ZZambia is an area with a rich pre-colo-

nial history related to long distance trade,

the development and disappearance of king-

doms, and innovations in land management

and artistic technologies.

While Portuguese, Arab

and Swahili traders had

operated in the area for

hundreds of years, trading

in slaves and wildlife

products, Christian mis-

sionaries began arriving

on a permanent basis in

the 1870s, and the pre-

cursor to British colonial

administration arrived

only in the last decade of

the 19thcentury. The

British South Africa

Company (BSAC), a

British chartered company, ruled what

became Northern Rhodesia until 1924, when

British colonial rule was instated.

Separation and differentiation were an inte-

gral part of British colonial rule. Therefore,

British colonialists looked at Africans as a

reversal of their own “Europeanness,” and

ultimately everything that was not

European,^1 and often everything that was

not human.^2 Europeans located their own

past in Africa’s present. Achebe^3 believes

that Europeans have a “need” to “set Africa

up as a foil to Europe” so that they can

“cast a backward glance periodically at

Africa trapped in primordial barbarity” and

“say with faith and feeling: there go I but

for the grace of God.” Because of these

feared connections, differences needed to

be constantly maintained and defined, lead-

ing to the continual “crafting” of a “gram-

mar of difference” to prove European claims

of superiority^4 and justify a wide range of

mistreatment, from slav-

ery to colonialism to

expulsion from protected

areas.

This grammar of differ-

ence underlies certain

ideas that have long

informed European-

African relations – a

paternalistic belief that

Africans could not make

rational decisions on their own behalf and a

deep-seated belief that Africans were some-

how rooted in nature. Both of these ideas

continue to inform how CBNRM is practiced

in Zambia today.^5 British colonialists saw

themselves as responsible for bringing civili-

History, cculture aand cconservation

This ggrammar oof ddif-
ference uunderlies ccer-
tain iideas tthat hhave
long iinformed
European-AAfrican
relations –– aa ppaternal-
istic bbelief tthat
Africans ccould nnot
make rrational ddeci-
sions oon ttheir oown
behalf aand aa ddeep-
seated bbelief tthat
Africans wwere ssome-
how rrooted iin nnature.

If AAfricans, bbecause oof

their cclose cconnections

to nnature, ccould nnot

make rrational ddeci-

sions aabout rresource

management aand uuse,

the ccolonial aauthorities

would hhave tto mmake

these ddecisions oon ttheir

behalf

Abstract: This paper contends that there is continuity between those ideas that underpin both the impo-

sition of exclusionary conservation during colonial times in Northern Rhodesia and the creation of commu-

nity-based natural resource management programs in independent Zambia. These ideas are based upon a

“grammar of difference” that distinguished between Africans and Europeans in colonial times, but today

distinguishes among rural Africans and African state authorities, NGOs and non-African donors. Marks of

distinction in both cases involve the assumption that rural Africans are closely connected to nature and,

as such, unable to make rational decisions on their own behalf. This justifies continued external decision-

making on their behalf and a failure to devolve real authority to rural Zambians.

Ideas, hhistory aand ccontinuity iin tthe ppractice oof ppower—

the ccase oof wwildlife mmanagement iin ZZambia

Ilyssa MManspeizer