Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Giving rights to nature: A new institutional approach for overcoming social dilemmas?

1,103 views

Published on

Crawford PhD Conference 2014

Published in: Environment
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Giving rights to nature: A new institutional approach for overcoming social dilemmas?

  1. 1. Giving rights to nature A new institutional approach for overcoming social dilemmas? Julia Talbot-­‐Jones PhD Candidate The Australian National University -­‐-­‐-­‐-­‐-­‐ julia.talbot-­‐jones@anu.edu.au
  2. 2. Time for little data!!!
  3. 3. Time for little data!!! But why?
  4. 4. Outline of presentation
  5. 5. Outline of presentation Background: Social dilemma institutions – Introduce common institutional arrangements for transcending social dilemmas – A new approach?
  6. 6. Outline of presentation Background: Social dilemma institutions Legalising nature Case study: Whanganui River, NZ – Introduce common institutional arrangements for transcending social dilemmas – A new approach? – Background – Legal Framework – Analysis of old and new governance arrangement using IAD Framewor
  7. 7. Outline of presentation Background: Social dilemma institutions Legalising nature Case study: Whanganui River, NZ Conclusion: Outcomes – Introduce common institutional arrangements for transcending social dilemmas – A new approach? – Background – Legal Framework – Analysis of old and new governance arrangement using IAD Framewor – Identify changes resulting from the new arrangement
  8. 8. Social dilemma institutions • Centralised governance; privatisation; community governance; co-­‐management – Differentiate through ownership of property rights (property rights are considered a bundle of rights) • Use Schlager and Ostrom’s (1992) five characteristics of property rights-­‐in-­‐use: 1) Entry – the right to enter a resource; 2) Withdrawl – the right to harvest and take some resource units out of the resource system; 3) Management – the right to change the physical structures in a resource system or develop a variety of physical infrastructures for any particular resource; 4) Exclusion – the right to determine who else could use the resource and what their specific rights would be; and 5) Alienation – the right to sell one or more of the first four rights permanently or for a given time period
  9. 9. Comparison Entry Withdrawl Management Exclusion Alienation Centralised governance Government Government Government Government Government Privatisation Individual Individual Government (Individual) Individual Individual Community governance Community Community Community Community Community Co-management Government Government Community Government Government !
  10. 10. Comparison Entry Withdrawl Management Exclusion Alienation Centralised governance Entry Withdrawl Management Exclusion Alienation Government Government Government Government Government Privatisation Individual Individual Government (Individual) Individual Individual Community governance Community Community Community Community Community Co-management Government Government Community Government Government ! Definitions Government: the collection of elected public officials designated to make decisions at the executive and legislative levels of a Government system Community: a group of people who interact directly, frequently, and in multi-­‐faceted ways Individual: just one person or organisation Centralised governance Government Government Government Government Government Privatisation Individual Individual Government (Individual) Individual Individual Community governance Community Community Community Community Community Co-management Government Government Community Government Government !
  11. 11. Comparison Entry Withdrawl Management Exclusion Alienation Centralised governance Entry Withdrawl Management Exclusion Alienation Government Government Government Government Government Privatisation Individual Individual Government (Individual) Individual Individual Community governance Community Community Community Community Community Co-management Government Government Community Government Government ! Definitions Government: the collection of elected public officials designated to make decisions at the executive and legislative levels of a Government system Community: a group of people who interact directly, frequently, and in multi-­‐faceted ways Individual: just one person or organisation Centralised governance Government Government Government Government Government Privatisation Individual Individual Government (Individual) Individual Individual Community governance Community Community Community Community Community Co-management Government Government Community Government Government ! Also, can’t forget the importance of social capital, transaction costs, and leadership influencing the success (or failure) of institutional arrangements
