Environmental Entitlements: Dynamics and Institutions in Community-Based Natural Resource Management

Leach, Melissa; Mearns, Robin; Scoones, Ian

doi:10.1016/s0305-750x(98)00141-7

Cited by 1,100 publications

(515 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

499

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More critical assessments have emphasized the ways in which market-based imperatives, and historically-determined transformations and and politics (cf. Cleaver, 2000;Johnson, 2001;Leach, Mearns and Scoones, 1999;Mosse, 1997). The Thai experience informs these perspectives both by illustrating the political challenge of enforcing rights of equity and empowerment in conditions of social inequality, and by questioning the wisdom and viability of devolving the costs of monitoring and enforcing rights of resource management to local communities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Leach, Mearns and Scoones (1999), in discussing environmental entitlements, use the example of Marantaceae plants (the leaves of which are used for wrapping food) in Southern Ghana to illustrate the ways in which the type of property regime can affect one's entitlement to a resource. If leaves are collected from forest reserve areas, women (who dominate the activity) must first obtain an official permit from the Forest Department, which entitles them to collect the leaves.…”

Section: The Theoretical Terrain (A) Rights-based Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a “Rights-Based Approach” to Forest Conservation in Thailand

Johnson¹,

Forsyth²

2002

World Development

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the eyes of the state: negotiating a "rights-based approach" to forest conservation in Thailand Article (Accepted version) (Refereed)Original citation: Johnson, Craig and Forsyth, Tim (2002) In the eyes of the state: negotiating a "rights-based approach" to forest conservation in Thailand. World development, 30 (9 This document is the author's final manuscript accepted version of the journal article, incorporating any revisions agreed during the peer review process. Some differences between this version and the published version may remain. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it. IN THE EYES OF THE STATE: NEGOTIATING A 'RIGHTS-BASED APPROACH' TO FOREST CONSERVATION IN THAILAND Craig Johnson and Tim ForsythWorld Development 30:9 1591-1605 2002 ABSTRACTRecent debates about governance, poverty and environmental sustainability have emphasized a 'rights-based' approach to development, in which individual rights and freedoms are strongly associated with fair and equitable development. Such approaches are defended both in terms of the 'intrinsic' benefits of basic human rights and the 'instrumental' benefits these may provide. However, the process of implementing a rights-based approach entails a number of political costs. Principal among these are the costs of ensuring that social rights are effectively enforced and the related cost of encouraging the state to intervene on behalf of poor and vulnerable groups in society. Reflecting upon these themes, this paper explores the case of Thailand's 'Community Forestry Bill', legislation that was introduced to support rights of access and environmental conservation for communities living in forest reserve areas. Examining watershed forests in the north and mangrove conservation in the south, it argues that efforts to support rural livelihoods through the establishment of community rights have been undermined by powerful private actors and by a state that has generally ruled in favour of commercial interests. The article then documents the creative ways in which civil society organizations have been able to negotiate and secure informal rights of access in rural areas. Such findings, it concludes, illustrate the need to situate rights-based approaches within the wider public spheres in which rules, rights, and 'community' are established, and defended.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Theoretical Terrain (A) Rights-based Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a “Rights-Based Approach” to Forest Conservation in Thailand

Johnson¹,

Forsyth²

2002

World Development

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A burgeoning body of work by social scientists has focused on the notion of 'institutions' as a social practice in relation to natural resource management (Berry, 1989;Leach, Mearns, & Scoones, 1999;Mazzucato & Niemeijer, 2002;Mehta et al, 1999;Uphoff, 1992). Although the term 'institutions' can refer to the organizations involved in natural resource management, in this context the concept is employed in a wider sociological sense to refer to 'regularised patterns of behaviour between individuals and groups in society' (Leach, Mearns, & Scoones, 1997: 5), and also links to other groups and individuals at higher and lower levels.…”

Section: Conceptualizing Institutions In a Wetland Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decentralization and local institutional arrangements for wetland management in Ethiopia and Sierra Leone

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tIn Ethiopia and Sierra Leone, recent social, political and environmental transformations have precipitated the intensification of wetland use, as local people have sought to safeguard and strengthen their livelihoods. Concurrent decentralization policies in both countries have also seen the government strengthen its position at the local level. Drawing upon recent field-based evidence from Ethiopia and Sierra Leone, this paper examines the compatibility between community-based local institutions for wetland use, and the process of decentralization. It argues that decentralization has in fact restricted the development of mature local institutional arrangements, due to its intrinsically political interventionist nature.Crown

show abstract

“…CBNRM has become the focus of a great deal of attention by social scientists interested in the interface between social action and environmental management in wildlife, forestry and pastoralism (e.g. Leach et al, 1999).…”

Section: What Is Community Conservation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

If community conservation is the answer in Africa, what is the question?

Adams¹,

Hulme²

2001

ORX

154

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proponents of community conservation present it as a means of reconciling conservation and development objectives by ensuring that the interests of local people are taken into account in making trade-offs. Conservation critics see it as a challenge to the state-led, scientific management that is necessary to guarantee the preservation of biodiversity. In this paper, we argue that community conservation is not one thing but many. It is evolving both as a concept and as a practice that must be built on. It is not a project or policy 'choice' that can be simply accepted or rejected. The key questions about community conservation are who should set the objectives for conservation policy on the ground and how should trade-offs between the diverse objectives of different interests be negotiated.

show abstract

Environmental Entitlements: Dynamics and Institutions in Community-Based Natural Resource Management

Cited by 1,100 publications

References 59 publications

In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a “Rights-Based Approach” to Forest Conservation in Thailand

In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a “Rights-Based Approach” to Forest Conservation in Thailand

Decentralization and local institutional arrangements for wetland management in Ethiopia and Sierra Leone

If community conservation is the answer in Africa, what is the question?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About