Original Research

Safari field guides’ work and careers in South Africa: Insights from Pilanesberg Game Reserve

Peet van der Merwe, Johannes Kraak, Neva Bojovic

Received: 07 May 2026; Accepted: 08 July 2026; Published: 14 Aug. 2026

Copyright: © 2026. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Abstract

Field guides are the face of South African nature- and wildlife-based tourism products. However, research on the work and careers of field guides in South Africa is lacking. To our knowledge, only two studies have researched field guides in other African countries. Therefore, the aim of this research is to delve deeper into the field guide work and career. Indeed, the management literature includes countless studies on how work characteristics and career motivations influence the performance of (service) employees. It is therefore crucial for the literature on South African nature-based tourism to begin to include research on field guides, as their performance is central to the largest sector contributing to South African tourism revenues. This exploratory study includes 24 in-depth interviews with field guides working in the Pilanesberg Game Reserve in South Africa.

Conservation implications: he study makes two key contributions: Firstly, as a contribution to the literature, we advance scholarship on tourism labour and precarity by offering an empirically grounded account of field guide career trajectories within the South African nature-based tourism industry. Secondly, a managerial contribution. This includes: (1) Organisations should formalise and improve communication on entry pathways for field guides by providing clear, accessible information on training routes, requirements, and points of contact. (2) Lodges and other operators could benefit from rebranding field guides as a high-status group. (3) To elevate safari guide training beyond short courses towards a more comprehensive and accredited qualification.

Keywords: careers; field-guides; nature-based tourism; Pilanesberg Game Reserve; South Africa.

Introduction

Nature- and wildlife-based tourism are the main tourism products in South Africa (Statistics South Africa [STATS SA] 2024). The country has 19 national parks, various provincial protected areas and thousands of private game reserves that offer unique experiences for nature and wildlife viewing. One of the most prominent ways tourists immerse themselves in these surroundings is through organised safaris in open safari vehicles – locally referred to as game drives – accompanied by a qualified field guide (Van der Merwe & Saayman 2014). During these game drives, field guides enhance the tourist experience by providing educational and novel opportunities for wildlife interaction (Radder, Han & Theron 2016). They are critical contributors to what van der Merwe and Saayman (2014) described as ‘memorable game viewing experiences’ for tourists and are pivotal in protecting the flora and fauna of parks through environmentally responsible behaviour (Kapa, De Crom & Hermann 2023). As such, they play a crucial role in conveying the conservation message to their guests.

Parks and game reserves are accordingly vested in attracting, training and retaining field guides who excel in these areas. Understanding the working conditions, career experiences and professional identities of field guides is important for several reasons. Tourism employment is widely characterised by precarity, low status and high turnover (Robinson et al. 2019), yet these conditions remain unexplored among field guides despite their centrality to ecotourism delivery. In nature-based tourism specifically, guides serve as the primary mediators of conservation interpretation (Weiler & Davis 1993), meaning their engagement and retention have implications not only for tourism performance but also for environmental education outcomes. Yet despite this, field guides’ own perspectives on their work remain largely absent from the literature. As a former field guide observed, he was ‘unable to find any literature which adequately answered the many questions, both aspirant and qualified guides have, as they journey through this career’ (Pritchard 2020:5).

In this study, the researchers define field guides as qualified professionals who hold a minimum National Qualifications Framework (NQF) Level 2 qualification or equivalent Field Guides Association of Southern Africa (FGASA) certification, are employed by lodges or safari operators and conduct organised game drives in open safari vehicles within protected areas. This distinguishes them from broader categories of tourist guides (e.g. city tour guides), self-employed safari operators and park rangers, all of whom operate under different employment structures, regulatory requirements and professional contexts.

Research on guiding more broadly has examined tour guides in urban and cultural tourism contexts internationally (e.g. Løland & Hallgren 2023; Zhang & Chow 2004) and within South Africa (De Beer, Rogerson & Rogerson 2014; Kapa et al. 2023). However, these studies address guide populations with different employment structures, qualifications and working environments from the field guides defined above. Furthermore, research on the safari industry from other perspectives, such as business owners or self-employed field guides (e.g. Sithole, Giddy & Nsukwini 2024), does not examine the lived experiences of field guides who work for lodges and safari operators. Research specifically examining the work and careers of qualified field guides in Africa remains limited, with available evidence drawn from Tanzania (Melubo & Buzinde 2016) and Zimbabwe (Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013). These studies emphasised precarious employment conditions, including insecurity, low remuneration and limited career stability. While they provide an important baseline, the evidence base remains both geographically narrow and analytically limited.

A notable gap persists regarding South Africa, a major global safari destination where guiding is comparatively formalised and regulated. The absence of research in this context risks overgeneralisation from less institutionalised settings. In addition, prior work has largely centred on constraints, with limited attention to guides’ lived experience, motivations, professional identity, perceived meaning and future aspirations. Motivated by this research gap, the researchers focus on three broadly defined research questions: (1) How do field guides perceive themselves and their work? (2) Do field guides have similar career trajectories? (3) How do field guides perceive the meaning, purpose and challenges of guiding?

Our study, based on interviews with 24 field guides in the Pilanesberg Game Reserve, South Africa, offers an in-depth account of their work and career contexts through their personal narratives. We make several contributions to the literature and practice. Firstly, we provide insights into the career paths and aspirations of field guides working in the South African safari tourism industry. Secondly, we shed light on the nature of field guide work and professional identity. Thirdly, we provide valuable insights into the motivations that drive field guides in their work.

Background

South Africa’s nature-based tourism sector is one of the largest contributors to the national economy (STATS-SA 2024). Safari tourism, in particular, depends on delivering high-quality, guided wildlife experiences that differentiate South Africa from competing destinations (Van der Merwe & Saayman 2014). The sector generates employment in often remote and economically marginal regions, making it a vehicle for rural livelihoods and community development (Tichaawa & Lekgau 2020). Yet despite its economic and conservation significance, the workforce (field guides) that delivers its core product has received limited scholarly attention relative to tourist demand, business operations or visitor motivations.

