Linking institutional change mechanisms with forest management outcomes: evidence from community forestry in Nepal

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Shambhu Charmakar, Jude N. Kimengsi, Lukas Giessen
{"title":"Linking institutional change mechanisms with forest management outcomes: evidence from community forestry in Nepal","authors":"Shambhu Charmakar, Jude N. Kimengsi, Lukas Giessen","doi":"10.5751/es-15085-290301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Global literature recognizes the interactions between endogenous and exogenous forest resource (FR) management institutions. However, a comprehensive understanding of the sources, mechanisms, and outcomes of institutional change in diverse physiographic regions is lacking. We analyzed mechanisms and outcomes of five decades of institutional change across four physiographic regions of Nepal. Data collection involved 45 key informant interviews, 37 expert interviews, and 22 focus group discussions, complemented by a review of 24 policy documents and 8 community forest (CF) management plans and reports. Through directed content analysis, we found that endogenous institutions are rooted more in customs, traditions, and social hierarchies, and formal exogenous institutions are rooted in national and international policies, which are frequently observed for commercialized forest resources. It further revealed transformational changes in forest management institutions from state-oriented to community-based management across the regions between 1976 and 2010. Critical juncture, priming-framing and puzzling-learning were key mechanisms in the middle and high mountains. In contrast, Terai’s recurrent mechanisms were negative/positive feedback and patching-up. After 2010, (de)incremental changes linked to exogenous and endogenous institutions were found to align more with a global agenda (e.g., REDD+). Priming-framing, negative/positive feedback, and transposition were key institutional change mechanisms of exogenous institutions across the study sites. Economic growth and exogenous institutions played an important role in (de)incremental changes linked to endogenous institutions. Additionally, exogenous institutions produced mixed socioeconomic and positive ecological outcomes, showing regional variations. Endogenous institutions led to positive outcomes, highlighting their importance in sustainable forest management. Future research should examine power dynamics, shedding light on how local actors employ institutions and power to produce differential outcomes in CF.</p>\n<p>The post Linking institutional change mechanisms with forest management outcomes: evidence from community forestry in Nepal first appeared on Ecology & Society.</p>","PeriodicalId":51028,"journal":{"name":"Ecology and Society","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecology and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5751/es-15085-290301","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Global literature recognizes the interactions between endogenous and exogenous forest resource (FR) management institutions. However, a comprehensive understanding of the sources, mechanisms, and outcomes of institutional change in diverse physiographic regions is lacking. We analyzed mechanisms and outcomes of five decades of institutional change across four physiographic regions of Nepal. Data collection involved 45 key informant interviews, 37 expert interviews, and 22 focus group discussions, complemented by a review of 24 policy documents and 8 community forest (CF) management plans and reports. Through directed content analysis, we found that endogenous institutions are rooted more in customs, traditions, and social hierarchies, and formal exogenous institutions are rooted in national and international policies, which are frequently observed for commercialized forest resources. It further revealed transformational changes in forest management institutions from state-oriented to community-based management across the regions between 1976 and 2010. Critical juncture, priming-framing and puzzling-learning were key mechanisms in the middle and high mountains. In contrast, Terai’s recurrent mechanisms were negative/positive feedback and patching-up. After 2010, (de)incremental changes linked to exogenous and endogenous institutions were found to align more with a global agenda (e.g., REDD+). Priming-framing, negative/positive feedback, and transposition were key institutional change mechanisms of exogenous institutions across the study sites. Economic growth and exogenous institutions played an important role in (de)incremental changes linked to endogenous institutions. Additionally, exogenous institutions produced mixed socioeconomic and positive ecological outcomes, showing regional variations. Endogenous institutions led to positive outcomes, highlighting their importance in sustainable forest management. Future research should examine power dynamics, shedding light on how local actors employ institutions and power to produce differential outcomes in CF.

The post Linking institutional change mechanisms with forest management outcomes: evidence from community forestry in Nepal first appeared on Ecology & Society.

将体制变革机制与森林管理成果联系起来:尼泊尔社区林业的证据
全球文献都认识到内生和外生森林资源(FR)管理机构之间的相互作用。然而,我们还缺乏对不同地貌区制度变迁的来源、机制和结果的全面了解。我们分析了尼泊尔四个地貌区五十年制度变迁的机制和结果。数据收集包括 45 次关键信息提供者访谈、37 次专家访谈和 22 次焦点小组讨论,以及对 24 份政策文件和 8 份社区森林 (CF) 管理计划和报告的审查。通过有针对性的内容分析,我们发现内生性制度更多地植根于习俗、传统和社会等级制度,而正式的外生性制度则植根于国家和国际政策,这在商业化森林资源中经常出现。研究进一步揭示了 1976 年至 2010 年间各地区森林管理体制从以国家为导向到以社区为基础的转型变化。在中高山地区,关键时刻、引子-框架和困惑-学习是关键机制。相比之下,德赖平原的经常性机制是消极/积极反馈和修补。2010 年后,与外生和内生机制相关的(非)渐进式变化被发现更符合全球议程(如 REDD+)。原始框架、消极/积极反馈和转换是各研究地点外源机构的主要制度变革机制。经济增长和外源机构在与内源机构相关的(去)增量变化中发挥了重要作用。此外,外源机构产生了好坏参半的社会经济和积极的生态结果,并显示出区域差异。内源机构带来了积极的结果,突出了其在可持续森林管理中的重要性。未来的研究应考察权力动态,揭示地方行动者如何利用制度和权力在社区林业中产生不同的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecology and Society
Ecology and Society 环境科学-生态学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
4.90%
发文量
109
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Ecology and Society is an electronic, peer-reviewed, multi-disciplinary journal devoted to the rapid dissemination of current research. Manuscript submission, peer review, and publication are all handled on the Internet. Software developed for the journal automates all clerical steps during peer review, facilitates a double-blind peer review process, and allows authors and editors to follow the progress of peer review on the Internet. As articles are accepted, they are published in an "Issue in Progress." At four month intervals the Issue-in-Progress is declared a New Issue, and subscribers receive the Table of Contents of the issue via email. Our turn-around time (submission to publication) averages around 350 days. We encourage publication of special features. Special features are comprised of a set of manuscripts that address a single theme, and include an introductory and summary manuscript. The individual contributions are published in regular issues, and the special feature manuscripts are linked through a table of contents and announced on the journal''s main page. The journal seeks papers that are novel, integrative and written in a way that is accessible to a wide audience that includes an array of disciplines from the natural sciences, social sciences, and the humanities concerned with the relationship between society and the life-supporting ecosystems on which human wellbeing ultimately depends.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信