which states that properties should have an appropriate management plan or other documented management system which should specify how the outstanding universal value of the property will be preserved. there was consensus from all the stakeholders including the local community. as noted by officials. The above aspects show that the management planning systems at the world heritage site are generally excellent and effective. The surveys also showed that the plan clearly identifies site values and links them to well defined management objectives and desired outcomes for the site. the management plan also identifies the needs and interests of other stakeholders and has taken these into consideration in decision making. The objectives and actions specified in the management plan are considered to be adequate and appropriate to issues facing the site. The situation has also been worsened by the failure to review the plan which expired in 2009. The local community were meaningfully and fully involved in development of the management plan and setting direction for the management of the site. Due to the participatory approach that was employed during its development. However these could not be put into action as the management committee failed to effectively work together. Plan content Interviews carried out with officials from NMMZ and DNPWM show that there is agreement that the information base on which the management plan is based on is adequate in depth and scope. The management plan also identifies the needs and interests of local communities and takes these into account in decision making. They failed to harmonise legislation which raises the risk of there being conflicts of interest and intend between stakeholders.managed among other issues. Management therefore has been ineffective in terms of the policy environment for the management of the site. However. despite being out-dated. about 54 000 hectares. The absence of human settlements in the park and the control of access have also helped protect the values of the world heritage area that are located in the national park. This is in line with paragraphs 99. As mentioned before. 100. DNPWM). 4. and that an adequate buffer zone should be provided. the world heritage area has established boundaries and a buffer zone. The national park has been one of the strengths of the site‘s design in terms of the management of the world heritage area‘s values. The national park has been undergoing referencing in a bid to better protect the wildlife in the national park. This establishment of a buffer zone and boundaries points to effective site management. This resulted in a plan based on agreed views and aims by all stakeholders and excellent planning systems. the boundaries of the world heritage area and its buffer zone can be to the greatest extent be said to adequate and ensure the greatest expression possible of the outstanding universal value of the site. including the cultural values (pers. The park area has fences maintained by DNPWM and these fences are constantly improved as in the case of the Whovi fencing project.ineffective implementation of the integrated management plan by the management committee. management has however been ineffective in implementation of the management actions set in the management plan. the restrictions and 58 . However. The various stakeholders all have established activity boundaries and jurisdictions. Mr Chibwe. 103 and 104 of the World Heritage Convention which require that the boundaries of world heritage sites include all areas and attributes that are tangible expressions of the site‘s outstanding universal value. The national park core area is protected by DNPWM which has teams of rangers patrolling the area.2 Site design Buffer zone and boundaries According to officials from NMMZ and DNPWM and a tourism lodge interviewed. comm. Management was therefore effective in the consultative process and crafting of the management plan. National park The park makes up 20% of the world heritage area. According to officials interviewed.3. the world heritage area falls under three types of land ownership which are (1) state protected areas such as the national park. However. According to the Matobo hills management plan (2004 – 2009). This has been attributed as being one of the causes of excessive poaching of trees and thatching grass as the local community find it expensive to go through the proper channel. has sites that have been declared as national monuments. The world heritage area is also characterised by multiple stakeholders who all have diverse needs and demands on the site which are either shared or are in conflict. The NMMZ. This situation goes against ideas of effective management presented by Mackinnon (2001) and Hockings et al (2008) who say that effective management involves the engagement of stakeholders sustained by local communities becoming an important part of site conservation efforts. The three categories have acts of parliament that demarcate boundaries. philosophically colonial and undemocratic in nature. (2) communal lands. The legislation therefore militates against scholarly established ideas of effective management and thus points to ineffective management at the site. Damaging the national monument or removal of any material from the site becomes a punishable offence at law. academics interviewed have pointed out weaknesses in this aspect of site design. state land without individual tenure and (3) privately owned land with individual tenure. They all agreed that the legislation marginalised the local community form their heritage. also called commercial land. according to the NMMZ heritage manager. This means that the sites are then given legal protection under the NMMZ act 25:11. National monuments The world heritage area. Multiple jurisdictions and stakeholders The world heritage site has different land ownership systems and multiple legal administrative systems. establish managing agencies within the bounded areas and control activities within the areas.conditions placed on local community access to resources within the national park area has been cause for discontent among local community members. 