This article explores the role of park rangers’ social networks in two national parks in Sub-Saharan Africa and suggests that the way that actors connect shape conservation outcomes. We do this against the backdrop of how conservation worldwide has moved away from state-centric top-down approaches towards management structures that includes a wide range of stakeholders spanning multiple administrative levels and sectors. This trend entails challenges as well as opportunities for conservation management. The theoretical framework of the study is given by social capital theory and the notion that the structure of social networks – more specifically the three network features of bonding, bridging, and linking – relate to the presence of institutional trust and rule compliance. The findings indicate that the structure of social networks, in particular the different forms of social capital in those networks, matters for the way they function. The result indicates that bridging and linking ties positively relate to institutional trust and rule compliance. These social networks form a basis for building institutional trust in areas where trust towards government tends to be low. Managers should think about these structures when they implement conservation policy. We recommend to 1) foster structures where park rangers connect to a wide range of actors and thus resources, information, and knowledge 2) include park rangers in the decision making for a more efficient and sustainable management, and 3) build bridges that reach the local communities to facilitate institutional trust and encourage voluntary compliance.

In this paper, we develop a framework for understanding the different spheres of authority of chiefs aiming to widen the perspectives on how government-chief interactions affect the governance process. The framework is applied in our analysis of interviews with government actors involved in area protection in the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Conservation Area (GLTFCA). Our results illustrate the variety of approaches and perceptions towards governance with chiefs that exist amongst government actors within the same governance system. Although government actors perceive chiefs in the GLTFCA as a parallel system, chiefs can act as a rival, mediator, adviser, or partner to the government; thus, both enable or hamper government governance.  The informal governance arrangements found in the data between government actors and chiefs moreover underscores the importance of qualitative case studies of hybrid governance systems.