1Tourism as a concept is widely debated in recent times. It has attracted various spheres on national debates, be it political, economic, socio-cultural, technological and educational. It is increasingly used as a government strategy for economic and social development (Simpson, 2016). However, Kilipris (2005) averts that projects imposed from outside and motivated by pursuit of rapid economic growth often override local needs, conditions and resources while they result in unacceptable environmental, social and cultural costs. In Lesotho, tourism is considered to be one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy and highly esteemed for its potential to contribute towards the country’s economic development (Government of Lesotho, 2012). This is proved by incessant erection of tourism facilities in spaces which were once communal and open to all citizens, in particular, habitants of such areas where constructions are taking place. It is with this view that new forms of life are manifested through new tourism production in the form of enclaves on landscapes that were freely accessible and controlled by local communities. Ecosystems found in spaces where constructions of tourism infrastructures are taking place are prohibited from communal use as they are currently designated as “Private Property Reserved for Tourism.” The production of tourist areas has both positive and negative effects on the populations affected. In cases where the effects are negative, results could be devastating particularly in the rural zones where residents depend on such spaces for their survival as some collect medicinal plants while others hunt for food at such places. Issues pertaining to local representations and empowerment are assessed through the implications of the production of tourism sites for the rural community in Lesotho. The following research question is looked into: What are the effects of new forms of life brought by development of tourism enclaves on landscapes that serviced local rural communities’ livelihoods?
2In this study, effects of tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon are assessed. For the purpose of this research, biopolitical is defined as the interaction between means of production such as land (environment and all plants and animals in situ), communities (local and non-local) and capital (funds and machinery) involved and affected by the construction of built environment to meet the developmental needs of tourism on spaces that once belonged to local communities. In this paper, tourism is treated from the angle of the “biopolitical production of tourism areas”, where the state imposes its power to earmark and construct tourism infrastructure. This production has varying impacts depending on the zone where the phenomenon is manifesting itself. The use of any given space, whether legally or illegally, in urban areas or in rural areas is political in nature as it affects the constituents of such spaces, whether human, animals or plants. This paper seeks to assess the effects of the biopolitical production of tourism at Ha Lejone where the Bokong Nature Reserve is located.
3Dependency theory constitute the main theoretical framework for this paper as it views tourism like any other industry used by developed countries to perpetuate the dependency of developing countries (Oppermann, 1993, p. 540). Instead of reducing the socio-economic disparities, tourism reinforces them through its orientation that creates enclaves. According to this theory, tourism as a development agent failed to fulfil most of its development plans and goals. Besides, it excessively depends on foreign capital. The dependency theory further indicates that underdevelopment is mainly a result of geography, socio-economically and politically peripheral position of destination countries and regions in the world economy (Saarinen and Wall-Reinius, 2019, p. 743). Brohman (1996) as cited by Saarinen and Wall-Reinius see tourism enclaves as products of global capitalism.
4Existing research portrays tourism enclaves as characterised by active border-making, power issues, material and symbolic separation from the surrounding socio-cultural realities. Saarinen and Wall-Reinius (2019, p. 7) conceive tourism enclaves as involving power inequalities, injustices and unsustainable practices that often have negative impacts on local socio-economic development. Mullins and Christy (2016, p. 478) describe power as a complex and dynamic concept, which is difficult to define. They indicate that it can be understood in two ways: firstly, as control or influence over the behaviour of other people with or without their consent; secondly, as the extent of the influence that can be exercised over other people and sometimes it is taken to include influence over objects or things as well as people.
5According to Minca and Oakes (2014, p. 295) the postmodern subjectivity is formed through an on-going tension between the powers of control and freedom; cognitive rationality and aesthetic reflexivity. Minca and Oakes acknowledge the power dynamics present in tourism. As a biopolitical phenomenon, the state power vested in the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Environment is imposed on communities that occupied and used the land that is presently demarcated for the development of tourism spaces. Prince (2017, p. 32) cites Foucault (1979) who defines how power is transmitted through social relations in a way which reflects the reality of society and its institutions. Foucault argues that truth could not emerge without the power of a mechanism which establishes its legitimacy and could not function without establishing truth over its legitimacy. In the case under study, the institution that earmarked the space of the Ha Lejone community has its power vested in its legitimacy as a public institution, representing the ministry responsible for tourism and environment in Lesotho. In his terms, Foucault (1980) as cited by Prince (2017) affirms that the effects of power are subtle and no amount of resistance is necessary from those affected by such power for it normalises behaviours and opinions so that individuals accept their state of affairs.
6Tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon is the product of government policies and global development agenda. Flew (2012, p. 47) cites Foucault who declares that his interest in lectures that he delivered on the ‘Birth of Biopolitics’ lies in the art of government which in his description, is an attempt to gauge the level of critical reflection occurring on what would be the best ways of governing. Murtola (2014, p. 844) insists on her side that biopolitics is about a power of life to resist and create alternative modes of not being governed by capital. She cites (Hardt, 2010) who contends that biopolitical production, centres on “the production of ideas, information, images, knowledge[s], code, languages, social relationships, affects and the likes.” Tourism as a crosscutting phenomenon has the potential to be manipulated by powerful economic forces in order to advance political as well as economic aspirations of powerful and prosperous nations. It goes without considering effects on the community which depends on spaces that are transformed into enclaves. Ek and Tesfahuney (2019, p. 864) argue that tourism enclaves are not spaces simply marked off from the norm, rather they make up the norm. In their opinion, tourism is not accidental but is central to modern societal and social order. In other words, by its virtue of not being accidental, it is planned even though public policies remain silent about measures of amalgamating policies of life (bio policies) for local populations and tourists.
7According to Minca and Oakes (2014, p. 295), everyday life was increasingly experienced in touristic terms; as a result, thinking about tourism would offer an increasingly central mode for thinking about social issues, dynamics, processes and experiences. They take into consideration the question of biopolitics in tourism which in their view is important for understanding future trends and their overall political and cultural implications where tourism is present in social and political systems used as new forms of government manipulation of local resources to pursue capitalistic endeavours of economic development. For Simpson (2016), tourist sites are treated as “enclave ‘spaces of exception’ within larger states; transnational investment regimes; public-private partnerships; transient multi-national populations; superlative and iconic architecture; and economies devoted to shopping, gambling, sightseeing, spectacle and amusement». According to Murtola, “the enclosures are often about the separation and claim of ownership of specific resources that were previously shared, thus potentially enabling the collection of monopoly rents through restriction of access” (Murtola, 2014, p. 845). She further posits that they reinforce the collection of monopoly rents through restriction of access. Thetsane (2019, p. 126) argues that in Lesotho as in many developing countries, tourism has been developed and controlled by large multinational companies that have little concern for local community’s social and economic conditions as they make decisions to be implemented by local communities who are not involved in the initial planning of tourism projects carried out on their space.
8Man has shown an increasing interest in people and events which are foreign, of escapism or trave and can only be explained by the thirst for foreign adventure which, according to Renards and Jean-Jacques, (1976), affects all man through the desire to understand customs, thought and aspirations of less known countries. In their view, that changed the concept of tourism to a more significant and interesting phenomenon as tourists, sun seekers and admirers of beautiful country side saw an increasing number of travellers who seek to have a deeper understanding into the life of people. However, Richard and Hall (2000) in Thetsane (2019) argue that if the local community is not involved from the initial stage, they might have some resentment.
9Minca (2010) reflects on the biopolitical implications for tourists and workers of enclave tourist resorts. In his paper, he makes reference to a film called The Island, produced by Michael Bay in 2005 in which clones were produced and controlled to serve as employees in the island like resort. He views the space of tourist and the worker’s contacts as fascinating for he perceives it as a haptic zone where the production of tourist experience occurs. In his opinion, this is a space in which the capitalist production of leisure tries to manage and tame and reduce to a minimum. Lemke (2011) in (Simpson, 2016, p. 33) cites Hardt and Negri who understand the biopolitical as “a new stage of capitalism characterised by the disappearance of the borders between economies and politics, production and reproduction”.