59 . They said that the legislation under which the sites were declared national monuments is out dated. Site custodians are also stationed at national monuments within the world heritage area to ensure their preservation and interpretation to the public. in line with its policies on national monuments has maintenance and monitoring programmes all aimed at the protection of these national monuments. The legislation used in this case therefore implies ineffective management in respect to this aspect. They said that their activities are also.4.Interviews conducted showed that to a lesser extent this situation could be considered to be a strength in site design as it means that different legal instruments and the different skills and knowledge from the different stakeholders can be channelled towards a single goal of protecting site values. It has failed to establish a common ground from which stakeholders can play their complimentary part in management of the site‘s values. suspicion and misunderstandings between stakeholders. The different legal instruments operating in the world heritage area were also not aligned. The table 4 shows the personnel needs against personnel available established through the questionnaires administered to NMMZ and DNPWM officials. This was then exacerbated by the failure of the management committee to work together. which is the level from which management effectiveness of the site is assessed. Management is therefore ineffective as evidenced by the discontent and conflict between stakeholders and site management. The implication of this scenario. 4. Thus management is now characterised by discontent. The informants however pointed out that the situation on the ground at the world heritage site pointed to this aspect of site design as being a weakness.1 Personnel NMMZ has a shortage in the number of trained personnel available for tour guiding in relation to visitor levels. is that management has been ineffective. this is negated by the failure by NMMZ when one looks at the situation from the overall site level. The stakeholders have different interests and priorities which are at times in conflict.4 Management needs and inputs 4. in the case of NMMZ. parks officials interviewed said game ranger numbers were generally adequate for patrols and the protection of some site values. when the need arises. complimented by the police and army. Information pertaining to DNPWM game ranger numbers was withheld for security reasons considering the national park‘s protected area status. However. This affects the level and type of interpretation experienced by visitors to the cultural sites as the available tour guides are at times under pressure. 60 . Even though DNPWM may have been effective in terms of personnel. of staff Current no.Institution Staff category NMMZ Heritage Bulawayo 2 managers 2 Tour guides Matobo hills 8 Security Matobo hills Principal manager Area manager ecologist DNPWM Rangers Matobo hills * * * Game ranger training Game ranger training Location Required no. of staff Number of trained staff Type of training required Level of training 2 Minimum of a degree in archaeology or heritage management Masters degrees in heritage management 4 4 In house tour guiding training 5 3 3 In house Tour guiding training Security Bulawayo 1 1 1 Matobo hills Matobo hills 1 1 1 1 1 1 * Information withheld for security reasons Table 3: NMMZ and DNPWM personnel required and available at the Matobo hills 61 Special constabulary training . This is evident by the ineffective grants provided by government at national level. The grant is administered by the head office and divided between the institution‘s 5 regions. Revenue from entry fees is directly used to fund the management of the site. Interviews conducted at NMMZ revealed that there is no specific budget by NMMZ for the world heritage area. Thus the funds provided for the world heritage site are never enough and adequate. According to the management plan (2004-2009). management has generally been ineffective. However. The world heritage site is in the NMMZ western region. NMMZ NMMZ receives a grant from government for its operations. The money is further divided and budgeted for operations for the whole region. the funding systems for the world heritage site have not been harmonised. All the NMMZ officials interviewed and questionnaires pointed to the fact that the grant is never adequate for effective management of sites and monuments in the country as a whole. DNPWM According to the management plan (2004-2009).4.4. In terms of funding.2 Budgets and funding According to the heritage managers and National parks officers. the institution is funded through the National Parks Statutory Fund which receives income through a grant from government. DNPWM has also in the past borrowed funds from the World Bank for conservation programmes in the world heritage area. The Pomongwe site museum was recently rethatched using funds donated by the Beit trust. the institution sometimes receives donor funds for management projects at the site. It is from this grant that salaries for the employees and funds for operations are taken from. Budgets are done for the region as a whole. The situation is then compounded by inadequacies at institutional level as in the case of NMMZ which has failed to establish budgeting mechanisms that specifically deal and cater for the management of the world heritage area. despite it being one of the goals of the site‘s integrated management plan. This however is not a steady source of funds on which the institution can base its budgets on. Questionnaires also showed that the financial management system was poor and significantly undermined the effectiveness of management of cultural values by NMMZ. 62 . This possibly contributed to the prevailing situation whereby institutions or stakeholders all have divergent work plans geared for the protection of their individual interests. The above mentioned curator said that management planning systems and decision making processes are excellent and all stakeholders were consulted in management planning. In terms of conservation. Interviews conducted showed that despite there being a few shortages in staff.4. the heritage manager says that the work plans are at departmental level at the museum and not necessarily in harmony with