hi Damodaran, I guess a first step before looking for potential alternatives is to explore why have these different stakeholders failed and what you call failure in each of the cases. Communities or the government might have failed not because they are communities or government but because of external factors that have affected their ability to manage natural resources sustainably or because of false assumptions or misconceptions of what are the issues to address for managing these resources. So you first need to identify how has the problem been perceived and framed by different actors and which factors external to the natural resource users might have affected natural resource managememt. Only then you can start identifying alternative pathways in terms of reframing the problem, and in terms of institutional or political economic reforms.

Yes, for my point of view the market is the next step, while we can consider it as a source of deforestation and much of unequal distribution, however, we may see that it may restrict o limit the opportunities of quasi-rents. see Bolivian example on forest control as to deforestation rates. We may also have to understand, if internal o external markets are thriving, or pushing conservation because of the market cycles.

Article The legally allowable versus the informally practicable in B...

Consider certification processes that monitor supply chains (e.g., blood diamonds, coffee certifications, dolphin-safe tuna).  If you can get certifiers into a country to track how resources are extracted and bring that information to consumers through certified consumer items, then market demand in developed countries might have an impact.  Note I say "might", as the evidence is still not strong.

I agree with Floriane that we first need to evaluate the "failure". It is important to critically study the criteria (failures according to specific criteria does not necessarily mean failure in any real sense of the word) for "failures" and from that go on and learn how things can be developed (developed criteria, organization or process). I would not put all my trust in the market as it is way to volatile for sustainable solutions (and dependent on state interventions). It also important to look at the institutional capacity of the community and, especially, the government to pinpoint weaknesses in, for instance, governance structures before giving up on them.

We shiuld make them work-but onealternative is to partner with the private sector and draw a robust contract that guarantees the the public interests

Hi,

I do not think that we can just assume "they have failed, what is next - markets, private sector"? NRM is indeed more complicated than that, in the sense that more factors (or variables if you wish) are intertwined and involved. As Florianne says above - first assess the reasons for the perceived 'failure'. Governments, communities, policies, in some cases alone, in others in partnerships can perform well in management of natural resources, when the 'conditions' are right. By conditions I mean the specific and context dependent factors. One need to understand the context before prescribing the 'best policies', as what is the best will depend on the context.

For importance on contextual factors (in this case on decision to comply or not with forest rules and laws), you may find this article interesting.

Article Towards an Analytical Framework for Forest Law Compliance

Hi, 

I think failures have persisted because there has always being a lack of collaboration. in Ghana for instance, when government shifted to community management for rural and peri-urban communities, government left the total responsibility after implementation to these communities. Now, if government have failed to ensure sustainability what makes them assume that communities alone can do it better. of course both parties have their strengths and weaknesses which should be combined to make it work.collaboration is key

Hi there,

I think in this case there would be the need for some sort of external agency. It could be an international NGO, civil society organizations, media groups, scholars and universities, etc to mobilize resources and capacities and promote or support better natural resources management practices.

Your question has no general answer. It indicates an erroneous view that what matters is the contents of the policy; however, implementation of planning policies is a world on its own with its own dynamics, appropriate strategies etc. Each constellation is different in: of formal legal powers, degree of compliance with these, organizational structure, institutional culture, degree of influence of NGOs, power differences among other stokeholds such as developers and resident groups, election rules and the power of politicians, role of media, degree of corruption,   There are some good theoretical frameworks on how to think out these complex factors.  A classical paper is: Paul A. Sabatier and Daniel A Mazmanian, (1981), The Implementation of Public Policy: A Framework for Analysis, Lexington Press, Ch. 1: "Effective Policy Implementation", pp. 3-35.

Hi, 

there is a certain groups of economists that would say: private property, of course! However, by private property rights they mean full-type = rights that are exclusive, fully transferable and effectively enforcable through courts. This opinion is not much popular now and belongs to Austrian School of Economic Thiking and also to Free Market Environmentalism. You can make your own opinion about arguments, assumptions, grounding in theory by going through numerous fulltexts that are freelly available on the web: 

- perc.org

- mises.org (LIBRARY - JOURNALS - ... "environment")

- Independent Review Journal (search for ... "environment")

You can also read my paper "Bridging theories..." that is posted here on Research Gate and that offers very brief summary of these thoughts.

