Lund University

Bachelor in Development Studies

Department of Political Science

STVK12 – Spring 2015

Supervisor: Dr. Catia Gregoratti

Animals in Development and Conservation

Spectacular Portrayals of Human-Lion Interactions

Maria Dahlman Ström

Abstract

With nature as its main attraction, ecotourism is promoted as a savior for both

development and conservation. However, neoliberal logics of turning biodiversity

into commodities have resulted in an increasing amount of ecotourism operators

offering interactive experiences with charismatic wildlife. Although the animals

are captive and forcefully employed as labor, the encounters are claimed to

support conservation. This thesis will investigate one such case: the African Lion

& Environmental Research Trust (ALERT) and their ‘hands-on’ lion project in

Antelope Park, Zimbabwe.

Two research questions are developed: how are interactive experiences with

animals marketed, and how are animals represented in this marketing material? A

qualitative content analysis of both textual and visual data is conducted in order to

answer these questions. The analysis is based on the ‘spectacle of nature’,

combined with more specific theoretical arguments on interactive experiences and

animal representation. This framework concerns itself with how the conservation

network produces a bewildering array of marketing material featuring spectacular

representations of exotic people, landscapes and animals in order to attract

funding.

This research finds that ALERT’s lion encounters in Antelope Park indeed are

marketed as spectacular, and that the lions are represented in a romanticized way

in order to hide the aspects of captivity and forced labor from potential visitors.

Hence, the chosen case is part of an extremely influential portrayal of neoliberal

conservation, while justifying a tourism industry which employs millions of

animals for human benefit each year.

Key words: ecotourism, neoliberalization, conservation, wildlife, portrayals

Words: 10 052

1

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 2

1.1 Research Questions and Purpose ........................................................................ 3

1.2 Relevance to Development Studies and Political Science ................................. 4

1.3 Outline ................................................................................................................ 5

2 Background ............................................................................................................. 6

2.1 Literature Review ............................................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Portrayals of Nature and Its Animals ......................................................... 7

2.2 The Case of ALERT and Antelope Park .......................................................... 10

3 Theory .................................................................................................................... 12

3.1 Understanding the Spectacle of Nature ............................................................ 12

3.1.1 Marketing the Spectacle of Nature ........................................................... 14 3.1.2 Marketing Spectacular Interactive Experiences ....................................... 15 3.1.3 Spectacular Animal Representations ........................................................ 16

4 Method ................................................................................................................... 18

4.1 Qualitative Content Analysis ........................................................................... 18

4.2 Coding .............................................................................................................. 20

4.3 Material ............................................................................................................ 20

4.4 Delimitations .................................................................................................... 21

5 Analysis .................................................................................................................. 23

5.1 Marketing of Interactive Experiences .............................................................. 23

5.2 Representation of Animals ............................................................................... 28

5.3 Unexpected Findings ........................................................................................ 30

6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 32

7 Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 34

8 Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................. 38

2

1 Introduction

Roughly three decades ago, neoliberalism rose to dominance in the international political and

economic system. Although no longer unchallenged, it is continuously spinning governments,

markets and businesses all over the world into its web. The process of neoliberalization

commonly entails the rolling back of the state, an increased importance of businesses and

market mechanisms as well as a growing role for civil society in providing societal services –

all in order to spur economic growth. Not only does neoliberalization have consequences for

human affairs, but it has also affected how we view nature, and in turn, how we are planning

to save it (Holmes 2011).

It was previously believed that environmental protection and economic growth were

incompatible. Nonetheless, as neoliberalism grew more dominant, conservationists and

neoliberal institutions found a compromise in ‘liberal environmentalism’; conservation efforts

which also spur economic growth can rise to greater prominence than those that oppose the

neoliberal/capitalist system (Bernstein 2002). Accordingly, conservation efforts are

continuously privatized or dealt with by actors such as international organizations, NGOs or

foundations instead of the state. Market logics are applied, resulting in the growing belief that

biological diversity is best saved by its commodification, i.e. through business-models,

market schemes and by putting a price-tag on all that nature entails (Holmes 2011).

One such market scheme which is highly endorsed is ecotourism. Although the concept

lacks a set definition, it is generally promoted as a non-consumptive form of tourism which

has nature as its main attraction. It builds on the logics of protecting the environment in order

to attract ecotourists, both of which create employment opportunities and, in turn, spur

economic growth. It is therefore praised as a savior for both nature and development in the

global South. However, the non-consumptive properties of ecotourism are highly debated, and

the success of ecotourism has been argued to heavily depend on “turning protected

biodiversity into tradable commodities, particularly by repackaging it through representation

and symbols” (Holmes 2011:4). This phenomenon has repeatedly been shown detrimental to

both local populations and nature, while also giving ecotourists a falsely positive image of

what they are consuming. The common theme in portrayals of ecotourism destinations is that

they are ‘untouched’ and free of human interference. Beaches are marketed and perceived as

3

‘pristine’, forests as ‘undisturbed’ and national parks as ultimate ‘wildernesses’, but these

destinations are rarely as natural as they seem, and can be argued to be entirely produced and

reproduced by humans (Duffy 2010).

The constructed dichotomy between humans and nature has created a widespread human

exoticization of nature and all things ‘wild’. In turn, this has resulted in an increasing luxury

demand of close encounters with charismatic wildlife, such as swimming with dolphins,

diving with sharks or walking with lions (Bulbeck 2005). Unlike ecotourism destinations,

however, where the production of ‘wilderness’ is relatively easily hidden from tourists, these

interactive experiences are more obviously man-made. The animals have been tamed, are held

in captivity or semi-captivity, and are far more dependent on humans than they would be in

natural circumstances. Consequently, questions of the marketing of these activities as

beneficial to nature arise. Ecotourism supposedly works as a savior for both conservation and

development, so how do interactive experiences between humans and wildlife fit into these

claims?

1.1 Research Questions and Purpose

As I will show in the next chapter, plenty of research has investigated the marketing of

ecotourism destinations and its effects on local populations. However, specific ecotourism

activities seem to have evaded scrutiny. This thesis will therefore investigate the increasingly

popular interactive experiences with wildlife, and how they are effectively repackaged

through marketing. The research questions I will deal with in this thesis are the following:

- How are interactive experiences with wildlife1 marketed?

- How are the animals represented in the marketing material?

The first question aims to investigate how experiences with captive animals, which have been

involuntarily employed as labor force in the ecotourism industry and which cannot speak for

themselves, are being repackaged and sold as for ‘the greater good’ (i.e. development and

conservation). The second question focuses more on how the animals are portrayed in order to

justify the unethical aspects of the interactions. These are important questions, since effective

1 For lack of a better term, ’wildlife’ is in this thesis used to describe both captive and non-captive non-

domesticated animals.

4

marketing can hide the ‘dark sides’ of a product and make its consumers less critical (Fuentes

2014). Furthermore, the representations of people, animals, and places present in such

marketing will inevitably affect the way we perceive them (Igoe 2010). Most of us would

argue that wildlife belongs in nature, and yet ecotourists flock to bottle-feeding operations

while the businesses and NGOs that run the operations claim that it is in the name of

conservation. It is crucial to understand how something so unnatural is enabled by its

marketing and representation.

As I will show, theoretical steps have recently been taken towards answering such

questions. The purpose of this thesis is therefore to use a case of interactive experiences with

wildlife in order to test those theoretical developments and potentially contribute to them.

This will in turn help shine further light on the issues of animal labor in development and

conservation, and how these issues are actively being hidden from potential consumers. I will

do so by conducting a qualitative content analysis focusing on the African Lion &

Environmental Research Trust (ALERT) and their ‘hands-on’ lion project in Antelope Park,

Zimbabwe, in order to investigate how their human-lion encounters are visually and textually

marketed towards a certain type of ecotourists, i.e. volunteer ecotourists.

1.2 Relevance to Development Studies and Political

Science

Neoliberalization is a political and economic process which leaves very few people and places

untouched. Here manifested as conservation, tourism and development, it has significant

effects on which solutions we deem possible, as well as how we view nature, local

populations and wildlife. Ecotourism has become an increasingly promoted ‘sustainable’ tool

for development, wedding the objectives of conservation and neoliberal development, but also

hiding the fact that neoliberal development has, in recent times, been a root cause of our

environmental problems (Igoe 2010). Ecotourism is therefore a paradox of great sort, and one

which, along with its consequences, is important to understand.