At the heart of any African safari experience, one will find skilled field guides who bring the intricacies of the bush and the wild to life (Smargiasso 2024). Field guides operating in ecotourism simultaneously serve as guides, motivators and mentors (Koroglu & Guzel 2013; Weiler & Davis 1993). Guides present information that helps tourists to understand and appreciate the natural environment, encouraging them to be environmentally friendly and responsible. They do so by what is referred to as ‘interpretation’ in ecotourism (e.g. Orams 1996), that is, explaining the meaning of natural and cultural resources to visitors. When performed well, it deepens learning and enjoyment while motivating low-impact behaviour and supporting conservation, thereby strengthening the long-term sustainability of protected areas (Newsome, Moore & Dowling 2012). Guides are therefore key front-line players and a critical success factor in wildlife tourism (Curtin 2010; Pearce & Dowling 2019).

While tourist motivations for engaging in nature-based activities have received substantial attention (e.g. Chiu, Lee & Chen 2014; Luo & Deng 2008), the motivations of guides themselves remain largely unexplored. This is notable given that a skilful guide is considered one of the most valuable assets of a safari destination (Kabii & Wandaka 2021) and that guides play a central role in shaping tourists’ encounters with nature and conservation (Weiler & Black 2015).

These patterns connect to broader scholarship on meaningful work, which examines how individuals find purpose, significance and self-realisation through their occupations (Rosso, Dekas & Wrzesniewski 2010). Related literature on work as a vocation or calling suggests that when workers perceive their occupation as aligned with a higher purpose or deep personal identity, they may sustain commitment despite poor material conditions (Bunderson & Thompson 2009). A recent meta-analysis of 201 studies found that experiencing work as a calling is strongly associated with perceived meaningfulness, work engagement and psychological well-being, but can also function as a ‘double-edged sword’ when strong vocational identity leads workers to tolerate poor conditions or over-invest at the expense of personal well-being (Dobrow et al. 2023). Bunderson and Thompson’s (2009) study of zookeepers, for instance, revealed how workers with a strong sense of calling accepted lower pay and difficult conditions because of their deep identification with animal care. Whether field guiding functions as a vocation in this sense, and how such meaning-making intersects with the structural precarity of tourism employment (Robinson et al. 2019), has not been empirically examined.

Internationally, research on tour guides has documented a profession characterised by structural undervaluation and precarious employment conditions. Ap and Wong (2001) identified low pay, lack of career progression and inadequate professional recognition as persistent issues facing guides in Hong Kong. Similar concerns have been reported across diverse contexts, from Scandinavia (Løland & Hallgren 2023) to East Asia (Zhang & Chow 2004), where guides face irregular income, seasonal instability and limited access to benefits. These conditions reflect broader patterns in tourism employment, which is widely characterised by precarity, low status and high turnover across the sector (Robinson et al. 2019). Despite often possessing specialist knowledge and performing emotionally demanding work, guides frequently occupy a marginal position within tourism labour markets, caught between professional expertise and service work (Ap & Wong 2001).

Within South Africa, research on tourist guides has highlighted concerns around decent work. De Beer et al. (2014) found that tourist guides (in general) across the country faced low pay, limited career prospects and insufficient social protections. Kapa et al. (2023), surveying 138 tourist guides, identified challenges including competition from illegal operators, insufficient training opportunities and a lack of industry recognition. While these studies encompass broader guide populations rather than field guides specifically, they suggest that structural undervaluation is a pervasive feature of guiding work in the country. In the safari sub-sector, Sithole et al. (2024) examined small-scale safari tourism businesses in Mpumalanga, documenting challenges around market access and post-COVID-19 recovery for owner-operators. Their work illustrates the sector’s entrepreneurial dimension but does not address the experiences of employed field guides.

Research on the work and careers of qualified, employed field guides in Africa is limited. Nyahunzvi and Njerekai (2013) depicted an occupation characterised by precarity and weak regulations in Zimbabwe. Guides often worked without licenses and therefore received lower wages. Many guides were employed on short-term contracts, and most relied on tips to make up for low, unstable pay. The study described hazardous working conditions, inadequate training and the absence of social protections such as medical insurance. Undervalued by their employers and the public, participants viewed guiding as a temporary occupation until better opportunities (often in South Africa) arose. Similarly, Melubo and Buzinde (2016) found that Tanzanian field guides, particularly those employed by locally owned operators, faced insecure, short-term contracts and were paid only for guiding, not for other tasks. Participants reported irregular salaries, dependence on tips, and limited access to health or retirement benefits, while also competing with unqualified guides for work.

Collectively, these studies portray field guiding in parts of East and Southern Africa as an insecure and poorly regulated occupation. Yet they also point to South Africa as a comparatively more desirable destination (Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013), perceived to offer stronger institutional structures, larger tourism markets and potentially more stable employment. The current body of literature, now over a decade old, provides only fragmentary and context-specific insights. Consequently, we lack empirical understanding of why individuals enter the field of guiding profession in South Africa, how they navigate their careers and how they perceive and construct their professional identities.

Research methods and design

Study design and setting

The study adopts an exploratory qualitative approach. Given the near absence of prior research on field guide work and careers in South Africa, a qualitative design is appropriate for generating an initial understanding of a poorly documented phenomenon (Creswell & Creswell 2018). Semi-structured interviews were selected as the primary data collection method because they allow participants to describe their experiences in their own terms while maintaining sufficient structure to address the research questions consistently across participants. This approach enables the rich, contextually grounded insights needed to capture the complexity of field guides’ lived experiences, professional identities and career trajectories.

Research was carried out in the Pilanesberg Game Reserve, located in South Africa’s North West Province. Pilanesberg is a reserve that spans 50 000 hectares of land, incorporating hills, valleys and broken rock country created by volcanic activity (North West Parks & Tourism Board 2024). The reserve offers tourists the Big Five (elephant, rhino, leopard, lion and buffalo), various other game species and diverse birdlife (Siyabona Africa 2025). Tourists are permitted to self-drive in the reserve. However, many stay at one of the lodges (e.g. Bakubung, Kwa Maritane, Shepards Tree Lodge, Ivory Lodge, to name but a few) in the reserve that offer game drives, or at nearby hotels or resorts (e.g. Sun City, Kingdom Come), and book game drives through operators. The researchers worked with nine safari lodges that employed field guides.

