IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fpr/worpps/56.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Collective action in plant genetic resources management: gendered rules of reputation, trust and reciprocity in Kerala, India

Author

Listed:
  • Padmanabhan, Martina Aruna

Abstract

"Collective action aims at the joint management of common pool resources. Agrobiodiversity at the community level is conceptualized as a collective resource requiring the management of varieties, species and their interrelations within a farming-system. In the rice dominated agriculture in the uplands of Kerala, India, few community groups continue maintaining and thus conserving their high diversity in landraces. Faced with the challenges of devastating prices for rice, their traditional system of collective action to exchange seed material and knowledge is endangered. A new institutional mechanism to manage biodiversity is the People's Biodiversity Register, a mandatory documentation procedure to enable cost and benefit sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity. The comparative analysis of these contrasting cases of an indigenous and an administered effort is concerned with the importance of the analytical category of gender for the rules structuring the actions of the groups. Gender is perceived as an institution, constructing regulations of access and conduct for its members, shaping the room to maneuver. Do the core elements constituting collective action, namely reputation, trust and reciprocity imply different consequences for men and women? Do the rules structuring group mobilization imply different consequences for men and women in the same given context and regarding the management of the same resource? Where do we observe differences and to which effect? Since action resources are very much determined by the existing construction of gender, the question is how does collective action enlarge or inhibit the choices of men and women. Based on 2005 empirical data, the paper analyzes the tribal community of Kurichyas and the People's Biodiversity Register with special emphasis on the analytical category of gender concerning the core elements trust, reciprocity and reputation of collective action." Author's Abstract

Suggested Citation

  • Padmanabhan, Martina Aruna, 2006. "Collective action in plant genetic resources management: gendered rules of reputation, trust and reciprocity in Kerala, India," CAPRi working papers 56, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    • Handle: RePEc:fpr:worpps:56
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifpri.org/cdmref/p15738coll2/id/33280/filename/33281.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    2. Jones, Eric C., 2004. "Wealth-Based Trust and the Development of Collective Action," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 691-711, April.
    3. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    4. Padmanabhan, Martina Aruna, 2005. "Institutional innovations towards gender equity in agrobiodiversity management: collective action in Kerala, South India," CAPRi working papers 39, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Swanson, Timothy & Goschl, Timo, 2000. "Property rights issues involving plant genetic resources: implications of ownership for economic efficiency," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 75-92, January.
    6. James A. Swaney, 1990. "Common Property, Reciprocity, and Community," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(2), pages 451-462, June.
    7. Agarwal, Bina, 2000. "Conceptualising Environmental Collective Action: Why Gender Matters," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 24(3), pages 283-310, May.
    8. David Mosse, 1997. "The Symbolic Making of a Common Property Resource: History, Ecology and Locality in a Tank‐irrigated Landscape in South India," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 28(3), pages 467-504, July.
    9. Veron, Rene, 2001. "The "New" Kerala Model: Lessons for Sustainable Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 601-617, April.
    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. Padmanabhan, Martina & Jungcurt, Stefan, 2012. "Biocomplexity—conceptual challenges for institutional analysis in biodiversity governance," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 70-79.
    2. Leone, Marinella, 2019. "Women as decision makers in community forest management: Evidence from Nepal," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 180-191.
    3. Naidu, Sirisha C., 2011. "Gendered effects of work and participation in collective forest management," MPRA Paper 31091, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Paudel, Jayash, 2018. "Community-Managed Forests, Household Fuelwood Use and Food Consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-73.
    5. Paudel, Jayash, 2016. "Community-Managed Forests and Household Welfare: Empirical Evidence from Nepal," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235481, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Barham, James & Chitemi, Clarence, 2008. "Collective action initiatives to improve marketing performance: Lessons from farmer groups in Tanzania," CAPRi working papers 74, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Fekadu Beyene, 2009. "Collective action in water‐point management: The case of pastoral and agropastoral communities in eastern Ethiopia," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 33(3), pages 175-188, August.
    8. Beitl, Christine M., 2014. "Adding Environment to the Collective Action Problem: Individuals, Civil Society, and the Mangrove-Fishery Commons in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 93-107.
    9. Esther Mwangi & Ruth Meinzen-Dick & Yan Sun, 2009. "Does Gender Influence Forest Management? Exploring Cases from East Africa and Latin America," CID Working Papers 40, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    10. Ntuli, Herbert & Mukong, Alfred Kechia & Kimengsi, Jude Ndzifon, 2022. "Institutions and environmental resource extraction within local communities in Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    11. Amadu, Festus O. & McNamara, Paul E. & Miller, Daniel C., 2020. "Understanding the adoption of climate-smart agriculture: A farm-level typology with empirical evidence from southern Malawi," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    12. Ballet, Jérôme & Bazin, Damien Jérôme Albert & Komena, Boniface K., 2020. "Unequal capabilities and natural resource management: The case of Côte d’Ivoire," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    13. Barham, James & Chitemi, Clarence, 2009. "Collective action initiatives to improve marketing performance: Lessons from farmer groups in Tanzania," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 53-59, February.
    14. Schnegg, Michael & Linke, Theresa, 2015. "Living Institutions: Sharing and Sanctioning Water among Pastoralists in Namibia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 205-214.
    15. Catherine Ragasa & Jennifer Golan, 2014. "The role of rural producer organizations for agricultural service provision in fragile states," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 45(5), pages 537-553, September.
    16. Floriane Clement, 2010. "Analysing decentralised natural resource governance: proposition for a “politicised” institutional analysis and development framework," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(2), pages 129-156, June.
    17. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    18. Kaganzi, Elly & Ferris, Shaun & Barham, James & Abenakyo, Annet & Sanginga, Pascal & Njuki, Jemimah, 2008. "Sustaining linkages to high value markets through collective action in Uganda: The case of the Nyabyumba potato farmers," CAPRi working papers 75, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    19. Kaganzi, Elly & Ferris, Shaun & Barham, James & Abenakyo, Annet & Sanginga, Pascal & Njuki, Jemimah, 2009. "Sustaining linkages to high value markets through collective action in Uganda," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 23-30, February.
    20. Thapliyal, Sneha & Mukherji, Arnab & Malghan, Deepak, 2019. "Economic inequality and loss of commons: Evidence from India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 693-712.

    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:fpr:worpps:56. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifprius.html .

    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.