Our analysis of the focus group results has yielded three main findings. First, the spatial distribution of community wardens inside and outside the national park is unequal and deemed unfair. Second, the establishment of the national park is generally perceived to have improved the environment and people’s lives both inside and outside the park, although elderly report that the environment has not yet recovered to the quality it was in the 1960s and ’70s and women indicate that more needs to be done to improve women’s welfare. Third, some concerns still remain regarding the appropriate management of solid waste and mitigation of human-wildlife conflict in the park. The latter concerns, raised by focus groups, are further supported by discussions with researchers from the Northwest Plateau Institute of Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences; and they are sometimes amplified in media reports, which tend to sensationalize such problems, overstating their degree and/or their extent).
4.1 Comparative analysis
Focus group transcripts were analyzed by the authors and major points of comparison drawn out. Table 2 shows the main results of the comparative analysis. The first comparisons are according to river basin, between the Yellow River Headwaters Park and Lancang River Headwaters Park (2.a); the second by gender (2.b); the third by location, inside versus outside the National Park (2.c); and the fourth by main stakeholder category, government versus resident (2.d). We did not detect major differences between the views according to age (i.e., older versus younger people).
Table 3. Focus Group result comparisons in the Sanjiangyuan area.
2.a Comparison between river basins
|
Similarities
|
Differences
|
Human-wildlife conflicts are serious, but local residents have little awareness about insurance schemes and the government has not publicized compensation opportunities.
|
Lancang River headwaters Park residents feel that residents in the first-level functional area should receive more compensation and enhanced provision of services, compared to residents outside national park boundaries.
|
Disposal of solid waste is a common problem.
|
Boundary conflicts are considered to be an important hidden danger of environmental protection in the Lancang River headwaters Park area, both inside and outside of its limits.
|
There are few opportunities for education.
|
Harvesting of Cordyceps is damaging the land both inside and outside the Lancang River headwaters Park.
|
Women require better health care services.
|
Yellow River headwaters Park residents believe that people in the middle and lower reaches of the river and future generations benefit most from the park; Lancang River headwaters Park residents believe that local residents within the national park benefit the most.
|
Tourism should be developed as an income source for local residents.
|
|
The establishment of the national park has had positive effects on the environment as well as on the lives of local residents.
|
Yellow River headwaters Park residents believe that local self-employed businesses, hotels, and tourism are most negatively affected by the park; residents in Lancang River headwaters Park believe that people outside of the park are most negatively affected.
|
The work of the Women's Federation is much better than before.
|
Residents in the Lancang River basin advocate restoring the pasture lands (grasslands) and controlling plateau pika[5].
|
Young people need more job opportunities and everyone needs more training in financial management.
|
|
There is no gender preference in selection of community wardens in the “One household, one post” system.
|
|
Residents living outside the park should also be assigned as community wardens with one position per household.
|
|
Environmental quality is reported as having significantly improved over 10 years[6].
|
|
The salary of 1,800 yuan / month for each community ranger is insufficient.
|
|
Table 2.b Comparisons between women and men
|
Similarities
|
Differences
|
More information is needed about women’s health.
More comprehensive medical facilities are needed, especially related to women’s health and mother and child health.
|
Men feel that female community wardens are more attentive, confident and diligent. In the past, women were not allowed to speak loudly in public, but they are now able to.
|
Young people need more job opportunities.
|
Women cannot get business loans, but men can, and women want to be treated fairly in this regard.
|
There is a lack of knowledge about financial management. (This issue also raised by both government officials and residents.)
|
|
Table 2.c Comparisons between inside/outside the National Park
|
Similarities
|
Differences
|
Tourism activities have been negatively affected by National Park rules and should be further developed (This issue was raised by both government officials and residents.)
|
Residents outside the national park feel unfairly treated as they are not allocated a community warden. Most environmental projects are first implemented inside the national park.
|
Young people need more job opportunities. (This issue was also raised by both government and resident focus groups.)
|
Tourism is prohibited in the national park due to focus on strict ecological protection, whereas there are few restrictions outside the national park.
|
Each family outside the park should also benefit from the one household, one post policy, with a salary of 1400-1800 yuan / month.