10“Tourist places are not just imagined places, they are also performed places and tourism employees are not just actors on stage, they have to act on that stage” (Shaw and Williams, 2004, p. 80). According to this statement, the production of tourism areas is not haphazard; rather it is an intentional and well thought process of disempowering the local communities through declarations of promises such as employment and other benefits. Saarinen and Wall-Reinius (2019, p. 740) attribute the term tourism enclaves to tourism destinations that are exclusively planned. Britton (1999), Bhohman, (1996) Shaw and Shaw (1999) in Saarinen and Wall-Reinius view such tourism environments as representing outcomes of a non-locally driven and governed neoliberal market economy. Kilipiris (2000, p. 28) asserts that for tourism to be truly beneficial to all concerned, that is the owners of the industry, employees, tourists and host, it must be ensured that resources are not over consumed while the tourism activities get integrated with other activities that provide tangible benefits to the local communities on assumption that they are involved in tourism planning, implementation which ensure respect of local cultures. Local communities are expected to welcome tourists as well as support the tourism establishments located in their space. Shaw and Williams further indicate that employees are trained to use stock of phrases such as “have a nice day”. This is supported by the Government of Lesotho (2019, p. 46) which asserts that tourists to Lesotho come into direct contact with local communities and thus making it imperative for community members to view tourism as beneficial and to value and own it together with resources related to it.
11Sarr, Sène-Harper and Gonzzalez-Hernandez (2021) state that social representation theory provides a framework to engage local communities. They hold that evidence of tourism as strategies to empower host communities remain elusive. External tourism development occurs with limited community participation as most decisions are top-down (Tia and Vanclay, 2021).
12On the other hand, Arvantis (n.d, p. 1) insists that presently, the world economy has started revising its attitude towards the bio-environment. In her opinion, if the environmental destruction is to be controlled, policies ought to be developed and implemented with the intention of promoting harmony and co-existence among all forms of life. Likewise, Lin, Minca and Ormond (2018, p. 887) posit that “thinking in terms of affirmative biopolitics means considering the generative “force” in the so-called ‘politics of life,’ whereby the power of life may be reclaimed from governmental apparatuses”. The manner in which the reclaiming can be undertaken is through empowerment which Constantino, Carlos and Ramslho (2012) maintain that is has four dimensions which are psychological, social, economic and political. In their views conditions that facilitated local empowerment include value for natural resources, rights to trade and manage resources, political organization of communities and collaboration of stakeholders. With respect to Arvantis’s view, the bio-environment is entangled in politics that are subsumed in state power.
13Indigenous knowledge System is key in tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon as it transcends the national as well as the community boundaries. Mokuku et al. (2004, p. 84) argue that the indigenous knowledge system is the knowledge that people have acquired and developed for many years of interacting with the environment. They further highlight that such knowledge is imperative in giving meaning to stages of natural environment which might not be obvious to any person who does not possess such knowledge. Scherl and Edwards (2007) put emphasis on the links between tourism and communities that reside in or alongside protected areas. They hold that positioning protected areas within an integrated context, in which actors are brought together, means more actors need to be empowered in order to manage them as well as ensuring their survival and extend their operation. The Government of Lesotho (2019) puts emphasis on the role of local communities and especially livestock owners and herd boys in caring for tourism resources, hosting tourists as well as providing services to tourists. The Lesotho Tourism Development Corporation (2013, p. 3) ran a number of awareness campaigns in the highlands where herd boys and school children were said to portray the socially and culturally unacceptable behaviour towards tourists. As a result of the awareness campaigns, herd boys committed themselves to using their talents such as playing traditional musical instruments for tourists and selling traditional food.
14He, Yang and Min (2020) indicate that In China, due to little reflection on the terminology used, community participatory approach is confused and disconnected to practice. Moreover, they highlight that research reveals many factors such as acceptance of local knowledge, formulation and implementation of laws to impact on the success of local community participation. However, Swiderska et al (2021), in an International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) publication assert that most of the Earth’s biodiversity is precisely located in territories of indigenous people and around half a billion people collectively manage about a quarter of the world’s land. With regard to the latter, policy makers can no longer ignore the vast body of evidence attesting to the critical contribution of the traditional knowledge and rights of indigenous people in addressing crisis of biodiversity loss. equity Swiderska et al (2021) further indicate that in Peru, Kenya, India and the South-West China, indigenous values and world views promote balance with nature and social.
15In summary, the construction of new tourism structures results in tourism enclaves that are externally driven. Local communities are disempowered through significant land grabbing and insignificant benefits of employment and firefighting skills. The value of the indigenous knowledge systems appears to have more theoretical value than the practical one.
