The

Application of the Stakeholder Theory in the Management of

Heritage Places in Malawi

[1]Davie Simengwa and [2]Simon Makuvaza

Abstract

Efforts to preserve and protect heritage places require the engagement of a

variety of stakeholders. This is important as this brings together for discussion,
frequently conflicting interests and values, which often arise from their
cultural differences. Heritage practitioners also have to usually deal with a
range of governmental authorities and departments, whose mandates
sometimes overlaps. Given this situation, heritage managers expend most of
their energy in trying to resolve conflicting interests of the stakeholders at the
expense of the actual management of heritage places. This paper discusses
legal heritage frameworks in Malawi, and it argues that the idea of embracing
stakeholders in the formal heritage system of the country has not been made a
priority. It is also argued in this paper that because of the non-involvement of
stakeholders in the formal heritage system, there are always conflicts in the
way heritage is managed in the country. As a way of resolving conflicts that
usually arises from managing heritage places with multi stakeholder interests,
it is suggested in this paper that a stakeholder theory, which guides
management, can be applied when managing heritage places in country. It is
hoped that this would equip heritage professionals in Malawi with practical
skills to manage heritage places of the country and thereby minimize conflicts.

Keywords: heritage management, stakeholder, heritage place.

Introduction

Defining stakeholder theory

The concept of stakeholder theory originates from the years around 1960s
(Freeman, 1984). Basically the concept was not meant directly to be used in
heritage management but was mainly useful in areas of law and gambling, it
referred to a person who was trusted with some stakes or a person who holds
all the bets placed on a game or race and who could pay the money to the
winner of the game (Oxford, 2005). This was the original meaning of the
concept in the disciplines of law and gambling. Later the concept is being used
in various fields such as project management and economy to refer to the one
that has got a stake in an enterprise, or an individual or company that is
involved in particular organization, project or system basically just because
they have invested their money in it (Charron, 2007). Post et al (2002), the
stakeholders in a corporation are “the individuals and constituencies that
contribute, either voluntarily or involuntarily, to its wealth-creating capacity
and activities, and that are therefore its potential beneficiaries and/or risk
bearers.” (Freeman, 1984

; Post et al., 2002)

here is another generally accepted definition of a stakeholder: “any individual

or group of individuals that are directly or indirectly impacted by an entity or a
task” (Charron, 2007)

. Stakeholders are an integral part of the management process in any

organisation or business and they are the individuals that have an active
interest in an organisation. The obligation of the organisation is to give priority
to the needs of the stakeholders. According to Evan Freeman (1993), the
stakeholder is so relevant to the organisation, that if a stakeholder was to give
up participation, the organisation would fail to function. A stakeholder has
been defined as a person who has the right and capacity to participate in the
process; thus, anyone who is impacted upon by the action of others has a right
to be involved (Gray, 1989). Donaldson and Preston (1995) say that, a person
or group can be classified as stakeholders if they have a genuine concern for
the activities and practices of the organisation. Similarly, Friedman and Miles
(2006) reasoned that a widely accepted method of individuating stakeholders
was by identifying groups of individuals that had identifiable connections with
the organisation; according to Chirukure and Pwiti (2008), any person, group,
company or institution with an interest in cultural heritage management. With
regards to these definitions the concept of stakeholder theory has different
meaning to each field depending with its content. We are not going to argue
about which definition is better but just enumerating them in order to reflect
the development of the stakeholder theory. Actually no matter based on which
defintion, there is a common denominator of all these perspectives:
“stakeholders perceive that they have stake in the entity or task” (Wen, 2007).

Although the motives and means for defining and identifying stakeholders
may differ from one another, but their objectives are the same. They are tools
to find stakeholders and to identify their characteristics. We believe that
eventually a stakeholder theory is to be used to promote a better collaboration
and achieve shared goals at most time. Along with the development of
stakeholder theory, it has been largely used in various disciplines, especially in
economy and management (Post et al., 2002). Heritage management had also
combined this theory with its own characters and applied it in its past
practices; this is an actual extension of the stakeholder theory. In this context,
a stakeholder in the tourism industry is deemed to be anyone who is impacted
on by development positively or negatively, and as a result it reduces potential
conflict between the tourists and host community by involving the latter in
shaping the way in which tourism develops (Bramwell and Lane , 1999).