the integrated management plan. Monitoring has not been concerted and the requirements have not been met. Management has thus been ineffective in this aspect.1 Management processes Management structures Interviews conducted showed that the values for the site have been agreed upon by all the stakeholders and are fully reflected in the management objectives. but the problem was/is in the implementation.5 Efficiency of management processes 4. especially for NMMZ. According to a curator from NMMZ. In terms of the reporting requirements for the world heritage site the questionnaires given to both the DNPWM and NMMZ showed that there was no reporting on the heritage site being done to the world heritage centre. However. He further said that a monitoring and evaluation system for the work and management activities by NMMZ exists but the actual monitoring on the ground is not being done. NMMZ has regular work plans for repairs and restorations at the cultural sites. review and updating of the plan. 63 . the management plan in use is out-dated and has not been fully and adequately implemented. The lack of joint effort in monitoring is possibly the major reason for the failure to meet the reporting requirements of the 1972 World Heritage Convention. Failure by the management committee has resulted in discontent and conflict. An academic who was informally interviewed said that the failure by the management committee to implement the management plan has been one of the causes of discontent and conflict among stakeholders at the site. staff were adequately trained for their tasks and office. To date the plan has not been updated. in terms of management planning.5. there is enough data on the cultural values. Their resource inventory has also been assisted and updated by the various researches that have been carried out by different organisations operating in the area. It has thus helped establish an on-going resource inventory that assists all management decisions and actions. The dysfunctional relationship between the stakeholders. Research that has been done and continues to be done in the world heritage area has helped site management update the resource inventory. according to a heritage manager from NMMZ. This has been complimented by the security measures put in place by NMMZ and DNPWM. DNPWM constantly monitors the wildlife in the national park. the management structures established have been 64 . Despite there having been agreements between stakeholders in relation to site management. and any other management plan to be implemented in the future under the current environment. This research and updating of resource inventories on the Matobo hills world heritage is in line with article 11 of the World Heritage Convention and article 12 of the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage convention which calls for the drawing up of resource inventories as a means of enhancing the management the site‘s values. and has in the past carried out ethnographic research on the area. Their information on the cultural values and aspects of the area was also improved through the consultations with the local communities that were held during the drafting of the integrated management plan for the site. NMMZ keeps record of all archeological research carried out in the area. makes it next to impossible for the current management plan. Management plan implementation Conservation and management Informants interviewed said that the management plan has not been effectively and fully implemented by the management committee. According to interviews conducted. in conjunction with organisations such as Chipangali wildlife trust and the Dambari wildlife trust. critical habitats and species to appropriately support and enhance management decisions and management planning. Resource management at the site has thus been effective. One of the objectives of the management plan was to finalise and make fully operational a hierarchy of management structures through formal agreements between major stakeholders.Resource management Patrols by DNPWM within the national park and the appointment of custodians and security personnel at cultural sites by NMMZ have helped to control and prevent inappropriate land uses and activities that may endanger the site‘s values. The DNPWM frequently holds training courses and a refresher course for its personnel involved in the management of the site. According to the heritage manager from NMMZ and parks officials. The management plan also aimed to minimise conflict by controlling movement of game. However. There are not enough tour guides and security personnel at the sites under its management. livestock and people between communal and protected areas. the policy has been enforced effectively and archeological impact assessments have been conducted to complement the environmental impact assessment. officials interviewed from DNPWM and NMMZ stated that to the greatest extent. However. Ultimately. Monitoring mechanisms are in place and have been used to monitor illegal activities that threaten biodiversity and the integrity of cultural sites. despite site management having been effective in some areas of 65 . has shortages of manpower at the sites under its management. This has also negatively affected the mechanisms that have been put in place to monitor illegal activities in the World Heritage Area. NMMZ. training and building among existing staff so as to enhance the effective management of the site. Shortage of resources has been the draw back to the organisation‘s efforts. However. Shortage of funds has greatly negated the provision of trained personnel and capacity development. their organisations had made progress towards developing capacity by appointing new staff where need be.dysfunctional. and has an established skills development programme. DNPWM has implemented and invested considerable effort into achieving this objective. the two organisations can be recommended for having been able to undertake regular inspections and corrective measures where necessary. The local communities feel the implementation has been inconsiderate of their needs and has ignored the promises made to them during the drawing up of the management plan. despite its claims. Enforcement