16The area of study is Bokong Nature Reserve (Figure 1), which according to the Government of Lesotho (2019, p. 63) constitutes one of the three formally protected areas. It is about 1970 hectares and lies between 2,600 and 3200 meters above sea level (Mokuku, Lepono, Khasipe and Mokuku, 2004). This area is purposively sampled by the researcher as it amasses reasonable quantities of animal and plant species which local population rely on for their day to day livelihoods. In this area, ecosystems and their biodiversity are trapped in political pursuits driven by power dynamics between the government and local communities at Ha Lejone. The nature reserve is situated in the northern part of Lesotho in the Leribe district at Ha Lejone. It lies at the head of the Mafika-Lisiu pass. This area is surrounded by the Maliba-Matšo river one of the tributaries of the renowned Lesotho Highlands Water Project of the the Katse dam, (Thetsane, 2019). The community in this area depends on agriculture for their livelihoods. The Bokong Nature reserve is a manifestation of the biopolitical nature of tourism as the government of Lesotho, through its representatives from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Environment used the state power to encroach the land together with other forms of life such as wildlife and other natural resources used by local communities in the Ha Lejone area. This seize of land to develop tourism attraction spaces at the detriment of the local inhabitants disrupted the local’s interaction with their means of crop and animal production. Capitalists’ pursuits of the government drive tourism stakeholders to seize control of the land that the villagers used for their livelihoods.
Figure 1: Map of Lesotho. National Parks and Natural Reserves
Lesotho Travel Guide
17Qualitative approach was used to undertake this study. According to Schurink, Schurink, and Fouché (2021), qualitative research is primarily concerned with increasing understanding of situations, contexts and people. They further indicate that it focuses on exploring, describing and understanding realities from the inside out. Qualitative research is more appropriate to this study because it seeks to assess the effects of the biopolitical production of tourism at Ha Lejone.
18The narrative inquiry and in-depth interviews were used to collect data. According to Savin-Baden and Van Niekerk (2007), the narrative inquiry refers to an approach that focuses on the use of stories as data. In their view, stories are collected as a means of understanding experience as lived and told through research and literature. Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill (2016) posit that with the narrative inquiry, the participant is the narrator while the researcher undertakes the role of the listener who facilitates the process of the narration. Finally the case study strategy has been used where the village under study constitutes the unit of analysis based on the real life context.
19The narrative was captured during the tour around the nature reserve, prior to data collection through face to face interviews with the villagers. The study involves in-depth interviews with the population residing near the study area. Permission to interview villagers in the area was telephonically granted by the village chief. Interviewees are villagers who were conveniently selected by the researcher on the basis of their availability on the day set for conducting interviews. The interviews took place in the context of a formal arrangement by the chief where the interviewer was assigned a guide to take her from house to house for the purpose of interviewing with villagers. The data analysis was done by drawing major themes which were categorized, organized and then analysed.
20The case study is developed with data that was collected at two intervals. The first phase was a guided study tour around the nature reserve and in this instance, the tour guide assumed the role of the narrator whose narrative was recorded in the form of field notes and later analysed. The following questions were asked in order to solicit clarity: How does the nature reserve affect villagers? How are the disputes related to the nature reserve resolved between villagers and the nature reserve management? The narrative was analysed through re-storying where the researcher derived major themes which were coded and then interpreted. The second phase was interviews with the villagers on the impacts of the Bokong Nature Reserve, as a tourist space developed in their area. The data collection using interviews was guided by the following items: 1. Bokong Nature Reserve located in which village? 2. Were the local residents informed about the establishment of the tourism area in their village? 3. Were the villagers trained on issues related to tourism? 4. How much do villagers know of services offered at the nature reserve? 5. How does the nature reserve benefit the villagers? 6. How has the area demarcated for the nature reserve affected the lives of the villagers? 7. Are the benefits promised at the beginning of the negotiations delivered to the community? 8. In your opinion, what is tourism? Each interview lasted for 20 to 30minutes. The participants were selected conveniently on the basis of their availability during the interviews which were conducted from house to house. Fourteen villagers comprising both men and women were interviewed in the village of Ha Lejone.
21The Bokong Nature Reserve, as a tourist site, is demarcated on the land that belonged to the village of Lepaqoa. Villagers cannot longer herd their livestock within the demarcated area of the reserve. There were disputes with the government as the new proprietor. Cattle and horses are captured if they are found in the nature reserve and a certain amount of money (not disclosed) has to be paid in order to release them. Initially the Police intervention was sought and a law was enacted to punish the villagers whose animals were apprehended. According to the narrator (the tour guide), animals which were found in the nature reserve must be shot by the police. The Police and employees at the nature reserve found the penalty to be heavy on the villagers and they resorted to financial fines.