Although focusing on animals, at first glimpse, might not seem particularly relevant for

social sciences, I argue that it is. Just as social effects on the environment are becoming

increasingly relevant to the fields of development and political science, more specific aspects

such as ecotourism’s effects on animals should too. After all, animals are being forcefully

employed by the tourism industry in order to spur development for humans and provide

5

tourists with amazing experiences, all for the greater cause of combatting anthropogenic

environmental problems.

1.3 Outline

Having introduced the problematics of interactive experiences with animals and devised two

research questions, the following chapter will provide an account of previous research on the

topics of ecotourism as well as portrayals of nature and animals. Doing so will contextualize

this thesis before moving on to a presentation of the case. The case of ALERT was chosen

due the organization’s self-proclaimed groundbreaking lion reintroduction program, funded

through offering human-lion interactions to volunteers and tourists, which after over 15 years

has not resulted in the reintroduction of a single lion. In order to answer the research

questions, a theoretical framework – the ‘spectacle of nature’ complemented with more

specific arguments regarding interactive experiences and animal representation – will be

presented, followed by a description of the chosen methodology and materials. Lastly, a

qualitative content analysis of both textual and visual materials will be conducted and the

results will be discussed.

6

2 Background

This chapter will start by reviewing previous research on the effects of ecotourism on local

populations and conservation, as well as how ecotourism frames nature and animals. This will

provide a contextualization of the topic of this thesis, before moving on to a description of the

chosen case.

2.1 Literature Review

In sociopolitical contexts it is commonly argued that the ecotourism creates revenues for

development and conservation by protecting the environment. For instance, Spencely

(2008:166), argues that ecotourism can create better opportunities for impoverished people

than most other industries. The majority of academics writing on the topic, however, have

remained skeptical to say the least.

The most common criticism is that the profits made from ecotourism are rarely equitably

shared. Adams (2004:210-211) has found that it is the businesses rather than the local

communities that are the big winners, and that the government investments necessary for

ecotourism infrastructure heavily decrease the budget for investments in health and education.

Moreover, Brockington et al. (2008:138) found that not even the profits that actually do reach

the local people are divided equitably. This has, on several occasions, led to conflicts with and

within local populations (Southgate 2006; Butt 2012), and according to Laudati (2010),

instead of being a positive force for development, ecotourism often creates even poorer, more

unequal communities as well as a dependence on the presence of tourists in order for the

locals to put bread on the table. Barrett (2013) argues similarly – the potential of ecotourism

in overcoming historical injustices is close to none, due to the fact that it subjects local

populations to an unpredictable commodity-driven industry, which feeds of the ‘otherness’ of

their lands and cultures. In fact, the big talk of engaging and including local communities in

development can rather be viewed as a tool in order to discipline these people in line with the

7

market. Those who do not conform to the desired lifestyles and practices will be more

excluded than ever (Barrett 2013).

The positive effects on conservation are debatable as well. For instance, the unequal

sharing of revenues can cause local populations to commit acts of rebellion such as habitat

vandalism and poaching (Southgate 2006). Some of the most common low-wage jobs that are

available to local populations are the production and selling of souvenirs, which are often

made out of endangered flora and fauna (Duffy 2010:188). Moreover, the ways in which

ecotourism destinations are built are rarely subjected to scrutiny – very few visitors consider

which materials were used, how the sewage system works and how the ecosystems have been

altered in order to provide such picture perfect resorts (Duffy 2010:205). Lastly, the presence

of tourists has been found to bring challenges of its own; common activities such as collecting

shells on the beach can have serious consequences for ecosystems and biodiversity (Duffy

2010:188-190).

Ecotourism proponents often respond to these criticisms by saying that negative effects

can be avoided by creating more favorable investment climates, more and better marketing,

improving the channeling back of revenues to the local communities among other things

(Pawliczek & Mehta 2008; Mbaiwa 2008). However, as argued by Brockington et al., “such

arguments largely miss the point that all forms of tourism have costs and benefits: there is no

fabled ‘win-win’ situation” (2008:138). In fact, many academics agree that the way

ecotourism repackages nature in order for it to fit better with the logics of neoliberalism has

several inherent problems. One such problem is that it assumes that ecotourism occurs in a

vacuum, devoid of any structures that could cause unequally shared benefits between

businesses, local populations and wildlife. Moreover, it portrays environmental protection as

important, not for the ecological necessity of biodiversity for the health of our ecosystems, but

because of nature’s economic value (see for example Adams 2004; Barrett 2013; Brockington

et al. 2008; Duffy 2010; Igoe et al. 2010; Laudati 2010).

2.1.1 Portrayals of Nature and Its Animals

As we have seen, the ecotourism industry is more problematic than it seems. However, it is

not only the representations of ecotourism that are skewed; in order to make full use of

nature’s economic value, ecotourism operators regularly market nature in ways that are

designed to be as awe-inspiring as possible by leaving out or actively altering certain aspects.

This is commonly done through portraying ecotourism destinations as wildernesses, which is

8

arguably also the most powerful force behind the creation of protected areas (Brockington et

al. 2008:47). Wildernesses are depicted, and therefore commonly perceived, as the last

untouched natural spaces, and maintaining undisturbed wilderness areas is argued to be

crucial for both nature and humans; nature needs to be able to thrive in areas without human

destruction, and humans need to be able to get away from the destruction of their everyday

lives (Brockington et al. 2008:48). Furthermore, it has been argued that experiencing

wilderness up close and creating revenues for local populations will garner more goodwill

towards nature as well as support for conservation projects (Curtin & Kragh 2014; Mbaiwa

2008:215).

However, the concept of wilderness has received an extensive share of academic critique.

The trouble with wilderness, as Cronon puts it, is that “far from being the one place on earth

that stands apart from humanity, it is quite profoundly a human creation” (1995:7).

Throughout our existence, humans have lived sustainably as part of the ecosystems, and it is

only recently that some parts of the world have industrialized so heavily that this has been

forgotten. Instead, we started believing that nature should exist in some pristine form, separate

from human civilization (Adams 2004:106; Barrett 2013; Duffy 2010:53).

It is not only the concept of wilderness that is created by humans, but the actual

wilderness areas as well. In the name of conservation, development and ecotourism, these

pristine areas are actively manufactured – ecosystems are being altered and local populations

driven out. Countless studies have shown how, from one day to another, whole communities

can find themselves transformed into unacceptable threats towards nature: trespassers,

poachers and enemies of conservation (see for example Adams 2004:108; Brooks et al. 2011;

Duffy 2010:57; Laudati 2010; Barrett 2013; Butt 2012). Unfortunately, these consequences

are entirely unnecessary, and caused by the misconception that wildernesses are crucial for

conservation (Brockington et al. 2008:49). In fact, the production of wildernesses highly

restricts the possibilities for conservation, since there is a limited amount of space where

humans can be entirely excluded. Furthermore, the processes of creating these undisturbed

spaces often have harmful effects on the ecosystems it claims to save (Duffy 2010:207;

Brockington et al. 2008:49).

The wilderness discourse is not only present in ecotourism operators’ marketing material

but in most media concerning nature, such as movies and documentaries. Monani (2012), for

instance, describes how wilderness is commonly used in adventure-nature films to fuel

speciesism and consumerist recreational activities. She argues that their “portrayal of human–

nature dichotomies fuels a disdain for the spaces of tame natural environments and

9

encourages a hunger for wilderness spaces”, which can become quite harmful to the

environment if we fail to see the connections between our consumerist, urban lives and nature

conservation in other parts of the world (Monani 2012:117).

Being a big part of nature’s attraction, wildlife is not spared from being romanticized and

exoticized in ecotourism marketing or other media. In fact, Malamud (2012) claims that every

time an animal is featured in media, particularly visual media, they are being involuntarily

displaced from their natural spaces into socially constructed cultural frames. For instance, van

der Druim et al. (2014) investigate different portrayals of the gorillas in Bwindi Impenetrable

National Park, Uganda. The authors find that the gorillas are framed as “coexisting with local

livelihood practices” in the development network, “as ‘trophies’ in the hunting network,

‘man’s closest neighbor’ in the scientific network, ‘endangered species’ in the conservation

network, and finally ‘objects of the tourist gaze’ through […] enrollment in the tourism

network” and that this highly affects how the gorillas are involved and represented in different

practices (van der Druim et al. 2014:597). Further, they argue that the boundaries between

these different networks are “constantly overflowed, blurred, and renegotiated” resulting in

complicated power relations but also in the ‘othering’ of those not part of the networks, i.e.

the gorillas and local populations (van der Druim et al. 2014:597).