of the environmental impact assessment policy has been one of the major successes of management at the site in terms of achieving management plan objectives. On the other hand. NMMZ has tried to adequately focus on maintaining quality management of the selected cultural sites in the world heritage area already open to the public. implementation of this objective has actually been one of the main causes of conflict between the institution and the local community who have resources they need in the protected areas. Community participation would meaningfully contribute to management of the site if it were done as a concerted effort that involves all the players. Sources say that the management committee has failed to hold enough consultative meetings with local community representatives. However. or when there is need for assistance on both sides. and also to carry school children visiting other schools for sport events. Community participation DNPWM has made considerable efforts to bridge the gap between the national park management and the local community. which is one of the objectives of the management plan currently in use. The national park has in the past provided transport to transport communal fertiliser and grain.conservation and management. The national park has also developed a project to supply firewood from areas with dead trees and bush encroachment to the community. The community has also been allowed to cut thatching grass for their own use on condition that they give a part of the grass to the park. Research and documentation The various research projects that have been done in the world heritage area and those that are currently being carried out have contributed to the scientific knowledge base for the planning and operational activities of on-going adaptive management. However. NMMZ has based its planning and operational activities on the regular condition surveys of the cultural sites it conducts in the world heritage area. DNPWM has benefited from the research and monitoring projects conducted by various organisations operational in the area. 66 . The organisation has used this information to complement its own surveys and research on biodiversity in the national park area. this is not enough considering that there is need for the world heritage site to be managed as one whole system in which stakeholders all complement each other with shared desired goals for the site. the various shortcomings militate against and negate this effectiveness. an adequate and appropriate research and documentation centre for documentation of the results of the various researches and monitoring projects has not been constructed. the absence of one centralised documentation center means that information will always be fragmented between the various organisations. However. Such a scenario greatly affects the interpretation of the World Heritage Area to the public as they access information in bits and pieces without getting the whole picture at once. They have made efforts to meet with the locals whenever there is new management. offering recommendations for management. the economy of management and the efficiency of management processes at the world heritage site were explored and discussed so as to give a picture of the effectiveness of management at the Matobo Hills World Heritage Site. The next final chapter 5 focuses on summarising and concluding the research and ultimately.Chapter summary The chapter presented the data that was gathered. The appropriateness of management planning systems. analysed it and presented discussion on the state of management effectiveness at the Matobo hills world heritage site. It explored in depth the context within which the site is managed. 67 . CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary Chapter 1 introduced the research and presented its aims and objectives. Terms used in the research. The research area and its components are described in this chapter together with the scope of the research. It explored the ethical considerations that were associated with the research. The chapter also gave a background to the study in which it explains the developments and scholarly ideas that inspired the research. Limitations that affected the research were also highlighted. The second chapter focused on the review of literature related to the research subject. It explained the descriptive research design used and then presents the research tools and approach used to gather and analyse data. that would need clarification to ensure that they are comprehended by readers are defined in the first chapter together with abbreviations. The chapter justified the need for research into the effectiveness of management at the Matobo Hills world heritage area as a means to enhancing the management and protection of its values. The third chapter presented the research methodology employed in the research. 68 . The chapter also presented the targeted population for the research and then explained how the population was sampled. It presented in detail and explored the sections of the 1972 World Heritage Convention and the 2003 Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Heritage that are used by the research as a theoretical basis for assessing management effectiveness at the world heritage site. The chapter presented the theoretical framework within which the research was conducted.CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY. The chapter also reviewed literature related to the subject of research and its constituent concepts. The chapter thus sets the stage for the reader to understand what the research is about and enables them to understand the logical precedence of subject matter and themes in the research. National context within which site is managed The major legal frameworks within which the site is managed are not generally adequate for effective protection of site values. analysed and discussed the findings of the research in relation to its aims objectives so as to answer the research questions. Thus there is no synergy between stakeholders with the relationship at times reaching levels of antagonism. but is to the greater extent problematic and dysfunctional. Stakeholder engagement The relationship between stakeholders