Management of Heritage Places Stakeholder theory

In order to balance the resources of the community by considering their

humanistic needs, which takes the relevant interest groups into account;
conflicts of different interest groups of heritage exist ever since the beginning
of heritage protection, like human usage of resource or economic development
against protection (Wen, 2007). Besides, clashes between heritage protection
policies and local communities’ profits often occur in present day’s heritage
conservation and management process (Jopela, 2011). For example, on the
purpose of heritage conservation, there might be many limits for local
communities such as to keep the site as integrate and authentic as possible. But
local communities have the need for development both economically and
socially, it is unfair to prohibit their use of nature, or to enclose them in a
certain area in order to demonstrate their ways of life as an exhibition. In
recent years it becomes overt that this kind of conflict can cause negative
impact on heritage value or even crisis along with the rising awareness of
heritage protection and increasing need for development, especially for the
country protected listed heritage by Department of Antiquities (Jopela, 2011).

The most up to date conflict of interest in heritage management is the

demolition of first colonial district commissioner office in Lilongwe and part
of demolition of the quarters house of the Blantyre colonial district
commissioner office, where the government has built its industrial court. The
results show that there was no good communication between the concerned
stakeholders (Pers comm Malijani, 2014). This kind of construction goes
largely against the monuments and relics Act of Malawi and its operational
guidelines on the purpose of heritage site conservation. In this case the conflict
between need for development and heritage site conservation arises; this is an
extreme example of negative impact of conflict on the heritage site, the
conflict of development and protection. The government of Malawi and its
department and professional are all relevant stakeholders of heritage sites in
demolished colonial buildings; apparently their collaboration and participation
in heritage conservation and management are not so good. Each one of them
has its own voice and stand, none of them shall be ignored.

If the government of Malawi through its department of antiquities would

better be aware of the heritage value and take more actions on protecting the
sites, rather than continue compromising the protected area for other use;
international organizations and local heritage managers professionals would
intervene earlier and help to give influential advices and support it for a
sustainable development, this unpleasant result might not happen. So again the
research on stakeholders’ participation in heritage conservation and
management is essential. How to communicate and then reach a consensus or
compromise is nevertheless crucial in practice. Therefore using a stakeholder
theory to consider different stakeholders’ appeals and to analyze their
participation in the whole process is a possible way worthwhile to try.

In this paper, we will take a look at different heritage places in the country as
our main focus to continue the discussion on application of stakeholder theory
in heritage management. The reason why we take heritage places as main
point of discussion is that we realize the humanistic aspect of a stakeholder is
quite important. Every heritage place in the country is carrier and container of
cultures.

Among the countries heritage places the Malawi monuments and relics Act of
1991 put more emphasis on the cultural sites than natural sites; among the big
group of cultural sites, there are a large number of historic places and areas of
great significance. So considering the application of stakeholders’ theory in the
conservation and management of heritage places, it has certain relevant values
of research. Therefore let us take a look at some important definition in
heritage management of Malawi, as defined in the Monuments and Relics Act
of 1991 (GoM, 1991).

“Preservation" means the taking of such actions, including salvage, as are

designed to record and maintain the cultural and natural heritage of Malawi;
"protected monument" means a monument which is protected and includes a
group of monuments protected under that section and any single monument in
such group; "protected relic" means a relic

"Relic" means any fossil of any kind; any artifact, implement, coin, document
and manuscript; any chiefly, religious or war regalia; ornament or article (not
being a monument), which is of archaeological, paleontological, geological,
anthropological, ethnological, prehistorically, historical, artistic or scientific
value or interest;

Section 2 of the monuments and relics Act of 1991, defines monument as any
area of land which has distinctive or beautiful scenery or which contains rare
or distinctive or beautiful vegetation or any area of land, structure, building,
action, ruin, stone circle, monolith, altar, pillar, statue, memorial grave,
tumulus, cairn, place of interminet, dwelling, trench, fortification, excavation,
working, kiln, rock sculpture, rock paintings, wall paintings or inscription or
any other site or article of similar kind or associated therewith which is of
archaeological, geological, anthropological, ethnological, pre-historical,
historical, artistic, or scientific value or interest or remains thereof and
includes the site on which any monuments or group of monuments was
discovered or exists and such portion of land and adjoining such sites as may
be required for the maintenance of or otherwise for the preservation of such
monuments. Thus the definition of monuments also includes natural features
such as vegetation.