Russel (1995) investigates orangutan tourism from the perspective of ecotourists visiting

a rehabilitation center. He finds that among the ecotourists there were two dominant

perceptions: orangutan as child and orangutan as pristine. On the same topic, Cohen (2009)

finds that tourists are increasingly drawn towards activities with humanized animals in semi-

or fully-contrived settings rather than seeing the ‘otherness’ of animals offered in natural

settings. This, he argues, is due to the fact that wildlife has been depleted in the natural

settings, making such activities attractive only to extremely dedicated tourists. Another part of

the problem is the proliferation of animal stories on television, in films and documentaries.

These offer, on the one hand, much more easily accessible ‘othered’ animals in their natural

settings (Cohen 2009), and on the other hand, plenty of humanized animal stories where

human social structures, gender roles, traits or emotions are inferred onto the animals in order

to engage the audience on an emotional level (Pierson 2005). Making a big effort to see wild

and free-roaming animals which could also be seen from the comfort of one’s living room has

therefore become disincentivized, while more tourists are seeking out easily achieved

interactions with cute, humanized animals.

10

2.2 The Case of ALERT and Antelope Park

This thesis will investigate ALERT and one of their ‘conservation projects’ offering

interactive experiences with lions to tourists and volunteers. ALERT was founded in Antelope

Park, Zimbabwe, and is a non-profit organization working for the conservation of the African

lion. Antelope Park is a private game park established in 1999 in Gweru and home to

ALERT’s ‘hands-on’ lion rehabilitation project. Hence, it runs commercial lion encounter

operations, where parts of the profits are channeled back to ALERT. Further, ALERT is

closely affiliated with African Impact – an organization dedicated to offering ‘responsible’

volunteer experiences – which helps them attract ecotourists and eco-volunteers (ALERT

2015a; Hunter et al. 2015; African Impact 2015).

Since ALERT was founded, the project has spread to two other locations: Lion Encounter

in Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe and Lion Encounter in Livingstone, Zambia, which, like

Antelope Park, work for profit (ALERT 2015d). Nonetheless, this thesis will focus on

Antelope Park, since it is by far the biggest of the projects.

Image 1. An organizational chart of the organizations involved and their relationships to each other (logos taken

from African Impact 2015; ALERT 2015a; Antelope Park 2015; Lion Encounter 2012).

The objective of ALERT’s lion project is to reintroduce lions to the wild following a four

stage program. The first stage is where the interactive experiences happen; in order to raise

awareness and funding for the program, tourists and volunteers get to, among other things,

interact with lion cubs, walk with them in the bush and have their photos taken while doing

this (ALERT 2015d). Step two is where a group of lions that have retired from stage 1 are

released as a pride into a large enclosure, with game to hunt, in order to live as wild. The cubs

that are born here will not have interacted with humans (ALERT 2015e). In stage 3 the lions

11

born in stage 2 are released into an even larger enclosure, before their offspring is finally

released into the wild with, it is argued, all the necessary skills and behaviors of wild lions

(ALERT 2015f; ALERT 2015g).

This project was chosen due to the fact that, in spite of working for the conservation and

reintroduction of lions, according to the latest available numbers, there are 162 lions in the

program, whereof only 23 have reached stage 2. No lions have been released into either stage

3 or 4 (ALERT 2015h). This means that, since the efforts started in Antelope Park in 1999,

not a single lion has been reintroduced. Furthermore, even if this program has the potential to

be successful, close interactions with lions are dangerous to both humans and the animals, and

captive lions are likely to develop maladaptive behavior which makes their offspring

unsuitable for the wild (Hunter et al. 2012). These interactive experiences are therefore hard

to justify – especially when put into the context of a bigger, poorly regulated industry, where

millions of animals, both domesticated and wild, “are used annually in tourism for human

enjoyment and benefit” (Fennell 2014:992).

On a more personal level, ALERT’s lion project is interesting due to the fact that I, in

fact, volunteered for them in 2011. My mixed emotions regarding the experience have caused

me to follow the controversies surrounding the ‘lion encounter’ industry (see for instance

Hunter at al. 2012; CBS 2014), and I am now convinced that such operations provide little

benefit for the animals. Nonetheless, ALERT and its associated organizations continue to

claim that there is great conservational value to their program and tourists as well as

volunteers continue to purchase these manufactured experiences (ALERT 2015c). Obviously,

this is a good example of marketing done right.

12

3 Theory

In this chapter, I will present a theoretical framework in order to answer the two research

questions. As a foundation, this thesis will use Igoe’s theoretical framework on spectacular

productions of biodiversity conservation – ‘the spectacle of nature in the global economy of

appearances’ (2010). It is based on Debord’s work on the ‘society of the spectacle’, where he

argues that, in our modern society, social life has been replaced with its representation. The

spectacle is “the mediation of relationships between people by images” (Debord 1967, cited in

Igoe 2010:376), where social relations have become equal to, or superseded by, relations

between commodities.

When proposing his framework on the ‘spectacle of nature’, Igoe (2010) expands the

definition to include relationships between people and the environment. I will further expand

the definition to include relationships between people and animals. This will be done by,

firstly, complementing Igoe’s framework (2010) with more specific theoretical arguments on

marketing of interactive experiences with animals made by Duffy (2014), and secondly, with

Stibbe’s (2005) arguments on animal representation in conservation discourse.

3.1 Understanding the Spectacle of Nature

Puzzled by the transformation of nature into commodities and Western fantasies, Igoe

proposes a theoretical framework for thinking about “biodiversity conservation and the

mediation of relationships in the context of neoliberal capitalism” (2010:376). Doing so, he

argues, offers opportunities to better understand the environmental contradictions and

paradoxes of neoliberalism.

In modern (Western) society, potential consumers are reachable through all media

sources and practically at all times. Marketing material, therefore, is no longer confined to

billboards, magazines and in-store displays, but can reach us in our homes and at our jobs as

well. With the help of the internet, we are constantly exposed to photographs and videos

through blogs, social networks and video-sharing websites. According to Igoe (2010), the

global conservation network, often in partnership with for-profit organizations, has taken

13

advantage of this by creating a bewildering array of marketing material that sends the same

message but with the help of different stories and contexts. This ‘360-degree’ marketing is

argued to be highly influential in affecting people’s perceptions and decisions regarding

conservation and how to contribute.

The ways in which these “interlinked, multi-platform promotions” are effective can be

understood through the concept of ‘world-making’ (Igoe 2010:377). World-making is the

creation of a fictional universe through the proliferation of numerous productions which send

the same message, as well as the self-conscious creation of a spectacle by myriad groups of

interconnected people and organizations world-wide in order to conjure investments (Igoe

2010). As such, spectacular production and accumulation is a highly useful method of

attracting funding for conservation in our ‘global economy of appearances’.

In the case of conservation, spectacular accumulation and world-making comes in the

shape of a plenitude of images and videos of panoramic landscapes, pristine wildernesses,

traditional populations and exotic animals. These are used in order to present potential

Western supporters with urgent problems that can only be solved with the help of their

investment or participation, i.e. consumption. Due to the interconnectivity and coherence of

the messages sent by the different conservation organizations and projects, the proposed

solutions, developed in the context of neoliberalism and for the continued expansion of

neoliberalism, are the only solutions that most potential consumers will ever know (Igoe

2010).

Hence, Igoe (2010) argues, the international conservation network has perfected the

spectacle of nature; the relationships Western consumers have with people, environments and

animals in the global South are completely shaped by their representation through images and

videos. A perfected spectacle is “simultaneously a commodity that people will pay to

consume and a medium for marketing commodities” due to the fact that it is “the ultimate

expression of alienation and fetishization” (Igoe 2010:378). Alienation, here, refers to the

feeling of not having control over one’s life and the conditions that shape it. In a neoliberal

world of individualization, with decreasing support from social networks and welfare as well

as an increase in both opportunities and risks, alienation causes individuals to turn to mass

media “as a more palatable alternative to life actually lived” (Igoe 2010:379). Here, the

fetishization of people, nature and animals in the global South present in conservation

productions promises escape from alienation by offering ways to contribute or participate in

simple solutions to terrifying problems. According to Igoe, fetishization is the portrayal of

objects, experiences (of nature and with animals) as well as people as commodities “without

14

reference to the relationships and contexts from which they were produced” (2010:378). The

allure of contributing or participating lies in the possibilities of escaping alienation by making

new social connections, with fetishized humans or animals, and in ‘making a difference’

without long-term obligations.

