Drivers of Environmental Institutional Dynamics in Decentralized African Countries

Abstract

This paper builds on the assumption that an effective approach to support the sustainability of natural resource management initiatives is institutional "bricolage." We argue that participatory planning processes can foster institutional bricolage by encouraging stakeholders to make their own arrangements based on the hybridization of old and new institutions. This papers aims at identifying how participatory process facilitators can encourage institutional bricolage. Specifically the paper investigates the specific contextual and procedural drivers of institutional dynamics in two case studies: the Rwenzori region in Uganda and the Fogera woreda in Ethiopia. In both cases, participatory planning processes were implemented. This research has three innovative aspects. First, it establishes a clear distinction between six terms which are useful for identifying, describing, and analyzing institutional dynamics: formal and informal; institutions and organizations; and emergence and change. Secondly, it compares the contrasting institutional dynamics in the two case studies. Thirdly, process-tracing is used to identify contextual and procedural drivers to institutional dynamics. We assume that procedural drivers can be used as "levers" by facilitators to trigger institutional bricolage. We found that facilitators need to pay particular attention to the institutional context in which the participatory planning process takes place, and especially at existing institutional gaps or failures. We identified three clusters of procedural levers: the selection and engagement of participants; the legitimacy, knowledge, and ideas of facilitators; and the design of the process, including the scale at which it is developed, the participatory tools used and the management of the diversity of frames.

A participatory approach to move towards a One Health surveillance system for anthrax in Burkina Faso

“…In the same vein, the decisions that will be taken, even in a collective and concerted manner, as part of the participatory process, have no certainty of success because they are dependent on elements external to the process [ 12 ]. In the case of our participatory process, most proposed actions are dependent on the availability of a sufficient budget, itself largely dependent on funding granted by technical and financial partners, who may have different priorities from those that guided the action plan.…”

“…It is therefore necessary to explicitly document the implementation of the process, to assess its intrinsic quality (method used, facilitation, representativeness of participants) and to measure its effects (changes engendered among participants, or on the implementation context) in a robust way, while considering other factors that could also have contributed to the observed effects [ 13 ]. Monitoring and evaluating the participatory process is also an opportunity to highlight elements that may impact the quality and effects of the process and therefore redirect the course of the process to take these elements into account [ 12 ].…”

“…Each participatory process is unique because it is specific to the context in which it is implemented, the participants mobilized, and the objectives pursued [ 12 ]. However, our study proposes a methodological framework that can be used, after adaptation, in other contexts to address different issues.…”

“…Rowe and Frewer (2004) [ 11 ] define participation as "the practice of consulting and involving relevant stakeholders in the identification of priorities, decision-making and policy-making activities of organizations or institutions responsible for policy development". In recent decades, participation has grown significantly and is increasingly mobilized to involve all stakeholders in decision-making to address issues in a variety of fields, such as technology, the environment and health [ 12 ].…”

“…In this vast field of participation, participatory planning is a particular method that aims to establish a dialogue between various stakeholders to collectively define the actions to be implemented to achieve a common goal [ 12 ]. In this approach, it is postulated that engaging beneficiaries early in the planning process establishes a collective vision that can be more effectively realized.…”