  12. 12. A new approach? “I am quite seriously proposing that we give legal rights to forests, oceans, rivers, and other so-­‐called “natural objects” in the environment – indeed to the natural environment as a whole.” -­‐ Stone C. 1972. Should trees have standing? Toward legal rights for natural objects. 45 S. Cal. L. Rev. 450.
  13. 13. Case Study: The Whanganui River, NZ
  14. 14. Case Study: The Whanganui River, NZ
  15. 15. Case Study: The Whanganui River, NZ Ecological perspective: The river is ecologically unhealthy (Sunde, 2003) Tikanga perspective: “Physical pollution of the Whanganui River affects its soul, its wairua; its supernatural and divine power, its mana; and, through the sacred affinity of this sacred place to our people, affects us, mentally, physically, and spiritually. No chemical combatants will reduce or eliminate this effect, nor will it alter the breach of tapu.” (Hikaia Amohia, 1988)
  16. 16. Case Study: The Whanganui River, NZ Ecological perspective: The river is ecologically unhealthy (Sunde, 2003) Tikanga perspective: “Physical pollution of the Whanganui River affects its soul, its wairua; its supernatural and divine power, its mana; and, through the sacred affinity of this sacred place to our people, affects us, mentally, physically, and spiritually. No chemical combatants will reduce or eliminate this effect, nor will it alter the breach of tapu.” (Hikaia Amohia, 1988) à Social dilemma – “river health and wellbeing” is not being provided for -­‐ how can we address these issues?
  17. 17. Let ’s make the river own itself!
  18. 18. Let ’s make the river own itself! But how?!
  19. 19. Let ’s make the river own itself! But how?! 1. “Te Awa Tupua is an indivisible and living whole comprising the Whanganui River from the mountains to the sea, incorporating its tributaries and all its physical and metaphysical elements.” [s2.1]
  20. 20. Let ’s make the river own itself! But how?! 1. “Te Awa Tupua is an indivisible and living whole comprising the Whanganui River from the mountains to the sea, incorporating its tributaries and all its physical and metaphysical elements.” [s2.1] 2. “Te Awa Tupua is a legal person” [s2.2] with “…the same rights, powers, duties, and liabilities of a legal person.” [s2.3]
  21. 21. Let ’s make the river own itself! But how?! 1. “Te Awa Tupua is an indivisible and living whole comprising the Whanganui River from the mountains to the sea, incorporating its tributaries and all its physical and metaphysical elements.” [s2.1] 2. “Te Awa Tupua is a legal person” [s2.2] with “…the same rights, powers, duties, and liabilities of a legal person.” [s2.3] 3. Title of the river bed will be vested away from the Crown and placed in the name of Te Awa Tupua itself. [s6.1]
  22. 22. New legal framework
  23. 23. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement
  24. 24. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework
  25. 25. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Awa Tupua Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework
  26. 26. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Awa Tupua Represented by: Te Pou Tupua Two guardians acting as one - one nominated by the Crown - one nominated by Iwi Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework
  27. 27. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Awa Tupua Represented by: Te Pou Tupua Two guardians acting as one - one nominated by the Crown - one nominated by Iwi Advised by: Te Karawao One person each from: - Nga Tangata Tiaki o Whanganui - iwi with other interests in the River - local authories Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework
  28. 28. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Awa Tupua Represented by: Te Pou Tupua Two guardians acting as one - one nominated by the Crown - one nominated by Iwi Advised by: Te Karawao One person each from: - Nga Tangata Tiaki o Whanganui - iwi with other interests in the River - local authories Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework Strategy group: Te Kopuka na Te Awa Tupua 17 representatives of local community groups
  29. 29. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Awa Tupua Represented by: Te Pou Tupua Two guardians acting as one - one nominated by the Crown - one nominated by Iwi Advised by: Te Karawao One person each from: - Nga Tangata Tiaki o Whanganui - iwi with other interests in the River - local authories Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework Strategy document: Te Heke Ngahuru ki Te Awa Tupua Strategy group: Te Kopuka na Te Awa Tupua 17 representatives of local community groups
  30. 30. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Awa Tupua Represented by: Te Pou Tupua Two guardians acting as one - one nominated by the Crown - one nominated by Iwi Advised by: Te Karawao One person each from: - Nga Tangata Tiaki o Whanganui - iwi with other interests in the River - local authories Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework Strategy document: Te Heke Ngahuru ki Te Awa Tupua Strategy group: Te Kopuka na Te Awa Tupua 17 representatives of local community groups
