IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v127y2020ics0305750x19303924.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The politics of participation: Negotiating relationships through community forestry in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala

Author

Listed:
  • Millner, Naomi
  • Peñagaricano, Irune
  • Fernandez, Maria
  • Snook, Laura K.

Abstract

Since the 1970s, Community forestry (CF) initiatives have sought to combine sustainable forestry, community participation and poverty alleviation. Like other community-based forms of natural resource management (CBNRM), CF has been lauded for its potential to involve local people in conservation while opening new opportunities for economic development. However, CF programmes are not always successful, economically or ecologically, and, by devolving new powers and responsibilities to an abstractly defined “community,” they risk exacerbating existing patterns of social exclusion, and creating new conflicts. In this paper we mobilise a relational concept of negotiation within a political ecology framework to explore how the power relations of CF are addressed and transformed in a region where issues of conflict and tenure security have long shaped the social forest. Specifically, we focus on the emergence and consolidation of ACOFOP [Asociación de Comunidades Forestales de Petén], a Forest Based Association in the Maya Biosphere Reserve in the Petén region of Guatemala, where CF has been practised for 25 years. Emphasising the importance of longer histories of social movements and organisations to local capacities for CF, we explore the conditions of possibility that enabled ACOFOP to emerge, as well as the strategies it has adopted to make national regulatory frameworks work for local communities. Through qualitative analysis derived from participatory research, interviews and ethnographic data, we trace four key areas of ACOFOP’s model of accompaniment (participatory decision-making; conflict resolution; advocacy and capacity-building) that have been developed in response to the negotiation of political issues pertaining to, and stemming from, the practice of CF. Highlighting ongoing challenges, and key strategies for CBNRM in other contexts, we conclude by emphasising that systems of community management cannot be “equitable,” or indeed sustainable, if political issues of access and tenure are not kept central to questions of participation.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:127:y:2020:i:c:s0305750x19303924
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104743
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X19303924
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2019.104743?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. Varughese, George & Ostrom, Elinor, 2001. "The Contested Role of Heterogeneity in Collective Action: Some Evidence from Community Forestry in Nepal," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 747-765, May.
    2. Leach, Melissa & Mearns, Robin & Scoones, Ian, 1999. "Environmental Entitlements: Dynamics and Institutions in Community-Based Natural Resource Management," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 225-247, February.
    3. Li, Tania Murray, 2002. "Engaging Simplifications: Community-Based Resource Management, Market Processes and State Agendas in Upland Southeast Asia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 265-283, February.
    4. Rocheleau, Dianne & Edmunds, David, 1997. "Women, men and trees: Gender, power and property in forest and agrarian landscapes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1351-1371, August.
    5. Nygren, Anja, 2005. "Community-based forest management within the context of institutional decentralization in Honduras," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 639-655, April.
    6. James McCarthy, 2005. "Devolution in the Woods: Community Forestry as Hybrid Neoliberalism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(6), pages 995-1014, June.
    7. Torres-Rojo, Juan Manuel & Moreno-Sánchez, Rafael & Amador-Callejas, Joel, 2019. "Effect of capacity building in alleviating poverty and improving forest conservation in the communal forests of Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 108-122.
    8. Andersson, Krister, 2013. "Local Governance of Forests and the Role of External Organizations: Some Ties Matter More Than Others," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 226-237.
    9. Lund, Jens Friis & Saito-Jensen, Moeko, 2013. "Revisiting the Issue of Elite Capture of Participatory Initiatives," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 104-112.
    10. 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.
    11. Wendy Wolford & Saturnino M. Borras Jr. & Ruth Hall & Ian Scoones & Ben White & Liza Grandia, 2013. "Road Mapping: Megaprojects and Land Grabs in the Northern Guatemalan Lowlands," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 44(2), pages 233-259, March.
    12. Fouksman E., 2015. "James Ferguson: What Shall the Fishermen Become? A review of Give a Man a Fish: Reflections on the New Politics of Distribution," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 10(2), pages 289-292, December.
    13. Kashwan, Prakash & MacLean, Lauren M. & García-López, Gustavo A., 2019. "Rethinking power and institutions in the shadows of neoliberalism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 133-146.
    14. 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.
    15. Ribot, Jesse C. & Agrawal, Arun & Larson, Anne M., 2006. "Recentralizing While Decentralizing: How National Governments Reappropriate Forest Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1864-1886, November.
    16. Agrawal, Arun, 2001. "Common Property Institutions and Sustainable Governance of Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1649-1672, October.
    17. 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.
    18. Ojha, Hemant R. & Ford, Rebecca & Keenan, Rodney J. & Race, Digby & Carias Vega, Dora & Baral, Himlal & Sapkota, Prativa, 2016. "Delocalizing Communities: Changing Forms of Community Engagement in Natural Resources Governance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 274-290.
    19. Bebbington, Anthony & Abramovay, Ricardo & Chiriboga, Manuel, 2008. "Social Movements and the Dynamics of Rural Territorial Development in Latin America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 2874-2887, December.
    20. Blaikie, Piers, 2006. "Is Small Really Beautiful? Community-based Natural Resource Management in Malawi and Botswana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1942-1957, November.
    21. Nancy Lee Peluso, 1992. "The Political Ecology of Extraction and Extractive Reserves in East Kalimantan, Indonesia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 23(4), pages 49-74, October.
    22. Frances Cleaver, 2000. "Moral Ecological Rationality, Institutions and the Management of Common Property Resources," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 31(2), pages 361-383, March.
    23. Kashwan, Prakash, 2017. "Inequality, democracy, and the environment: A cross-national analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 139-151.
    24. Gupta, Divya & Koontz, Tomas M., 2019. "Working together? Synergies in government and NGO roles for community forestry in the Indian Himalayas," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 326-340.
    25. Michael Richards, 1997. "Common Property Resource Institutions and Forest Management in Latin America," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 28(1), pages 95-117, January.
    26. David Edmunds & Eva Wollenberg, 2001. "A Strategic Approach to Multistakeholder Negotiations," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(2), pages 231-253, March.
    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. Bocci, Corinne & Fortmann, Lea, 2023. "Community and industrial forest concessions: Are they effective at reducing forest loss and does FSC certification play a role?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    2. Trejos, Bernardo & Flores, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Influence of property rights on performance of community-based forest devolution policies in Honduras," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    3. Bocci, Corinne F. & Fortmann, Lea, 2023. "Community and Industrial Forest Concessions: are they effective at reducing forest loss and does FSC certification play a role?," 2023 Annual Meeting, July 23-25, Washington D.C. 335972, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    4. Rana, Pushpendra & Miller, Daniel C., 2021. "Predicting the long-term social and ecological impacts of tree-planting programs: Evidence from northern India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).