in relation to site management does have some positive aspects. The chapter highlighted response rates for data gathering methods used in the research and explains these response rates. analysis and discussing the data complimented with tables. Conclusions Current management context and status of the site Values and management objectives The site has established values that are effectively linked to the management objectives of the site management plan. As shown in chapter 4.Chapter 4 presented. The management committee which is supposed to coordinate and ensure mutual understanding and cooperation between the stakeholders has been dysfunctional and failed in its mandate. and limited focus on preventive action on the potential threats. The NMMZ act 25:11 falls short as it has shortcomings 69 . Site management is fully aware of these threats and has mechanisms in place to monitor these threats. The local community has the most grievances and feel they have not benefited from their heritage as much as they would have wanted. This presents an environment conducive for effective site management. Threats The site is faced by various threats which are both potential and current threats. A narrative approach to presenting. It is characterised by conflict and mistrust. major management focus is placed on dealing with the current threats. 70 . The declaration of cultural sites in the world heritage area as national monuments has also been effective in the protection of the site‘s values as the sites become protected by force of law. The management plan is based on an information base that is adequate in depth and scope in such a way that enhances decision making. Restrictions and regulations placed on access into the national park area and its resources has been cause for conflict. The country is also a signatory to various international conventions aimed at the protection of site values. Site design The site‘s boundaries have been effectively delineated and a buffer zone fully established for the protection of the world heritage area‘s values. The multiple jurisdictions and stakeholders that characterise the site have been weaknesses in the site‘s design as the various the stakeholders and jurisdictions all have different interests and objectives which are at times in conflict. However. The area is fenced and patrolled by parks rangers.when it comes to intangible heritage and has had to draft a policy on intangible cultural heritage. All stakeholders were comprehensively consulted in its drafting and the plan identifies all the site‘s values and links them to management objectives. The policies in the management plan are incomplete and inadequate in many respects. The management plan is also out-dated and still being reviewed. The government has however fallen short when it comes to its funding conservation of the world heritage area. The various legal frameworks affecting the site were not aligned in the integration of management planning. The national park area has proved to be effective in protective the world heritage values in the national park area. The legislation on which national monuments are declared also marginalises the local community. It clearly articulates the desired outcomes of site management in a way that assists the effective management of the site. the policy environment for management has shortcomings. Thus the site is managed within a context and framework guided by these conventions. However. The various legislations have also not been harmonised. Appropriateness of planning systems Adequacy of the management plan The management plan provides an adequate decision making framework. This situation is exacerbated by the failure to work together of the management committee. the site‘s design has some flaws. The site also receives funding from the World Heritage Fund for special projects. Management actions. Grants provided by the governments are not adequate for NMMZ operations. There is no alignment and coherence in the management processes of the managing stakeholders as they all have their different work programmes and plans. in relation to resource management. DNPWM funds its operations mainly from entry fees into the park. Efficiency of management processes at the site Management processes at the site have been planned effectively in the management plan. NMMZ does not have a budget specific to the site. Resource management has however been generally effective. 71 . This has been enabled by the various researches constantly undertaken in the site. NMMZ has a shortage in manpower at the sites in the world heritage area that are under its management. However. However. DNPWM has adequate game ranger numbers who are at times complimented by police and army details when the need arises. There is shortage of security personnel and tour guides. Thus the funding requests do not always go through and at times take time to be approved. Thus the park has to base its budgets on levels of visitorship and donations. However they have to submit proposals which are also weighed against other proposals from world heritage sites around the world. have been based on a sound working knowledge base of the resources in the world heritage area. Budgets and funding The funding base of the site is generally not adequate and effective to the greater extent. The plan creates an adequate environment for effective management process at the site. in terms of management actions and implementation. The management committee has failed to implement the management actions and the plan has not been updated.Management needs and inputs Personnel Personnel requirements for the protection of the site‘s values have shortcomings. management has not been effective. tested and fully operational integrated disaster management plan or strategy involving all the stakeholders in the site. Despite individual efforts to implement some of the objectives of the plan by different stakeholders. especially the local communities. This would go a long way in eliminating the suspicion that local communities hold over the site managers. The plan should comprehensively cover all phases of the disaster management cycle which are the ―before‖ phase. Relationship with stakeholders There is need for the establishment