scholarly journals Application of the Governance Disruptions Framework to German agricultural soil policy

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Bartkowski ◽  
Stephan Bartke ◽  
Nina Hagemann ◽  
Bernd Hansjürgens ◽  
Christoph Schröter-Schlaack
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Soil ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
Natural Resource Governance ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Governance Systems ◽  
Holistic Analysis

Abstract. Governance of natural resources is inherently complex and requires navigating trade-offs at multiple dimensions. In this paper, we present and operationalize the Governance Disruptions Framework (GDF) as a tool for holistic analysis of natural resource governance systems. For each of the four dimensions of the framework (target adequacy, object adequacy, instrument adequacy, and behavioural adequacy) we formulate guiding questions, to be used when applying the framework to particular governance systems. We then demonstrate the use of GDF by applying it to the core of German agricultural soil policy. We show that for each framework dimension, the governance system exhibits deficits, particularly with respect to object adequacy and instrument adequacy. Furthermore, we use the GDF-based analysis to highlight research gaps. We find that stakeholder analyses are a central gap across GDF dimensions.

scholarly journals Application of the governance disruptions framework to German agricultural soil policy

SOIL ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 495-509
Author(s):  
Bartosz Bartkowski ◽  
Stephan Bartke ◽  
Nina Hagemann ◽  
Bernd Hansjürgens ◽  
Christoph Schröter-Schlaack
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Soil ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Research Gaps ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
Natural Resource Governance ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Multiple Dimensions ◽  
Governance Systems ◽  
Holistic Analysis

Abstract. Governance of natural resources is inherently complex and requires navigating trade-offs at multiple dimensions. In this paper, we present and operationalize the “governance disruptions framework” (GDF) as a tool for holistic analysis of natural resource governance systems. For each of the four dimensions of the framework (target adequacy, object adequacy, instrument adequacy, and behavioural adequacy), we formulate guiding questions to be used when applying the framework to particular governance systems. We then demonstrate the use of GDF by applying it to the core of German agricultural soil policy. We show that for each framework dimension, the governance system exhibits deficits, particularly with respect to object adequacy and instrument adequacy. Furthermore, we use the GDF-based analysis to highlight research gaps. We find that stakeholder analyses are a central gap across GDF dimensions.

Performance of community-based natural resource governance for the Kafue Flats (Zambia)

2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 296-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
BIMO A. NKHATA ◽  
CHARLES M. BREEN
Keyword(s):  
Rural Communities ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Environmental Governance ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Community Based ◽  
System Perspective ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
Natural Resource Governance ◽  
Governance Systems ◽  
Practical Experiences

SUMMARYThe performance obstacles surrounding community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) in southern Africa have much to do with understanding of environmental governance systems and how these are devolved. CBNRM appears to be failing because of flawed environmental governance systems compounded by their ineffective devolution. A case study in Zambia is used to illustrate why and how one CBNRM scheme for the most part faltered. It draws on practical experiences involving the devolution of decision-making and benefit-distribution processes on a floodplain wetland known as the Kafue Flats. While this CBNRM scheme was designed to facilitate the devolution of key components of an environmental governance system, the resultant efforts were largely unsuccessful because of the poor social relationships between government actors and local rural communities. It is argued that in Zambia, at least from an environmental governance system perspective, CBNRM has mostly failed. While generally bringing some marginal improvements to local communities, the construction and execution of an effective environmental governance system have been largely flawed.