In this case the basic definitions of heritage of Malawi are very specific, for
instance relic; it means any fossil of any kind and any implement ornament or
article, which is of archaeological, geological, anthropological, ethnological,
pre-historical, artistic or scientific value or interest. Two kinds of heritage
being specified thus monuments and relics and things which are to be
protected.

As shown in the above definitions there is a different rank of heritage, a

monument and protected monument, protected relic and a relic. Once an area
is declared protected, and then government takes care of it except where it is
private property, in which case the minister will enter into an agreement with
the owner on the terms of how to take care of the said property. This
agreement limits the owners’ rights to use the place as he pleases and sets out
rules on public access.


Why stakeholders are needed in Heritage management in Malawi

Since its establishment the monuments and relics act of Malawi during the
past 49 years, the conservation of heritage has been widened from tangible
monuments to cultural landscapes with mixtures of human interaction.
Therefore the participation of a wider range of stakeholder groups of heritage
is needed (Smith, 2006). The combination of stakeholder theory and heritage
management becomes more and more important since heritage conservation
and management is no longer very efficient in the country. One cannot simply
talk about the implementation of heritage related policies within the
government sectors only. Without concerning other issues such as local
community’s will, heritage conservation and management action would be not
enough to meet the new development of heritage concept. On the other hand,
it is not logical to assume that because some heritage sites form part of the
communities, the traditions and norms of the traditional institutions of local
communities will automatically conserve heritage assets such as
archaeological sites. Jopela (2011) has pointed out that the problem with this
assumption is that some of the traditional uses of heritage may not be in
accordance with the conservation philosophy of state-based heritage
institutions. In addition, community attachment to heritage places does not
always imply that such communities are the traditional custodians or that they
embrace custodianship system. For instance, in Mwala olemba, Malawi rock
shelter paintings, although the communities recognizes the paintings, but they
don’t feel the paintings to be part of their heritage and history, therefore they
do not think that it should be conserved, as a result they destroy the paintings
similar to this is Mwanganda butchery site in northern Malawi (Ngumbira,
2011).

Due to high-speed economic growth and drastic increase of population in the

country it is posing a threat to preservation of heritage places. People have
encroached in rich heritage places (Ngumbira, 2011). The encroachment is in
form of clearing the areas for agricultural activities but also new settlements
that has resulted into disturbances of heritage places. It is well stipulated in the
monument and relic act of 1991 section 25, that by virtual of extant of heritage
resources that are of local and national significance, those places and their
context are naturally, protected by law and are properties of Malawi
government.

While reasonable-sound actions are being taken to preserve heritage places in

the country, it happens more often to give up historic buildings or other
heritage places to modern development and sometimes even conduct blind
demolishment and construction (Malijani, 2014). This is a result of poor
planning which is sacrificed by the influence of money and other economic
pressure by heritage managers. Again this shows lack of appropriate
collaboration amongst concerned heritage stakeholders in the country, who can
take the construction and conservation as a comprehensive consideration.

Most of heritage places in Malawi do not have adequate heritage management

personnel whose work can cope with present-day management tendency still
stays at out-of-date methods and means (Gomani, 2004; Makuru, 2014). A few
sites even put their focuses on economic development only, changing
administrative regulations in order to rent cultural heritage properties to
enterprises; for instances, in local governments, there are no employed
heritage managers who could be consulted in the planning for some economic
development of the cities and town where most heritage places are located
(Malijani, 2014). As we all know, enterprises care their profit much more than
any other issues, so the potential threat to heritage conservation is amid the
development of local economy. Involving positive participation of
stakeholders is an approach to avoid conflict and unintentional harm to
heritage places amongst the heritage managers. For instance the case of blind
demolition of some parts of infrastructures of first Blantyre district
commissioner colonial offices a nation monument, which is currently rented
by a number of private enterprises and a tenants who have modified the
structure to suit their own businesses, this is weakening the strength of the
historical building. This is another example where there is lack of
collaboration amongst the concerned stakeholders which are the local
government, department of antiquities, private enterprises and the district
commissioner who are always in conflict about the conservation and
management of heritage places located in urban places. Section 11 of the
monuments and relics act is very clear on modification and disturbances of
monuments, it state that “no person shall without the prior written consent of
the minister, make any alteration to destroy or damage, any monument or relic
or any part thereof or carry out any cultivation or mining project or other
works so as to cause or likely to cause damage or disturbances to any
protected monument or relic”.

