Suchergebnisse

"Balancing the Commons in Switzerland outlines continuity and change in the management of common-pool resources such as pastures and forests in Switzerland. The book focusses on the differences and similarities between local institutions (rules and regulations) and forms of commoners' organisations (civic communities, corporations) which have managed common property for several centuries and have shaped the cultural landscapes of Switzerland. The core of the book are five case studies from the German, French and Italian speaking regions of Switzerland. Beginning in the late medieval ages and focussing on the transformations in the 19th and 20th century, it traces the internal and external political, economic and societal changes and examines what impact these changes had on commoners. It goes beyond the work of Robert Netting and Elinor Ostrom, who discussed Swiss commons as a unique case of robustness, by analysing how local commoners reacted to, but also shaped changes by adapting and transforming common property institutions. Thus, the volume highlights how institutional changes in the management of the commons (pastures, forest) on the local level are embedded in the public policies of the respective cantons (provinces), and the state, which generates a high heterogeneity and an actual laboratory situation (Swiss lab). It shows the very different ways that local collective organisations and their members have followed in order to try to cope with the loss of value of the commons and the increased workload for maintaining common property management. Providing insightful case studies of commons management, this volume delivers lessons to be learned for the commons worldwide and for the general theoretical debate on the commons. It is published on the 30th anniversary of Ostrom's Nobel Prize winning title Governing the Commons from which it gets its name. This book will be of great interest to students and scholars of the commons, natural resource management and agricultural development"--

AbstractThis paper aims to show the relevance that institutions governing common-pool resources (CPRs) play in peasant resilience. It outlines nine variables for resilience taken from socio-economic and ecological anthropological theories focusing on subsistence and minimax strategies and used for the comparative historical analysis of African case studies. These include drylands (Morocco, Ghana), semi-arid areas (Sierra Leone, Malawi, Tanzania) and wetlands (Cameroon, Kenya, Zambia). The variables could be found under pre-colonial common property but were no longer operating during colonial and postcolonial institutional change from common to state property and privatisation via land grabbing, leading to commons and resilience grabbing.

Recent debates in social anthropology on land acquisitions highlight the need to go further back in history in order to analyse their impacts on local livelihoods. The debate over the commons in economic and ecological anthropology helps us understand some of today's dynamics by looking at precolonial common property institutions and the way they were transformed by Western colonization to state property and then, later in the age of neoliberalism, to privatization and open access. This paper focuses on Africa and refers to the work of critical scholars who show that traditional land tenure was misinterpreted as customary tenure without full property rights, while a broader literature on the commons shows that common-pool resources (pasture, fisheries, wildlife, forestry etc.) have been effectively managed by locally-developed common property institutions. This misinterpretation continues to function as a legacy in both juridical and popular senses. Moreover, the transformation of political systems and the notion of customary land tenure produced effects of central importance for today's investment context. During colonial times a policy of indirect rule based on new elites was created to manage customary lands of so-called native groups who could use the land as long as it was of no value to the state. However, this land formally remained in the hands of the state, which also claimed to manage common-pool resources through state institutions. The neoliberal policies that are now demanded by donor agencies have had two consequences for land and land-related common-pool resources. On the one hand, states often lack the financial means to enforce their own natural resource legislation and this has led to de facto open access. On the other hand, land legally fragmented from its common-pool resources has been transformed from state to private property. This has enabled new elites and foreign investors to claim private property on formerly commonly-held land, which also leads to the loss of access to land related common-pool resources for more marginal local actors. Thus, the paper argues that this process does not just lead to land grabbing but to commons grabbing as well. This has furthermore undermined the resilience and adaptive capacity of local populations because access to common-pool resources is vital for the livelihoods of more marginal groups, especially in times of crisis. Comparative studies undertaken on floodplains in Botswana, Cameroon, Mali, Tanzania and Zambia based on a New Institutional Political Ecology (NIPE) approach illustrate this process and its impacts and show how institutional transformations are key to understanding the impacts of large-scale land acquisitions (LSLA) and investments in Africa

Intercultural, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research interfaces confront researchers with considerable challenges. Towards Shared Research portrays how scholars from different disciplinary and geographical origins and at various academic career stages strive for a more inclusive and better understanding of knowledge about African environments. The book is addressed to researchers, facilitators, and policy-makers to make a case for participatory and integrative approaches resulting in systemic and co-created analyses.

