Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study

Schusser, Carsten; Krott, Max; Movuh, Mbolo C. Yufanyi; Logmani, Jacqueline; Devkota, Rosan R.; Maryudi, Ahmad; Salla, Manjola; Bach, Ngo Duy

doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.011

Cited by 105 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As found elsewhere, the rural poor under well intended SF policies must compete on "an uneven playing field of … social inequities and economic hurdles" (Larson and Ribot, 2007). Indeed, it might seem that the official SF policy is an attempt to re-centralize, to re-assert control over forest resources by the government (Maryudi, 2012;Schusser et al, 2015;Adiwibowo et al, 2016). Simply put, state-led land and forest reform strategies often do not succeed because "bureaucratic modalities cannot accommodate the varying meanings of land, plural notions of property, and diverse politicaleconomic contexts" (Sikor and Müller, 2009).…”

Section: Sf Within Decentralization Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The adoption of neo-liberalism (McCarthy, 2005) further drives the discourse that in order to alleviate poverty, SF needs to be managed as a business enterprise (De Jong 2012), thereby reducing forests and forest resources to a commodity. During processes of devolution, negotiation and change, local elites have frequently managed to grab control over benefits at the expense of broader community interests Schusser et al, 2015).…”

Section: Social Forestry Discourse and Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As part of the CIFOR project ASEAN-Swiss Partnership on Social Forestry and Climate Change (ASFCC), the two countries provide an interesting comparison given their rather different histories of democracy and levels of forest abundance and pressures. Implementation and outcomes, however, have been disappointing in the sense that devolution has not included the full suite of rights to accompany the responsibilities of forest management (Maryudi, 2012;Maryudi et al, 2012;RECOFTC 2014;Chomba et al, 2014;Chomba et al, 2015;Gilmour, 2016;Schusser et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Social Forestry - why and for whom? A comparison of policies in Vietnam and Indonesia

Moeliono¹,

Pham²,

Bong

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Community forestry or social forestry (henceforth referred collectively as SF) programs have become new modes of forest management empowering local managers and hence, allowing integration of diverse local practices and support of local livelihoods. Implementation of these initiatives, however, face multiple challenges. State-prescribed community programs, for example, will remain isolated efforts if changes in the overall economic and social governance frameworks, including the devolution of rights to local users is lacking. Financial sustainability of these measures remains often uncertain and equity issues inherent to groups and communities formed for SF, can be exacerbated. In this article, we pose the question: Whose interests do SF policies serve? The effectiveness of SF would depend on the motivations and aims for a decentralization of forest governance to the community. In order to understand the underlying motivations behind the governments' push for SF, we examine national policies in Vietnam and Indonesia, changes in their policies over time and the shift in discourses influencing how SF has evolved. Vietnam and Indonesia are at different sides of the spectrum in democratic ambitions and forest abundance, and present an intriguing comparison in the recent regional push towards SF in Southeast Asia. We discuss the different interpretations of SF in these two countries and how SF programs are implemented. Our results show that governments, influenced by global discourse, are attempting to regulate SF through formal definitions and regulations. Communities on the other hand, might resist by adopting, adapting or rejecting formal schemes. In this tension, SF, adopted to serve the interest of local people, in practice has not fulfilled its promise.

show abstract

Section: Sf Within Decentralization Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Social Forestry Discourse and Evolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social Forestry - why and for whom? A comparison of policies in Vietnam and Indonesia

Moeliono¹,

Pham²,

Bong

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fonte -Adaptado de Schusser et al (2015) resultados A partir da observação de campo, pôde-se identificar alguns atores do PEIG. A seguir, apresenta-se a distribuição desses atores em categorias.…”

Section: Visitanteunclassified

Planejamento do Turismo a partir da Perspectiva Actor-Centered Power no Parque Estadual da Ilha Grande, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

Araujo¹,

Cândido

Krott³

2017

Rev. Tur. Anál.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoUsualmente, o planejamento do turismo no Brasil segue a perspectiva normativa em sua execução. Este estudo propõe integrar a perspectiva actor-centered power ao planejamento a fim de elucidar quais são os atores sociais mais poderosos e quais são seus interesses no desenvolvimento turístico. Tal perspectiva é possível por meio da identificação desses atores e de sua relação com a coerção, a informação dominante e incentivos e desincentivos, categorias derivadas das abordagens de poder desenvolvidas por Krott. Para cumprir o objetivo proposto, realizou-se entrevistas mediante a técnica bola de neve. A hipótese de pesquisa é que o planejamento do turismo no Parque Estadual da Ilha Grande (Rio de Janeiro, Brasil) é direcionado pelos interesses dos atores sociais mais poderosos. Os resultados confirmam tal hipótese e demostram que há grande conflito de interesses entre ONGs, governo e administração da Unidade de Conservação. Usually, tourism planning in Brazil follows the normative perspective in its implementation. This study proposes to integrate the actor-centered power perspective with planning in order to elucidate which are the most powerful social actors and what are their interests in tourism development. Such perspective is enabled through the identification of these actors and their relation with coercion, dominant information, and incentives and disincentives, categories derived from the approaches to power developed by Krott. In order to achieve the objective, interviews were conducted by employing the snowball technique. The research hypothesis is that tourism planning in the Ilha Grande State Park (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) is directed by the interests of the most powerful social actors. The results confirm such hypothesis and show that there is great conflict of interests between NGOs, Government, and the administration of the Conservation Unit.

show abstract

“…While the theory has already been applied in many community forestry studies across many countries (Devkota 2010, Maryudi et al 2012, Yufani Movuh and Schusser 2012, Schusser 2013, Schusser et al 2015, lately it has also been used in studies on the implementation of the international forest regime complex at national level (Brockhaus et al 2014, Mohammed and Inoue 2014.…”

Section: Power Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

International Forest Policy by International and Transnational Organizations

Burns¹

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study

Cited by 105 publications

References 44 publications

Social Forestry - why and for whom? A comparison of policies in Vietnam and Indonesia

Social Forestry - why and for whom? A comparison of policies in Vietnam and Indonesia

Planejamento do Turismo a partir da Perspectiva Actor-Centered Power no Parque Estadual da Ilha Grande, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil

International Forest Policy by International and Transnational Organizations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About