Data collection

We conducted 24 semi-structured interviews in March 2025 with field guides in Pilanesberg, yielding a sufficiently large sample for this type of research (Saunders & Townsend 2016). Access was facilitated by the North West Parks & Tourism Board, the provincial body that manages the reserve. Data were collected through convenience sampling, with participating companies inviting volunteer guides to take part. We recognise that employer-mediated recruitment may have introduced selection bias, as guides who volunteered may differ systematically from those who did not. However, participants frequently offered critical perspectives on their employers, clients and industry bodies, and several stated explicitly that they had volunteered because they considered it important for their profession to be heard. This suggests that employer mediation did not systematically filter out dissenting voices. Notably, the final sample included participants from seven of the nine operators active in Pilanesberg, with experience ranging from 7 months to 25 years, varied job ranks and both strongly positive and critically negative accounts of their work, suggesting reasonable diversity of perspective despite the non-random approach.

The interview guide included a series of general questions regarding the participants (e.g. demographic information; how long they have worked in Pilanesberg), the participant’s career trajectory, the job itself (e.g. their typical day at work, what they like or dislike about their job) and how field guides saw themselves (e.g. do they identify as a field guide; are they an active member of their professional group). We also included questions on career aspirations (e.g. do they see themselves working in this industry for a long time). Interviews lasted 37–72 min, were recorded with consent and were transcribed for analysis.

Our study adhered to ethical guidelines as approved by the institutional review board at the first author, Peet van der Merwe’s, institution, ensuring that: (1) the participants were given sufficient information about the study, (2) each participant subsequently signed a consent form, and (3) the rights and privacy of all the participants were fully protected throughout the research process. Measures taken to maintain data confidentiality included not requesting sensitive data throughout the research, thereby respecting participants’ privacy. Any personal identifying information (e.g., demographics) was handled in accordance with the rules set out in the Protection of Personal Information Act (Act 4 of 2013). Ethics approval was obtained from the EMS-REC ethics committee of the Faculty of Economics and Management Sciences at the North-West University, with ethics clearance number NWU-01861-24-A4.

In addition to interviews, we reviewed available documentation on field guide qualifications from the FGASA (2020). Field Guides Association of Southern Africa is one of the providers of the professional certification that field guides need before they can register and get employed at South African parks and reserves. These documents provided insight into the formal structures and training underpinning field guiding.

Sample

Table 1 presents an overview of the sample. The participants worked for seven safari operator companies in Pilanesberg. Most of these companies were safari lodges, but we also spoke with participants employed by two tour operators contracted to conduct game drives. The sample included 4 women and 20 men; 19 field guides were black, and five were white. The average age was 37.5 years; two field guides were Zimbabwean, six were from the Pilanesberg region, and the rest were from elsewhere in South Africa. Participants had permanent contracts and worked at different levels: 16 held the job title of field guide, six were head or senior field guides, and two held the dual roles of head field guide and lodge manager. They had varying levels of experience, but most were very experienced: six had worked for up to 2 years, five for 5 years and 13 for 6–25 years in Pilanesberg. (FGASA is formally linked to CATHSSETA, the national authority that accredits training and qualifications in tourism and hospitality in South Africa (FGASA 2020). In South Africa, entry-level training requirements for field guides have been formalised through the National Qualifications Framework (NQF), which allows field guides to work in the country. Field guides can obtain the Professional Guide Qualifications (NQF2–NQF4) and a variety of certifications, such as rifle handling (FGASA 2020). Each qualification allows the field guide to grow in their career and perform additional activities with clients.

Data analysis

Analysis proceeded iteratively to identify recurring patterns and themes reflecting how field guides perceive their work, professional identity and careers (Creswell & Creswell 2018). The analysis unfolded in several stages.

Firstly, all authors repeatedly read the transcripts to gain an overall sense of the narratives and identify initial ideas. Secondly, the second author, Johannes Kraak, who had conducted half of the interviews and therefore had deep familiarity with the data, performed open coding, assigning descriptive labels to meaningful segments of text, while bearing the research questions in mind. Thirdly, the first author, Peet van der Merwe, who was also familiar with the data from conducting the other half of the interviews, reviewed and refined these codes, comparing them across participants to identify shared ideas, relationships or tensions. Fourthly, the third author, Neva Bojovic, who had not been involved in data collection and therefore brought an outsider perspective, independently reviewed the emerging thematic structure. This provided an analytical audit, as the third author, Neva Bojovic, could identify assumptions or interpretive leaps that the interviewing authors may have taken for granted. Fifthly, all three authors discussed the themes collectively, refining and finalising them through deliberation. Finally, the thematic structure was reviewed against the existing literature to ensure analytical coherence and identify points of convergence or departure.

Coding was conducted manually, using Microsoft Excel. Saturation was assessed at the thematic level (Nelson 2017). During analysis, we tracked whether new interviews introduced new thematic categories or whether they reinforced and elaborated existing ones. We observed that the core thematic structure stabilised during the later stages of analysis, with subsequent transcripts providing confirmatory evidence and additional illustrative material rather than generating new themes. We acknowledge, however, that saturation is an interpretive judgement rather than an objective threshold, and that additional interviews in different reserves or with different guide populations could surface further themes. The final thematic structure is presented in Online Appendix 1.

