IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v39y2014icp21-31.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Linking outputs and outcomes from devolved forest governance using a Modified Actor-Power-Accountability Framework (MAPAF): Case study from Chilimo forest, Ethiopia

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammed, Abrar Juhar
  • Inoue, Makoto

Abstract

Recent changes in the policy and institutional framework for forestry of Ethiopia emphasize the decentralization of power including through devolution. With the aim of filling the gap in the literature on Ethiopia, this study explored the actors involved, the nature of power they hold, the accountability relationships among actors and the social and environmental outcomes of the devolved governance system using a Modified Actor-Power-Accountability Framework (MAPAF). The results indicated that discretionary decision-making space is created for the local population and the leaders of Forest Cooperatives to manage and protect the forest and use it for subsistence purposes. To generate income from their withdrawal rights, however, local actors require approval from a mid-level actor, the Oromia Forest and Wildlife Enterprise. Devolution has improved physical and human conditions and the benefits from natural capital, which were identified as salient for the local population as a means of coping with their vulnerabilities and for income generation. The environmental outcome differed depending on the policy followed by the mid-level partner organizations that make decisions with the local population on income-generating activities from the sale of forest resources. Overall, elite capture and the recent emphasis on income generation over forest conservation were identified as key factors hampering positive social and environmental outcomes from the devolved governance system.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammed, Abrar Juhar & Inoue, Makoto, 2014. "Linking outputs and outcomes from devolved forest governance using a Modified Actor-Power-Accountability Framework (MAPAF): Case study from Chilimo forest, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 21-31.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:39:y:2014:i:c:p:21-31
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.11.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113002426
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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 & Gupta, Krishna, 2005. "Decentralization and Participation: The Governance of Common Pool Resources in Nepal's Terai," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1101-1114, July.
    2. Kumar, Sanjay, 2002. "Does "Participation" in Common Pool Resource Management Help the Poor? A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of Joint Forest Management in Jharkhand, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 763-782, May.
    3. Jagger, Pamela & Pender, John & Gebremedhin, Berhanu, 2005. "Trading Off Environmental Sustainability for Empowerment and Income: Woodlot Devolution in Northern Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1491-1510, September.
    4. Ackerman, John, 2004. "Co-Governance for Accountability: Beyond "Exit" and "Voice"," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 447-463, March.
    5. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    6. Klooster, Daniel, 2000. "Institutional Choice, Community, and Struggle: A Case Study of Forest Co-Management in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-20, January.
    7. Campbell, Bruce & Mandondo, Alois & Nemarundwe, Nontokozo & Sithole, Bevlyne & De JonG, Wil & Luckert, Marty & Matose, Frank, 2001. "Challenges to Proponents of Common Property Recource Systems: Despairing Voices from the Social Forests of Zimbabwe," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 589-600, April.
    8. Subhrendu K. Pattanayak & Erin O. Sills, 2001. "Do Tropical Forests Provide Natural Insurance? The Microeconomics of Non-Timber Forest Product Collection in the Brazilian Amazon," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 77(4), pages 595-612.
    9. Serdar Yilmaz & Yakup Beris & Rodrigo Serrano-Berthet, 2010. "Linking Local Government Discretion and Accountability in Decentralisation," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 28(3), pages 259-293, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Tesfaye, Yemiru & Roos, Anders & Campbell, Bruce M. & Bohlin, Folke, 2011. "Livelihood strategies and the role of forest income in participatory-managed forests of Dodola area in the bale highlands, southern Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 258-265, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jagger, Pamela, 2014. "Confusion vs. clarity: Property rights and forest use in Uganda," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 32-41.
    2. Sikor, Thomas & He, Jun & Lestrelin, Guillaume, 2017. "Property Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis Revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 337-349.
    3. Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "Paradoxes of participation: The logic of professionalization in participatory forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-6.
    4. Prabowo, Doni & Maryudi, Ahmad & Imron, Muhammad A. & Senawi,, 2016. "Enhancing the application of Krott et al.'s (2014) Actor-Centred Power (ACP): The importance of understanding the effect of changes in polity for the measurement of power dynamics over time," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 184-186.

    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:39:y:2014:i:c:p:21-31. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.