Community Self-Governance of Forests in Bolivia: The Role of External Actors Krister Andersson University of Colorado at B...
Motivation <ul><ul><li>Self-governance of forest benefits from  </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>An enabling policy environm...
What is Self-Governance?  <ul><li>A group of people able to exercise all of the necessary functions of power without inter...
Why is it Important? <ul><li>Self-governance of CPRs often perform better than alternative policy interventions  (Ostrom, ...
Previous Research <ul><li>Emergence of self-governance depends on  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Resource attributes (sufficient s...
Institutional Support <ul><li>External actors’ potential  support functions:  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Forums  for conflict r...
Conceptual Framework Biophysical Context  Socio-Economic Context  Policy Context Community  Structure Self-Governance Arra...
Empirical Context <ul><li>Bolivia  </li></ul><ul><ul><li>History of centralized forest governance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><...
Hypothesis for Bolivian Context  <ul><li>Communities that are more closely associated with municipal governments:  </li></...
Data <ul><li>Random sample (n=200) </li></ul><ul><li>One-day workshops discussing forest use </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mapping...
Taking Stock of Self-Governance in Bolivian Forestry  <ul><li>How common is it that communities decide to self-organize fo...
How common is community governance of forests in Bolivia?
Open question: “Which are the three most important organizations to support your forestry activities?”
Which external actors most affect community governance?  <ul><li>Multivariate regression to test relationship effects </li...
Binary Logit Regression Results (excerpt) * significant at the 90-percent level **significant at the 95-percent level *** ...
Findings <ul><li>Surprise 1:  </li></ul><ul><li>No discernible effect of relationships with NGOs </li></ul><ul><li>Surpris...
Why? <ul><li>Volatile policy environment: e.g. Land and tree tenure uncertain </li></ul><ul><li>Communities   selective in...
NGO incentives are different <ul><li>Few are membership-based </li></ul><ul><li>Depend on and accountable to international...
Conclusion <ul><li>Bolivian municipalities are uniquely positioned to provide self-governance support functions  </li></ul...
Thank you! [email_address]   Photo by Daniel Beams
Comparison Possible drivers Regional NGO activities Narrow (Corn, Coffee) NGO funding USAID, PI, TF Municipal programs  Ag...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Community self governance of forests in Bolivia the role of external actors

656 views

Published on

Krister Andersson
University of Colorado at Boulder, USA

krister.andersson@colorado.edu
Presentation for the conference on
Taking stock of smallholders and community forestry
Montpellier France
March 24-26, 2010

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
656
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
7
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Community self governance of forests in Bolivia the role of external actors

