Between tradition and transformation: Negotiating land and water resources in Ghana’s Pra River Basin

IF 5.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Augustine Chiga Awolorinke , Marcin Pawel Jarzebski , Alesia Dedaa Ofori , Martiwi Diah Setiawati
{"title":"Between tradition and transformation: Negotiating land and water resources in Ghana’s Pra River Basin","authors":"Augustine Chiga Awolorinke ,&nbsp;Marcin Pawel Jarzebski ,&nbsp;Alesia Dedaa Ofori ,&nbsp;Martiwi Diah Setiawati","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104245","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While numerous studies have highlighted the connection between changes in land use and surface water quality and quantity, there remains a paucity of literature that critically examines how the coexistence of customary and statutory governance systems influences basin-level ecological outcomes in the context of legal pluralism. Using a qualitative case study approach, we examine how overlapping statutory mandates, and the enduring authority of customary actors shape environmental outcomes. Drawing on stakeholder interviews, this study reveals that conflicting governance norms, siloed planning, and tenure insecurity significantly contribute to riparian ecosystem decline. Customary authorities retain legitimacy and close ties to local land practices, yet their exclusion from formal planning processes undermines integrated basin management. Conversely, statutory bodies, although backed by legal authority, often lack local legitimacy and effective enforcement capacity. This study reiterates the urgent need for a harmonization of these governance systems to bridge the divides by integrating customary legitimacy with statutory authority. We propose a framework that illustrates governance interactions that provide a pathway to institutional synergy. This framework provides a lens for addressing surface water governance challenges, particularly in African contexts, where water governance is fraught with legal pluralism. This study contributes to the political ecology literature by demonstrating how harmonized governance can foster more inclusive, adaptive, and resilient water management in sub-Saharan Africa.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 104245"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125002618","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While numerous studies have highlighted the connection between changes in land use and surface water quality and quantity, there remains a paucity of literature that critically examines how the coexistence of customary and statutory governance systems influences basin-level ecological outcomes in the context of legal pluralism. Using a qualitative case study approach, we examine how overlapping statutory mandates, and the enduring authority of customary actors shape environmental outcomes. Drawing on stakeholder interviews, this study reveals that conflicting governance norms, siloed planning, and tenure insecurity significantly contribute to riparian ecosystem decline. Customary authorities retain legitimacy and close ties to local land practices, yet their exclusion from formal planning processes undermines integrated basin management. Conversely, statutory bodies, although backed by legal authority, often lack local legitimacy and effective enforcement capacity. This study reiterates the urgent need for a harmonization of these governance systems to bridge the divides by integrating customary legitimacy with statutory authority. We propose a framework that illustrates governance interactions that provide a pathway to institutional synergy. This framework provides a lens for addressing surface water governance challenges, particularly in African contexts, where water governance is fraught with legal pluralism. This study contributes to the political ecology literature by demonstrating how harmonized governance can foster more inclusive, adaptive, and resilient water management in sub-Saharan Africa.
传统与转型之间:加纳普拉河流域土地与水资源谈判
虽然许多研究强调了土地利用变化与地表水质量和数量之间的联系,但仍然缺乏文献批判性地审查在法律多元化背景下习惯和法定治理系统的共存如何影响流域一级的生态结果。采用定性案例研究方法,我们研究了重叠的法定授权和习惯行为者的持久权威如何影响环境结果。通过对利益相关者的访谈,本研究揭示了相互冲突的治理规范、孤立的规划和权位不安全是导致河岸生态系统衰退的重要原因。习惯当局保持合法性,并与当地土地实践密切联系,但将其排除在正式规划程序之外,破坏了流域综合管理。相反,法定机构虽然有法律权威的支持,但往往缺乏地方合法性和有效的执法能力。这项研究重申,迫切需要协调这些治理制度,通过将习惯合法性与法定权威结合起来,弥合分歧。我们提出了一个框架,说明治理的相互作用,为制度协同提供了途径。该框架为解决地表水治理挑战提供了一个视角,特别是在水治理充满法律多元化的非洲环境中。本研究通过展示协调治理如何促进撒哈拉以南非洲地区更具包容性、适应性和弹性的水管理,为政治生态学文献做出了贡献。
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
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信