Stakeholder theory in the Monuments Relics Act of Malawi

In this paper we are looking at the stakeholder theory and try to apply it in the
context of Malawian heritage legislation. The concept of stakeholder could be
important in guiding heritage conservation and management. In applying the
theory we are going to look at the current legislation system if it is efficient to
ensure stakeholders participation.

It has not been mentioned in the monuments and relics act of 1991, about the
definition and range of stakeholders of the country heritage sites, but normally
the conservation and management activities for a listed national heritage sites
or those gazette would be seen as the government responsibility. However,
even it is not written in the official policy, the actions of heritage conservation
and management cannot be implemented by the government only; they need to
be done in close collaboration with administrative authorities at all level and
local communities, professional heritage conservation and management
agencies, academic institutions and other stakeholders in heritage property
management.

Again in the Monuments and relics act, there is nothing said about
empowering government departments to collaborate in conservation and
management of heritage in the country. However, conservation in legal
framework of Malawi means measures taken to prevent destruction,
deterioration or loss of cultural and natural heritage of Malawi; wherein
“conservation of heritage sites comprises all the processes of looking after a
place so as to retain its cultural significance” (Burra Charter 1999:2). With
regards to this statement there is lack of formal collaboration between
government department and local communities where most heritage places are
located. If this could happen it would likely contribute to the sustainability of
conservation and management of those places. This would be the role of
primary stakeholder within the heritage legal framework of Malawi, because
local authorities would guide the preservation of the values associated with
heritage places located in their areas. Despite having the Forest Act, Land Act,
Land reform Programme and Environmental Act, the monuments and relics
act of 1991 is not clear about working together with other government
institutions involved in heritage matters. Mumma (2009) pointed out that for
the effectiveness of heritage management, institutional cooperation and
coordination is of paramount importance. The involvement of relevant
stakeholders through a participatory approach is encouraged by the operational
guidelines of World Heritage Convention ( UNESCO, 2014). So a
participatory partnership of relevant stakeholders, which is to make various
forces coherent in order to achieve one common goal of all, is needed.

In the Malawi monuments and relics act of 1991, there is no clear out
provision for primarily stakeholders to exercise any control over the process or
to have responsibilities for decision relating to the protection of their
significant heritage places; nor any provision for a formal consultation on
what is to be protected. In most cases it is the government which has the
mechanism to manage and define the heritage. This makes it difficult for
heritage managers employed by government to exercise the conservation and
management as most of times it leads to conflict between the local
communities and heritage managers. For instance the case of Mwanganda
butchery sites a Middle Stone Age site in northern Malawi, the community are
not aware of the heritage found in their community as a result they are not
willing to invest their time in conserving the sites. Every time when the sign
post is put on the site they vandalize it, this comes in because there is lack
formal collaboration between the community and heritage managers as a result
it leads to conflict (Ngumbira, 2011). Similar to this is failure by the
government department to supervise the renovation of the Nguludi Fathers
house, which was built in 1918 by the Dutch Montfortians. The building has
been renovated contrary to section 20 and 25(3) of monument and relics of act
1991. All these are the results of lack of collaboration amongst the concerned
stakeholders. Sections 13, 24 and 56, summarized together, state that no
person shall, without the prior written consent of the Minister make any
alteration to, destroy or damage any protected monument or relic or listed
monument or do anything that can cause or likely to cause damage to them.

Stakeholder Analysis in heritage management of Malawi

The department of antiquities falls under Ministry of Youth, Culture Sports.

The section of culture is sub-divided into almost five departments which all
directly report to the ministry; these are Antiquities, Arts Crafts, Censorship
Board, Museums and Archives. The mission of the Department of Antiquities
is to protect, preserve, conserve the immovable cultural heritage of Malawi
and the associated cultural values and natural environment for posterity,
educational, scientific, recreational and socio-economic growth of the
communities around the heritage sites in particular and Malawi as a nation in
general. This includes all archaeological, paleontological, rock art sites and all
historical sites


Local Community

A community is referred to as a group of people living in a particular locale

(Chirikure and Pwiti 2008). In this paper we define the local community as
Malawian citizens who live in areas where heritage places are located. As
frequent users and sometimes owners of heritage places their main interests
might lay more on their own profits, like the concentration on the conservation
and utilization of local resources, the possibility to have better living condition
such as good environment, housing, public infrastructure, transportation, jobs
and so on.

