IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v49y2014icp34-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance

Author

Listed:
  • Krott, Max
  • Bader, Axel
  • Schusser, Carsten
  • Devkota, Rosan
  • Maryudi, Ahmad
  • Giessen, Lukas
  • Aurenhammer, Helene

Abstract

Community forestry has been described as a decentralised mode of forest governance that only partly lives up to its expectations. The power of important actors to misuse the community forestry approach for their self-interests has been reported as a major obstacle to comprehensive success. Hence, this article aims at developing an analytical, theory-based and empirically applicable framework for assessing an actor's power using community forestry as an illustrative case. The actor-centred power approach (ACP) analysis aims to provide a scientific answer to the question of who are the politically most powerful actors in community forestry practices. In making use of suitable components of power theories it builds strongly upon the social relations of actors, organisational aspects and power sources, as described by Weber, Dahl, Etzioni and their adherents. Actor-centred power approach (ACP) is defined as a social relationship in which actor A alters the behaviour of actor B without recognising B's will. In our framework we distinguish between three core elements: coercion, (dis-)incentives and dominant information. These make up the basis for observable facts that involve not only physical actions but also threats by power elements and the very sources of said power elements. Theoretical considerations show that, despite the focus being on actors, by looking to their power sources a considerable part of structural power can be more tangible at least in part, like rules, discourse or ideologies. Furthermore, the paper shows how the actor-centred power approach distinguishes power from other influences on forest management and contributes to the identification of the group of powerful actors on an empirical basis. Due to the focus on actors and well-defined and observable elements of power, the actor-centred power approach (ACP) could serve not only as a basis for research but also as a tool for quick assessment of power networks, delivering valuable preliminary information for designing forest policy in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:34-42
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113000804
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.012?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun & Gibson, Clark C., 1999. "Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 629-649, April.
    2. Arts, Bas, 2012. "Forests policy analysis and theory use: Overview and trends," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 7-13.
    3. Cashore, Benjamin & Stone, Michael W., 2012. "Can legality verification rescue global forest governance?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 13-22.
    4. Pettenella, Davide & Brotto, Lucio, 2012. "Governance features for successful REDD+ projects organization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 46-52.
    5. Perez-Cirera, Vanessa & Lovett, Jon C., 2006. "Power distribution, the external environment and common property forest governance: A local user groups model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 341-352, September.
    6. de Jong, Wil & Arts, Bas & Krott, Max, 2012. "Political theory in forest policy science," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 1-6.
    7. Yufanyi Movuh, Mbolo C., 2012. "The Colonial heritage and post-Colonial influence, entanglements and implications of the concept of community forestry by the example of Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 70-77.
    8. Brockhaus, Maria & Obidzinski, Krystof & Dermawan, Ahmad & Laumonier, Yves & Luttrell, Cecilia, 2012. "An overview of forest and land allocation policies in Indonesia: Is the current framework sufficient to meet the needs of REDD+?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 30-37.
    9. Winkel, Georg & Sotirov, Metodi, 2011. "An obituary for national forest programmes? Analyzing and learning from the strategic use of “new modes of governance” in Germany and Bulgaria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 143-154.
    10. Krott, Max, 2012. "Value and risks of the use of analytical theory in science for forest policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 35-42.
    11. Sikor, Thomas & Nguyen, Tan Quang, 2007. "Why May Forest Devolution Not Benefit the Rural Poor? Forest Entitlements in Vietnam's Central Highlands," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 2010-2025, November.
    12. Bas Arts & Jan Tatenhove, 2004. "Policy and power: A conceptual framework between the ‘old’ and ‘new’ policy idioms," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(3), pages 339-356, December.