3.1.1 Marketing the Spectacle of Nature

With these theoretical insights as a backdrop, Igoe (2010) moves on to an examination of

hundreds of conservation-promoting online videos in order to establish more concrete

characteristics of videos partaking in the spectacular production of biodiversity conversation.

He finds that there is significant convergence and similarity in the messages communicated –

in fact, “the worldview they present is a remarkably unified one” (Igoe 2010:381).

One common characteristic identified is the toggling back and forth between wide-angle

zoom-outs of landscapes or animals and zoom-ins of human or animal faces. This, Igoe

(2010) argues, is a technique employed in order to show the severity and scale of the

problems at hand, or the vast potential of the pristine landscapes, while simultaneously

romanticizing the iconic animals and exotic people that ought to be ‘saved’ or already have

benefited from the project. What is actively left out, however, is the complex reality. There is,

for instance, no mention of the root causes of environmental problems and biodiversity loss,

such as Western consumerism or global inequality and injustice. Instead, the ‘bad guys’ are

the local people that do not conform to the rules established by the conservation

organizations. Moreover, the negative effects of the projects, such as the displacement and

impoverishment of local people as well as the impacts of tourism on local ecosystems, are

ignored in order to leave room for the success stories.

Having presented such a simplified account of the problems at hand, the marketing

material is then free to suggest equally simple connections, relationships and solutions. These

are supposedly designed in partnership with local stakeholders, beneficial to people as well as

animals, and are “promised through the consumption of new commodities which

simultaneously promise opportunities for individual self-expression” (Igoe 2010:383).

Furthermore, they commonly produce imaginary communities, by inviting the Western

consumer to join ‘us’, ‘humanity’ or ‘the team’ in saving the planet.

15

3.1.2 Marketing Spectacular Interactive Experiences

In her investigation of interactive experiences with elephants in Botswana, Duffy (2014)

explains the processes through which nature is reconfigured, shaped and commodified by

tourism. She argues that nature’s different components are decontextualized through the

separation of them from their ecosystems, resulting in the creation of commodities that fit

perfectly with neoliberal logics. In the case of interactive animal encounters, charismatic

animals are entrained as labor force in order to provide a new type of luxury commodity

available for purchase. She recognizes that “in many ways the use of trained animals disrupts

the idea that safari tourism is based around stereotypes of wildlife and wilderness” (2014:93),

but finds that this inconsistency is avoided through the marketing of the experiences as ‘back

to nature’: a way of touching the wild and getting closer to wildlife. Consistent with Igoe’s

claims of fetishization (2010), Duffy argues that “in promotional material the interactive

trained elephants are almost completely divorced from the social and economic processes that

produced them in the first place” (2014:95-96). Hence, the entrainment and commodification

of the animals are hidden from the tourists alongside the negative effects the activities have

on the welfare of the animals, and the tourist-animal interactions are portrayed as

opportunities for companionship.

The combination of the theoretical arguments made by Igoe (2010) and Duffy (2014)

results in a theoretical framework for examining marketing material of interactive experiences

with animals in the name of conservation which is summarized in Table 1. However, in order

to further uncover how the animals are represented in these promotions, it is time to turn

towards literature that can help shed light on such issues.

16

3.1.3 Spectacular Animal Representations

In the previous subsection, it became clear that representation of animals in the conservation

spectacle comes in the shape of iconic, charismatic species. These species are commonly

either threatened with extinction or making a comeback thanks to conservation efforts, and

are iconic in the sense that they stand for a certain problem or solution (Igoe 2010). As

species they are therefore represented as vulnerable and dependent on humans for their

survival, while the individual animals that are part of any given conservation project are

represented as happy and better off because of human intervention.

When it comes to fetishization, both Igoe (2010) and Duffy (2014) argue that not only the

human-animal encounters have been fetishized, but also the animals that are employed as

Characteristics of marketing productions of interactive experiences with animals

Relationship between

different productions Mutually reinforcing, repeating the same message, offering no alternative solutions

Directed at Western consumers concerned about environmental problems

Appeals for Funding and/or participation

Use of scale (videos

and pictures) Toggle back and forth between large scales and small scales

Large scale Wide-angle shots, often taken from the air. Either spectacular shots of landscapes and

animals or showing the extent of damage having been done to the ecosystems

Small scale Tight shots of the faces of people and animals, or close-ups of miniature ecosystems

Animals as Icons, threatened with extinction or making a come-back thanks to conservation, framed

as companions instead of commodities

Local people as 1. Benefiting from the project, 2. Partners, 3. Threats

Proposed solutions Simple solutions to terrifying problems, dependent on Western people and consumption

of new commodities (i.e. interactive experiences)

Actively excluded References to what caused the problems in the first place, how the commodities were

produced, how the animals were 'entrained', and negative consequences

Actively highlighted Success stories, imaginary communities, wilderness in the sense of 'back to nature'

Seductive allure Promises of connections, individual self-expression, no long-term obligations,

experiencing local cultures and the wild but always able to retreat to luxury

Table 1. An overview of the main characteristics of marketing material of interactive experiences with animals. Based on

Igoe's 'Spectacle of Nature' (2010) and Duffy's more specific arguments on close animal encounters (2014).

17

(forced) labor in the organizations offering the encounters. Although neither of the authors

expands upon this argument in relation to animals, applying fetishization to them would mean

that there is no mention of how these, originally wild, animals ended up captive and employed

as labor force. Furthermore, the fact that the animals have been trained and are no longer as

wild as they would have been in nature is likely to be mentioned to a minimal extent (Duffy

2014).

When aiming to attract investments (or participation), Stibbe (2005) claims that

conservation organizations frame animals in a romanticized way in order to create empathy.

Just like Igoe (2010), he argues that the focus is on endangered species, and that the animals

are assigned value based on criteria such as their “large size, rarity,

cuteness/charisma/popularity, power, and majesty” (Stibbe 2005:10). Visual and linguistic

emphasis will therefore be put on how mighty, charismatic, majestic or inherently wild a

species or animal is. This strategy is indeed successful in establishing empathy, respect and

attracting funds, but the usage of such criteria "establishes a hierarchy of animals, in which

respect is reserved for the large and the rare" (Stibbe 2005:10). The animals or species central

to a certain project will therefore actively be represented as more important than other species.

This hierarchical representation can be seen as yet another example of how animals are

divorced from the wider context of an ecosystem in order to be commodified and fit with

neoliberal logics (as argued by Duffy 2014), since in an ecosystem no species is more

important than the other. Furthermore, reducing a living thing into a set of adjectives,

especially while constructing them as resources for human consumption, causes us to see

animals as passive objects and enables continued justification of their unethical treatment

(Stibbe 2005).

18

4 Method

In this section I will show how the theoretical framework is applied in order to answer the

research questions, and how the coding protocol is developed in accordance with it.

Furthermore, the chosen material will be presented, along with an explanation of the relevant

delimitations.

4.1 Qualitative Content Analysis

Due to a growing awareness of the importance of language in sociopolitical contexts, there

has been a recent upsurge within the social sciences in the usage of methods which analyze

the meanings and implications of linguistic communications (Halperin & Heath 2012:309).

Qualitative content analysis is one such method which is concerned with the language and

meaning of the material in question. It is similar to quantitative content analysis in the sense

that it attempts to maintain a systematic, replicable and valid manner of analysis, but differs

on the basis that it is not merely what can be seen and counted which is believed to infer

meaning. Instead, it also pays attention to what can be read ‘between the lines’ (Halperin &

Heath 2012:319; Mayring 2000; Rose 2001:55). It is therefore “a more interpretive form of

analysis concerned with uncovering meanings, motives and purposes in textual content”

(Halperin & Heath 2012:310). It is sensitive to the social contexts which have produced the

material, since they are believed to be crucial in understanding how meanings are constructed

(Halperin & Heath 2012:332). Hence, it aims to uncover the symbolic qualities behind the

material (Rose 2001:55).