We briefly reflect on our positionality in relation to the study. The research team comprises South African and European academics. One of the authors, Peet van der Merwe, is a South African tourism management expert with previous experience in tour guiding, although not in field guiding specifically. This provided familiarity with the broader South African tourism landscape and cultural context, while maintaining analytical distance from the specific field of the guiding profession. Another author, Johannes Kraak, based in Europe, is currently enrolled on the theoretical component of the NQF-2 field guide qualification. However, as this training started after data collection was complete, it informed aspects of the analysis but did not shape the interview process. None of the authors has worked as an employed field guide, which meant we approached the interviews without insider assumptions about daily routines or workplace norms, but it also required us to rely on participants’ willingness to explain taken-for-granted aspects of their work. Both researchers who conducted the interviews were white men, while most participants were black men. We remained attentive to how this racial and gender dynamic may have influenced participants’ openness, particularly regarding sensitive topics such as employer relations, remuneration or experiences of discrimination. Interviews were conducted privately and confidentially to mitigate such effects. Throughout the analysis, the combination of insider (South African) and outsider (European) perspectives within the team provided an analytical balance, allowing us to challenge each other’s assumptions. We maintained awareness that our academic positioning and lack of direct industry experience shaped both the questions we asked and our interpretation of responses.

Ethical considerations

Ethical clearance to conduct this study was obtained from the North-West University and Economic and Management Sciences Research Ethics Committee (EMS-REC) (No. NWU- 01861-24-A4).

Results

We organise the findings around the three themes that address the three research questions we used to explore the work environment and careers of field guides in South Africa. Before presenting these themes, we briefly outline the employment conditions shared across the sample, as these form the backdrop against which participants’ experiences should be understood.

All participants had a permanent contract. Their employers paid for the mandatory professional licenses, and they were granted various forms of healthcare insurance, pension plans, profit-sharing and opportunities for additional training. Most of the participants lived in the employer-provided personnel quarters. Some lodges allowed partners and children to live in the quarters. Some allowed family members to stay, visit and enjoy game drives at a reduced price or free of charge. The participants worked long hours, often waking up before 4:00 and going to bed after 22:00. Most had 6 days off per month.

Field guides work and identity

This section presents findings on field guides’ perceptions of their work and professional identity, organised around two sub-themes: perceptions of work and professional identity.

Field guide work

Our analysis uncovered two main themes regarding the work of field guides: the multitude of job roles and the (un)predictable nature of the job. The first theme identified was field guides that perceived three roles in their work: (1) field guiding, (2) other hospitality activities and (3) duties and admin. The visible component field guides are most associated with the actual game drive, during which they guide, sharing their vast knowledge of sightings:

‘We move out into the park, and you respond to different sightings. Obviously, you conduct the game drives, you talk to the guests, explain about whatever you want to talk about. If it’s about flowers, trees, animals, insects, geology, history of the park.’ (P20)

However, the game drive includes many related activities (e.g. preparing the vehicle, picking up guests, and preparing drinks and snacks for the drive), which are mostly invisible to clients. As one of the participants described:

‘Come here at four o’clock. Prepare the hot box for my guests. Make sure that I have coffee and biscuits for them. Then start the wake-up calls, waking them up to prepare for the morning game drive. Then I will be here with them, interacting with them … By three, I’ll have to be at the lodge again. Then I’ll go to the admin and call them, and ask if they’re joining the afternoon game drive, and I’ll ask their drink orders … come to the bar area and collect them, and prepare my cooler box, put some ice, put the drinks, then wait for them.’ (P8)

Beyond game drives, field guides perform two additional categories of work. The second job role involves other hospitality activities, including welcoming clients upon arrival at the lodge, picking them up or accompanying them back to their room, procuring supplies for a client and addressing their needs, such as fixing a light or removing a snake from the room. Sometimes, a field guide is appointed as the duty ranger, in charge of organising and coordinating game drives and hospitality activities for the day. The third job role involves duties and administrative tasks, such as washing and cleaning the vehicle, taking vehicles to the workshop, cleaning hot water bottles and other materials for morning coffee or evening drinks and snacks, and checking water levels in reservoirs. These activities take up much of the field guides’ workday:

‘Average day for me, I would say, probably about 8 hours a day that I spend out there physically with the guests on the vehicle. And then in between, probably about 2 to 3 hours, depending on what activities are taking place.’ (P17)

Some guides in managerial roles (i.e. head field guide, senior field guide, manager) have extra administrative responsibilities. They check the vehicles, ensure uniforms are taken to the cleaners, check that maintenance is up to date, create rota plans, mediate any tensions within the team, make sure junior guides receive proper coaching or handle the administration.

The second theme that emerged from the data was the contradiction between routine and unpredictability in the field guides’ work. On the one hand, they have a very structured work environment with fixed times for game drives. When asked to describe a typical workday, all participants described it as very structured. At the same time, the safari tourism sector is influenced by peak periods in visitor numbers during holidays and weekends, which can affect how field guides’ work is organised:

‘It really depends if we are busy or not. Sometimes it gets very hectic that you don’t get a chance to go to your house to eat. You get to do three game drives a day … And sometimes it gets very lazy, where it’s not busy.’ (P11)

The job of a field guide can also hold many surprises. The most common unpredictable element is the animals. As they move freely throughout the park, field guides constantly adjust their pace and narrative in response to (lack of) sightings. To increase the chances of interesting sightings for their clients, guides inform each other via radio of rarer sightings, such as lions or leopards. However, clients can also be unpredictable, exerting pressure on the field guide to come up with a solution:

‘What are you going to find now? Already by that time, you’ve seen antelopes, you’ve seen whatever. Your aim was to try to find the cats, and then you find one, and then they say, you have to go. So sometimes you wonder what’s happening. It becomes so sad, painful, because you don’t know what to do.’ (P3)

Professional identity

Having established the nature of field guide work, we now turn to how participants construct their professional identity in relation to these varied roles and demands. We found three ways in which field guides construct and express their professional identities: (1) embracing and defending the field guide identity, (2) expanding the identity and (3) defining professional belonging through formal and informal networks.

