IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i19p11900-d920299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Whose Knowledge? Examining the Relationship between the Traditional Medicine Sector and Environmental Conservation Using a Stakeholder Analysis: Perceptions on Warwick Herb Market Durban South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Nontando N. Xaba

    (School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu Natal, Durban 4001, South Africa)

  • S’phumelele L. Nkomo

    (School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu Natal, Durban 4001, South Africa)

  • Kirona Harrypersad

    (School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu Natal, Durban 4001, South Africa)

Abstract

The South African traditional medicine sector is estimated to accommodate millions of citizens, despite it being informal. The existence of such a healthcare system embodies the dual system of both primary and traditional healthcare, with some preferring one and others utilising both systems. The gathering, harvesting, and selling of medicinal plant and animal species have inevitable environmental effects. The paradox between biodiversity conservation and livelihood sustenance is eminent in South Africa’s contemporary environmental legislation. The purpose of the study was to highlight and examine the dynamics between prominent stakeholders involved in biodiversity conservation and the traditional medicine sector. The stakeholder analysis and political ecology approach were adopted and applied respectively to guide the study. The study was conducted in 2020 and a questionnaire was used to capture the realities and experiences of prominent stakeholders in the biodiversity sector. Common legal mandates such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); the National Environmental Management Biodiversity Act No. 10 of 2004; Threatened or Protected Species (TOPS) regulations; and the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Ordinance 15 of 1974 are used to control and enforce legislation by biodiversity stakeholders. The main findings of the study are as follows: (a) Traditional Health Practitioners (THPs) do not have adequate training and knowledge on the environmental and legal aspects of their system; (b) Biodiversity stakeholders are treated with violence and hostility when they attempt to enforce legal mandates at the Warwick Herb Market; (c) There is a significant gap in communication and co-operation between municipal officials and biodiversity stakeholders. There is evidently, a need for environmental educational initiatives and improved methods of enforcement and communication between biodiversity stakeholders, municipal officials and THPs.

