**2.2. Conceptual framework**

The pathways approach is composed of two building blocks: a complex systems perspective and a normative emphasis on reductions in poverty and social injustice as defined by and for particular people and settings—strategies and dynamics [23]—see **Figure 2**. The complex system perspective is concern with 'framing', or the different ways in which different actors understand or represent a system. In this study, we capture this aspect of system framing by eliciting the narratives of wildlife conservation and local livelihood across different

**Figure 1.** Location of study area within the Lebialem Highlands.

Analysing Environment-Development Interventions Through the Lens of Indigenous People... http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.69885 67

**Figure 2.** Representation of framing, strategies and dynamics in the pathways approach (adapted from Ref. [23]).

**Figure 1.** Location of study area within the Lebialem Highlands.

66 Indigenous People

actors. The normative emphasis on reduction in poverty and social injustice as used in this study referred to strategies and dynamics in governing natural resources to meet both local needs and conservation needs. The strategies and dynamic aspect in the pathways approach questioned if narratives within a given policy are intervention strategies aimed at exercising control in order to resist disturbance or shocks (stability); it also questioned if there exists an acknowledgement that they may be limit too control, and thus, the interventions should resist shocks in a more responsive fashion (resilience); furthermore, it questioned if interventions attempt to control the potential changes in the case where a system is subjected to important stresses (durability), and finally, if the interventions embraces both the limits to control and an openness to endure shift (robustness)? The above dynamic properties guided the analysis in this study to questions how the situation of the THWS can open up opportunities for sustainability. The framework as presented below also acknowledges that framings, strategies and dynamics are interconnected and play out simultaneously to determine the pathways to sustainability.

#### **2.3. Data collection approach**

Data collection for this study was mainly between the periods of January 2013 and July 2015. In order to capture how different actors in the THWS understand and frame conservation and local livelihood issues, we used a collective research approach [24]. The collective research identified the different strategic groups involved. The research questions were guided to elicit information on how each strategic group perceived conservation and livelihood challenges in the study area. Participants were asked to narrate how their perception and understanding of conservation and its ability to meet the need (livelihood) of the local people. They were also asked to narrate how they fell other actors understand conservation and local needs. The identified strategic groups included local government staffs, conservation practitioners (local non-profit organisations—NGO), farmers (men and women), hunters, youths, chiefs, elites, researchers and policy makers (represented by the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife). The collective research involved the following steps: an individual inquiry on site by the principal investigator to prepare the subsequent teamwork by identifying in summary the main local issues and thus making it possible to predetermine the main strategic groups. This was followed by a preparatory seminar to familiarise the research team with the pre-identified problems and the methods that will be used to elicit information from the strategic groups. The research team included the principal investigator and two graduates from the University of Buea Cameroon, who were also familiarised with the settings of the research environment. Now acquainted with the strategic groups and the main problems, the research team did a tour of the study communities; spending 2 days in each community, meeting with strategic groups. This enabled the researchers to perceive issues through the perspective of the strategic groups and at the same time realising the variety and relativity of the strategic groups. The target of the research team was to talk to many people as possible across the defined strategic groups in each community. At the end of the participatory research phase, we spoke to 378 community members (Fossimondi-36, M'mock mbin-43, Bamumbu-37, Folepi-47, Bechati-54, Banti-27, Igumbo-21, Besali-49, Bangang-35 and Nkong-29), 6 elites, 4 local government representatives, 3 staff from the local non-profit organisation and 4 policy makers in the conservation sector. This gave a total of 395 participants.

#### **2.4. Data analysis**

questioned if narratives within a given policy are intervention strategies aimed at exercising control in order to resist disturbance or shocks (stability); it also questioned if there exists an acknowledgement that they may be limit too control, and thus, the interventions should resist shocks in a more responsive fashion (resilience); furthermore, it questioned if interventions attempt to control the potential changes in the case where a system is subjected to important stresses (durability), and finally, if the interventions embraces both the limits to control and an openness to endure shift (robustness)? The above dynamic properties guided the analysis in this study to questions how the situation of the THWS can open up opportunities for sustainability. The framework as presented below also acknowledges that framings, strategies and dynamics are interconnected and play out simultaneously to determine the pathways to

Data collection for this study was mainly between the periods of January 2013 and July 2015. In order to capture how different actors in the THWS understand and frame conservation and local livelihood issues, we used a collective research approach [24]. The collective research identified the different strategic groups involved. The research questions were guided to elicit information on how each strategic group perceived conservation and livelihood challenges in the study area. Participants were asked to narrate how their perception and understanding of conservation and its ability to meet the need (livelihood) of the local people. They were also asked to narrate how they fell other actors understand conservation and local needs. The identified strategic groups included local government staffs, conservation practitioners (local non-profit organisations—NGO), farmers (men and women), hunters, youths, chiefs, elites, researchers and policy makers (represented by the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife). The collective research involved the following steps: an individual inquiry on site by the principal investigator to prepare the subsequent teamwork by identifying in summary the main local issues and thus making it possible to predetermine the main strategic groups. This was followed by a preparatory seminar to familiarise the research team with the pre-identified problems and the methods that will be used to elicit information from the strategic groups. The research team included the principal investigator and two graduates from the University of Buea Cameroon, who were also familiarised with the settings of the research environment. Now acquainted with the strategic groups and the main problems, the research team did a tour of the study communities; spending 2 days in each community, meeting with strategic groups. This enabled the researchers to perceive issues through the perspective of the strategic groups and at the same time realising the variety and relativity of the strategic groups. The target of the research team was to talk to many people as possible across the defined strategic groups in each community. At the end of the participatory research phase, we spoke to 378 community members (Fossimondi-36, M'mock mbin-43, Bamumbu-37, Folepi-47, Bechati-54, Banti-27, Igumbo-21, Besali-49, Bangang-35 and Nkong-29), 6 elites, 4 local government representatives, 3 staff from the local non-profit organisation and 4 policy makers in the conservation sector. This

sustainability.

68 Indigenous People

**2.3. Data collection approach**

gave a total of 395 participants.

The data collected aimed to understand how different actors frame and perceive conservation and local livelihoods and how the strategies used in the implementation of the conservation programme offer opportunities for stability, resilience, durability and robustness as defined in the conceptual framework. Analysis on how different actors framed conservation and local livelihoods was guided by the following dimensions of framing: scale, boundaries, key elements and relationships, dynamics in play, outputs perspectives, interests, goals, values and notions of relevance.