    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. 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.
    2. Trejos, Bernardo & Flores, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Influence of property rights on performance of community-based forest devolution policies in Honduras," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    3. Hayes, Tanya & Persha, Lauren, 2010. "Nesting local forestry initiatives: Revisiting community forest management in a REDD+ world," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 545-553, October.
    4. Ojha, Hemant R. & Ford, Rebecca & Keenan, Rodney J. & Race, Digby & Carias Vega, Dora & Baral, Himlal & Sapkota, Prativa, 2016. "Delocalizing Communities: Changing Forms of Community Engagement in Natural Resources Governance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 274-290.
    5. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Medhin, Haileselassie, 2020. "Leader turnover and forest management outcomes: Micro-level evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Long, Hexing & de Jong, Wil & Yiwen, Zhang & Liu, Jinlong, 2021. "Institutional choices between private management and user group management during forest devolution: A case study of forest allocation in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    7. Lucungu, Prince Baraka & Dhital, Narayan & Asselin, Hugo & Kibambe, Jean-Paul & Ngabinzeke, Jean Semeki & Khasa, Damase P., 2022. "Local citizen group dynamics in the implementation of community forest concessions in the Democratic Republic of Congo," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    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. Sikor, Thomas, 2006. "Analyzing community-based forestry: Local, political and agrarian perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 339-349, June.
    10. Johnson, Craig & Forsyth, Timothy, 2002. "In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a "Rights-Based Approach" to Forest Conservation in Thailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1591-1605, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Nunan, Fiona, 2006. "Empowerment and institutions: Managing fisheries in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(7), pages 1316-1332, July.
    13. Siegelman, Ben & Haenn, Nora & Basurto, Xavier, 2019. "“Lies build trust”: Social capital, masculinity, and community-based resource management in a Mexican fishery," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    14. Carías Vega, Dora E. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2016. "Situating community forestry enterprises within New Institutional Economic theory: What are the implications for their organization?," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 1-13.
    15. Prakash Kashwan, 2016. "Integrating power in institutional analysis: A micro-foundation perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 5-26, January.
    16. Kashwan, Prakash & MacLean, Lauren M. & García-López, Gustavo A., 2019. "Rethinking power and institutions in the shadows of neoliberalism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 133-146.
    17. Davis, Emily Jane & Hajjar, Reem & Charnley, Susan & Moseley, Cassandra & Wendel, Kendra & Jacobson, Meredith, 2020. "Community-based forestry on federal lands in the western United States: A synthesis and call for renewed research," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    18. Chomba, Susan & Treue, Thorsten & Sinclair, Fergus, 2015. "The political economy of forest entitlements: can community based forest management reduce vulnerability at the forest margin?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 37-46.
    19. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    20. Zhan, Shaohua, 2015. "From Privatization to Deindustrialization: Implications of Chinese Rural Industry and the Ownership Debate Revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 108-122.

    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:wdevel:v:127:y:2020:i:c:s0305750x19303924. 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/worlddev .

    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.