Quinoa and production rules: how are cooperatives contributing to governance of natural resources?

Abstract

Abstract:The sharp increase in the price and production of quinoa between 1990 and 2014 has had important impacts in Bolivia's southern Altiplano region, previously considered one of the poorest regions in the country. The socio-economic status of most inhabitants improved significantly as a result of the "quinoa boom". However, it also caused severe disturbances in socio-ecological systems and posed challenges to resource governance by traditional indigenous institutions. This article focuses on the role of farmer cooperatives, in particular, and examines how their production rules may have mitigated some of the challenges associated with the quinoa boom. We assess the activities of cooperatives with the help of Elinor Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework and analytic tools such as the ADICO grammar (Attribute, Deontic, aIm, Condition, Or else) and the eight design principles. The key production rules of cooperatives are examined and compliance with these rules is estimated based on semi-structured interviews and a survey conducted with quinoa producers How are cooperatives contributing to governance of natural resources? 403 (n=305). We argue that the cooperatives successfully contributed to alleviate pressures on resources in a context where traditional authorities were challenged by new tasks associated with land grabbing and the crowding out of diversified agricultural activities. In conclusion, we argue that collaboration between traditional authorities and farmer cooperatives holds great potential for improving the governance and sustainability of socio-ecological systems in the region.

Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.): An Overview of the Potentials of the “Golden Grain” and Socio-Economic and Environmental Aspects of Its Cultivation and Marketization

“…Connected to the appropriation of communal lands, Winkel and colleagues highlight the dynamics between the quantitative patrimonialization of lands, reaching its limits in space, and the qualitative patrimonialization, which is needed in the future in order to "improve cropping practices, and negotiate comprehensive agreements for using common land resources" [68] (p. 201). For this reason, addressing extensive agricultural practices raises the need to tackle the topic of governance of local resources as well [68][69][70]. In addition, soil erosion [71,72] or poor seed placement [72] can be risks of mechanization, too.…”

Mobilizing common biocultural heritage for the socioeconomic inclusion of small farmers: panarchy of two case studies on quinoa in Chile and Bolivia

“…In a broader perspective, both case studies demonstrate the importance of local action for the governance of biocultural resources, thus corroborating the potential for efficiency and resilience of local self-organization compared to centralized governance of natural resources (Ostrom 1990;Tittonell 2014;Tschopp et al 2018).…”

Governance and Deforestation: Understanding the Role of Formal Rule-Acknowledgement by Residents in Brazilian Extractive Reserves

“…These external economic changes contributed to the emergence of new structural formats in the forest product-trade chain (Tschopp et al, 2018), which the rubber tapping communities in our study reserves seem to be unable to adapt to. With respect to rubber, communities embodied the role of "microentrepreneurs", since they are responsible for cutting the rubber trees and treating the latex, and for negotiating and selling it to processing industries.…”