The majority of participants (n = 22) expressed a strong attachment to the field guide role. They emphasised their confidence and commitment to the profession, for example, ‘I’m a field guide. That’s all I am’ (P10). However, several participants also felt that the field guide profession was often misunderstood or undervalued by others (e.g. clients; we will return to this later in the findings in the ‘challenges’). They engaged in what can be described as an identity defence, asserting their professionalism and qualifications to challenge the low status projected onto the profession (e.g. in response to being perceived as ‘drivers’ rather than trained experts). For example, one participant highlighted:

‘I’m a field guide. I studied for it. It’s like saying I’m a doctor. If you’re a doctor, you worked hard to be a doctor. That is your title and you own it, and you have a hundred percent right to be addressed that way. And I’m very first, they know, my colleagues will tell you, a guest will come and say, are you a driver? And I’m like, no, a driver just comes with a license. I’m a guide. I come with a qualification. I worked hard for this thing.’ (P13)

A substantial group (n = 14) described a more fluid sense of identity, seeing themselves not only as guides, but also as conservationists, educators or community ambassadors. Expanding the identity reflects the multiple functions they perform, the personal meaning they attach to their role in ecotourism and oftentimes their career aspirations and perceived future selves:

‘I feel like I’m not just a field guide but I’m more of a field guide and conservationist at the same time.’ (P6)

This expanded sense of self was reinforced through the professional communities in which guides participate. Some guides extend their conservation role into surrounding communities. One of the participants volunteers in schools said:

‘… school kids as well … we do tell them about the littering… the teachers will call you … come and speak to … teach these kids about littering.’ (P22)

Another participant in a youth education programme stated:

‘… we teach them about nature, anything about flora and fauna, and then just for them to have a clue. And also, a bit of advising in terms of taking careers.’ (P24)

Such initiatives demonstrate how guides serve as conservation ambassadors beyond the park’s boundaries.

Field guides defined their professional belonging through both formal and informal networks. Formal belonging was tied to membership of organisations such as FGASA, which most viewed as a necessary licensing structure rather than an active source of professional support. Informal belonging, however, is central to their everyday work and sense of community. Guides formed close peer networks across lodges and companies, for example, through park-wide WhatsApp groups, sports teams and collaborative communication about wildlife sightings, fostering solidarity and shared identity. As one guide explained:

‘We have a group in WhatsApp we call it Pilanesberg Sighting. We update each other on the sightings. Maybe the activity that’s going on during the day. Maybe if I spotted cheetahs on the other side, I will post that picture and let them know folks, I saw three cheetahs on the other side of the park.’ (P8)

Field guide careers

Field guides entered the profession through diverse pathways and expressed varied aspirations for their future careers, which we present next.

Entry pathways into guiding

Unlike in the study of Nyahunzvi and Njerekai (2013), who reported most of their sample in Zimbabwe guided because of a lack of better work options, our analysis uncovered three distinct pathways into guiding: (1) affinity with nature; (2) social influences; and (3) access, opportunity and career change. These findings suggest a more intentional set of trajectories, highlighting that field guides are drawn to the profession for varied and often personally meaningful reasons.

The first pathway to guiding was affinity with nature. This group of participants described formative nature-related experiences from their childhood (e.g. holidays to Kruger National Park). Others watched nature documentaries on television or grew up around animals, as one explained:

‘I grew up with ducks and rabbits. Hamsters, dogs, cats, you name it. So, I think that’s how I fell in love. Also, we would go to the farms a lot. Visit farms or go to the farm to feed. I would love to follow searching for insects, different flowers.’ (P20)

The second pathway was shaped by social influence, particularly through friends, family and other contacts. Fifteen participants were exposed to the sector through relatives, friends or established contacts who provided either inspiration or practical access to training opportunities. Of these, seven had relatives who worked directly as field guides, rangers or in related park roles. One participant explained how his brother, a field guide himself, helped him move into field guiding:

‘I was doing HR, I had so much pressure. That’s when I learned from my brother, who was already in the field. My brother is also a field guide. He’s been doing that for a long time in Botswana. So, then he’s the one who advised me about, okay, maybe can you just pursue something along these lines.’ (P15)

The final pathway into guiding included access to a career in guiding (e.g. through a paid internship) or an opportunity that facilitated a career change. For instance, one participant explained that she was unemployed and contacted an NGO looking for youth to train as guides, rangers, chefs or housekeepers:

‘I found out that this field guiding thing, let me just give it a try. I applied. So, I did my research about it. I got successful. And then that’s where I fell in love with nature. I mean, that’s when I noticed that this is actually something I can do on a daily basis.’ (P23)

Future outlook and career aspirations

While the preceding section examined how field guides entered the profession, we also explored whether they intended to remain. In contrast to Nyahunzvi and Njerekai’s (2013) finding that Zimbabwean guides viewed their work as temporary until better opportunities arose, our participants expressed more varied and often long-term aspirations. We identified three career aspirations: (1) staying in guiding and possibly adding activities, (2) desire for growth while remaining in a related field and (3) planning to exit guiding and the sector.

The first career aspiration was to remain in guiding. Some participants could not see themselves doing any other job:

‘I don’t want to do anything else. Yes. I don’t want to be anything else. I’ve done it. I’ve been in an office. I lived in a big city, and I lived the corporate existence, and I didn’t like it. So, this is, this is my end game.’ (P10)

Other participants were considering continuing part-time field guiding, adding other activities such as artwork or field guiding at a lodge while conducting tours and transfers on the side. Several participants wanted to grow further in guiding by becoming a fully qualified trail guide, allowing them to conduct walking tours:

‘I would prefer to do more walks than driving. Because there is a lot to learn, especially when you are walking, get to feel nature, touch the trees and everything.’ (P8)

The second set of aspirations related to the desire to grow in the field, for instance, advancing into managerial roles, pursuing conservation or establishing their own game reserve or business. These ambitions were driven by varied motivations, including a desire to deepen engagement with nature and a greater financial stability:

‘I see myself working in this line of job for the longest time. Now I’m busy researching to do nature conservation. So yeah, I think it’s something that I would rather pursue in the future, just for, obviously, financial security.’ (P13)

Finally, three guides envisioned a departure from guiding and the ecotourism sector altogether. One planned to pursue property investment and establish a private business, another to become a farmer and a third intended to return home to be closer to family, having already qualified as a primary school teacher in preparation for this career change:

‘In the coming few years, I see myself as a teacher … I find it hard being far, far, far from everyone and everything.’ (P23)

Meaning, purpose and challenges of guiding

Participants described guiding as both deeply meaningful and structurally challenging, with four main sub-themes emerging: two positive (connection to nature and sense of purpose and recognition) and two negative (workplace stressors and low status of the profession).

