**5. Conclusions**

The purpose of our study was to (1) assesses recent innovations in the managemen<sup>t</sup> of the Gonarezhou National Park, (2) evaluate the relationship between the park and communities, (3) examine and highlights challenges faced in the park and limits of the innovation and (4) draw lessons from the case study of Gonarezhou to contribute to the scholarship in stakeholder engagemen<sup>t</sup> and protected areas. From the study it is evident that for successful managemen<sup>t</sup> of protected areas, communities must be involved as important stakeholders. However, the terms on which communities are engaged still remains a challenge. Thus, the GCT acknowledges the importance of community mobilization and development, and as a result they have started on a journey of *"Mpfhuka"* which engages surrounding communities. Through *"Mpfhuka*" the GCT engages the community in conservation while at the same time supporting it in its efforts to improve its livelihood. Other studies also concur that community engagemen<sup>t</sup> is an evolving and learning journey that is vital for the collaborative managemen<sup>t</sup> of protected areas [10,17,77]. Trust is crucial for effective collaboration with communities in the managemen<sup>t</sup> of protected areas. However, it takes time to build sustainable relationships and solid trust [10,35]. A lack of support from or involvement of communities threatens protected areas [17,77], for example, through poaching activities in the national park. Solutions for challenges such as poaching as a result of poverty and poor or weak coordination amongs<sup>t</sup> implementing agencies must continuously be sought. Thus, we propose more efforts to engage with and benefit communities from wildlife tourism of protected areas to deter negative and retrogressive actions by communities. Protected area managers are encouraged to therefore genuinely seek to engage communities and not view them as threats.

Our study highlights the importance of innovative partnerships between state and non-state non-profit organizations, local communities, and local and international partners in managing protected areas in Zimbabwe and elsewhere as they provide financial and technical assistance crucial in protected areas administration. Prior to the GCT partnership, tourist numbers were declining, and the conservation efforts were suffering. It is important to note that protected area managemen<sup>t</sup> is not only about conservation but also about increasing revenue from tourism, enabling protected areas to become self-sustaining.

From a conservation perspective, the partnership has increased elephant and wildlife populations which shows the utility of area-based approaches in conserving wildlife. However, this has resulted in human-wildlife conflict and the park carrying more elephants than it can manage. Nevertheless, international statutes do not allow the culling of elephants, so park authorities are left to deal with a growing problem of animal numbers. Exporting the elephants would be a solution but it is done under strict guidelines. Thus, while it is noble to follow international statutes such as CITES, this should not be at the expense of sustainable managemen<sup>t</sup> of natural resources and negative outcomes on local livelihoods. This shows the complex structures governing protected areas that need to be navigated as well as divergence between policy and practice.

From a land cover perspective there has been a positive increase of dense shrubs and maintenance of woodland which is crucial for the supply of ecosystem services. The paper illustrates that there are limits to how much local based initiatives like the GCT can resolve vulnerabilities of protected areas. The issues of CITES regulations, community sentiments, transboundary resource governance and sensitivity of natural resource governance issues pose serious challenges whose resolution is beyond the scope of the GCT and this publication. However, the transboundary protected area managemen<sup>t</sup> regimes and global conservation frameworks have the potential to provide the framework within which these can be sustainably tackled. The findings are that the initiatives like this one work best in a contained environment with a broader stakeholder base engagement. The stakeholder base should be expanded to include the diverse governmen<sup>t</sup> departments engaged in the governance of natural

resources This is even more complex with managing transboundary conservation such as the GLTP. While it is worthwhile and noble to engage in transboundary initiatives, these are di fficult to implement due to complex governance structures and competing interests. Lastly, innovative partnerships with communities are crucial for sustainable managemen<sup>t</sup> of natural resources; however, governance, climate change, and trust are challenges which must be navigated in protected area management.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, W.M., T.G., G.P., N.A.N. and N.B.S.; data curation, W.M., E.M., N.A.N. and N.B.S.; formal analysis, W.M., T.G. and E.M.; funding acquisition, W.M.; investigation, W.M., T.G., G.P., N.A.N. and N.B.S.; methodology, W.M., T.G., G.P., E.M., N.A.N. and N.B.S.; project administration, W.M. and T.G.; resources, W.M. and T.G.; software, W.M.; supervision, W.M.; validation, W.M., G.P., E.M., N.A.N. and N.B.S.; visualization, N.A.N.; writing—original draft, W.M., T.G., G.P., E.M. and N.A.N.; writing—review & editing, W.M., T.G., G.P. and N.B.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This work was funded by the National Research Foundation, South Africa (Grant no. 119288), and the Article Processing Charge (APC) was funded by the University of Johannesburg, Faculty of Engineering and the Built Environment.

**Acknowledgments:** Sincere thanks goes to Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, Gonarezhou Conservation Trust, and Southern Alliance for Indigenous Resources (SAFIRE) for their assistance during the project.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