|
|
Table 2.d Comparisons between Government’s and residents’ awareness
|
Similarities
|
Differences
|
Both groups recognize the tourism industry has been affected, and both consider that appropriate tourism should be developed.
|
Residents are unaware of the possibility of compensation for damages (losses) arising from human-wildlife conflict.
|
Source: authors
4.2 Implementation of the community warden program
Almost all residents believe that the establishment of national parks has had a large positive impact on the environment and residents’ lives. The establishment of the "one household, one post" ecological management system has transformed (or in some ways, re-established) residents from simple users to guardians of the grassland. It appears that local residents feel well qualified for this job, and also feel a sense of accomplishment. Significantly, living standards have reportedly improved, as also has environmental quality within the national park.
The main selection criteria to participate as a community warden is to be between 18 and 55 years of age and capable of physical labour. Each family nominates the family member who will occupy the community warden position, with no gender discrimination noted. However, residents outside the national park do not benefit from this system to the same extent. First, the "one household, one post" has not been extended to all households outside but only those living in close vicinity of the park. Second, there are fewer environmental projects such as wildlife monitoring, grassland restoration and plateau pika control outside of the national park[7]. Although the local government has taken some measures to reduce the gap between people living inside and outside of the park boundary, such as skills training, more could be done for people living on the outside. Yet, due to stricter ecological protection and also the presence of wildlife in the national park, residents in that area do incur some additional costs (e.g., inability to benefit from tourism, weaker infrastructure, more human-wildlife conflict), which is deemed by authorities to justify the differential. Broadly speaking, though, local residents recommend that those living outside of the park should also benefit from the “one household, one post” policy, but with possibility for this to be at a reduced monthly salary of 1,400-1,800 CNY (219.27-281.92 USD) per month.
4.3 Environment
Elderly residents born in more challenging times said their lives have seen tremendous changes and they perceive national park policies as a form of social assistance – relative to their prior socio-economic deprivations, which current policies are now addressing at least in part. On the other hand, they report that current environmental quality is not as good as what they experienced when were young. Few if any plastic bags or plastic bottles were present in the 1960s to ‘80s, and there were no notable problems with small burrowing mammals. Between 20 and 30,000 mu (1,333-2,000 ha) of grassland provided enough pasture for 1,500-1,600 Tibetan sheep, but now the same area can only support 500-600 sheep. In the past, Tibetan herders used oil lamps for lighting and there were no batteries or coal for heating, thus there was little pollution of the environment. Many respondents thus felt that environmental quality in more recent times, from ~2000 to 2016, was not very good. However, from 2016 to the present (i.e., since the establishment of the national park pilot), environmental quality is reported to have greatly improved, though it is still not as good as in the more distant past. Young residents also reported that environmental quality improved significantly over the ten years period[8].
With all such statements, however, while there may be correlation, we must not immediately imply causality when/where none can be directly/properly attributed. For example, a major snowstorm in 1985 that caused great losses to livestock and wildlife and a period of aridification with rapid extension of sand dunes and losses of streams and lakes in the 1980s and ‘90s and even into the early 2000s could also be behind other observations; and more recent noted changes may simply be ‘recovery’ from these abnormal situations (which are not themselves representative of longer-term baselines or averages)[9].
Affected by increasing human economic activities as well as global climate change, the conflicts between people and nature in the Sanjiangyuan area have gradually increased. The most serious grassland degradation in the Sanjiangyuan area basically took shape around the mid 1970s, and generally continued until the mid 1990s. No sharp increase in grassland degradation occurred since then until the present (Liu et al., 2008).
4.4 Women
The selection of community wardens has not been discriminatory according to gender, and thus has upheld the principle of gender equality. Male residents generally acknowledge that female community wardens are more attentive and diligent than their male counterparts and that they have made vital contributions to environmental protection. The establishment of national parks has undoubtedly strengthened women’s confidence. Most recently, the Women’s Federation organized female wardens and female members during the Covid-19 pandemic to make donations and hold lectures on the prevention of transmission of the virus and organized them to visit impoverished student families and conduct community clean-up campaigns. At present 6-7 lectures are held each year, and the women’s groups hope to increase the number of lectures on women’s health. It was also noted that women desired better health facilities, e.g. for gynaecological health care. In addition, women cannot easily obtain commercial loans, while men can; women participants in the FGs expressed their wish to be treated fairly in this regard.
