IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/endeec/v23y2018i04p434-451_00.html

No sense of ownership in weak participation: a forest conservation experiment in Tanzania

Author

Listed:
  • Handberg, Øyvind Nystad

Abstract

Sense of ownership is often advocated as an argument for local participation within the epistemic development and nature conservation communities. Stakeholder participation in initiating, designing or implementing institutions is claimed to establish a sense of ownership among the stakeholders and subsequently improve the intended outcomes of the given institution. Theoretical and empirical justifications of the hypothesis remain scarce. A better understanding of the effects of local participation can motivate more extensive and stronger participation of local stakeholders and improve institutional performance. This paper applies theories from psychology and behavioral economics to sense of ownership. The empirical investigation is a framed field experiment in the context of tropical forest conservation and payments for environmental services in Tanzania. The results lend little support to the hypothesis in this context. The participation treatment in the experiment is weak, and a possible explanation is that sense of ownership is sensitive to the participation form.

Suggested Citation

  • Handberg, Øyvind Nystad, 2018. "No sense of ownership in weak participation: a forest conservation experiment in Tanzania," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 434-451, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:endeec:v:23:y:2018:i:04:p:434-451_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1355770X18000190/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vincent R. Nyirenda & Bimo A. Nkhata & Oscar Tembo & Susan Siamundele, 2018. "Elephant Crop Damage: Subsistence Farmers’ Social Vulnerability, Livelihood Sustainability and Elephant Conservation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-19, October.
    2. Ortiz-Riomalo, Juan Felipe & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Engel, Stefanie, 2023. "The impact of participatory interventions on pro-social behaviour in environmental and natural resource management Evidence from the lab and the field," EconStor Open Access Book Chapters, in: Behavioural Economics and the Environment: A Research Companion, pages 160-181, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    3. Nchanji, Yvonne Kiki & Ramcilovic-Suominen, Sabaheta & Kotilainen, Juha, 2021. "Power imbalances, social inequalities and gender roles as barriers to true participation in national park management: The case of Korup National Park, Cameroon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    4. Degnet, Mohammed B. & van der Werf, Edwin & Ingram, Verina & Wesseler, Justus, 2022. "Community perceptions: A comparative analysis of community participation in forest management: FSC-certified and non-certified plantations in Mozambique," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    5. Cammelli, Federico & Angelsen, Arild, 2019. "Amazonian farmers' response to fire policies and climate change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Grisaffi, Thomas & Farthing, Linda & Ledebur, Kathryn & Paredes, Maritza & Pastor, Alvaro, 2021. "From criminals to citizens: The applicability of Bolivia’s community-based coca control policy to Peru," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • Q23 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Forestry

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:cup:endeec:v:23:y:2018:i:04:p:434-451_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ede .

    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.