Government

Here we refer to all government managing bodies at all levels which includes;
the local government and other government departments in charge in relation
to heritage are considered too. Managing bodies as stakeholders of heritage are
more powerful in action. The interests of different departments of government
are sometimes contradictory, like the local government, land, forest
departments might care about other development more than what department
of antiquities does, and the latter may consider other conservation more
important than other. However, in general, the balance between development
and conservation, between enjoyment of heritage and the use of it, the
continuity of polices and feasibility of an established management plan and its
implementation would be considered thoroughly by the government as a
whole. The government is the leading power of heritage conservation and
management and the designation or listing of heritage places.

The relationship between government and its other stakeholders of heritage is

not always as good as would be desirable. For example, in some circumstances
like within some heritage places, the government may want to protect the
place and may set up regulations to limit the local community’s activities on
their own place. The situation could be that the government may see the local
community primarily as a potential threat to the particular heritage, and the
original dwellers of the area are not well recognized in their role in
maintaining heritage value, or those residents would see the creation of a new
heritage place which is under rigid protection as an oppressive development,
bringing in different values and depriving them of their own wealth and
culture. So conflicts and misunderstandings between heritage managers and
local residents would cause difficulties in conservation and management of
heritage places in the country.

Stakeholder Involvement

The involvement of all stakeholders would normally mean involving all those
who have an interest in a common goal and the outcome of a planned activity
or project that in relation to them. It will have government at all levels,
agencies in charge, institutions, private sectors, NGOs, local associations and
individual citizens or communities involved. If a consensus on the aim of the
common goal can be reached, its potential success then becomes likely.
Consultation with stakeholder involves the process. This process involves
consulting different levels of people, organizations, companies, government
departments, and other relevant technicians in the area of need.

Current situation of heritage management in Malawi

Lack of legal consciousness; once there is conflicts between economic

interests and cultural heritage conservation, the decision makers in
government departments always consider the short-term actual interest,
instead of the long-term interests. Therefore, this is leading to the destruction
of the hundred and thousand year old heritage places which could be wealth
conserving for the benefit of the nation.

The approach to city planning needs improving. There is lack of consultation

amongst the heritage managers and the local government town planners. As a
result this becomes the section for which property developers fiercely
compete. To pursue economic efficiency, actions have been taken in some
places to level the ground, widen traditional roads and erect high buildings. As
a result, many heritage places and its setting have been destroyed. The
monuments and relic act of 1991 is not clear about archaeological impact
assessment in any development taking place in the country. This has led to loss
of many heritage places in the country.

Inappropriate utilization of urban land has done harm to cultural heritage.

With tourism booming, an increasing number of tourists has added heavy
burden to many heritage places, resulting in the irremediable damage to those
places. Hence many heritage places lack well trained managers. This is
intensifying commercialization; artificialization and urbanization have gravely
affected the original setting of interesting heritage places.

Conclusion

The concept of heritage conservation becomes more and more accepted by

people all over the world. When a site is honorably named as heritage
especially World Heritage, it is no longer just a site itself. Additional values
and culture(s) behind it become also concern.

The protection regulations on heritage places in Malawi are not making further
progress the Legislation construction, survey on heritage resources, protection
of significant sites, properly exploitation of heritage, and training of human
resource in heritage management are not becoming key issues. From that we
could find that although the management statuses of heritage places in Malawi
are uneven, some sites are advanced in standard management, because of their
present status of gaining as World Heritage Site and some are less developed,
but the whole tendency of heritage management is not promising, not only for
nation heritage places but also for potential sites and sites which have their
own significant values.

