![iconomy nodes iconomy nodes](http://fasanonet.com/rad/lib/exe/fetch.php?cache=&w=470&h=364&tok=1c5eb1&media=neck_nodes_2.gif)
These enterprises will be encouraged in the tourism, forestry, agriculture, animal management and land rehabilitation sectors, all of which it is hoped will result in “improved livelihoods/earnings/job opportunities for local people”. They plan to do this through a mix of developing small-, micro- and medium-sized enterprises, with a particular focus on women-owned SMMEs and youth training and mentorship programmes. It notes two reasons for this: “rural poverty”, which leads to an “absence of meaningful livelihood alternatives” and “non-conservation friendly activities, such as mining, agriculture, and livestock”.Īccording to the government, the overall aim of the project will be to “build biodiversity economy nodes across South Africa and scale these up, enhancing communities’ stake in wildlife conservation”. The grant application also stated that protected areas in South Africa are increasingly threatened by unsustainable and illegal practices such as the overexploitation of natural resources and poaching. The government has stated it will use this money to demonstrate how people living in or around three specific protected areas can benefit from them because, as the government noted in its application for the grant, they are mostly negatively affected by them. In May 2021, the government received a R132-million grant from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) to fund the absurdly named Catalysing Financing and Capacity for the Biodiversity Economy Around Protected Areas Project. If we want protected areas to contribute to transformation we must have difficult conversations that lead to collective choices and meaningful participation by people. If we continue to champion protected areas only for their economic benefits, we risk opening the gateway for extractive industries to displace people, destroy our natural heritage and hasten climate change harms.