Qualitative content analysts are commonly interested in identifying and understanding

ideologically based representations of certain phenomena or social groups (Halperin & Heath

2012:310), making the method ideal for answering the two questions posed by this thesis.

Furthermore, content analysis is an unobtrusive method, meaning that it is not part of the

creation of the data, but instead uses data which is already accessible. It therefore reduces

potential distortion of data, as can happen when interviewees give socially acceptable answers

rather than their versions of the truth, or when people act differently because they know they

19

are being observed (Halperin & Heath 2012:318). Therefore, the method will allow this thesis

to investigate data where the actual representations of interactive experiences and animals are

present, rather than data reflecting perceptions of these representations.

In order to conduct a systematic, replicable and valid analysis, this thesis will take a

deductive approach and utilize the theoretical framework in developing analytical categories

(Mayring 2000). These categories will then help in developing a priori codes, which are used

in order to identify and label certain passages or features of the material. However, in order to

not miss important aspects of the material, these categories and codes are not written in stone,

and can be adjusted throughout the process of analysis (Mayring 2000). When the material

has been successfully coded, the analysis will compare the characteristics of the material with

common features of the theoretical framework.

Although qualitative content analysis commonly engages with written language,

visuality, too, can be seen as a sort of language. As Rose explains it, “a specific visuality will

make certain things visible in particular ways, and other things unseeable […], and subjects

will be produced and act within that field of vision” (2001:137). Krippendorff (2004:xiii)

agrees, arguing that, for a content analyst, data is "texts, images, and expressions that are

created to be seen, read, interpreted, and acted on for their meanings, and must therefore be

analyzed with such uses in mind". These claims have been disputed by many who argue that

language and image are not the same, but can be justified through reminding them that

messages are disseminated through all sorts of media – not only through written or spoken

sources. Furthermore, it is highly unusual to encounter visual representations which are

completely unaccompanied by any sort of textual or spoken message. Hence, visuality is

powerful and seductive in its own way (Rose 2001:10). Limiting the research to textual

sources, therefore, risks missing important meanings and messages conveyed. As such, visual

sources will in this thesis be viewed as important contributors to linguistic constructions of

the social world. Doing so ensures a higher level of representativeness of the material – an

important aspect of content analysis (Rose 2001:57) – since the analysis will be based on the

meanings and motives behind all sorts of communication, rather than only textual documents.

Moreover, this approach is consistent with the theoretical framework, which deals with

messages communicated through both linguistic and visual techniques.

20

4.2 Coding

Coding, as earlier mentioned, is the process of labelling and tagging parts of the material in

order to signify that they represent broader thematic ideas. Doing so ensures that the different

materials are analyzed in a systematic way, but also that the process of analysis can be

understood by the reader (Halperin & Heath 2012; Mayring 2000). Using a deductive

approach means that the categories and codes are based on the theoretical framework. A

preliminary coding protocol is therefore devised in accordance with the framework on the

spectacle of nature and spectacular representations of animals.

This research will examine three different types of material: text, image and video. The

text will be processed by attaching relevant codes to specific paragraphs, while each image

will be assigned all relevant codes. Regarding the video, codes will be applied to different

time intervals. These time intervals will vary in length depending on the scenes. While coding

the material, it is possible that certain, important aspects will not be covered due to theoretical

limitations. New codes can then be established, applied to these sections and added to the

coding protocol. These can help in further theorizing the spectacle of nature and conservation,

especially in regards to interactive experiences and animal representations. The final protocol

can be found in Appendix 1.

The results are to be presented in the analysis, and will come in the shape of general

findings as well as representative quotes, images or still-frames from the videos, and will be

thoroughly compared with the theoretical framework. Furthermore, since the theoretical

framework is concerned not merely with what is present in the marketing material, but also

with what is being left out, these hidden aspects have to be incorporated into the coding

process. Therefore, codes that are unlikely to appear will be developed for certain categories.

Comparing the emphasis on or frequency in appearance of the likely and unlikely codes will

show which aspects are being underrepresented or entirely left out.

4.3 Material

This thesis will focus on marketing material that is directed at potential volunteers. Such

material is important to investigate, since, in 2014, volunteers brought in almost double the

funding for ALERT than did ‘normal’ ecotourists (ALERT 2015b). Furthermore, volunteers

21

in search of the perfect program to support are more vulnerable to spectacular representations

of conservation and animals. This vulnerability stems from the fact that what they are looking

for (i.e. volunteering experiences) are ideal opportunities for escaping alienation: they require

no long-term obligations, volunteers will be welcomed into a team, and ‘saving the world’

through consumption is on the agenda (Igoe 2010).

The first piece of material that has been chosen is the official brochure, available on

African Impact’s web site, for volunteering in the ‘Hands-On Lion Rehabilitation Project’ at

Antelope Park, Zimbabwe. This brochure includes both text and images (see African Impact

2015). The second piece of material consists of a video, available both on ALERT’s web site

and on Youtube, which is a trailer for an in-production TV series called ‘Lodging with Lions’.

This video focuses on the volunteers and their experiences at Antelope Park (see Don Percival

2013). Although not explicitly directed at volunteers only, this research will assume that its

presence on ALERT’s web site, along with its focus on volunteer experiences and its intended

TV broadcast, indicates a purpose of attracting more volunteers.

The importance of the material stems from ‘360-degree’ marketing (described in chapter

3); through new technology, potential consumers are constantly exposed to marketing from all

different media sources. Similarly, the chosen material of this thesis exists on several web

sites on the internet and will potentially be broadcasted on TV. Furthermore, if the material

does indeed add to the accumulation of spectacular conservation marketing, it is part of a

repeated, consistent and alternative-less message which is highly influential on how to view

nature, conservation and wildlife (Igoe 2010).

4.4 Delimitations

Due to the scope of this thesis, I will only investigate one project which offers interactive

experiences with animals. This might cause concerns for the generalizability and

representativeness of the case for interactive experiences with animals in the name of

conservation. However, the aim of the thesis is not to provide a case study which is

representative for the phenomenon in general – instead, the aim is to investigate if this

particular case strengthens the claims of a ‘spectacle of nature’ and if it offers any potential

additions. If so, and thanks to the empirical foundation of the theoretical framework, this

thesis can be seen as yet another case of spectacular representations of conservation and

animals, rather than a single case claiming representativeness. Furthermore, this research is

22

methodologically inspired by Wilson’s (2011) investigation of Southern women in the

marketing campaigns of three different organizations. Unlike her, however, I have chosen

three types of marketing material promoting the same project, in order to dig deeper into both

the case and the different types of data.

In addition, this thesis treats volunteer tourism as an example of ecotourism and as part of

the chosen case, since it fits well with the theoretical framework. It is therefore not discussed

in detail, but for further discussion, see Vrasti (2013). Moreover, the case of ALERT and

Antelope Park is treated as part of a global industry of commodified wildlife, with similar

operations across the globe (see for example Bulbeck 2005), and emphasis has therefore not

been put on situating the organization in Zimbabwe.

23

5 Analysis

This chapter will provide an analysis of the findings, both expected and unexpected. It will

start by analyzing the marketing of interactive experiences and how this fits into the

‘spectacle of nature’. Secondly, the portrayals of animals will be investigated in order to find

out if the proposed ‘spectacular animal representations’ are indeed present. Last but not least,

some unexpected findings will be discussed. Throughout the analysis, potential paradoxes

will be scrutinized – it is, after all, the ultimate purpose of Igoe’s framework to uncover “the

environmental contradictions of global neoliberalism” (2010:375).

5.1 Marketing of Interactive Experiences

Although claiming to attract volunteers from all over the world, the chosen material is, as

expected, quite certainly directed at young, Western consumers. This argument is based on

the fact that in both the images and the video, there is no sight of any volunteer that does not

fit into that description. These volunteers are implored to “leave [their] imprint on Africa

playing a vital part in conserving the African Lion” through their participation in the project,

but also to “make friends for life”, “experience local Zimbabwean culture, and visit the local

orphanage weekly”, as well as “see more of Zimbabwe’s natural wonders and wildlife areas”

– there is even reference to “Zimbabwe’s spectacular sights” (African Impact 2015, emphasis

added). These quotes are prime examples of many arguments laid out in the theoretical

framework. The seductive allure is not just in making a difference and saving the world, but

in the promise of a community, in self-expression and living the dream, as well as in

experiencing romanticized landscapes, local cultures and people. This is further highlighted in

the text by the following quote: ”It’s not just about the hands-on help and skills that

volunteers bring; it’s also about what this amazing continent, its people and its wildlife can

give those volunteers in return” (African Impact 2015).