22With regard to medicinal plants, local traditional doctors could no longer access them and this has infringed on the livelihoods of those who depended directly on those plants for their livelihoods. Only rationed portions of plants can be granted through formal request made to the nature reserve management. Traditional doctors are only allowed to gather a rationed proportion of plants upon production of a certificate which identifies the collector as the traditional doctor/healer.
23Training of villagers was limited to the drawing of the fire belt as well as to undertake the weather assessment. During the drawing of the fire belt, villagers who have participated in the exercise have been trained on detecting the wind direction as well as its strength in the manner that enable them to determine whether the wind will allow the drawing of the fire belt to be undertaken.
24From the above account, power dynamics come into play in the relations that exist between the Bokong Nature Reserve proprietor and the Ha Lejone community. The latter’s behaviour and opinion are normalised by the state power through the ministry that initiated the negotiations that led to the demarcation of the nature reserve space from the site that the community used as pasture, location for the traditional initiation school and for herdsmen habitat known as “metebo”. Power as an inherent part of politics cannot be divorced from the government and in the case of Ha Lejone, it is used to strip off land, biological and plants resources that belonged to the community. The narrator affirms that there was a point where the community resisted even though their resistance was halted through police intervention. At the area under study, external actors seized control of local resources such as land and introduced new forms of life in the form of tourist enclaves which include accommodation and recreational facilities provided at the nature reserve. Such developments do not only isolate the local communities from the landscape that they used to explore in various ways to meet their existential needs but they also inhibit their mobility into such monitored areas. Besides, there is no social representations of such communities in the management structures of the nature reserve.
25Kilipiris (2005) posits that educational programs that prepare people for participation in the process of defining and implementing development strategies that are socially and environmentally sensitive are essential. However, the training of local community members in drawing the fire belt raises the question on how skills attained through the training contributed to earning a living in a sustainable manner. The training provided to the local community was not related to tourism as well as how to interact with tourists who are attracted to their village by the enclave space that has been transformed into the nature reserve. In as much as offering people skills is important, it becomes less important if such skills cannot be applied to solve daily live challenges imposed by the seizure of the community space which was used to support both human and animal lives at Ha Lejone.
26Nine participants declare to have been initially informed through the public gatherings. They indicate that during the negotiations with the community, the government representatives initiated several community meetings which one respondent highlights to have been clouded by misunderstandings. Upon the erection of the tourist attraction at the site that was snatched from the community, there had been no further communication from the government. For five members who seem not to have any idea of any information about the plan to establish the nature reserve on the land that serves various community interests, it is underlined that some were not yet residing in the community during negotiations as most of them are young women who must have moved to the village through marriage. As for elderly participants who insisted not to have any idea, they fall under the category which is likely not to attend community gatherings called by the chief.
27Moreover, the findings indicate the existence of some level of communication during the initial plan to establish the tourist attraction on the land that the community use for various purposes. That depicts the biopolitical nature of tourism in the sense that community spaces could no longer be accessible to such communities. Land is a means of production and take it from the community has dire consequences on its life. The government officials representing the Ministry responsible for Tourism and Environment in Lesotho use its statutory power to deprive the Ha Lejone community of their means of livelihoods. Government is a political institution which from the biopolitical lens imposes the political aspirations on both the biological as well as the environmental endowments of the area. This contention is corroborated by the narrative which indicates that community members today could not access the pasture as their animals which at times cross over to the site that is demarcated for the nature reserve, are captured and have to be released at very heavy fines. Similarly, those who depend on medicinal plants for survival are not only requested to produce certificates which confirm their role as traditional healers but are also given limited access to the plants. The worst part is that, the same place which they used to access for free, they should now pay a gate fee to enter it. The level of informing the community about the plan to develop the Bokong Nature Reserve is clouded by obscurities which are reflected from the lack of local involvement as well as active participation in plans as well as decision makings that surround their land.