of integrated conflict resolution mechanisms that involve more interaction between site management and other stakeholders. This could be done through holding frequent consultative meetings where all parties can discuss issues affecting them and negotiate with the other stakeholders. That would mean that there would be an action plan that would enable threats to be dealt with even when they are still potential threats.Management plan implementation Implementation of the management plan has been unsatisfactory. these efforts have been in line with their individual interests. This would help prevent conflicts with the local communities as in the case where the local communities have accused NMMZ of just being interested in collecting entry fees and DNPWM of not keeping its promises of relaxing regulations pertaining the harvesting of thatching grass and wood from the national park. 72 . Recommendations Threats Site management should develop an established. the ―during‖ and the disaster recovery phase. as was intended when the committee was established. The stakeholders with key management functions in the world heritage area need to keep their word and be true to their moral obligations. This would help find solutions to conflicts. so that both parties get a mutual understanding of the importance of their being in synergy in relation to the sustainable management of the site. The management committee has also failed to coordinate and implement the objectives of the management plan through an integrated framework. They are not obligated to divulge financial information. 73 . The whole management plan review process should also be reviewed. It would also enable the review and addressing of shortcomings in the legislations operational in the Matobo hills. The management plan for the site is also out-dated and hence there is need for it to be reviewed as soon as possible and a new up to date plan implemented.Institutions with management function in the world heritage area also need to be more transparent and accountable in their use of the revenue generated from entry fees. narrowed in scope towards the tangible heritage and it marginalises local communities. This is especially true in the case of NMMZ. but they should at least regularly explain to the local community what they are doing for them and what they will do for them in the future which would go a long way in helping prevent conflicts. This would also improve the chances of the management committee functioning fully and effectively. The various legal frameworks that are operational in the world heritage area should be reviewed in relation to the common goal of site management and in relation to the individual interests and goals of all the other stakeholders. Management planning context There is need for a review of the whole policy environment within which the site is managed. This would also improve the extent to which site conservation can be integrated into other government programmes and policies. This is because it has not been factually proven that these institutions are embezzling funds. They should put in place a system whereby they review the plan and update it in an on-going process during its established life span and not wait until it has expired. such as the NMMZ act 25: 11 which is out-dated. thus the issue most likely lies in their not doing anything tangible that will benefit the community. This would help create a more efficient and viable policy environment for the effective management of the site. Individual institutions should also adopt assessment tools that cater for their own interests at. There is also need for NMMZ to be more innovative and outgoing in fund raising activities and seeking donors as done by the DNPWM. Management processes and plan implementation There is need for improvement in the management processes and implementation of the management plan for the world heritage area. especially where cultural values are concerned. Management effectiveness assessment There is need for site management to adopt and use. in their routine management activities. institution level. This would go a long way in enhancing the protection of the values attached to the world heritage site. This would strengthen their funding base and enhance their management of the cultural heritage in the world heritage area by giving them the capacity to recruit the required manpower. which the site has been failing to meet. there is need for an evaluation of the applicability of these toolkits before they are adopted. 74 .Economy of management NMMZ should recruit and train more personnel to fill in the manpower shortage at the cultural sites under its care. This is because the researcher faced some difficulties in adapting the tool kit to the Zimbabwean context. For example. Failure to implement the management plan to acceptable levels by the management committee has shown that the current management plan implementation process has shortcomings. management effectiveness assessment tools such as the enhancing our heritage toolkit. NMMZ can adopt the enhancing our heritage tool and use for assessing the effectiveness with which they are managing cultural sites. However. Adoption of management effectiveness assessment tools would also help the site meet the reporting needs required by the world heritage centre. The whole implementation process should be reviewed and improved. Rome: ICCROM. Ndoro and G.ICCROM Conservation Studies 8. In: Ndoro W. Conservation Biology 20(5):1528–1538. (2006). In Legal frameworks for the protection of immovable cultural heritage in Africa. WWF.Rapid assessment of protected area management effectiveness in Four Countries. W.List of references Alexander M.Tracking progress in managing protected areas around the world. Protecting Immovable Heritage in English Speaking Countries of Southern Africa: 1-5.Recent developments in management planning and monitoring on protected sites in the United Kingdom. 1164-1168.Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines. Chipunza K T (2005). Ervin J. Turrialba. Parks 9:50–55. ed. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). WWF International. (2004). IUCN. Ervin J. Chirikure S.Protection of immovable cultural heritage in Zimbabwe: An evaluation.Medición de la Efectividad de manejo de áreasProtegidas. (2008). 