Tackling Elite Capture by the ‘Counter-Elite’ and ‘Co-Opt-Elite’ Approaches in Bangladesh and Ghana

Wong, Sam

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199659036.003.0014

Cited by 23 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Power relations are often the most resistant part of institutions to change (Wilshusen, 2009;Sneddon and Fox 2007;Wong, 2010), perpetuated through political ties, family assets and land holdings, family networks, and religious affiliations (Dasgupta and Beard 2007;Lund and SaitoJensen 2013;Schusser et al, 2016). In the processes around SF, the State usually deals with the village institution, and this institution is often also an apparatus of the State.…”

Section: Sf As a New Mode Of Governance?mentioning

confidence: 99%

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 As a New Mode Of Governance?mentioning

confidence: 99%

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

“…The strategy to have an impact on the power of local elites by working with instead of against them -applying the 'co-opt elite' option presented by Wong (2010) -has allowed this initiative to start taking effect. The strategy to have an impact on the power of local elites by working with instead of against them -applying the 'co-opt elite' option presented by Wong (2010) -has allowed this initiative to start taking effect.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, the ward platform integrates elites while challenging their individual power; a solution Wong (2010) suggests when implementing community-based development projects and challenging elite domination (Wong 2010: 15). Nevertheless, in ward platforms where there are both elites who are concerned about the needs of the local population ('benevolent elites', as Wong (2010) calls them) and elites who concentrate on the needs of their relatives, the latter might be overpowered by the former.…”

Section: The Ward Platform Capturing Elitesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accountability at the Local Level in Fragile Contexts: Bangladesh Case Study

Buchmann¹

2013

IDS Working Papers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper, part of an IDS and Helvetas Swiss Intercooperation research project, is about the promotion of accountability at the local level in Bangladesh. By exploring in this context the legal grounds for accountability, the role of social hierarchies based on gender, education, family and wealth, and the impact of political alliances on accountability, the paper focuses on the social and political factors which may enable or prevent emerging accountability practices. The accountability practices studied in this context are local networks formed and supported by SDC's local governance programme Sharique. These networks strive to emerge as catalysts of social and economic development as well as good governance in Bangladesh. Composed of local governance actors, local networks bring information, spaces for participation and opportunities for oversight closer to citizens in rural Bangladesh, making it easier for them to benefit from accountability options provided by their government. This paper elaborates the strategy Sharique applies to help networks take on this role in a socially and politically divided context. It maintains that this strategy contributes to a transfer of power from a powerful individual to a group, setting off a process of collectivisation and affecting each member's role in engaging in local development and promoting accountability. However, the paper also draws attention to disparities that persist between members of the networks studied, with respect to different elements of accountability. It argues that the active promotion of all elements of accountability is necessary for Sharique to reach out to all populations through this initiative. It concludes that the success of accountability practices both on a conceptual and applied level is subject to clear differentiation between elements of accountability, which avoids relying on assumed casual connections between them.

show abstract

“…They promote the empowerment of citizens so that they are at the centre of decision-making processes and are able to resist the influence of elites (Lewis and Hossain, 2008;Wong, 2010Wong, , 2013. Counter-elites assume that elites are bad and that they should not oversee or be involved in the delivery of public goods and services.…”

Section: Rural Governance Logic and Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Barriers or enablers? Chiefs, elite capture, disasters, and resettlement in rural Malawi

Kita¹

2018

Disasters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chiefs are at the centre of household and community development efforts in most low-income countries around the world. Yet, researchers and scholars have paid limited attention to the institution of chieftaincy and to understanding its role in the management of climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction. This paper draws on a micro ethnographic evaluation conducted in two predominantly rural districts of Malawi in southeast Africa to assess two different manifestations of elite control. In the first case, a resettlement programme was implemented where chiefs were co-opted and took the lead. In the second case, a food insecurity response programme was designed to exclude chiefs. The study finds that neither co-opting nor countering chiefs prevents elite capture. Rather, the majority of chiefs oscillate between malevolent and benevolent capture. The findings require that states focus on the cultural and political dimensions of rural life when designing climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction programmes.

show abstract

Tackling Elite Capture by the ‘Counter-Elite’ and ‘Co-Opt-Elite’ Approaches in Bangladesh and Ghana

Cited by 23 publications

References 0 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

Accountability at the Local Level in Fragile Contexts: Bangladesh Case Study

Barriers or enablers? Chiefs, elite capture, disasters, and resettlement in rural Malawi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About