Best

Lenka

Welcome to the world of global governance, Dear Damodaran. This has usually been the case in at least a few African countries i know. Government might have other 'more urgent' priorities, policies might be toothless due to political (political decisions by government), institutional (e.g. lack of adequate capacity, lack of inter-institutional coordination,...), etc. Communities might be tempted to unsustainably exploit their own natural resource when there is real lack of empowerment, severe competition from external actors, and lack of other livelihood alternatives, etc. Therefore, depending on the natural resource type in question, some policy advocacy by a homegrown civil society group would be very helpful. The policy advocacy should start from a participatory exercise that properly diagnoses the problem and identify the root causes by consistently asking the question 'why' until we reach the root causes. Then, some actions could be identified to address the root causes, which could include educational campaigns, community mobilization, media programs, local campaigns, petitions, etc. The actions could be designed either as collaborative or confrontational actions depending on the problem analysis. The concept of global governance is all about the role of actors other than the government in making things happen. Individuals can make a difference by fighting for such causes. A case in point is the late Nobel Laureate Wakgari Mathai. I strongly recommend you to read her biography. In order to institutionalize individual initiatives/endeavors, some form of local civil society group could be contacted [if it exists at all] or formed. Wakgari established the Green Belt Movement, for instance. I've been an environmental campaigner myself and one tool we used is to initiate a national Green Award Program, which has been used to foster public and political will for environmental causes. That was very helpful in expanding good initiatives and empowering some local 'green' voices, who could make more difference in their localities. Where should one start i the case you just mentioned? Initiate a taskforce of 5-6 people drawn from groups that have a strong stake in the issue and start candid conversation that could help you identify the real causes. This is very important because it helps you consolidate your precious efforts and limited resources in the right direction. If you are interested, i can forward you some materials for policy advocacy that you could use. Please send me a message.As a final point let me underline that you should use local institutions as much as possible so that the cause could be credible enough and you could avoid any unnecessary accusations. At a later stage, some form of linkage could be established with regional or international actors once the initiative gathers the required momentum and the necessity is evident. All the best, Negusu

Your question has no general answer. It indicates an erroneous view that what matters is the contents of the policy; however, implementation of planning policies is a world on its own with its own dynamics, appropriate strategies etc. Each constellation is different in: of formal legal powers, degree of compliance with these, organizational structure, institutional culture, degree of influence of NGOs, power differences among other stokeholds such as developers and resident groups, election rules and the power of politicians, role of media, degree of corruption,   There are some good theoretical frameworks on how to think out these complex factors.  A classical paper is: Paul A. Sabatier and Daniel A Mazmanian, (1981), The Implementation of Public Policy: A Framework for Analysis, Lexington Press, Ch. 1: "Effective Policy Implementation", pp. 3-35.

Think of coordinating mechanisms that bring all three elements together.

Dear Damodaran, use of natural resources carries a cost; if individuals and institutions using natural resources pay a cost which is less than the cost for replenishing these resources or ensuring continued availability of these resources, then it means there private cost is lower than the social cost and some other groups are paying the cost for the profit/benefit  pocketed by specific users. In that case social and private cost needs to be equalized through taxes or high user fee. If there are non price issues then evidence based dialogue between all is needed

 One of the alternatives is the improvement of public governance. According to North, Wallis, and Weingast (2009), the current states can be divided into two groups: open access countries and limited access countries. The last ones are organized according to the needs of governing elites. Of course, also the use of natural resources is arranged according to the same principle. Thus major improvements in the management of natural resources, if any, can be expected only after the development of public governance. Because the character of public governance is reflected in corruption, indicators like corruption perception index illuminate the current development stage in public governance (see pp. 195-226 in the attached book). However, development processes are very slow and mismanagement of natural resources happen also in open access countries but there exists some hope because openness of governance.

Book Missing a Decent Living for Everyone: Success and Failure in...