| Some of the major debates that have governed and/or influenced the post-independence policies and strategies of environmental and human settlement management in Africa are explored in detail in this research. Based on the experiences of Ghana and Ethiopia, it is argued that the uncritical adoption of global environmental and habitat management paradigms and policies emanating from institutions such as the World Bank, the United Nations System and International Union for the Conservation of Nature has defined and structured thought and action in the region. The paradigms and policies have revolved around the concepts of arresting population growth, strengthening the role of the state, promoting sustainable development and reducing poverty. It is further argued that the changes made in raising public awareness and establishing institutional frameworks, though important, have failed to arrest the downward spiral in both environmental and habitat management. The historical analysis is informed by contemporary debates on nature-society relations, political ecology, discourses on population, sustainable, development, environmental and habitat management at global, regional and national scales.;Based on extensive archival research, semi-structured focused interviews of professionals in the World Bank, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and specialized agencies of the United Nations system and personal field experiences, this research shows that both countries have followed essentially technocratic, centralized and modernist assumptions and responses of environmental and habitat management. The research suggests that the significant changes made in increasing public awareness and institution building at state and civil society levels in both Ethiopia and Ghana have been based on global development, environment and habitat agency constructions of the driving forces behind environmental and habitat deterioration. The responses have been generally biased in favor of increasing the role of the state; science and technology and experts. Based on these findings, the study calls for the adoption of new principles of environmental and human settlement management at both geographical (regional, national, local) and functional (ministerial, departmental, unit) levels. The study of global development agencies suggests that the principles of multiple engagement, democratic governance, decentralization and public education may offer more effective solutions to sustainable environmental and habitat management. |