49 (3): 467-485. Brooks Jet al. (2010). Rome: ICCROM.Protected area assessments in perspective. EboreimeJ. Butchart S et al. Cifuentes M et al (2000). Gland. 42–45. Costa Rica. (2003a).Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories. Gland Dudley N.Community Involvement in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage Management: An Assessment from Case Studies in Southern Africa and Elsewhere. IUCN. Stolton S. Pwiti. Environ Policy Plan 6:131–142.Options for guaranteeing the effective management of the world‘s protected areas. Challenges of heritage management in Africa. Bioscience 53:819–822. Pwiti G (2008). Dudley N (ed). Gland. Rowell T. (2008). (2003b). (1999).Testing hypotheses for the success of different conservation strategies. Hockings M. GTZ. 75 . Science 328(5982). Dudley N et al (2007). Abungu G (eds) Cultural Heritage and the Law. Mumma A. J. Parks 9:5–14. Vincent G. 76 . Bioscience 53:823–832. De Lacy T (eds) Protected Area Management: Principles and Practice. Hockings.M. (2005). Gland. Stolton S. J. Dudley N. IUCN. Lawes. Hockings. Queensland.Fountain. Environmental Management 22(3):337–345. Oxford University Press. Fountain. Stolton S.M. M. (1999). Annals of the Zimbabwe geological Survey 7: 1-9. Dudley N. International Wildlife Law Policy 7:31–42.Systems for assessing the effectiveness of management in protected areas. Hockings M. Hockings. World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and IUCN. (1998). Phillips A. Lockwood M.M.The geology of the Bulawayo-Greenstone Belt and the surrounding granitic terrain. Hockings M. (2000). Hockings M. A. Garson. Hockings M. Dudley N. Bulletin of the Zimbabwe geological Survey 93: 83-109. (2003). How well are we doing? Some thoughts on the effectiveness of protected areas. Leverington F. James R. (2004).Evaluating management effectiveness. University of Queensland. Annals of the Zimbabwe geological Survey 8: 9-20.(2002). (2004).Evaluating Management of Protected Areas: Integrating Planning and Evaluation. Ervin J. (2000).Assessing the management of protected areas: the work of the world parks congress before and after Durban. S. Gland. (1981). Hockings M. Stolton S. South Melbourne. pp 553–573. A.Evaluating Protected Area Management: A Review of System for Assessing Management Effectiveness of Protected Areas.On the geology and structure of the country around Bulawayo. (1982).The geology of an area south of Bulawayo. (1995).Management effectiveness: assessing management of protected areas? Environmental Planning Policy Management 6(2):157–174. In: Worboys GL. School of Natural and Rural System Management.Evaluating Effectiveness: A Summary for Park Managers and Policy Makers.Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing the Management of Protected Areas. Hockings M. Hockings M. G (eds) Cultural Heritage and the Law. Hockings M. UK. In: Ndoro W.IUCN. M. . Leverington F. (2000). (2009). Stolton S. C. R. (2010). In: Barber. K. Kamuhangeri E.: Securing Protected Areas in the Face of Global Changes Issues and Strategies [Electronic version]. Cambridge. Carter RW.Smart Partnerships: Cultural landscapes Issues in Africa. V.Accountability.Administrative arrangements for heritage resources management in sub-Saharan Africa. Pressey R. 2nd edn. South African Archaeological Bulletin 61(184): 166–171. pp.Margules CR. Protecting Immovable Heritage in English Speaking Countries of Southern Africa: 43-51. J et al. Munjeri. 134–143. Nature 40:243–253.Management Effectiveness Evaluation in Protected areas: a Global Study. Gatton. IUCN. WWF. (2003). Rome: ICCROM. Washington DC. Island Press. Courrau J. Liu. 77 . J et al.Systematic conservation planning. D. (2008). Science 292:98–101 LILLO. Margoluis R. James R. Leverington F.UNESCO 2003 Convention on Intangible Heritage: practical implications for heritage management approaches in Africa.Measures of Success: Designing. (2004). (2008).Ecological degradation in protected areas: the case of Wolong nature reserve for giant pandas. Leverington F. Abungu. Costa K. Pavese H.Hockings M. Cultural Landscapes: the challenges of conservation. TNC. .(2006). Environmental Management 43:1013–1025 Keitumetse S. University of Queensland.. 137167. Paris. Environmental Management 46(5):685–698. Salafsky N. reporting or management improvement? Development of a state of the parks assessment system in New South Wales.Building capacity to manage protected areas in an era of global change. World Heritage Centre. Lisle A. (2001). WCPA. Managing. Mahachi G. UNESCO World Heritage Centres. and Monitoring Conservation and Development Projects. Dudley N.A Global Analysis of Protected Area Management Effectiveness. Cook C.Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing the Management of Protected Areas. Miller. Gland. &Boness. Costa KL. Hockings M.ICCROM Conservation Studies 8. Mumma A. (1998). (2006). IUCN. (1986). (2005). 25. (2001). Our Shrine: The Preservation of Great Zimbabwe. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Pwiti.Let the ancestors rest in peace? New challenges for cultural heritage management in Zimbabwe. Public Archaeology 2 (1): 21-34.Heritage Management in Southern Africa: Local. G.The legacy of colonialism: Perceptions of the cultural heritage in southern Africa with special reference to Zimbabwe. BUGGEY. P. Public Archaeology 2:21–34 Ndoro W. (2005).Heritage management in southern Africa: Local. No. (2001).Your Monument. (1999). Biological Conservation 141(10): 2417-2431.W(1999). pp. 1. Brown & Co.Mazrui A.The Africans: A Triple Heritage. Pwiti G (1996). Reed.58-66. B. 17. Ndoro. N. In: Conservation of living religious heritage. Ranger T. Boston. NdoroW. Pwiti. and MacKinnon K. Gland. national.Continuity and Change: An archaeological study of farming communities in Northern Zimbabwe c. IUCN..Rome p. Conservation and Management of Archaeological Sites 1:151–60. National and International Discourse. African Archaeological Review 16:143– 53. Uppsala: Uppsala University. (1996). G. Little. The George Wright Forum. PwitiG.A living religious shrine under siege: theNjelele Shrine/ King Mzlikazi´s grave conflicting demands on the Matopo Hills area of Zimbabwe. Mumma A (2003). Ndiweni. Switzerland. culture.1700. Paris: UNESCO. 