4.5 Ecotourism
Almost all residents think it is important to develop ecotourism activities. For example, residents of Huanghe and Huashixia towns in the headwaters of the Yellow River are collectively calling for the development of ‘tourist villages’ to contribute to improving their livelihoods. Yet tourism has been banned since May 2017 in national parks. The establishment of national parks has thus had a serious impact on the local industry, such as locally owned, operated and staffed hotels and restaurants. Residents believe, however, that a viable model could be developed to meets both environmental and development goals, by limiting the number of tourists and offering more exclusive high-end ecotourism experiences.
4.6 Local ecological knowledge
Residents near the Yellow River headwaters National Park discussed approaches for better restoring pastures. They proposed that Tibetan sheep should be used instead of yaks on degraded pastures, as Tibetan sheep fertilize the soil through their manure and the particular trampling action of their hooves (a behaviour that yak do not exhibit; Long et al., 2008)[10].
In the Lancang River headwaters National Park, local residents expressed concern regarding the use of poisons to eliminate the plateau pika; which have successfully eliminated some populations of the targeted species, but in addition also have led to loss of many other wildlief species including their natural predators – and thus, the use of poisons has caused serious long-term damage to the pasture. Residents instead argued in favour of natural methods, such as erecting scaffolds to attract more raptors (birds of prey) to grassland areas, allowing them to increase in number and control the pika through their hunting behavior.
Additionally, local residents proposed that ice-breaking operations be implemented in relevant parts of the national park. They reported that grassland fires occur every year because of the freezing of lakes in winter, leading to formation of natural convex mirrors that concentrate sunlight, causing grassland fires. The herders themselves already carry out ice-breaking operations each year to avoid such fires, but they highlight that further support in this would be helpful to them.
4.7 Other insights from the focus groups
Residents in the headwaters of the Yellow River believe that the construction of the national parks will generate most benefits for residents in the middle and lower reaches of the rivers, as well as for future generations. Although upstream residents are making sacrifices, they are for the most part willing to take such responsibility for protecting the headwaters. Residents in the Lancang River headwaters, for their part, believe that it is they, the local residents, who will benefit most from the construction of the national park.
In the latter context, Zaduo County is the best place for collecting Cordyceps sinensis.[11] Residents in the main Cordyceps collection area in the Lancang headwaters wish to manage the area by themselves. Since a large number of outsiders dig Cordyceps every year, the damage to the environment is signficant. Zaduo government allowed outsiders to enter the county to dig Cordyceps prior to 2007, but this practice was then banned for nearly a decade. Since 2018, however, outsiders have been allowed again to harvest Cordyceps after June 30th each year, even though studies have shown that it still reproduces in July. Local residents feel that outsiders who harvest Cordyceps do not take sufficient care to backfill the holes that they dig during harvesting, and also they are more likely to leave litter behind. Local residents would therefore prefer the ban on outsiders’ harvesting of Cordyceps to be more flexible and not limited to specific dates, allowing for more adaptive or responsive management.
Local government officials also reported that border conflicts consitute a hidden (unrecognized) serious threat for environmental protection in the Sanjiangyuan National Park. The southern headwaters of the Yangtze River is located near the border of Qinghai Province and Tibet Autonomous Region. The national park model encourages conservation through community wardens, however the nearby area in Tibet Autonomous Region is designated as a “mixed pastoral zone” where Tibet and Qinghai herdsmen rely on a combination of livestock grazing and the harvesting of Cordyceps; creating possibility for conflicts at their interface.
Zhaqing Town has a solid waste disposal facility, but other towns in the area do not. Residents report that there are insufficient waste management facilities and it is very difficult to transport solid waste from the pastoral areas to the county headquarters due to the poor quality roads, high cost of fuel, and the community wardens’ low monthly salary of 1,800 CNY.