24

Image 2. (Top) From brochure, volunteers having fun (African Impact 2015). Image 3. (Bottom left) From

brochure, happy lion and volunteer (African Impact 2015). Image 4. (Bottom right) From video at 8:02,

volunteers and lions walking together (Don Percival 2013).

The same seduction is featured in the images and the video. Five out of 11 images in the

brochure show volunteers having fun, walking with lions or working hard together as a

community (see image 2). A substantial percentage of the video shows the same. However,

the community does not come merely in the shape of human relations, but also in their

connections with the lions. Four out of 11 images show how happy the lions and volunteers

are together (see image 3). In the video, the method of filming the volunteers and lions

together from the perspective of another, imagined lion is often employed (see image 4). This

video perspective is not covered by the theoretical framework, but provides a potential

addition to it. It seems to illustrate how the lions see the volunteers as part of the pride, and

that they gladly follow wherever the volunteers go. Which potential volunteer, passionate

about the environment and lions in particular, would not want to be part of a lion pride?

The landscape is also shown in a way which enforces the claims made in the text.

Countless sunsets, countless aerial zoom-outs of wildlife and other ‘spectacular’ sights are

present in both the images and the video (see image 2 and 5). The wilderness facade is

continuously highlighted, and the narrator of the video even states that the project is “based in

a beautiful wilderness area in the heartland of Zimbabwe” (Don Percival 2013). In none of the

25

brochure images do we see any hint of human settlement, and in the video there are just a few

glimpses of such – a rather misleading feature, considering that the ‘wilderness’ area is a

private ranch, housing captive lions partaking in a man-made and man-led project.

All these seductions of landscapes, people and animals are further emphasized in the

video by the music, which seems to play on the emotions that the video attempts to inspire. In

scenes where the volunteers are having fun there is happy background music, in exciting

scenes there is thrilling music, and in spectacular scenes there is dramatic music. However, it

is always traditionally African, as to highlight that the volunteers will experience ‘a different

world’. Music is therefore another possible addition to the theoretical framework.

Image 5. (Top left) From video at 0:34, aerial perspective of giraffes (Don Percival 2013). Image 6. (Top right)

From video at 7:55, a lion enjoying some human touch (Don Percival 2013). Image 7. (Bottom) From brochure,

a lion keeps hard-working volunteers company (African Impact 2015).

Yet another seduction is the chance to make a difference, and in order to make this aspect

believable, there are numerous mentions of the hard work and tasks that will have to be

undertaken in the text. Nonetheless, the project is short term (between two and eight weeks)

and opportunities for relaxation, luxury, experiences and fun are always mentioned adjacent

to the duties. There is, for example, a stunning swimming pool, gourmet chefs, daily cleaning

of the rooms, and last but not least, “accommodation upgrades are available to those who

26

wish to have a more ‘exclusive’ volunteer experience” (African Impact 2015). Furthermore,

in most of the images and the video scenes showing hard work, the volunteers seem to have

an incredibly fun and exciting time. The beneficial effects of this hard work on the lions are

illustrated in the video by numerous zoom-ins on their seemingly happy faces (see image 6),

as theorized by Igoe (2010). Moreover, in one image a content and relaxed lion cub is shown

keeping the volunteers company while they perform their duties, as if to symbolize how

grateful the lions are for the great efforts achieved by the volunteers and the project (see

image 7).

The emphasis on the benefits and luxuries the project can bring the volunteers, while they

work to save the world, is a clear indication of a strong driving force behind participation in

such projects; escaping alienation. However, in spite of this emphasis, the main goal is

continuously argued to lie in saving the African lion. In this as well, many claims and

arguments have been foreseen by the theoretical framework. For example, although lions are

not yet endangered (IUCN 2014), they are framed as exactly that: “Over the past 40 years, the

African lion population has decreased by an astonishing 80-90% […] with up to 18 sub-

populations believed to have existed in 2002 having now been confirmed as extinct” (African

Impact 2015). In a single sentence, the problem at hand is portrayed as both terrifying and

urgent, while completely leaving out the causes. Not once in the text, images or video is any

blame directed towards Western consumers for the everyday practices which continuously

result in rapid biodiversity loss – a strategy most likely employed in order to sell Western

consumption of interactive experiences and participation in the project as the solution rather

than the problem.

Granted, the solution is not framed so bluntly, but as a “ground-breaking Lion

Rehabilitation Program” which “aims to release the cubs of captive bred lions into appropriate

national parks and reserves across Africa where they can one day have their own wild-born

offspring” (African Impact 2015). In order to do so, the cubs are removed from their mothers

at 3 weeks old so that volunteers and staff can become dominant members of the pride and

teach them their natural behavior. These teachings take place while walking with the cubs in

the bush, rendering the interactive experiences far from commodities, and instead as utterly

necessary and beneficial to the lions. The mothers are argued not suitable for this job due to

their captivity and lack of knowledge in natural lion behavior, but these logics seem

somewhat off – surely, captive lionesses possess more natural lion behavior than humans do?

Furthermore, the simplicity of the final solution is both theoretically anticipated and naïve –

however many lions they manage to introduce, the effects will be short-lived as long as the

27

root causes are not being addressed. Additionally, such reintroductions face extreme

biological, technical, financial, sociological and moral challenges which severely limit the

potential of the strategy (Hunter et al. 2012).

In spite of the fact that no lion has yet been reintroduced by ALERT into the wild, the

project is continuously argued to be a success. The interactive experiences are portrayed as

extremely effective at fostering natural behavior in the cubs, and several scenes in the video

show the successful outcomes of their hunt for prey. Furthermore, it is repeatedly mentioned

in the brochure that “the release program has so far successfully released two prides into

fenced-wild areas, and these prides are having wild-born cubs of their own” (African Impact

2015). In the video, which was published in 2013, a Volunteer Manager argues that

agreements for a stage 3 release site have been reached, and that “things are moving on very

fast” (Don Percival 2013). However, as we know, things certainly have not moved on very

fast, and stage 3 has not yet been reached. As expected, none of the marketing material

mentions any of the challenges the project faces. Instead, the spread of the project is portrayed

as a success story in sentences such as “the rehabilitation program has expanded across two

more locations, and we now have a total of three lion conservation projects working hard to

raise captive-bred lion cubs to be released into the wild” (African Impact 2015). This quote

frames these developments as recent and as good signs for the future, while failing to

acknowledge that since these two additions were founded2, the project is no closer to

achieving its goals.

The initiative congratulates itself with yet another success; it provides countless social

benefits to surrounding communities. Although this is nothing that is explained in any detail,

ALERT is argued to, for instance, work “with communities to meet the challenges of living

alongside a dangerous predator” (African Impact 2015). Hence, the local populations are both

beneficiaries and partners of the project, but what about the third portrayal suggested by the

theoretical framework? Although it is never spelled out, there are discrete hints of local

populations as ‘the bad guys’. These hints come in the shape of suggestions of what a typical

day as a volunteer might entail: regular snare sweeps and boundary patrols. Therefore, the

only possible cause behind rapid lion decline that can be identified in the material is that of

poaching – a highly flawed and oversimplified view (Duffy 2010).

2 There is no information on any of the websites on when Lion Encounter Zambia / Zimbabwe were founded, but

when I was a volunteer at Lion Encounter Zimbabwe in March 2011 they had already existed for some years.

28

Not until all the benefits for volunteers, lions and local communities have been outlined

and repeated, the brochure reveals its true purpose: funding. Charging more than USD 4,100

for four weeks (excluding flights), it is explained that, in addition to financing the volunteers’

housing and meals, this fee “goes directly back into the project” (African Impact 2015).

Indeed, the experiences offered are commodities, although African Impact, ALERT and

Antelope Park are unlikely to ever admit that.

5.2 Representation of Animals

As mentioned in the previous section, the marketing of the interactive experiences portrays

the lions as endangered, as happy and as benefiting from the project, while hiding the aspects

of commodification and captivity. This section aims to investigate these representations in

more detail.

Image 8. (Top left) From video at 1:36, lions as wild companions (Don Percival 2013). Image 9. (Top right)

From video at 2:49, a ‘free’ lion in the ‘wilderness’ (Don Percival 2013). Image 10. (Bottom) From brochure, a

beautiful and majestic lion (African Impact 2015).

