Overview Community-based Natural Resource Management: Introduction & definitions State of the Science—Global Perspectives Legacy of research on longstanding CPRs State of the science on CBNRM CBNRM in rangeland ecosystems Linking CBNRM and resilience thinking María E. Fernández-Giménez Dept. of Forest, Rangeland & Challenges for CBNRM research Watershed Stewardship Opportunities for CBNRM research in Colorado State University, USA Mongolia Introduction Common pool resources Central question driving research: Resources: from which it is difficult to exclude How can communities of resource users potential users ( excludability ), and effectively organize themselves to self- regulate their use of shared resources? where use by one individual leaves less remaining for others ( subtractability ) Open access Property regime Absence of property rights or rules A set of formal or informal rules Can lead to overuse and degradation That define the rights and obligations of specific individuals or groups with respect No incentive for individuals to conserve, to access, use or management of a because resource (e.g. grass, water, trees, wildlife) What one person does not use will be harvested and used by someone else.
Typology of property rights Property rights Access Enter & enjoy non-subtractive benefits Property Property Rights (e.g. wildlife watching) Regime & Access Use Management Exclusion Alienation Use Obtain resource units Rights Holder (Withdrawal) (Withdrawal) (e.g. hunt wildlife, graze grass, divert water for irrigation, Private property √ √ √ √ √ cut trees) ( individual, Management Regulate internal use and transform resource via corporation ) improvements Common property √ √ √ √ (e.g. set aside reserve pasture, regulate seasonal ( group of movements, limit stocking rates to within carrying capacity) resource users ) State property √ ? √ ? √ ? Exclusion Determine who has access and how rights are √ ( government on transferred behalf of citizens ) Alienation Right to sell or lease Open access No rights or rules, individuals capture as much ( none ) as possible Community-based Natural Resource Private property vs. common property Management “A process by which landholders gain access and use rights to, or ownership of, natural resources; collaboratively and transparently plan and participate in the management of resource use; and achieve financial and other benefits from their stewardship.” B. Child & M.W. Lyman. 2005. Natural Resources as Community Assets, Lessons from Two Continents. Madison, WI: The Sand County Foundation. Community-based Conservation Co-management involves people who directly affect and are Institutional arrangement for natural resource affected by conservation decisions in management in which decision-making authority conservation planning and stewardship is shared between local people and local, regional, or national government. provides direct economic and social benefits to resource users while improving or maintaining biodiversity and land health Pinkerton, E., ed. 1989. Cooperative Management of Local Fisheries: New Directions for Improved Management and Community Development. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Western, D. & M. Wright. 1994. Natural Connections. Washington, D.C.: Island Pres..
10 Proposed Benefits of CBNRM 10 Proposed Benefits of CBNRM (cont’d.) Increased social legitimacy and likelihood Increased trust and strengthened of implementation of management relationships within the community decisions Improved livelihoods Application of diverse knowledge sources Greater community capacity to management--local knowledge and science Improved environmental conditions Improved on-the-ground resource More resilient social-ecological systems management Increased monitoring and adaptive management Decreased conflict over resources Legacy of Research on Longstanding Additional Research Questions CPRs Does CBNRM live up to its promise? How should “success” be defined and who should define it? What factors influence the process and outcomes of CBNRM? Are the outcomes of CBNRM really different or better than other alternatives or existing management regimes? Findings from Longstanding CPRs Learning from Long-standing CPRs ( Synthesis by A. Agrawal. 2002. Ch 2 in Drama of the Commons ) Case studies of long-term common Resource characteristics property regimes Small, well-bounded, predictable supply, low mobility, storable Ostrom, E. 1990. Governing the Commons Group characteristics Small, well-bounded, shared norms, interdependence, leadership, 8 design principles low poverty Bromley, D. ed. 1992. Making the Commons Work Resource-group relationships Baland, J.M. & J.P. Plateau. 1996. Halting Users live near and depend on resource, benefits allocated fairly, Degradation of Natural Resources; Is there a Role for low demand Rural Communities? Users have clear rights to use and manage the resource Acheson, J. and B. McCay. 1987. The Question of the Rules Commons. Simple & easy to understand Many others… Locally devised Mostly qualitative, 1 or few cases Easy to monitor & enforce Monitors and officials accountable to users
State of the Science on Contemporary Research on Contemporary CBNRM CBNRM Institutions Initially, mostly positive “success stories” Recently, more critical perspectives Important to avoid oversimplification of “community” and to attend to implications of differences in gender, ethnicity, poverty/wealth and power within communities Critiques of the role and motivations of facilitating donors and NGOs CBNRM in Rangeland Ecosystems CBNRM in Rangeland Ecosystems Difficult to define spatial boundaries in Today: Challenges due to: semi-arid and arid ecosystems Land conversion & intensification of use, Difficult to identify group members in Privatization of communal lands, mobile societies where social organization Land appropriation by the state for other is fluid purposes Yet, many examples of historically well- Political conflict and lack of security functioning CPRs in rangeland systems Linking CBNRM & Resilience Thinking: Linking CBNRM & Resilience Thinking: Why might CBNRM build resilience? Why might CBNRM build resilience? 1. Locally-adaptive practices based on local 4. CBNRM strengthens social capital , which is ecological knowledge important for adaptive capacity 2. Large, centralized bureaucracies make 5. CBNRM promotes social learning through large mistakes—small, local institutions monitoring and adaptive management , make smaller mistakes and learn & adapt which strengthen feedbacks between faster social and ecological systems 3. Diversity of CBNRM institutions, increases likelihood of learning what works
Challenges in CBNRM Research Challenges in CBNRM Research Defining and measuring “success” Determining causal relationships between CBNRM and social and ecological Measuring environmental outcomes: outcomes Often slow to appear Many confounding factors, including those beyond Comparing CBNRM cases to “status community’s control quo”—similar locations without CBNRM Variability among cases limits comparisons and generalizations Need for research that combines the Measuring social outcomes: richness of case studies with the rigor and Difficult to measure “intangibles” such as trust and hope inferential power of large samples Appropriate scale for measuring social outcomes? quantitatively analyzed. Opportunities for CBNRM Research in Opportunities for CBNRM Research in Mongolia Mongolia “case-control” studies comparing sites Relatively homogeneous environment with and without CBNRM within each ecological zone large sample studies as well as in-depth Relatively homogeneous social and case studies. cultural context in most of the country involve project managers and community Over 2000 potential CBNRM cases, most members in the research design and started within the past 5-10 years. implementation Cases vary in “design”, with multiple reflect, learn and apply learning to examples of each design approach. improve practice understand role of CBNRM in resilience to climate and economic change Conclusions Conclusions Strong theoretical basis for CBNRM Opportunity for research to help document and understand the social and ecological Vast empirical research, but mostly based outcomes of community-based on individual case studies or limited conservation in Mongolia. comparative case studies Gaps in knowledge and research about ecological and social outcomes Lack of empirical research on social- ecological resilience and the potential role of CBNRM in resilience-building
Thank You!
Recommend
More recommend
