Disturbances, robustness and adaptation in forest commons: Comparative insights from two cases in the Southeastern Alps

Abstract

Exposure to disturbances of different nature and scale can represent a threat for the survival of rural communities but also a stimulus to adjustment. Disturbance, robustness and adaptation are here examined through the lens of Forest Commons, as a typical institution, developed by communities in the southeastern Alps since several centuries. The paper relies on Commons' theory and further developments and carries out a historically-embedded analysis of disturbances, robustness and adaptation in Forest Commons of Slovenia and Veneto (Italy). Data have been drawn from multiple sources, following an approach based on an area scale and later on case-studies. The analysis focuses on evidence of Forest Commons' reactions to disturbances induced by political changes and State actions. Ostrom's design principles are used to test robustness of eight selected cases and identification of their adaptation patterns. The paper concludes by confirming Forest Commons as robust and adaptive social-ecological systems and thus useful in Community Forestry conceptualisation. However, thanks to its cross-border analysis, it also points out future research needs for their better understanding.

Traditional Institution for Forest Conservation within a Changing Community: Insight from the Case of Upland South Sumatra

“…In general, the researchers used specific theoretical frameworks mentioning the determinants of institutional endurance to be empirically tested in the field, through a survey method or combining quantitative and qualitative techniques (e.g. Cox et al 2010;Urech et al 2013;Gatto and Bogataj 2015). The studies did not address the attribute required by local community or key factors to establish a durable institution, in relation to the challenges of change faced in their daily lives.…”

Research trends: Forest ownership in multiple perspectives

“…There is a long and rich tradition of communities owning, managing and using forests in Europe, and work in FACESMAP showed the enormous potential to understand this diversity of arrangements as a forest governance laboratory (Lawrence et al, 2016a). Case studies include medieval and earlier models, and their survival or loss (Gatto and Bogataj, 2015); the effects of socialism and postsocialism (Bogataj and Krč, 2014;Gatto and Bogataj, 2015;Premrl et al, 2015); community forestry as social innovation following land reform (Ambrose-Oji et al, 2015; Hoffman, 2013) as well as social and environmental impacts (Carlsson, 1999;Lawrence and Ambrose-Oji, 2015;Lidestav et al, 2013;Sandstrom et al, 2016). This fertile domain needs more attention; a recent review of 40 years of community forestry around the world noted only in passing that Europe has been little studied (Gilmour, 2016).…”

The Legacy of Elinor Ostrom on Common Forests Research Assessed Through Bibliometric Analysis

“…The authors reveal that the rigid legal framework can affect efficiency in governance of common resources. Gatto and Bogataj (2015) also used design principles to analyze disturbances, robustness, and adaptation in common forest management. The authors argue that forest commons are robust and adaptive socio-ecological systems, and point out the need for more research to better understand them.…”