    13. Jesse C. Ribot, 2001. "Integral local development: "accommodating multiple interests" through entrustment and accountable representation," International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 1(3/4), pages 327-350.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    2. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Pülzl, Helga & Secco, Laura & Sergent, Arnaud & Wallin, Ida, 2018. "Orchestration in political processes: Involvement of experts, citizens, and participatory professionals in forest policy making," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 4-15.
    3. Maryudi, Ahmad & Citraningtyas, Erlita R. & Purwanto, Ris H. & Sadono, Ronggo & Suryanto, Priyono & Riyanto, Slamet & Siswoko, Bowo D., 2016. "The emerging power of peasant farmers in the tenurial conflicts over the uses of state forestland in Central Java, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 70-75.
    4. Rahman, Md Saifur & Sarker, Pradip Kumar & Sadath, Md. Nazmus & Giessen, Lukas, 2018. "Policy changes resulting in power changes? Quantitative evidence from 25 years of forest policy development in Bangladesh," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 419-431.
    5. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Yufanyi Movuh, Mbolo C. & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahamad & Salla, Manjola & Bach, Ngo Duy, 2015. "Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 92-101.
    6. Stevanov, Mirjana & Dobšinska, Zuzana & Surový, Peter, 2016. "Assessing survey-based research in forest science: Turning lemons into lemonade?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 105-117.
    7. Krott, Max & Giessen, Lukas, 2014. "Learning from practices — implications of the “practice based approach” for forest and environmental policy research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 12-16.
    8. Brobbey, Lawrence Kwabena & Hansen, Christian Pilegaard & Kyereh, Boateng, 2021. "The dynamics of property and other mechanisms of access: The case of charcoal production and trade in Ghana," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    9. Calfucura, Enrique, 2018. "Governance, Land and Distribution: A Discussion on the Political Economy of Community-Based Conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 18-26.
    10. Aurenhammer, Peter K., 2017. "Forest land-use governance and change through Forest Owner Associations – Actors' roles and preferences in Bavaria," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 176-191.
    11. Koch, Susanne & Tetley, Camilla, 2023. "What ‘counts’ in international forest policy research? A conference ethnography of valuation practice and habitus in an interdisciplinary social science field," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    12. Arts, Bas, 2014. "Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality⁎⁎This article belongs to the Special Issue: Assessing Forest Governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 17-22.
    13. Prakash Kashwan, 2016. "Integrating power in institutional analysis: A micro-foundation perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 5-26, January.
    14. Juniyanti, Lila & Purnomo, Herry & Kartodihardjo, Hariadi & Prasetyo, Lilik Budi & Suryadi, & Pambudi, Eko, 2021. "Powerful actors and their networks in land use contestation for oil palm and industrial tree plantations in Riau," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    15. Kleinschmit, Daniela & Böcher, Michael & Giessen, Lukas, 2016. "Forest Policy Analysis: Advancing the analytical approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 1-6.
    16. Millner, Naomi & Peñagaricano, Irune & Fernandez, Maria & Snook, Laura K., 2020. "The politics of participation: Negotiating relationships through community forestry in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    17. García-López, Gustavo A., 2019. "Rethinking elite persistence in neoliberalism: Foresters and techno-bureaucratic logics in Mexico’s community forestry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 169-181.
    18. Fisher, Janet A. & Patenaude, Genevieve & Giri, Kalpana & Lewis, Kristina & Meir, Patrick & Pinho, Patricia & Rounsevell, Mark D.A. & Williams, Mathew, 2014. "Understanding the relationships between ecosystem services and poverty alleviation: A conceptual framework," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 7(C), pages 34-45.
    19. Brockhaus, Maria & Di Gregorio, Monica & Mardiah, Sofi, 2014. "Governing the design of national REDD+: An analysis of the power of agency," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 23-33.
    20. Nguyen, Van Thi Hai & McElwee, Pamela & Le, Hue Thi Van & Nghiem, Tuyen & Vu, Huong Thi Dieu, 2022. "The challenges of collective PES: Insights from three community-based models in Vietnam," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:49:y:2014:i:c:p:34-42. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.