Common property theory and resource governance institutions: strengthening explanations of multiple outcomes

2011 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
ARUN AGRAWAL ◽  
CATHERINE SHANNON BENSON
Keyword(s):  
Common Property ◽  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Renewable Resource ◽  
Multiple Outcomes ◽  
Property Theory ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
Natural Resource Governance ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Governance Institutions ◽  
Common Property Theory

SUMMARYDifferent strategies to govern resource commons generate outcomes that can be assessed along different dimensions, in terms of the ecological or social sustainability of the resource system, contributions to the livelihoods of those who rely on these resources, or equity in the allocation of benefits. This paper reviews the existing literature concerning three major renewable resource commons, namely pasture lands, fisheries and irrigation water. Most existing work on these commons has been inattentive to the multiple outcomes that management of all renewable resources generates. Studies of commons can provide better information about livelihoods, sustainability and equity dimensions of natural resource governance outcomes than previously. Attending to the distinctive determinants and drivers of these outcomes and the nature of trade-offs and synergies among them has the potential to advance common property theory substantially. Possible relationships among livelihoods, sustainability and equity are identified, and the major explanations of outcomes advanced by scholars of fisheries, pastoral and irrigation commons reviewed. An interdisciplinary approach is needed to improve existing efforts to determine the outcomes that resource commons generate.

scholarly journals Framing and integration in the global forest, agriculture and climate change nexus

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (8) ◽  
pp. 1415-1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cinthia Soto Golcher ◽  
Ingrid J Visseren-Hamakers
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Soft Law ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Forest Policies ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Governance Systems ◽  
Smart Agriculture ◽  
Key Events

This article contributes to the debate on Integrative Governance by studying integration in the global forest–agriculture–climate change nexus. Since the 1990s, the role of the land-use sector, in particular forests and agriculture, has become increasingly prominent in climate change debates due to its vulnerability and its contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions. Addressing agriculture, climate change and forest policies in an integrated way could therefore create important synergies and reduce trade-offs. This article aims to analyse the extent of integration in current global governance in the nexus of agriculture, forests and climate change, and to explain this extent of integration. Based on the analysis of secondary data, participation in key events and semi-structured interviews, this article concludes that efforts to enhance integration have taken different forms for the different pairs of domains (climate change–agriculture, agriculture–forest, forest–climate change) as well as for the nexus of the three. Integration has been mainly enhanced through soft law, programmes and integrative approaches (e.g. landscape approach, climate smart agriculture, agroforestry). The analysis also shows that the extent of integration among the governance systems has differed. Interplay management efforts on forests and climate change have been relatively successful. Agriculture and forest, and agriculture and climate have low and modest levels of integration respectively, except adaptation in agriculture, which enjoys higher integration levels. Differences in integration can be explained by the medium to high degrees of legalization and the (in)compatibility of the dominant frames present in the different governance systems. Furthermore, our results show that integration in a governance system with a high degree of legalisation, and dominated by one regime, as is the case in climate change, presents important challenges. In such cases, integration might have greater potential outside the intergovernmental regime through soft law approaches.

Political Settlements, Natural Resource Extraction, and Inclusion in Bolivia

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Bebbington ◽  
Abdul-Gafaru Abdulai ◽  
Denise Humphreys Bebbington ◽  
Marja Hinfelaar ◽  
Cynthia A. Sanborn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resource ◽  
Central State ◽  
Dominant Party ◽  
Resource Governance ◽  
Natural Resource Extraction ◽  
Natural Resource Governance ◽  
Holding Power ◽  
Resource Nationalism ◽  
Economic Elite ◽  
Competing Interest

Bolivia’s natural resources have served as a ‘mechanism of trade’ mobilized by competing interest groups to build coalitions, create political pacts, and negotiate political settlements in which dominant actors attempt to win over those resistant to a particular vision of development and/or governance. These pacts and settlements are revisited constantly, reflecting the weak and fragmented power of the central state and of the elite and persistent tensions between national and subnational elites. Ideas about, and modes of, natural resource governance have been central to periods of instability and stability, and to significant periods of political rupture. The period since 2006 has been characterized by a stable settlement involving an alliance between the presidency, his dominant party, and national social movements. This settlement is sustained through bargains with parts of the economic elite and subnational actors with holding power, as well as through ideas of resource nationalism and state-led developmentalism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document