  31. 31. New legal framework Ruruku Whakatupua Te Mana o te Iwi o Whanganui - The Deed of Settlement Te Ruruku Whakatupua – Legal Framework Strategy document: Te Heke Ngahuru ki Te Awa Tupua Guided by Tupua te Kawa (four intrinsic values): 1. Ko te Awa te mātāpuna o te ora - the River is the source of spiritual and physical sustenance 2. E rere kau mai te Awa nui mai te Kahui Maunga ki Tangaroa – the great River flows from the mountains to the sea 3. Ko au te Awa ko te Awa ko au – I am the River and the River is me 4. Ngā manga iti, ngā manga nui e honohono kau ana, ka tupu hei Awa Tupua – the small and the large streams that flow into one another and form one River Te Awa Tupua Represented by: Te Pou Tupua Two guardians acting as one - one nominated by the Crown - one nominated by Iwi Advised by: Te Karawao One person each from: - Nga Tangata Tiaki o Whanganui - iwi with other interests in the River - local authories Strategy group: Te Kopuka na Te Awa Tupua 17 representatives of local community groups
  32. 32. How might this new institutional arrangement affect the governance structure of the Whanganui River/Te Awa Tupua? Meta-­‐constitutional choice The nested nature of rules and incentives using the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework Source: Adapted from McGinnis, 1999
  33. 33. The Whanganui River/Te Awa Tupua Governance of the WR + Actors governance structure Anthropocentric worldview Tikanga worldview National statutes Monitoring + Sanctioning Management of the WR + Actors District and Regional Plans Working rules-­‐ in-­‐use Monitoring + Sanctioning Bio-­‐physical conditions Community attributes Rules-­‐in-­‐use Use of the WR + Actors ‘Mana’ of Iwi damaged; poor river health Constitutional choice level Collective choice level Operational choice level The nested nature of rules and incentives influencing governance of the the Whanganui River/Te Awa Tupua analysed using the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework Source: Adapted from McGinnis, 1999 Meta-­‐ constitutional choice level
  34. 34. The Whanganui River/Te Awa Tupua Governance of the WR + Actors governance structure Anthropocentric worldview Tikanga worldview National statutes Monitoring + Sanctioning Management of the WR + Actors District and Regional Plans Working rules-­‐ in-­‐use Monitoring + Sanctioning Bio-­‐physical conditions Community attributes Rules-­‐in-­‐use Use of the WR + Actors ‘Mana’ of Iwi damaged; poor river health Constitutional choice level Collective choice level Operational choice level The nested nature of rules and incentives influencing governance of the the Whanganui River/Te Awa Tupua analysed using the Institutional Analysis and Development Framework Source: Adapted from McGinnis, 1999 Te Ruruku Whakatupua Meta-­‐ constitutional choice level
  35. 35. Outcome: Three major changes
  36. 36. Outcome: Three major changes 1. Introduces a new actor – “Te Awa Tupua” represented by “Te Pou Tupua”
  37. 37. Outcome: Three major changes 1. Introduces a new actor – “Te Awa Tupua” represented by “Te Pou Tupua” 2. Changes the property rights structure Entry Withdrawal Management Exclusion Alienation Legalising nature Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Community) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary)
  38. 38. Outcome: Three major changes 1. Introduces a new actor – “Te Awa Tupua” represented by “Te Pou Tupua” 2. Changes the property rights structure Entry Withdrawal Management Exclusion Alienation Legalising nature Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) 3. Formalises “informal” Maori worldview Te Awa Tupua (Community) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Anthropocentric worldview Tikanga worldview Constitutional choice Collective choice Operational choice
  39. 39. Outcome: Three major changes 1. Introduces a new actor – “Te Awa Tupua” represented by “Te Pou Tupua” 2. Changes the property rights structure Entry Withdrawal Management Exclusion Alienation Legalising nature Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) 3. Formalises “informal” Maori worldview Te Awa Tupua (Community) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Te Awa Tupua (Judiciary) Anthropocentric worldview Tikanga worldview Constitutional choice Collective choice Operational choice
  40. 40. Conclusion • New property rights arrangement only worthwhile if benefits > costs • Will take several years to determine the effectiveness of this change • Already being replicated for the governance of Te Urewera National Park, New Zealand
  41. 41. Conclusion • New property rights arrangement only worthwhile if benefits > costs • Will take several years to determine the effectiveness of this change • Already being replicated for the governance of Te Urewera National Park, New Zealand Thank you. Questions and comments welcome.
  42. 42. Conclusion • New property rights arrangement only worthwhile if benefits > costs • Will take several years to determine the effectiveness of this change • Already being replicated for the governance of Te Urewera National Park, New Zealand Thank you. Questions and comments welcome. julia.talbot-­‐jones@anu.edu.au

×