28Of the fourteen participants, only one says that he received training while the other thirteen affirm that local communities have not received any training that is related to tourism. The proceeding results are paradoxical as there is more that is expected from local communities in terms of supporting tourism development in their areas. However, the same people that are expected to have a significant role in tourism are deprived any form of training that is pertinent to tourism. Prince (2017, p. 29) highlights some of the requirements for re-imagining tourism as a moral practice include looking at how local actors handle their close encounters with tourists within their own living spaces. Tourism in itself does not happen in vacuum therefore as a biopolitical phenomenon it cuts across the community boundaries as tourist developments are imposed on spaces that belong to local communities. In as much as Salazar (2012) as cited by Prince holds “local communities must develop strategies for receiving and interacting with tourists as well as displaying themselves and their culture” the role expected from the community that has been stripped of its land appears to be overambitious. The community has been disempowered through the seizing of their land because the manner in which the development of the Bokong Nature Reserve appear to have happened, has not facilitated equal benefits between the Government and the community. The manner in which the nature reserve was established, it was not intended to equip local communities with skills that will help them cope with the new reality of living without the space that supported their existence as well as that of their livestock.
29Most of the community members who participated in this study do not know about services offered at the Bokong Nature Reserve. Only one participant confirmed his knowledge of services offered at the tourism site. The response indicates the enclave and separatism characteristics of the tourism site that community members cannot even enter and discover services as well as activities that are offered. Tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon at Ha Lejone has rendered the community unhappy as the development that is constructed in their midst has become an island which cannot be entered by either the livestock or human beings living in local communities without any monetary exchange. The land that once belonged to the community has become an enclosed area which the unemployed community members without entrance fees cannot even access information on services available at the reserve. Local communities have no idea of what is taking place at the nature reserve due to the exclusive and the non-participatory approach of tourism development at this area.
30Members have various understanding of the concept of tourism. Nine members who answered the question explain tourism as (i) people who travel, sleep and leave some money at the Bokong Nature Reserve; (ii) people who travel to inspect the country (iii) and the environment and animals (iv) and at times travel to have fun ; (v) the study about places and things found in such places; (vi) it’s a place of people who have come together to bring development as well as a group of foreign travellers in a bus; (vii) the people who visit other places. The other five participants said they have no idea about what the concept of tourism entails.
31From the above observation, it is evident that there is still a significant number of interviewees that does not have any idea what tourism is. In as much as local communities are expected to welcome tourists warmly, such an ideal is a little bit uncertain particularly in hurt communities such as those at Ha Lejone where the government has shredded the socio-economic fabric of the community.
32Of the fourteen participants, twelve say that tourism production in the form of the Bokong Nature Reserve has no benefits for the local community. To substantiate the aforementioned assertion, some state that during the construction phase of the infrastructure made on the site, two men from each of the seventeen villages of the Ha Lejone used to be recruited. However, since the completion of the built infrastructure, local communities have known no benefits such as employment, access to pasture and developments in their communities as it was initially promised during the negotiations between government representatives and the local community. One participant, who knows the benefit of the nature reserve, explained that one of his family members once got employed at the site. Lastly, there is another participant who has no idea about any of the benefits drawn by the local community from the tourism development that have been constructed on their land.
33Effects of the Bokong Nature Reserve on local communities undermine the indigenous knowledge systems. By virtue of not involving the local community in the developments that are taking place on the space that initially belonged to them, this says that the government, through the Ministry of Tourism, Environment and Culture disregard the rich knowledge that local community of Ha Lejone has about the place regarding its bio-environmental stock. Given that local communities residing around Ha Lejone are marginalised by the Bokong Nature Reserve on various grounds, some of the initiatives from the site operators might be opposed by the local community as they have indicated that they do not benefit from the establishment of the Bokong Nature Reserve. On the contrary, they suffer profound monetary loss from fines imposed by the site management once the community’s herds graze closer to the enclaved area. Shaw and Williams (2004) allude to what they call the “emotional content” which according to them, refers to a sensory feeling engendered in a transaction. In the case under study, the emotional content of the local communities has been disregarded by the state power upon grabbing the land from them.
34On the political angle, tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon in the area under study invades local communities in guise of development to snatch away space that the community earns their living from. In this manner, conflicts can result especially where livestock of the local communities are confiscated upon grazing on the land that used to be a communal grazing land before the erection of the Bokong Nature Reserve.