The two by far most commonly occurring features in the representation of the lions are as

companions and as wild. These two features, although rather paradoxical, are commonly

29

intertwined, both textually and visually – a perfect example of Duffy’s (2014) argument of

how inconsistencies between wilderness and interactive experiences are avoided. Instead of

describing and showing captive, trained animals part of a man-made project, the brochure

describes how the cubs bond to the humans, who in turn teach them their natural behavior,

while the video and the images show ‘free’, ‘happy’ and ‘wild’ lions and volunteers together

as a pride (see image 8). This is further emphasized in two main ways. Firstly, the lions are in

the video commonly shown walking freely in vast wildernesses with no volunteers around,

exhibiting ‘typical’ lion behavior – fighting each other, playing with snakes, stalking wildlife,

or just relaxing together (see image 9). Once again, filming from the perspective of the lion is

commonly employed, as if to suggest that this is what the lions see and experience: only vast,

natural wilderness. Secondly, newly arrived volunteers are in several scenes warned about

what not do to in the presence of the lions, in order to avoid triggering their natural hunting

instincts. When the lions actually do approach volunteers and staff, however, it is always in a

highly loving manner, and as previously mentioned, several shots and images show them as

very happy and cuddly companions. Furthermore, occasional sentences such as “every day is

different as animals rarely operate to our schedule” (African Impact 2015) – as if it is the

lions and not the humans that ‘run the show’ – only contribute to this representation of lions

as wild companions.

Representing the lions as both wild and companions seems to serve one main purpose – it

portrays the ‘wild’ lions as far from forced labor, and rather as having voluntarily chosen the

staff and volunteers as members of their pride. This, in turn, appears to serve as a justification

for the commercial use of lions, which might otherwise have been perceived as significantly

less ethical by potential volunteers. Furthermore, if the lions are wild and live a natural life,

there is less need to explain how they or their mothers became captive in the first place, or

why they were bred in order to lead captive lives. Accordingly, these causes are not

mentioned a single time, rendering the theorized fetishization of animals strengthened.

Further romanticization of the lions comes, as expected, in the shape of highlighting their

beauty, cuteness, rarity, charisma, power and majesty (see image 10). The beauty is shown in

images and in the video with close-ups of serene lion faces, often with a beautiful background

such as a sunset or a vast wilderness. Cuteness comes in the shape of week-old lion cubs,

struggling to keep up with their human surrogate mothers on a walk or climbing over their

legs in order to investigate the camera. The rarity, as already described, is highlighted by

framing the lions as endangered although they are not (yet). Charisma comes in the shape of

playful and curious lions, and power comes in the shape of successful hunts. Last but not

30

least, their majesty, probably the most commonly expressed lion attribute, is emphasized

through countless of images and shots of lions lying, sitting or standing on some sort of

natural platform, gazing out across ‘their’ territory.

The result is the unmistakable representation of the lions as an icon for Africa and as

more important than other species, all in order to enable the marketing of the interactive

experiences of attracting as many eco-volunteers as possible. As argued by a volunteer in the

video, “everybody wants to see lions when they come to Africa; if you don’t have lions,

people aren’t gonna come. [If] you have lions, people are gonna pay to come” (Don Percival

2013).

5.3 Unexpected Findings

Needless to say, the chosen case fits very well with the theoretical framework. However, there

are some minor inconsistencies and unexpected findings, which will be addressed here.

Although the training of the lions was expected to not be present in the material, it is, in

fact, mentioned once in the brochure. However, the sentence, which reads “[we] train the cubs

only to the point that they are safe for us to walk with” (African Impact 2015, emphasis

added), does its best to highlight how untrained they still are, while also guaranteeing the

safety of potential volunteers. Furthermore, the other materials show nothing of the sort, and

as mentioned in the previous section, the video focuses instead on how the volunteers are

trained for the lion encounters. This conveys the message that, since the lions are wild, it is

the humans that have to adapt to them.

Another unexpected finding is the fact that, in many scenes and images, the volunteers

are seen holding a large stick in their hand (see image 3 and 11). This stick has, by a former

employee at a similar project in South Africa, been argued to be a tool of domination (CBS

2014) and therefore does not fit well with the portrayals of lions being wild and voluntary

participants. However, it can be assumed that most potential volunteers neither notice nor

understand the presence of the stick, and the inconsistency is further avoided in the video by

describing the stick as a distraction tool in case the ‘wild’ lion cubs would let their natural

instincts take over.

Regarding bottle-feeding of the youngest cubs, the brochure claims that, since “much of

the issues people have regarding the ethics of breeding lions in captivity come from the

images they see of people […] bottle feeding them in their arms”, this is not permitted

31

(African Impact 2015). However, in the video, there is a rather lengthy scene of a volunteer

doing just that with three lion cubs (see image 12). Furthermore, in spite of the persistent

attempts to market the experiences as all but man-made, occasional contradictions appear. For

instance, ALERT aims to “preserve the African Lion by producing quality, disease-free gene

pools” (African Impact 2015), but rather obviously, human breeding does not happen in wild

and natural settings. These inconsistencies I offer no explanation for, other than that all

activities based on large-scale paradoxes, such as ecotourism and neoliberal conservation, are

bound to exhibit paradoxes of smaller scale as well.

Image 11. (Top) From brochure, volunteers with sticks (African Impact 2015). Image 12. (Bottom) From video

at 3:52, volunteer bottle-feeding lion cubs (Don Percival 2013).

32

6 Conclusion

This thesis investigated the growing industry of commodified interactive experiences with

animals as an instance of ecotourism and neoliberal conservation. It did so by firstly

introducing the problematics of interactive experiences posing as beneficial to both

development and conservation, and devising two research questions: how are interactive

experiences marketed and how are animals represented in this marketing material? Thereafter,

an account of previous research on the topics of ecotourism as well as portrayals of nature and

animals was provided, in order to contextualize this thesis before moving on to a presentation

of the chosen case. ALERT and Antelope Park were chosen due to their self-proclaimed

groundbreaking lion reintroduction program, funded through offering human-lion interactions

to volunteers and tourists, which after over 15 year has not resulted in the reintroduction of a

single lion. In order to answer the research questions, a theoretical framework – the ‘spectacle

of nature’ complemented with more specific arguments regarding interactive experiences and

animal representation – was explained, followed by a description of the methodology and

materials. Lastly, a qualitative content analysis of both textual and visual materials was

conducted and the results were discussed.

I found that, in spite of a few inconsistencies, the interactive experiences indeed are

marketed consistently with the spectacle of nature, since all necessary characteristics were

featured in the material. Hence, the interactive experiences are portrayed to potential

volunteers as an escape from alienation, by romanticizing the conservational value of the

project as well as the landscapes and lions. The aspects of commodification and production

are effectively hidden, and the lions are represented as icons for a terrible problem as well as

its solution. Further, in order to justify the unethical aspects of forced animal labor, the

animals are regularly portrayed as wild and happy companions, whom do and live as they

please and have chosen the staff as well as the volunteers as members of their pride.

As such, the different types of material investigated are not only mutually reinforcing, but

part of a larger and repeated message of spectacular nature, which leaves no alternative

solutions. Furthermore, and rather paradoxically, in order to overcome their own alienation,

33

the consumers of these interactive experiences support the alienation of animals, which have

no control over the conditions that shape their lives.

This research has provided the ‘spectacle of nature’ with the challenge of a particular

kind of conservation project that it has previously not dealt with, i.e. interactive experiences

with animals, and proven it highly valuable. New aspects of spectacular marketing of

interactive experiences have been suggested, such as portraying the animals as ‘wild

companions’, featuring spectacular, traditional music in videos as well as filming from the

perspective of the animals. Nonetheless, as this research only provides one such case, more

research is needed in order to further theorize spectacular marketing of interactive experiences

as well as spectacular animal representations. Furthermore, having established that the

activities are portrayed as something they are not, the empirics must also be investigated –

where do all the captive animals come from and where do they end up, and what are the

implications of interactive experiences on animal welfare? Moreover, how does the alliance

between development, tourism and conservation in the name of neoliberalism affect more

traditional conservation organizations and their modus operandi? Lastly, as part of a larger

industry using wildlife as commodities, the recently suggested links between captive wildlife

breeding, ‘canned hunt’ operations and the black market for endangered animals (CBS 2014;

Lindsey et al. 2012) must be taken seriously.