35–46. G. Mass. S. Ndoro. MITCHELL.ICCROM. MacKinnon J.Community-Based Legal Systems and the Management of World Heritage Sites. ICCROM Conservation Studies. Nyathi. Pwiti. World Heritage Papers 13: 43-44. Vol.Managing protected areas in the tropics. 78 . and history in the Matopos. W. (1986).Protected landscapes and cultural landscapes: taking advantage of diverse approaches.AD 500. and international discourse. Harare: Weaver Press. (2008). S. (2000).Voices from the rocks: Nature. Rome. Conservation Biology 19:295–309.The Matopos. Mambo Press. Stolton S. R. Zimbabwe. Dudley N (1999). Mechtild (1998): Landscapes in the Framework of the World Heritage Convention and other UNESCO Instruments and Programmes. Proceedings of a Seminar Organized by BfN and EUROPARC Federation on the Island of Vilm. NABU. Switzerland and Cambridge.Assessment of Management Effectiveness in European Protected Areas Sharing Experiences and Promoting Good Management. 24-32. (1998). Parks 9:27–33. Germany. Gland.) Cultural Landscapes and Nature Conservation in Northern Eurasia. Walker. W. (1978). ArchaeologicalUpsailiensis. (2005). In: Stephan Dompke and Michael Succow (eds.J. Junk. (1996).The Painted hills.Monitoring and evaluation in conservation: a review of trends and approaches. 2nd edn. Biogeography and Ecology of Southern Africa. (2003). Walker. (2004). Middleton J. Bonn.Guidelines for Management Planning of Protected Areas.Management effectiveness tracking tool— reporting progress at protected area sites. UK. The Afromontane Region. White. The Hague.Disconnects in evaluating the relative effectiveness of conservation strategies. In: M.IUCN Gland. 79 . N. Rock of the Matopos. N.Late Pleistocene and Holocene. L. (1995). WWF (2004). (1956). (2007).Rossler. F.Federal Department of Printing and Stationery.King of foods Marula economics in the Matopos. Thomas. Uppsala Sweden. Proceedings of the Worlitz Symposium. Stolton S et al. Stem C et al. South African Wildlife 43(6): 281-285. Walker.A Werger (ed). Saterson K et al. N.Ix +79pp.World Wide Fund for Nature. Stolton S (ed) (2008). Conservation Biology 18:597–599. Salisbury. Hunter-gatherers of the Matopos: An Archaeological Study of change and continuity in Zimbabwe‘s societies.A preliminary survey of management status and threats in forest protected areas. Tredgold. 80 . How adequate is the legislation under which you operate (does it provide a strong enough framework to preserve values)? 2.Are national legislation and/or policy hampering the involvement of local communities in site management? 11.Are there any legislative or policy arrangements with regards to benefit sharing? 81 . How willing is the government to fund management of the site? 10. What conventions and treaties relevant to management of the site has the government signed to? 8.Does legislation and policy affect the way communities access the site and its resources? 12. To what extent is the legislation used? 3. Has enforcement of the legislation helped preserve the values? 4.Appendix 1 Interview guide for national context review 1. Is there conscious attempt to integrate conservation within other areas of government policy? 7. How high does conservation of the site rank relative to other government policies? 5. How adequately have these conventions been implemented? 9. Does other government policy relative to site undermine conservation? 6. APPENDIX II Worksheet for identification of threats Threats (List threats) Values threatened Current Major causes of or threat potential threat (C or P) 82 Management response . List issues affecting either you as a stakeholder group or the world heritage area in relation to its management (Main issues associated with you and the site).) 3. social. 2.Appendix III Engagement of stakeholders’ questionnaire STAKEHOLDER/INSTITUTION:_____________________________________ 1.Are your activities of positive impact to the management of the site? In what way? 5.Are the management activities of site managers beneficial to your activities? In 83 .Does the management of the site have any negative impacts on your interests and activities? What are these negative impacts? 4. religious…etc.What benefits do you derive from the world heritage area? (economic. What is your relationship with the site‘s managers? What is the capacity (including resources) for engagement? 8. Briefly give 84 .Briefly describe your actual engagement in management of values.what way? 6.How willing are you to participate or engage in the management of the site‘s values? Under what terms or conditions? 7.What opportunities do you have to contribute to management of values? Are there formal or informal management agreements in place between you and site management? 9. details of the nature and extent of your engagement. Is there a disaster management plan. Is there a fully operational hierarchy of integrated management structures based on formal agreements between major stakeholders? YES[ ] NO[ ] 2. Has a survey and documentation programme for all types of cultural sites to update and expand existing checklists and ensure maintenance of the World Heritage values been developed? YES [ ] NO [ ] 6. livestock and people between communal and protected areas? YES [ ] NO [ ] 4. Are regular consultative meetings held between the Management Committee and local community representatives to develop mutual understanding and respect? YES [ ] NO [ ] 85 . Has a conservation and documentation center been constructed in the Matobo hills? YES [ ] NO [ ] 7. in line with the requirements of the World Heritage Convention? YES [ ] NO [ ] 5. Do you undertake regular inspections and take corrective action when necessary to conserve the significance of cultural sites and natural resources? YES[ ] NO [ ] 3. Comments/recommendations Appendix IV Management plan implementation questionnaire for DNPWM and NMMZ PLEASE TICK OR PLACE AN ‗X‘ 1. Have efforts been made to minimize conflict by controlling the movement of game. 8. Are there any programmers to promote awareness of the value of local traditions and culture that contribute to the significance of the World Heritage Site. especially to restore lost interest among the youth in traditional customs? YES [ ] NO [ ] 86 .