35Culturally, the community laments the demolition of the traditional initiation school which was located in the space that today is known as Bokong Nature Reserve. The school is a major traditional institution for Basotho as well as the cultural epicentre for the Ha Lejone community. Production of the Bokong tourism area invaded the sacred space of the community. The structure is now part of the attractions to be seen by tourists in their tour of the nature reserve. As such, the affected community highlights the misunderstanding that occurred during initial negotiations as there were some community members who did not agree with the negotiating ministry. Irrespective of the lack of consensus that was evident, the ministry used power to continue with the intended development without considering the views of those who did not support the move.
36Spaces earmarked for tourism purposes are secluded and enclaved. They portray an element of division as tourists “mostly people who are coming from outside places are allowed to camp in this areas” (Minca, 2010). This is evident from the experience of participants of Ha Lejone who are no longer allowed to access the land that used to belong to them. Only people from outside these places, at a certain fee paid to enter the site are permitted to enter the secluded area of Bokong Nature Reserve.
37Given that during negotiations, community members were promised that they could still access the pasture for their herds, it is a deceitful torment that the community is faced with, for they indicate that the very secluded site of the nature reserve is not even fenced and as a result, their animals sometimes cross over to the nature reserve.
38While disempowerment of the villagers through the grabbing of their land is obvious, impoverishment of the local community is the major effect that is known. Members who participated in the study indicate that their livestock which got confiscated in the unfenced tourism site are released at heavy fines while in some instances even get killed. For a family, whose livelihood depends on livestock, getting some killed constitute a great economic loss.
39Moreover, community members also feel deceived as all that was promised by the government representatives during the negotiations was never accomplished. They mentioned continued access to the pasture as well as the employment opportunities which were tabled as some of the benefits to the community were never delivered except for two individuals who were recruited from each village.
40From the above perspective, tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon induce friction between local as well as external stakeholders particularly where there is a feeling of deception as it has been experienced by the local community. The tourism project is introduced in the land that the local community uses to earn their living and contrary to prior negotiations; things turn out in the opposite direction rather than what was promised. As it has been learnt from the guide’s narrative, there were some resistance which resulted in a conflict that called for police intervention. This reveals the negative outcomes of unfulfilled promises from the government representatives. It is mischievous to local communities affected by tourism site production because to date in Lesotho, the 2018/2019-2022/2023 National Strategic Development Plan declares thus “multiple sites were identified for tourism development feasibility studies” (Government of Lesotho, n.d). The biopolitical implications of the exercise are not taken into consideration as well as the repercussions on the local communities that depend on such spaces. From the given scenario, it suffices to view government as pursuing the profits that are likely to be derived from the production of multiple tourism spaces at the expense of local communities. Tia et al. (2021) state that government officials side with tourism developer than to protect the interests of local communities. What this means is that rather than empowering local communities, tourism at Ha Lejone disempowered local communities through lack of social representation in the nature reserve initial planning and decision making structures and in this manner, rendered them powerless by depriving them of any participation in projects surrounding the Bokong Nature Reserve.
41The government through its various institutions spearheaded the dispossession as well as disempowerment of local community residing in villages around the places with potential for tourism development. In pursuit of the capitalist endeavours, resources that were communally owned by the villagers are transformed into private properties at the detriment of villagers. Tourism as a biopolitical phenomenon crosses over the national as well as community boundaries demarcated for the occupation of local population. At Ha Lejone, the Bokong Nature Reserve has snatched from the local community the space that the community members used to have as pasture for their livestock, area for herdsmen habitats known as “metebo”, space designated for traditional initiation school while herbalists are deprived access to beneficial plants used to cure diseases and save lives. Hunters are not spared as those who practised it and fed families with hunted meat are also facing nutritional challenges. In addition to ignoring the existence and the relevance of the indigenous knowledge systems, the establishment of the tourism facility brought misery to the local community as all that were promised by the stakeholders representing the government during negotiations have never been accomplished. Rather, mechanisms employed by the state representations withered power from the local chief and his community. The community also suffer loss from fines issued from the Bokong Nature Reserve when their animals are confiscated while other promises such as better lives, employment opportunities as well as development in their communities have never been done for the community. This has resulted in mistrust of outside stakeholders by the community.
42New forms of colonialism is manifested in the case study as the national government through its ministries serve as intermediaries between the colonisers in the name of multinational cooperation which through the so called development funds target particular areas that they can exploit. Tourism development is the new mode of control strategy imposed on local communities with the view of dispossessing them of the means of production, particularly land.
Flux RSS