34

7 Bibliography

Adams, W. M. (2004) Against extinction: The story of conservation. London: Earthscan.

African Impact (2015) Hands On Lion Rehabilitation Project: Antelope Park, Zimbabwe

[online] Available at:

http://www.africanimpact.com/system/projects/files/000/000/104/original/Antelope_Park_Ha

nds_On_Lion_Rehabilitation_Project_Brochure.pdf (last accessed 2015, May 28)

ALERT (2015a) African Lion Rehabilitation & Release into the Wild Program [online]

Available at: http://lionalert.org/alert/project-detail/african-lion-rehabilitation--release-into-

the-wild-program (last accessed 2015, May 28)

ALERT (2015b) Annual Report 2014 [online] Available at: http://lionalert.org/page/our-

annual-reports (last accessed 2015, May 15)

ALERT (2015c) Release Program: Frequently Asked Questions [online] Available at:

http://lionalert.org/page/RPFAQ (last accessed 2015, May 25)

ALERT (2015d) Release Program: Stage One [online] Available at:

http://lionalert.org/page/RPStageOne (last accessed 2015, May 8)

ALERT (2015e) Release Program: Stage Two [online] Available at:

http://lionalert.org/page/RPStageTwo (last accessed 2015, May 8)

ALERT (2015f) Release Program: Stage Three [online] Available at:

http://lionalert.org/page/RPStageThree (last accessed 2015, May 8)

ALERT (2015g) Release Program: Stage Four [online] Available at:

http://lionalert.org/page/RPStageFour (last accessed 2015, May 8)

ALERT (2015h) Release Program: Lions in the Program [online] Available at:

http://lionalert.org/page/RPlionsintheprogram (last accessed 2015, May 28)

Antelope Park (2015) Our Pride, Our Passion [online] Available at:

http://www.antelopepark.co.zw/index.php/about-us/ourprideourpassion (last accessed 2015,

May 28)

Barrett, G. (2013) Markets of exceptionalism: Peace parks in Southern Africa. Journal of

Contemporary African Studies, 31(3), 457-480.

Bernstein, S. (2002) Liberal environmentalism and global environmental governance. Global

Environmental Politics, 2(3), 1-16.

35

Brockington, D., Duffy, R. & Igoe, J. (2008) Nature unbound: Conservation, capitalism and

the future of protected areas. London: Earthscan.

Brooks, S., Spierenburg, M., Van Brakel, L., Kolk, A. & Lukhozi, K. B. (2011) Creating A

Commodified Wilderness: Tourism, Private Game Farming, And ‘Third Nature’ Landscapes

In Kwazulu‐Natal. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 102(3), 260-274.

Bulbeck, C. (2005) Facing the wild: Ecotourism, conservation and animal encounters.

London: Earthscan.

Butt, B. (2012) Commoditizing the safari and making space for conflict: Place, identity and

parks in East Africa. Political Geography, 31(2), 104-113.

CBS (2014) 60 Minutes: The Lion Whisperer [online] Available at:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-lion-whisperer/ (last accessed 2015, May 26)

Cohen, E. (2009) The wild and the humanized: Animals in Thai tourism. Anatolia, 20(1),

100-118.

Cronon, W. (1995) The trouble with wilderness: Or, getting back to the wrong nature. In

Cronon, W. (ed.) Uncommon ground: Toward reinventing nature. New York: W.W. Norton.

Curtin, S. & Kragh, G. (2014) Wildlife tourism: Reconnecting people with nature. Human

Dimensions of Wildlife, 19(6), 545-554.

Don Percival [DON PERCIVAL] (2013, August 5) Lodging With Lions Series Taster 15

mins [video file] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ES4aI6aqVQ8 and

http://lionalert.org/page/ALERTonTV/cat-id/3 (last accessed 2015, May 28)

Duffy, R. (2010) Nature crime: How we're getting conservation wrong. New Haven and

London: Yale University Press.

Duffy, R. (2014) Interactive elephants: Nature, tourism and neoliberalism. Annals of Tourism

Research, 44, 88-101.

van der Duim, R., Ampumuza, C. & Ahebwa, W. M. (2014) Gorilla Tourism in Bwindi

Impenetrable National Park, Uganda: An Actor-Network Perspective. Society & Natural

Resources, 27(6), 588-601.

Fennell, D. A. (2014). Exploring the boundaries of a new moral order for tourism's global

code of ethics: An opinion piece on the position of animals in the tourism industry. Journal of

Sustainable Tourism, 22(7), 983-996.

Fuentes, C. (2014) Green Materialities: Marketing and the Socio‐material Construction of

Green Products. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(2), 105-116.

Halperin, S. & Heath, O. (2012) Political Research: Methods and Practical Skills. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

36

Holmes, G. (2011) Conservation's friends in high places: Neoliberalism, networks, and the

transnational conservation elite. Global Environmental Politics, 11(4), 1-21.

Hunter, L. T. B., White, P., Henschel, P., Frank, L., Burton, C., Loveridge, A., Balme, G.,

Breitenmoser, C. & Breitenmoser, U. (2012) Walking with lions: Why there is no role for

captive-origin lions Panthera leo in species restoration. Oryx, 47(1), 19-24.

Igoe, J. (2010) The spectacle of nature in the global economy of appearances:

Anthropological engagements with the spectacular mediations of transnational conservation.

Critique of Anthropology, 30(4), 375-397.

Igoe, J., Neves, K. & Brockington, D. (2010) A spectacular eco‐tour around the historic bloc:

Theorising the convergence of biodiversity conservation and capitalist expansion. Antipode,

42(3), 486-512.

IUCN (2014) The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species [online] Available at:

http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/15951/0 (last accessed 2015, May 25)

Krippendorff, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 2nd

Edition.

Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Laudati, A. (2010) Ecotourism: the modern predator? Implications of gorilla tourism on local

livelihoods in Bwindi Impenetrable National Park, Uganda. Environment and Planning D:

Society and Space, 28(4), 726-743.

Lindsey, P., Alexander, R., Balme, G., Midlane, N., & Craig, J. (2012) Possible relationships

between the South African captive-bred lion hunting industry and the hunting and

conservation of lions elsewhere in Africa. South African Journal of Wildlife Research, 42(1),

11-22.

Lion Encounter (2012) Frequently Asked Questions [online] Available at:

http://www.lionencounter.com/about-us/faqs (last accessed 2015, May 18)

Malamud, R. (2012) An Introduction to Animals and Visual Culture. Houndmills: Palgrave

Macmillan.

Mayring, P. (2000) Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2)

Mbaiwa, J. E. (2008) The Realities of Ecotourism Development in Botswana. In Spencely, A.

(ed.) Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for Conservation and Development. London:

Earthscan.

Monani, S. (2012) Wilderness Discourse in Adventure–Nature Films: The Potentials and

Limitations of Being Caribou. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 19(1),

101-122.

Pawliczek, M. & Mehta, H. (2008) Ecotourism in Madagascar: How a sleeping beauty is

finally awakening. In Spencely, A. (ed.) Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for

Conservation and Development. London: Earthscan.

37

Pierson, D. P. (2005) “Hey, They're Just Like Us!” Representations of the Animal World in

the Discovery Channel's Nature Programming. The Journal of Popular Culture, 38(4), 698-

712.

Rose, G. (2011) Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials.

London: Sage.

Russell, C. L. (1995) The social construction of orangutans: An ecotourist experience. Society

and Animals, 3(2), 151-170.

Southgate, C. R. J. (2006) Ecotourism in Kenya: The vulnerability of communities. Journal of

Ecotourism, 5(1-2), 80-96.

Spencely, A. (2008) Impacts of wildlife tourism on rural livelihoods in Southern Africa. In

Spencely, A. (ed.) Responsible Tourism: Critical Issues for Conservation and Development.

London: Earthscan.

Stibbe, A. (2005) Counter-discourses and the relationship between humans and other animals.

Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of the Interactions of People & Animals, 18(1), 3-17.

Vrasti, W. (2013) Volunteer tourism in the global south: Giving back in neoliberal times.

City: Routledge.

Wilson, K. (2011) ‘Race’, gender and neoliberalism: Changing visual representations in

development. Third World Quarterly, 32(2), 315-331.

38

8 Appendix 1