Local community as an important vehicle of culture, are key players in one

culture’s tangible and intangible expressions. All kinds of stakeholders are
different parts of them. To a larger extent, in the global village today, no
matter you live in urban area or countryside, each of us is a so-called
stakeholder of all human beings’ heritage. Therefore human issue as an active
factor in the context of heritage conservation and management should be
recognized. It is necessary to emphasize its importance, only when the
understanding of it becomes deeper, will human activities be more appropriate
to lead to a sustainable conservation and development. The reason we take it
into account and use it as an angle view of this paper, is that most of heritage
conservation and management actions would include human issues. For
instance, the management activity is mainly a control of different groups of
people. Stakeholders from various sides are the closest groups in relation to
heritage management. The management of stakeholder groups is more
complicated so it is more difficult to deal with them in practice. The attempt to
analyze stakeholders of heritage and their participation are not easy to be
drawn from time to time. One reason would probably be that human beings’
behavior is hard to predict in the changing world. We often talk about
sustainable development in the field of heritage management, and many
others, but sustainability is a comprehensive concept itself already. It not only
requires economic development, but other aspects are also important. We still
need to further think about when stakeholders are put into the context of
sustainable development of heritage, whose interest is mostly concerned
eventually?

Reference

Bramwell, B. and B, Lane. (1999). Collaboration and Partnerships for

Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7, 179–181.

Burrar Charter . (1999). The Australian ICOMOS Charter for the

Conservation of Places of Cultural Significance. Sidney: ICOMOS 181.

Charron, D. C. (2007). Stockholders and Stakeholders; The Battle for Control

of the Corporation. Cato Journal, 27(1).

Chirikure, S. and Phwiti, G. (2008). Community Involvement in Archaeology

and Cultural Heritage Management: An Assessment from Case Studies
in Southern Africa and Elsewhere. Current Anthropology, 49(3), 467-
482.

Evan, W. M. and Freeman, E.R. (1993). A stakeholder theory of the modern

corporation: Kantian capitalism (4th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston:

Pitman.

Friedman, A. L. ( 2006). Stakeholders: theory and practice. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Government of Malawi (GoM). (1991). Monuments Relics Act. Laws of

Malawi. Malawi.

Gomani, E. M. (2004). Management Plan for the Chongoni Rock Art Site.
Department of Antiquities, Ministry of Youth, Sports and Culture,
Lilongwe.

Gray, B. (1989). Collaboration Finding Common Ground for Multi-party

Problems. San-Francisco: Josey Bass.

Jopela, A. P. (2011). Traditional Custodianship: a useful framework for

heritage management in southern Africa. Special issue of Conservation
and Management of Archaeological Sites, Eduardo Mondlane
University, Department of Archaeology and Anthropology, Maputo.

Makuru, M. (2014, November 12). Heritage places in Malawi and their

management. (D. Simengwa, Interviewer)

Malijani, O. (2014, November 13). Discussion on current heritage

management in Malawi. (D. Simengwa, Interviewer)
Mumma, A. (2009). The Link between Traditional and Formal legal systems.
In W. a. Ndoro, Legal Frameworks for the Protection of Immovable
Cultural Heritage in Africa (pp. 22-24). Rome: ICCROM.

Ngumbira, G. (2011). An assessment of the factors affecting management of

Mwanganda and Mbande archaeological sites in Karonga, Malawi.
Unpublished Bachelor Thesis, The Catholic University of Malawi,
Department of Anthropology.

Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary. (2005). http://www.oup.com/oald-

bin/web_getald7index1a.pl. Retrieved November 14, 2014, from
http://www.oup.com/oald-bin/web_getald7index1a.pl

Post, J. E., Preston, L.E., and Sachs, S. (2002). Redefining the Corporation-
Stakeholder Management and Organising Wealth. Stanford University
Press.

Smith, B. (2006.). Rock Art Tourism in Southern Africa:Problems,

Possibilities and Poverty Relief. In N. . Agnew, Of the Past to the
Future: Integrating Archaeology and Conservation (pp. 322-330).
Washington DC.

UNESCO. (2014, November 8). Retrieved November 08, 2014,

fromhttp://whc.unesco.org/en/list,

Wen, J. (2007). Stakeholder Participation Approach in Urban Cultural

Heritage Management and Conservation. Master’s Thesis for the
Programme World Heritage Studies, Brandenburg University of
Technology, Cottbus, Germnay.

[1] Author is managing associate consultant at Lanujos Social Research &

Consultancy Ltd, C/o Po Box 40044, Soche, Blantyre 4 Malawi. He is a both
researcher in archaeology and anthropology.

[2] Author is a PhD fellow at Zimbabwe University of Science and

Technology