Institutional supply, public demand, and citizen capabilities to participate in environmental programs in Mexico and India

Abstract

In this paper, we argue that, like a three-legged stool, participatory programs require three elements for stability: a supply of participatory institutions, a demand from citizens to participate, and citizens with capabilities for participation. We illustrate the importance of these three elements using case studies from forest management in central India and southern Mexico, and use the evidence from these cases to suggest hypotheses for future investigation. We argue that when participatory programs are implemented in places where demand for citizen engagement is weak and citizens lack the capability to engage, participation is unlikely. On the other hand, where people demand to participate and have the capability to do so, they are sometimes able to overcome obstacles to utilizing participatory institutions. Individuals' agency for citizen engagement is developed in interaction with the structures of participation; this means that there may be a long-term synergy between the supply of participatory institutions and the development of skills and demand for citizen engagement. Our work implies that designers of participatory programs should pay equal attention to cultivating participatory capabilities, providing incentives that enhance demand for participation, and building institutions to open spaces for participation in governance. Building participatory environmental governance may thus require long-term, sustained attention to both citizenship and institution-building.

How politics shapes the outcomes of forest carbon finance

“…Political reforms that secure land rights for indigenous and forest dependent people are strongly associated with improved forest cover and condition in the global south [40,[90][91][92][93][94][95], and represent a powerful opportunity to store carbon and enhance the well-being of the rural poor [96,97] while also supporting democratization [98]. These reforms likely need to be accompanied by efforts to build countervailing power among forest-dependent people that allow them to resist intrusions on their land and obtain institutional recognition of their land management rights [40,93,99,100]. There is some evidence that some forest carbon funders recognize these opportunities [101].…”

Participación en Instituciones de la Democracia Participativa: el aporte discriminante de variables sociopsicológicas

“…Y el marco temporal también es relevante, pues la agencia individual y colectiva para la participación ciudadana se desarrolla en interacción con las estructuras de participación. Sería esperable que haya una sinergia a largo plazo entre la oferta de instituciones participativas y el desarrollo de habilidades y la demanda de participación ciudadana (Fleischman et al, 2018). Futuras indagaciones posibilitarán saber si los hallazgos aquí reportados son estables en el tiempo y, consecuentemente, caracterizan a la cultura política configurada en relación con estas innovadoras instituciones.…”

From participation to responsiveness: The changing priorities of community forestry governance in Nepal`s Terai

“…Participatory forest governance should ensure sustainable forest conservation along with fair and equitable distribution of benefits and the decision-making rights of forest dependent people (Larson and Petkova 2011). The outcomes of community forestry are sustainable if local actors engage in and integrate technical, social and environmental elements of forest management (Bahagel et al 2017, Fleischman andSolorzano 2018). For sustainable outcomes, local communities should have opportunities to participate, there should be demand from the communities to participate, and the communities should have capability to participate (Fleischman and Solorzano 2018).…”

“…The outcomes of community forestry are sustainable if local actors engage in and integrate technical, social and environmental elements of forest management (Bahagel et al 2017, Fleischman andSolorzano 2018). For sustainable outcomes, local communities should have opportunities to participate, there should be demand from the communities to participate, and the communities should have capability to participate (Fleischman and Solorzano 2018).…”