Positive aspects

A connection with nature was expressed by all 24 participants. Field guides frequently described being surrounded by nature as providing fulfilment, tranquillity and escape from everyday concerns:

‘This is the best office ever in my life. Even guests will remind me that we’ve got the best office. Because obviously, no stress out in the bush … we complement each other with the animals.’ (P22)

Some explained how constant immersion in nature deepened their enthusiasm and curiosity, inspiring ongoing learning about the park. This often encouraged them to look beyond the Big Five and other popular attractions, focusing instead on smaller animals, plants and the broader ecosystem. They would then share this knowledge with colleagues and clients.

The second positive aspect is the purpose and recognition guides receive from the different areas of their work. Interaction with clients was key, as this is where field guides felt central to the experience, creating memorable encounters, educating guests about nature and conservation and ensuring their safety:

‘Making sure that my guests are happy. Just to, you know, the guests travel from far for this experience. So, I just love giving them that memorable experience.’ (P23)

Beyond clients, some spoke of how their position (e.g. head field guide) allowed them to train, protect or help their peers, and that many of the guides move up the ranks and are essential to the lodges:

‘We literally run lodges. That’s where you get your private lodges, opening up lodges and being run by field guides, like somebody whose basic profession is a field guide, just different levels.’ (P13)

Others viewed their work as contributing to the promotion of ecotourism and conservation, which in turn supports employment opportunities for others. As P11 explained, such initiatives had even enabled them to enter the profession:

‘And also, it is important because it has created employment. So, every year, tourists and [lodge name], they give out bursaries. So, like I’ve said in the beginning that I’m the product as well. They take four students, two to four students, depending on how good you were in the interview. So, they’re creating employment.’ (P11)

Participants also highlighted their role as agents of conservation. Many explained how they stop for animals crossing the road, pick up plastic and bottles in the park and explain to their clients how dangerous littering and poaching are for the park:

‘The big thing for me to try just show that it’s not just about the big five. It’s from the bird to the worm, to the beetle, to the tree, to the grass. If you take this, that disappears. If that disappears, you lose all life form over here. So, you try your best to explain the ecology and the conservation, why we’re trying to keep the animals alive and keep them healthy and keep them protected from any poaching or anything of the sorts. We try to leave it as natural as possible. You only intervene if you need to, in terms of rhinos, for example.’ (P12)

Field guides also received recognition from families and communities regarding their job, as well as the pride that field guides feel when they can support their families. As Participant P1 opined:

‘This job has given me the privilege to be that certain person to my family. My kids, they see me as a father. My family, they see me as a provider.’ (P1)

Negative aspects

The first source of negative experiences for field guides arose from a range of workplace stressors. The two existing studies in Tanzania and Zimbabwe have already addressed salary issues and extra duties outside game drives (Melubo & Buzinde 2016; Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013). Our analysis includes those stressors but also expands on others stressors.Field guides work long hours, perform physically demanding work with little time for studying or rest, are often away from their families for extended periods, and generally earn low salaries, making them dependent on tips to supplement their income.

The second group of work stressors is the infrastructural and environmental conditions. Poor road quality and long distances meant that certain field guides had to drive 45 min–60 min (a round trip that takes up almost two-thirds of the 3 h game drive) before they would get to good sightings (P6). Overcrowding at popular sightings (e.g. around lions or leopards) created frustration and competition. Adding to the hardship is working outside year-round, despite difficult weather conditions such as cold, rain or scorching heat.

Clients were also a major source of workplace stress, being ‘very demanding and very strenuous’ (P10). For instance, clients often ‘get frustrated if they don’t see animals’ (P1), or they make the job difficult by ‘want to talk over you’ (take control) (P4). Several participants reported client misbehaviour, ranging from littering to fighting with other clients, while female guides, in particular, faced scepticism about their competence. At the start of a drive, some clients openly questioned their abilities, evoking gender stereotypes by asking, for example, ‘Are we safe with you?’ (P11). Similarly, another described:

‘Being in this field as a lady, I’ve noticed that as soon as you meet your guests, and they notice it’s a lady taking us on a drive, they’ll be like, yeah. They’re not too sure …’ (P23)

Next, work stressors were grouped into categories related to professional standards and workplace culture. Participants expressed frustration with colleagues who ignored park rules (e.g. speeding, crowding at sightings, or refusing to rotate viewing positions) and with employers who undervalued their expertise or ignored safety concerns.

As we noted, administrative or non-guiding duties consume significant time, particularly for those in senior or managerial roles. Many participants view these tasks and duties as stressors that prevent them from resting and studying for their core guiding role. As one guide summarised:

‘A lodge environment is very difficult because you have to be awake when they’re [tourists] awake. You have to go to sleep when they go to sleep. Every time they want you, you have to be there. When they check in, you have to be there. When you check out, you have to be there. So, you never really get a time to rest or do anything else.’ (P10)

The second negative aspect is the profession’s low status. Participants reported persistent undervaluation of their professional expertise by employers, clients or the public. These three (employers, clients, or the public) were explicitly referred to as ‘drivers’ by clients (P11, P13, P16), while others noted that guiding is seen as a skill, not a profession and that guides are treated as ‘domestic workers’, despite expensive training (P21), that the occupation is not taken seriously as a career (P4, P16), or that guides lack professional recognition and respect (P2, P9). As one of the participants described:

‘I think maybe because people don’t take it seriously, that’s where you end up being referred as a driver. And sometimes, unfortunately, I think it’s the worst in terms of trying to make people understand where you are, the dangers of not listening. Because you’ve got wild animals.’ (P16)

Low status has broader consequences. As field guiding is often not seen as a career, many people who might be interested in becoming a guide do not know about these job opportunities, whom to contact for more information, or how to apply for training. Several participants stated that they were not aware of guiding as a career choice and that they came across information by accident or through a friend or family member. This suggests that potential future employees, such as people living close to the park, may not enter the ecotourism industry:

‘But I had no information of how to become a field guide. What is a field guide? I had no idea. I just knew there are people that actually take people on a game drive and there are people that monitor the animals like I needed to do research in terms of the difference and everything.’ (P13)

Discussion

This study explored how field guides in the Pilanesberg Game Reserve perceive their work, professional identity, career trajectories and the meaning and challenges of their occupation. While existing research on field guides in Africa has been limited, focusing on Zimbabwe and Tanzania (Melubo & Buzinde 2016; Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013), our findings offer new insights into the lived experiences of field guides working in South Africa’s Pilanesberg Game Reserve. The results reveal a profession that is simultaneously rewarding and precarious. Guiding offers deep personal fulfilment and connection to nature, yet remains characterised by long working hours, modest pay and limited recognition. Next, we situate these findings within the broader literature on tourism. We also discuss managerial implications, the study’s limitations and areas for further research.

