Doing more harm than good? Community based natural resource management and the neglect of local institutions in policy development

Approaches to natural resource management emphasise the importance of involving local people and institutions in order to build capacity, limit costs, and achieve environmental sustainability. Governments worldwide, often encouraged by international donors, have formulated devolution policies and legal instruments that provide an enabling environment for devolved natural resource management. However, implementation of these policies reveals serious challenges. This article explores the effects of limited involvement of local people and institutions in policy development and implementation. An in-depth study of the Forest Policy of Malawi and Village Forest Areas in the Lilongwe district provides an example of externally driven policy development which seeks to promote local management of natural resources. The article argues that policy which has weak ownership by national government and does not adequately consider the complexity of local institutions, together with the effects of previous initiatives on them, can create a cumulative legacy through which destructive resource use practices and social conflict may be reinforced. In short, poorly developed and implemented community based natural resource management policies can do considerably more harm than good. Approaches are needed that enable the policy development process to embed an in-depth understanding of local institutions whilst incorporating flexibility to account for their location-specific nature. This demands further research on policy design to enable rigorous identification of positive and negative institutions and ex-ante exploration of the likely effects of different policy interventions.

Decentralising natural resource governance in Ghana: critical reflections on the artisanal and small-scale mining sector

This paper critically examines the impact of decentralization on contemporary and future governance arrangements in Ghana’s artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) sector. The sector, while providing valuable employment in rural areas, is beleaguered by environmental and social issues. Proponents of decentralization argue that re-distributing decision-making authority leads to more responsive, transparent and efficient natural resource management. The analysis presented here, however, demonstrates how weak decentralization has exacerbated the complex, conflictual and clandestine nature of local resource politics surrounding ASM. If future decentralization reforms are going to reverse this trend and improve the governance of ASM in Ghana, then facilitating the participation of traditional authorities is imperative. It is argued that doing so requires addressing the reticence regarding the role of chiefs in resource governance; simply ironing out existing technical issues with decentralization reforms is unlikely to improve the social and environmental performance of ASM in the country. In light of the chronic resource management deficiencies in Ghana, epitomized in the ASM sector, fostering frank political debates on resource governance is becoming urgent.

Resource-dependent livelihoods and the natural resource base

The natural resource base, terrestrial and marine, provides rural households in lower-income countries with income, food, shelter, and medicines, which are variously gathered and hunted in common lands and waters. These resources may be actively managed, whether by the government or local community; or may be de facto open access, with little effort by governments to prevent what may be de jure illegal extraction. This paper provides an appraisal of the literature that encompasses the direct value of wild resources to rural households; the extent to which these resources mitigate poverty and inequality; and the importance of the institutional context. The literature is increasingly addressing competing demands on the resource base both to support nearby livelihoods, and to enhance ecosystem services such as biodiversity; and how initiatives such as community-based payments for ecosystem services are changing how people interact with the resource base.

Integrated natural resource management in Australia: the opportunity offered by a national coastal policy

Under the Australian Constitution the management (and planning) of Crown Land is a State and Territory Government responsibility. When this is considered in conjunction with the Offshore Constitutional Settlement, which affirmed that coastal waters out to three nautical miles (in general) offshore were also the responsibility of State and Territory Governments, then clearly coastal management in Australia is largely a State/Territory responsibility.

Beyond three nautical miles it is a different story. Under the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS), which Australia ratified in October 1994, Australia claims jurisdiction out to 200 nautical miles and beyond (Wescott, 2000). These waters cover an area including the Antarctic claim of over 15 million square kilometres or twice the land area of Australia.

Hence in marine and coastal terms we have the national (Commonwealth) Government managing the oceans and seven State and Territory governments largely in charge of coastal management (coastal land and coastal waters). Heading "up river", State and Territory Governments plan and manage catchments.

Given the uncoordinated relationships between Australian coastal management policy and both catchment management policy and Australia's Ocean Policy (Commonwealth of Australia, 1998a and b), the Commonwealth Government's commitment to a "National Coastal Policy" presents an opportunity to progress the integration of natural resources management for the first time in decades.

