Placing the Commoning First: Getting Beyond the Patronage Trap in Natural Resource Decentralization Policies

IF 1.7 Q2 FORESTRY Forest and Society Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.24259/fs.v7i2.25926
Nurhady Sirimorok, Micah R. Fisher, Bart Verheijen, Muhammad Alif K. Sahide
{"title":"Placing the Commoning First: Getting Beyond the Patronage Trap in Natural Resource Decentralization Policies","authors":"Nurhady Sirimorok, Micah R. Fisher, Bart Verheijen, Muhammad Alif K. Sahide","doi":"10.24259/fs.v7i2.25926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research on the commons have been an inspiration for initiatives on natural resource decentralization over the past three decades. Researchers are increasingly recognizing however, that these commons initiatives are mostly failing to support rights, improve livelihoods, and conserve natural resources. These “commons projects,” defined as approaches that claim to devolve natural resource governance to local institutions, have their origins in various formulations of theories of the commons but are usually interpreted and applied by states and donor organizations. This paper identifies and analyzes deficiencies in theories of the commons through the slight but significant refocusing on perspectives of commoning. We found that commons scholarship lacks a grounding in power relations, and furthermore, tends to portray commons-governing groups as homogenous communities enacting long-established practices. Conversely, a commoning perspective provides a more dynamic and relational approach, and thus distinctly centers political dimensions of collective practices among diverse groups of citizens. We also extend this argument by showing that a fundamental shift in understanding commoning will help advocate for, and anticipate what commoners can actually do in regions of the Global South undergoing widespread enclosures in the face of powerful informal patronage networks controlled by state power actors and interests.","PeriodicalId":43213,"journal":{"name":"Forest and Society","volume":"319 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forest and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v7i2.25926","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research on the commons have been an inspiration for initiatives on natural resource decentralization over the past three decades. Researchers are increasingly recognizing however, that these commons initiatives are mostly failing to support rights, improve livelihoods, and conserve natural resources. These “commons projects,” defined as approaches that claim to devolve natural resource governance to local institutions, have their origins in various formulations of theories of the commons but are usually interpreted and applied by states and donor organizations. This paper identifies and analyzes deficiencies in theories of the commons through the slight but significant refocusing on perspectives of commoning. We found that commons scholarship lacks a grounding in power relations, and furthermore, tends to portray commons-governing groups as homogenous communities enacting long-established practices. Conversely, a commoning perspective provides a more dynamic and relational approach, and thus distinctly centers political dimensions of collective practices among diverse groups of citizens. We also extend this argument by showing that a fundamental shift in understanding commoning will help advocate for, and anticipate what commoners can actually do in regions of the Global South undergoing widespread enclosures in the face of powerful informal patronage networks controlled by state power actors and interests.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
以公为先:突破自然资源分散政策中的庇护陷阱
过去三十年来,对公地的研究启发了自然资源下放的倡议。然而,研究人员越来越认识到,这些公共倡议大多未能支持权利、改善生计和保护自然资源。这些“公地项目”被定义为声称将自然资源治理下放给地方机构的方法,它们起源于公地理论的各种表述,但通常由国家和捐赠组织来解释和应用。本文通过对公地视角的轻微但重要的重新关注,识别和分析了公地理论的缺陷。我们发现,公地学术缺乏权力关系的基础,而且,它倾向于将公地治理团体描绘成制定长期惯例的同质社区。相反,共同的观点提供了一种更有活力和关系的方法,从而明显地集中了不同公民群体集体实践的政治层面。我们还扩展了这一论点,表明理解共性的根本转变将有助于倡导和预测在面临国家权力行为者和利益控制的强大非正式赞助网络的全球南方地区,平民实际上可以做些什么。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Forest and Society
Forest and Society FORESTRY-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
35.30%
发文量
37
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Good Life: Agriculture Transformation and the Pursuance of Goals in Two Rural Villages of Northeastern Thailand Emergent Institutional Issues from New Tenure Reforms and Social-Forestry Initiatives in Indonesia: Notes from The Field Fish, Freshwater, and the Promise of Biodiversity History for Indonesian Studies Placing the Commoning First: Getting Beyond the Patronage Trap in Natural Resource Decentralization Policies Assessing Indigenous Forest Management in Mount Merapi National Park Based on Ostrom’s Design Principles
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1