Residents both inside and outside the Lancang River headwaters National Park believe that residents in the primary protection area should receive more compensation and better government services. For example, Chadan Town is located in the core area and construction of a planned national highway was cancelled due to the establishment of the national park. Roads remain poor, making it difficult to access services and markets, transport garbage, or for students to go to school.
Local residents generally believe that the quality of education should be improved, too, and they wish to be trained in financial management knowledge and skills. Residents also highlight the importance of provided more job opportunities for young people throughout the region.
Overall, human-wildlife conflict is presently one of the most difficult problems, seriously threatening the livelihoods (and sometimes lives) of local residents. However, few residents are aware of the possibility to buy insurance, and the government has not publicized the possibility. Now the life cycles of snow leopards (Panthera uncia), bears (Ursus arctos pruinosus) and Tibetan wolves (Canis Lupus chanco) are changing. Bears no longer hibernate and they no longer appear to be afraid of humans. These wild animals have caused extensive damage to residents’ houses, and also seriously threaten the residents’ personal safety – most people are now fearful living in pastoral areas. Significantly, government-backed compensation plans for losses incurred in this way are not yet adequately planned or implemented.
Finally, many respondents note that the two protection systems of nature reserves and national parks co-exist, with many management contradictions. One example is that the important headwaters of the Dangqu and Lancang Rivers south of the Yangtze River are not included in the national parks. Another example is Sulu, Jieduo and Sahuteng towns in Zaduo County, which also constitute important headwaters for the Lancang and Yangtze Rivers but not included in the national parks. From the perspective of the integrity of ecosystem as well as integrity in administration, it is widely considered that these areas should be included in the parks.
[5] Further, competition [of plateau pika] with livestock for food has been widely reported, especially in areas where pika densities were highest (Sun & Zhao, 2009); more recently, though, this has largely been refuted as more detailed vegetation and behavioral studies have recognized the plateau pika’s fundamental role as keystone species. Extensive targeted poisoning campaigns aiming to control populations occurred repeatedly since the 1950s (Jiang & Xia, 1987), but over the past decade these have largely ceased.
[6] The National Development and Reform Commission’s comprehensive evaluation report on the ecological effects shows that the main protection objects in the Three Rivers Source Area have been better protected and restored, the quality of the ecological environment has been improved, the ecological functions have been consolidated, the water conservation has increased year by year, the grassland coverage, and grass production The volume has increased by 11% and 30% respectively over 10 years ago.
[7] Although we mention these so-called ecological activities, we are not in fact ‘endorsing’ them, as some work counter to biodiversity conservation principles, especially the poisoning campaigns, which are effectively annihilating a very important keystone species of the plateau (Smith & Foggin 1999).
[8] Our results are “what the respondents have reported” and “what they feel/consider” – but not necessarily the actual case, i.e. may not be confirmed through other means. Timelines also can be blurred; and the fact the national park pilot began in 2015 does not mean that changes noted since then are necessarily due to the park’s creation (even if reported by some respondents as such). Memory bias and the possibility that responses being could be influenced by the context of the FGs, including audience (i.e. who is present, e.g. government officials) are here noted, too.
[9] It’s worth noting that peoples' perceptions and reporting thereof, not actually a documenting of the substance of what is being reported.
[10] While yak and sheep do indeed have different behaviours… there is also value in having diverse grazers, rather than single kind of grazing animal as multiple/varied pressures can lead to more resilient grasslands.
[11] In the Tibetan region, Cordyceps sinensis is widely known as yartsa gunbu (Tibetan), chongcao (Chinese), or “summer grass, winter worm.” Chongcao has been used in traditional medicine across China and the Himalayan region for centuries to treat ailments ranging from cancer and kidney disease to inflammation and aging. In more recent years it has earned the nicknames of “Himalayan Viagra” and “Himalayan gold.” Chongcao is mainly found in the alpine zone above 4,000 meters above sea level. The production of chongcao in Yushu Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture of Qinghai Province accounts for 60% of the country’s total production. This is in the heart of the Sanjiangyuan region. Due to the large size, good quality and high proportion of chongcao produced in this area, the local harvest can directly affect the price of chongcao nationally. Therefore, Zaduo county is also known as "the first county of China for chongcao" (Sulek, 2019).