Seeking mechanisms for improved integration of biodiversity issues in regional natural resource management planning

This article reviews the literature on natural resource management (NRM) planning in Australia, with particular consideration given to exploring how regions might better integrate biodiversity conservation into catchment or regional planning in ways that lead to improved biodiversity conservation practice in the field. Many of the findings of the review are generic, affecting a range of NRM issues (including biodiversity conservation) and the NRM planning process itself, whilst other findings are specific to conservation of biodiversity. Factors affecting the integration of biodiversity include the organizational characteristics of the regional NRM body, clarity in the region of the responsibilities across the three tiers of government, effective participation of stakeholders, existence of detailed NRM plans that include sound biodiversity data and management principles, access to interpreted information, use of a mix of policy instruments capable of delivering biodiversity goals, and effective monitoring frameworks and tools to track the return on investment. there is considerable variability in the ways that NRM planning is practiced across Australia, at the enterprise, regional or catchment levels. However, an overarching issue is how well the planning caters for differences across space, time and human values and this article attempts to identify the considerations that impact on that requirement.

Using multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management

The proposed volume aims to provide useful insights on the use of Multi-criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) in natural resource management by examining a number of empirical applications for several countries and natural resources. There is increasing interest among researchers and policy makers in using MCDA to evaluate complex management issues and problems. While several books with empirical applications have been published, these applications are very recent. Evidence from major studies suggests that MCDA approaches to the management of water, forestry, wetland and other natural resources have substantially improved the design and implementation of natural resource and environmental policies. Using innovative approaches, such as MCDA, to manage complex natural systems will enhance our understanding and management of those systems. Stakeholder involvement is an important determinant of successful resource management, and MCDA provides a useful and effective framework for getting stakeholders involved in resource management decisions. Despite the general acceptance of the role of MCDA in natural resource management, problems remain in applying these techniques. Problems include difficulties in applying the techniques, eliciting required information, lack of suitable measures for environmental variables, and development of innovative methods to simplify the use of MCDA. The proposed book examines several applications of MCDA for several countries (Australia, USA and Europe) and natural resources, including forestry, water resources and vegetation.

Game theory applications in natural resource management : review of evidence, problems and potential

Game theory is a rapidly advancing approach to structure and understand complex management problems in the natural resources sector in both the developed and developing countries. Many natural resource problems are complex due to common property and public goods characteristics. Despite these limitations many researchers have used game theory to analyze water shed management, irrigation water management, grazing land management, and managing other ecological resources. The prisoner’s dilemma game has been widely used. The work of Runge shows that collective action is feasible if a critical mass of people can cooperate. The use of game theory is hindered by lack of information, paucity of empirical applications and the lack of interest by policy makers who wish quick answers to critical policy issues. The potential still remains high for game theory to be productively used both in developing and developed countries.

Anything new under the sun? Lessons learned from community based natural resource management

Involving community in natural resource management has occurred under a wide variety of approaches, ideologies and titles over the last 30 odd years, with equally wide variety of outcomes for both the community and natural resource management!. Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) is now a commonly used and promoted, if not always well defined, approach. Claims about the benefits of CBNRM cover wildlife management and biodiversity, sustainable utilisation and management of natural resources, poverty reduction, increased livelihoods outcomes, improved food security, as well as less material benefits of livelihood diversification, empowerment, increased gender equality, and better institutional relations. There are also some fairly convincing criticisms of CBNRM reflecting on assumptions of the nature of communities, institutional arrangements and both institutional and community expectations. This paper reflects on the changing nature of community engagement in natural resource management, the emergence of CBNRM as an approach and the lessons learned from promoting CBNRM across case studies in the developing world.

Integrating farm production and natural resource management in Tasmania, Australia

This paper reports on the social learning from a project aimed to increase the knowledge and capacity of a group of farmers in Tasmania, Australia, to reduce the impacts of intensive agriculture on soil health and waterways, and to optimise the efficient use of on-farm inputs. The plan-do-check-review cycle adopted in this project required the farmers to assess current management practices, identify where to make changes, implement changes and monitor for improvements. The success of the project was due to careful attention to social processes as well as technical input. The combination of group activities with individual mentoring and one-to-one advice was key to the success of this project in enabling farmers to undertake on-farm action.

There is value in social learning that included developing relationships, using one-to-one contact and group workshops together with expert input when working with farmers to tackle some difficult and complex interrelated natural resource management and production issues. Sufficient time must be allowed for the process of facilitating good practice in natural resource management, particularly when addressing systemic environmental impacts. Practical operational recommendations are presented on communication, feedback, focus of activities and meeting content, as these will be useful to other project officers and facilitators working with farmer groups.