  1. 1. Community Self-Governance of Forests in Bolivia: The Role of External Actors Krister Andersson University of Colorado at Boulder, USA krister.andersson@colorado.edu March 25, 2010
  2. 2. Motivation <ul><ul><li>Self-governance of forest benefits from </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>An enabling policy environment (Ostrom, 1990; Gibson et al, 2000, 2005; Bray, 2010) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Supportive relationships with external actors (Sunderlin et al 2005; Andersson and Ostrom, 2008). </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li> Which relationships are most important? </li></ul></ul>D. Beams K. Andersson
  3. 3. What is Self-Governance? <ul><li>A group of people able to exercise all of the necessary functions of power without intervention from any authority which they cannot themselves alter </li></ul>Self-governance of forests : individuals agree to organize themselves to create , monitor and enforce their own rules that constrain their own choices of resource access and use
  4. 4. Why is it Important? <ul><li>Self-governance of CPRs often perform better than alternative policy interventions (Ostrom, 1990; Baland & Platteau, 1992; Wade, 1986) </li></ul><ul><li>Strength of self-organized institutions is positively correlated with forest CPR stability (Gibson et al, 2005; Coleman, 2008; Chhatre & Agrawal, 2008) </li></ul><ul><li> When does it occur?? </li></ul>
  5. 5. Previous Research <ul><li>Emergence of self-governance depends on </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Resource attributes (sufficient scarcity, potential gains) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User Attributes (salience of resource, trust) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Broad institutional support </li></ul></ul>Daniel Beams
  6. 6. Institutional Support <ul><li>External actors’ potential support functions: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Forums for conflict resolution </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Facility for information exchange </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resource for problem solving </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Back-up for law enforcement </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Who can best deliver such functions? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Governments often not prioritizing CBNRM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>NGOs seem to have a better track record (Suich et al 2008; Child, 2008; Redvers, 2008) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Polycentric governance theory: Context-dependent </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Little systematic evidence (any?) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Conceptual Framework Biophysical Context Socio-Economic Context Policy Context Community Structure Self-Governance Arrangements
  8. 8. Empirical Context <ul><li>Bolivia </li></ul><ul><ul><li>History of centralized forest governance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Substantial transfers of resources, and responsibilities to municipalities (1996) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Recent focus on community forestry (2008) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>But not clear how new program will be designed </li></ul></ul>Photo by Daniel Beams
  9. 9. Hypothesis for Bolivian Context <ul><li>Communities that are more closely associated with municipal governments: </li></ul><ul><li>- enjoy more favorable institutional conditions </li></ul><ul><li>- are more likely to self-organize institutions </li></ul>
  10. 10. Data <ul><li>Random sample (n=200) </li></ul><ul><li>One-day workshops discussing forest use </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mapping of usage </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Local institutions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relationships with external actors </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Taking Stock of Self-Governance in Bolivian Forestry <ul><li>How common is it that communities decide to self-organize forest governance? </li></ul><ul><li>Which are the most common external organizations that work with them? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Which have the most positive influence on self-governance? </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. How common is community governance of forests in Bolivia?
  13. 13. Open question: “Which are the three most important organizations to support your forestry activities?”
  14. 14. Which external actors most affect community governance? <ul><li>Multivariate regression to test relationship effects </li></ul><ul><li>Binary logit </li></ul>
  15. 15. Binary Logit Regression Results (excerpt) * significant at the 90-percent level **significant at the 95-percent level *** significant at the 99-percent level Independent Variables Own rules Own M&E Own Sanctions NGO interactions 0.094 (0.193) -0.129 (0.225) 0.234 (0.214) Municipal Interactions 0.331 (0.160)** 0.531 (0.189)*** 0.423 (0.179)** Centr Gov Interactions 0.218 (0.349) 0.319 (0.348) -0.721 (0.412) Own rules --- 0.944 (0.411)** 0.987 (0.419)** Forested land (%) 0.013 (0.074)* 0.027 (0.009)*** 0.016 (0.009)* Wealth difference 0.047 (0.066) -0.262 (0.090)*** 0.099 (0.083) Dist. Health center 0.046 (0.019)** 0.024 (0.018) -0.056 (0.026)** # NGOs in municipality 0.014 (0.023) 0.026 (0.026) -0.013 (0.028) Ind / ha of forest 0.003 (0.009) -0.000 (0.001) -0.002 (0.002)
  16. 16. Findings <ul><li>Surprise 1: </li></ul><ul><li>No discernible effect of relationships with NGOs </li></ul><ul><li>Surprise 2: </li></ul><ul><li>Municipalities play an important role in self-governance support </li></ul><ul><li>Less surprising: </li></ul><ul><li>Own rulemaking increases likelihood of self-organized M&E, sanctions </li></ul>
  17. 17. Why? <ul><li>Volatile policy environment: e.g. Land and tree tenure uncertain </li></ul><ul><li>Communities selective in partnerships </li></ul><ul><li>Municipal governments perceived as legitimate “supporter” of self-governance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Formal accountability (recourse, resource), </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Mandate to serve all: Main service provider </li></ul></ul>K. Andersson Daniel Beams
  18. 18. NGO incentives are different <ul><li>Few are membership-based </li></ul><ul><li>Depend on and accountable to international donors </li></ul><ul><li>Need to show short-term impact ,minimize risk, </li></ul><ul><li>select partners carefully </li></ul><ul><li>Mobile, opportunistic </li></ul><ul><li> May not represent trustworthy supporter of forest self-governance </li></ul>
  19. 19. Conclusion <ul><li>Bolivian municipalities are uniquely positioned to provide self-governance support functions </li></ul><ul><li>Community Forestry may be possible without substantial NGO support </li></ul><ul><li>Future Community Forestry policy in Bolivia: consider municipalities! </li></ul>Daniel Beams
  20. 20. Thank you! [email_address] Photo by Daniel Beams
  21. 21. Comparison Possible drivers Regional NGO activities Narrow (Corn, Coffee) NGO funding USAID, PI, TF Municipal programs Ag, forestry extension Source of technical know-how municipal fora

×