Suggested Citation

  • Nontando N. Xaba & S’phumelele L. Nkomo & Kirona Harrypersad, 2022. "Whose Knowledge? Examining the Relationship between the Traditional Medicine Sector and Environmental Conservation Using a Stakeholder Analysis: Perceptions on Warwick Herb Market Durban South Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-26, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:11900-:d:920299
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/11900/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/11900/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip Keefer & Stuti Khemani, 2005. "Democracy, Public Expenditures, and the Poor: Understanding Political Incentives for Providing Public Services," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 20(1), pages 1-27.
    2. Mojtaba Vaismoradi & Hannele Turunen & Terese Bondas, 2013. "Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 398-405, September.
    3. Heinrich, Michael & Ankli, Anita & Frei, Barbara & Weimann, Claudia & Sticher, Otto, 1998. "Medicinal plants in Mexico: healers' consensus and cultural importance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 47(11), pages 1859-1871, December.
    4. Nancy Leech & Anthony Onwuegbuzie, 2009. "A typology of mixed methods research designs," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 265-275, March.
    5. Menoka Bal & David Bryde & Damian Fearon & Edward Ochieng, 2013. "Stakeholder Engagement: Achieving Sustainability in the Construction Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-16, February.
    6. Robert Newcombe, 2003. "From client to project stakeholders: a stakeholder mapping approach," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 841-848.
    7. Christopher J. Burman, 2019. "Re-Contextualizing Medical Pluralism in South Africa: a Research Schema for Indigenous Decision Making," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 379-402, August.
    8. John M Bryson, 2004. "What to do when Stakeholders matter," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 21-53, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhatt, Brijesh & Singh, Anoop, 2020. "Stakeholders’ role in distribution loss reduction technology adoption in the Indian electricity sector: An actor-oriented approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    2. Evangelos Bellos & Georgios Chatzistelios & Angeliki Deligianni & Vrassidas Leopoulos, 2021. "Stakeholders and Risks in Liquified Natural Gas Bunkering Projects: The Hidden Link," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-18, July.
    3. Ahsan, Dewan & Pedersen, Soren & Bang Nielsen, Mathias Rohwer & Ovesen, Jacob, 2019. "Why does the offshore wind industry need standardized HSE management systems? An evidence from Denmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 691-700.
    4. Tuomas Lappi & Harri Haapasalo & Kirsi Aaltonen, 2015. "Business Ecosystem Definition in Built Environment Using a Stakeholder Assessment Process," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 10(2), pages 111-129.
    5. Ahsan, Dewan & Pedersen, Søren, 2018. "The influence of stakeholder groups in operation and maintenance services of offshore wind farms: Lesson from Denmark," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 819-828.
    6. Bert George, 2017. "Does strategic planning ‘work’ in public organizations? Insights from Flemish municipalities," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(7), pages 527-530, November.
    7. Sapanna Laysiriroj & Walter Wehrmeyer, 2020. "Intergenerational differences of CSR activities in family-run businesses in eastern Thailand," Asian Journal of Sustainability and Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Basem Al Khatib & Yap Soon Poh & Ahmed El-Shafie, 2018. "Delay Factors in Reconstruction Projects: A Case Study of Mataf Expansion Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Hans-Joachim Schramm & Carolin Nicole Czaja & Michael Dittrich & Matthias Mentschel, 2019. "Current Advancements of and Future Developments for Fourth Party Logistics in a Digital Future," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-17, February.
    10. Tatiana Khavenson, 2019. "Integration of Schools in Latvia and Estonia Using Curriculum Reforms," Voprosy obrazovaniya / Educational Studies Moscow, National Research University Higher School of Economics, issue 3, pages 77-100.
    11. Anastasios Michailidis & Chrysanthi Charatsari & Thomas Bournaris & Efstratios Loizou & Aikaterini Paltaki & Dimitra Lazaridou & Evagelos D. Lioutas, 2024. "A First View on the Competencies and Training Needs of Farmers Working with and Researchers Working on Precision Agriculture Technologies," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, January.
    12. Martin Luštický & Martin Musil, 2016. "Stakeholder-Based Evaluation of Tourism Policy Priorities: The Case of the South Bohemian Region," Acta Oeconomica Pragensia, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2016(3), pages 3-23.
    13. Maider Belintxon & Nisha Dogra & Paula McGee & Maria Jesus Pumar‐Mendez & Olga Lopez‐Dicastillo, 2020. "Encounters between children's nurses and culturally diverse parents in primary health care," Nursing & Health Sciences, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 22(2), pages 273-282, June.
    14. Jolanta MAJ, 2015. "Diversity Management’S Stakeholders And Stakeholders Management," Proceedings of the INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE, Faculty of Management, Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 780-793, November.
    15. Tetsuya Tanioka & Rozzano C. Locsin & Feni Betriana & Yoshihiro Kai & Kyoko Osaka & Elizabeth Baua & Savina Schoenhofer, 2021. "Intentional Observational Clinical Research Design: Innovative Design for Complex Clinical Research Using Advanced Technology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, October.
    16. Franco-Trigo, L. & Fernandez-Llimos, F. & Martínez-Martínez, F. & Benrimoj, S.I. & Sabater-Hernández, D., 2020. "Stakeholder analysis in health innovation planning processes: A systematic scoping review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1083-1099.
    17. Emmanuel Songsore & Michael Buzzelli, 2016. "Ontario’s Experience of Wind Energy Development as Seen through the Lens of Human Health and Environmental Justice," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    18. Ana Cristina Lindsay & Sherrie F. Wallington & Faith D. Lees & Mary L. Greaney, 2018. "Exploring How the Home Environment Influences Eating and Physical Activity Habits of Low-Income, Latino Children of Predominantly Immigrant Families: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-13, May.
    19. David P. Ashmore & Roselle Thoreau & Corina Kwami & Nicola Christie & Nicholas A. Tyler, 2020. "Using thematic analysis to explore symbolism in transport choice across national cultures," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 607-640, April.
    20. Ayham A. M. Jaaron & Chris J. Backhouse, 2017. "Operationalising “Double-Loop” Learning in Service Organisations: A Systems Approach for Creating Knowledge," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 30(4), pages 317-337, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:11900-:d:920299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.