Contributions to literature

This research will contribute to scholarship on tourism labour and precarity by offering an empirically grounded account of field guide career trajectories within the South African ecotourism industry. The existing research on field guiding in Africa portrays it as precarious, informal and short term (Melubo & Buzinde 2016; Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013), while aligning with broader discussions of tourism employment as being low status or transitional (e.g. Robinson et al. 2019). Our findings add to this characterisation, highlighting the importance of conducting context-specific research rather than generalising results across countries and institutional conditions.

Unlike their Zimbabwean and Tanzanian counterparts (Melubo & Buzinde 2016; Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013), many field guides in our study viewed guiding as a chosen career rather than a stopgap occupation. Many expressed a desire for long-term growth within ecotourism. This suggests that guiding, at least in this context, constitutes a form of vocational commitment rather than precarious necessity. Our participants’ accounts of guiding as inseparable from their identity, their reluctance to imagine alternative careers and their willingness to endure material hardship for the sake of proximity to nature are consistent with what Bunderson and Thompson (2009) termed occupational callings. However, unlike their zookeepers, who largely accepted low status as a feature of their devotion, field guides in our study actively defended their professional credentials and resisted symbolic demotion to ‘drivers’. This suggests that calling and professional identity assertion can coexist and that vocational commitment does not necessarily preclude demands for recognition.

Secondly, this study contributes to the literature on tourism labour and professional identity by providing a detailed, context-specific understanding of field guide work and identity in the South African ecotourism context of the Pilanesberg Game Reserve. As discussed in the background section, existing literature has largely focused on the interpretive and educational roles of guides (Curtin 2010; Orams 1996; Pearce & Dowling 2019; Weiler & Davis 1993). Our findings extend this by revealing how these ideals of interpretation and environmental stewardship are embedded within a complex set of job realities that include hospitality, logistics and administrative responsibilities. Field guides in our sample demonstrated a professional identity that extends far beyond the interpretive ideal that dominates ecotourism theory.

When compared with prior studies (Melubo & Buzinde 2016; Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013), our findings highlight both continuities and contrasts. Like their Zimbabwean and Tanzanian counterparts, field guides in Pilanesberg face demanding working conditions and long hours. However, their employment structures differ markedly. All the participants held formal qualifications (e.g. FGASA, NQF2 or higher) and permanent contracts, reflecting a higher degree of institutionalisation and professionalisation of the occupation. This supports earlier suggestions that South Africa offers a more structured and regulated environment for guiding (Nyahunzvi & Njerekai 2013), yet our findings also reveal that regulation alone does not guarantee professional recognition. Despite formal training and extensive ecological knowledge, many field guides continue to experience symbolic undervaluation, often being perceived by employers or tourists as ‘drivers’ rather than expert interpreters. Consequently, the field guides in our study worked continuously to defend their expertise and affirm their contributions to conservation and education. This negotiation between the interpretive ideal and service realities demonstrates how professionalism in ecotourism guiding is both performed and contested in everyday work.

Gender adds a further dimension to identity negotiation. Although our sample included only four women, their accounts suggest that female guides face additional identity work at the outset of interactions, having to establish competence against gendered assumptions before they can perform their interpretive role. This resonates with broader findings on women in male-dominated professions and warrants dedicated investigation in future research.

Thirdly, our study addresses a gap in the literature on motivation in ecotourism labour. As noted earlier, the motivations of field guides were left under-researched, despite their central role in shaping tourists’ encounters with nature and conservation (Weiler & Black 2015). Our findings reveal that field guides’ engagement in guiding is driven primarily by intrinsic motives, including a deep affinity with nature, the satisfaction of educating and inspiring guests, and pride in contributing to conservation. This is counterbalanced against extrinsic constraints such as long hours, modest pay and guest pressures. This interplay resonates with recent evidence showing that callings strongly predict both eudaimonic outcomes (meaningfulness, psychological well-being) and hedonic outcomes (job satisfaction, subjective well-being), and are also associated with lower strain (Dobrow et al. 2023). Yet this meaning-making coexists with material precarity, illustrating what has been described as the ‘double-edged sword’ of deeply meaningful work (Bunderson & Thompson 2009; Dobrow et al. 2023), in which a strong vocational identity may lead workers to tolerate poor conditions that would otherwise drive them to exit. This helps to explain both persistence and turnover among field guides.

Managerial implications

This research also makes several contributions to practice. Our findings show that lodges, parks and other (non-governmental) bodies in the ecotourism sector, such as FGASA or provincial tourism boards, should formalise and improve communication on entry pathways by providing clear, accessible information on training routes, requirements and points of contact. Several guides told us they were interested in becoming field guides but had no idea where to start, and that many people in local communities do not know these jobs exist or what they entail. Targeted, long-term outreach initiatives are required. These may include structured information campaigns, school engagement programmes, community meetings and visibility at industry events such as Indaba and World Travel Market (WTM) Africa. Efforts should prioritise communities surrounding parks and reserves, where proximity may facilitate both access and retention. Such a campaign would fit all three entry pathways we identified. Attracting candidates with a passion for nature and a better understanding of the job could result in greater interest in guiding and efficient recruitment (i.e. fewer candidates failing when a group is sent to NQF2 training on a bursary) and a better fit with the company for which they would work.