Intercultural, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research interfaces confront researchers with considerable challenges. Towards Shared Research portrays how scholars from different disciplinary and geographical origins and at various academic career stages strive for a more inclusive and better understanding of knowledge about African environments.The book is addressed to researchers, facilitators, and policy-makers to make a case for participatory and integrative approaches resulting in systemic and co-created analyses.

Intercultural, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research interfaces confront researchers with considerable challenges. Towards Shared Research portrays how scholars from different disciplinary and geographical origins and at various academic career stages strive for a more inclusive and better understanding of knowledge about African environments. The book is addressed to researchers, facilitators, and policy-makers to make a case for participatory and integrative approaches resulting in systemic and co-created analyses.

This article is an attempt to discuss the image of Alexander von Humboldt as a pure natural scientist with a humanist ethos, and to highlight that he was in fact one of the first thinkers who anticipated positions known today as political ecology. We outline that his universal knowledge obviously has contradictory perspectives, and was interpreted in several directions. On the one hand, there is the position taken by post-colonial critics that Humboldt showed Eurocentric and imperialist thinking during his travels to the Americas, as Pratt has advocated. On the other hand, and in explicit contrast to the post-colonial critique, Humboldt has been regarded by Sachs as a founding figure of American environmentalism and as "perhaps, the first ecological thinker." Furthermore, Wulf's biography titled The Invention of Nature tries to show that Humboldt wanted to bridge the gap between the emerging natural sciences and Romanticist aesthetics. However, based on his writings, we argue that his perception of nature has been misread and that his position was shaped by a view akin to open and critical political ecology, as opposed to pure nature constructivism without including local humans. We show this by focusing on his research methods that were open to local Indigenous ecological knowledge, his appraisal of Indigenous socio-cultural systems, his perception of nature as Indigenous cultural landscapes degraded by colonial and early capitalist market forces, his openness towards Indigenous ontologies of what we call nature, and finally his focus on local institutions for the sustainable governance of resources.

Powerful states and elites frequently manage protected areas with little or no concern for historic land uses, people, or governance practices, justified by ideologies that portray these areas as "pure nature" to be protected from humans. New international participatory platforms, such as the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Program, coupled with strategic active agency, have provided an opportunity for challenging the fortress model of conservation in Israel. We examine the change in Israel's government ecological policies following its failure in managing the Carmel forests, whereby its bargaining power with the local Druze-Arab minority was significantly reduced, opening a window of opportunity for the Druze to take advantage of new UNESCO rules on local participation to create management institutions for the local forest commons.

Participatory approaches to conservation have been applied worldwide by governments and non-governmental organisations. However, results from a comparative analysis of the impacts of global change on management issues in 13 protected areas in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and Europe show that in many cases the involvement of local people has remained limited, and economic gains for local livelihoods have been limited or non-existent. Viewed from a 'new institutionalist' perspective and focusing on power relations and ideologies, the results of this study carried out within the framework of the Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South show that in African cases local people do not feel part of the process and, therefore, become disengaged. In Asia, and even more so in Latin America, local indigenous peoples and their leaders support protected areas as a means to gain political rights over areas threatened by immigration. The European (Swiss) case is the only one where political rights and economic incentives present a context in which participation is of direct interest to local people. Meanwhile, recent debates on new global conservation developments in the context of climate change policy indicate a growing tendency to treat conservation as a commodity. We argue that this can have problematical effects on efforts to devolve power to the local level in the context of conservation.

Many scholars claim that open access due to the effective absence of state control is the major reason for the overuse of common-pool resources such as fisheries. Based on data from the Kafue Flats fisheries in Zambia, we argue that the main problem in open-access situations is the paradox of a state that is simultaneously absent and present: present in actions that dismantle local fishery institutions but absent when it comes to the ability to enforce the laws that might protect the resources. Thus, the state is present in the voice of immigrants from other parts of the country who use their Zambian citizenship to legitimize free access to the fisheries. But it is absent when the Department of Fisheries is not able to enforce its own formal rules or control these immigrants' activities. Local groups are unable to act collectively to reinstall new institutions due to the absence of formal law enforcement. This paper analyses this historic process of institutional change within the theoretical framework of New Institutionalism. We test the hypothesis that the main reason for the lack of local collective action in the Kafue Flats is ideology (the notion of citizenship) strengthening the bargaining power of external actors, who profit most from open access constellations.