Secondly, lodges and other operators could benefit from rebranding field guides as a high-status group (i.e. experts with unique knowledge). As skilful guides are one of the most important assets of a safari destination (Kabii & Wandaka 2021), highlighting the high status these guides deserve could have various positive effects. More employer acknowledgement could improve job satisfaction and commitment among field guides and, by extension, the client experience. Such acknowledgement is not necessarily monetary; it could also take the form of time to focus on or study the core job of guiding, or of offering exposure and gratitude when someone does a good job (e.g. a field guide of the month photo at the lodge entrance). This rebranding should also be directed towards the clients. Several field guides stated that guests see them as mere drivers. Lodges could therefore benefit from more clearly branding the field guides as experts. If clients know they are taking a game drive with uniquely trained experts, they might engage with the field guides differently, leading to a more enriching experience in which the guides can be true experience brokers. The field guide is the face of the company and with the right branding, clients can view it as one of the unique elements that make their safari holidays unforgettable.

The third implication is the need to elevate safari guide training beyond short courses towards a more comprehensive, accredited qualification – potentially at diploma or degree level. A structured 3-year training programme would not only strengthen technical and ecological competencies, but also professionalise the occupation, positioning guiding as a high-status career intersecting tourism and conservation. Such a shift could enhance the credibility and perceived importance of guides as custodians of natural heritage and cultural interpretation. However, this approach carries cost implications, particularly for aspiring guides from rural or disadvantaged backgrounds who may lack the financial means to pursue extended formal education. Therefore, while it is essential to raise the academic and professional standards of guide training, equitable access must be ensured through bursaries, learnerships and blended training pathways that combine classroom learning with field-based experience. The overarching goal is to enhance the status and societal recognition of safari guides as skilled professionals who are integral to conservation and sustainable tourism.

Conservation implications

Our findings carry direct implications for conservation in protected areas. Firstly, field guides in this study actively engage in conservation behaviours beyond their formal job descriptions, including stopping to let animals crossroads, removing litter from the park and educating clients about the dangers of poaching. Their daily interpretation work extends beyond the ‘Big Five’ to encompass broader ecological systems, fostering deeper environmental awareness among visitors. Secondly, many participants identified themselves not merely as guides but as conservationists, suggesting that professional identity and conservation commitment are mutually reinforcing. Thirdly, the low visibility of guiding as a career limits the pipeline of conservation-minded professionals entering protected areas, particularly from surrounding communities. Improving entry pathway communication could therefore serve both employment and conservation goals simultaneously. Together, these findings suggest that investing in field guide retention, recognition and professional development is not only a labour issue but also a conservation strategy, given that guides serve as the primary mediators through whom visitors develop an understanding of and commitment to protected environments. As stated by Dioum (1969), ‘in the end, we will conserve only what we love, we will love only what we understand, and we will understand only what we are taught’. Field guides fulfil this role.

Limitations and future research

Like any other research, our study has several limitations which open areas for further research. Firstly, limitation is the scope of our exploratory study. Although we are confident that we captured valid reflections from Pilanesberg-based field guides, we did not interview field guides who work at other protected areas in South Africa, such as national parks (SANPARKS) or private reserves. Even though most of our participants had worked or interned in other parks and reserves, future research could investigate potential differences in field guides’ work elsewhere in South Africa.

Secondly, we focused on field guides. As a result, we might have missed relevant information and insights into the policies governing the operation of parks, reserves and lodges that could enrich the field guides’ narratives. Future research could therefore invite people from the lodge or park management, national tourism bodies (e.g. to promote field guides as experts) or clients (e.g. to see how to improve the perceptions of the field guide as an expert) to participate in studies in order to create a more exhaustive understanding of this tourism sector in South Africa.

Thirdly, as an exploratory qualitative study, our primary aim was to map and describe the lived experiences of field guides rather than to test specific theoretical mechanisms. Future studies could build on these insights by focusing on specific dimensions of field guiding, such as recruitment and training pipelines, job satisfaction and retention or the psychological and emotional aspects of working in isolated natural environments. Longitudinal or mixed-method designs could further examine how intrinsic motivations and structural constraints interact over time to influence career persistence and turnover.

Conclusion

This study provides one of the first empirical accounts of field guide work and careers in South Africa. Based on interviews with 24 field guides in the Pilanesberg Game Reserve, our findings reveal a profession defined by strong vocational commitment, diverse entry pathways, multifaceted job roles that extend well beyond game drives and the active construction of professional identity in the face of persistent undervaluation. Within the comparatively formalised context of South Africa, guiding functions as a meaningful and long-term career rather than the temporary or precarious occupation documented elsewhere in Africa. However, formal regulation and qualifications alone do not guarantee professional recognition; symbolic undervaluation by employers, clients and the public persists. Our findings highlight the need for targeted interventions to improve entry pathway visibility, elevate the professional status of field guides and support their role as conservation interpreters in protected areas. These conclusions provide a foundation for future comparative research across South Africa’s diverse nature-based tourism settings.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank North West Parks and Tourism Board who arranged the interviews with field guides at Pilanesberg Game Reserve. They also acknowledge all the guides, safari operators and lodges who participated.

During the preparation of this work, the authors used Claude Opus 4.6 (accessed through Metis, the institutional artificial intelligence [AI] platform of two of the authors) and Grammarly to improve the text’s grammar, clarity and flow. Copilot was used for correcting the references according to the journal requirements. No text was generated by AI. All content, ideas and structure are our own. After using this tool and service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the publication’s content.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationships that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

CRediT authorship contribution

Peet van der Merwe: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Investigation, Project administration, Writing – original draft and Writing – review & editing. Johannes Kraak: Conceptualisation, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft and Writing – review & editing. Neva Bojovic: Conceptualisation, Validation, Writing – original draft and Writing – review & editing. All authors reviewed the article, contributed to the discussion of results, approved the final version for submission and publication and take responsibility for the integrity of its findings.

Funding information

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, Peet van der Merwe, upon reasonable request.

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and are the product of professional research. They do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated institution, funder, agency or that of the publisher.

References