IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v28y2004i3p224-233.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospects for the co‐management of mangrove ecosystems on the North Brazilian coast: Whose rights, whose duties and whose priorities?

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Glaser
  • Rosete Da Silva Oliveira

Abstract

This article describes the co‐management approach in situations of open access to and of increasing pressure on resources, using a mangrove coastal zone in North Brazil as an example. Co‐management clearly has the potential to turn nonviable, de facto open access to mangroves into effective common property management. Alliances of different political and ideological groups have been formed under the RESEX (reservas extrativistas — natural resource user reserve) model of coastal co‐management. Local economic interests have been mobilized as client constituencies. The RESEX system of co‐management assigns additional duties to both co‐managing parties, i.e., the state administration and the local users, in exchange for new rights. The authors argue that local support for the RESEX model has been gained on partially distorted premises. As the public authority passes on responsibility for management to local users under the RESEX model, this entails a number of duties for the local users. Thus local users assume the duty to implement and monitor resource management; they also appear to gain the right to take local decisions, such as excluding outsiders from resource access, and designing local resource management rules. However, as this article shows with two examples, some important new rights for local users under the RESEX co‐management concept are contrary to environmental legislation in force. This conflict is at present unresolved. It is argued that increased transparency about their precise rights for local resource co‐managers will considerably improve the prospects of coastal co‐management in Brazil.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Glaser & Rosete Da Silva Oliveira, 2004. "Prospects for the co‐management of mangrove ecosystems on the North Brazilian coast: Whose rights, whose duties and whose priorities?," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 28(3), pages 224-233, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:28:y:2004:i:3:p:224-233
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2004.00092.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2004.00092.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1477-8947.2004.00092.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    2. Paulo A.L.D. Nunes & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2003. "The Ecological Economics of Biodiversity," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2993.
    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. Claire H. Quinn & Lindsay C. Stringer & Rachel J. Berman & Hue T.V. Le & Flower E. Msuya & Juarez C.B. Pezzuti & Steven E. Orchard, 2017. "Unpacking Changes in Mangrove Social-Ecological Systems: Lessons from Brazil, Zanzibar, and Vietnam," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14, March.

    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. Verbic, Miroslav & Slabe-Erker, Renata, 2009. "An econometric analysis of willingness-to-pay for sustainable development: A case study of the Volcji Potok landscape area," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1316-1328, March.
    2. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    3. Caparros, Alejandro & Cerda, Emilio & Ovando, P. & Campos, Pablo, 2007. "Carbon Sequestration with Reforestations and Biodiversity-Scenic Values," Climate Change Modelling and Policy Working Papers 9323, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    4. Gillespie, Stuart & van den Bold, Mara, 2015. "Stories of change in nutrition: A tool pool:," IFPRI discussion papers 1494, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Turpie, J.K. & Marais, C. & Blignaut, J.N., 2008. "The working for water programme: Evolution of a payments for ecosystem services mechanism that addresses both poverty and ecosystem service delivery in South Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 788-798, May.
    6. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    7. Anne Hardy & Leonie J. Pearson, 2016. "Determining Sustainable Tourism in Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    8. Ariane Amin & Johanna Choumert, 2015. "Development and biodiversity conservation in Sub-Saharan Africa: A spatial analysis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(1), pages 729-744.
    9. Katharina Löhr & Christian Hochmuth & Frieder Graef & Jane Wambura & Stefan Sieber, 2017. "Conflict management programs in trans-disciplinary research projects: the case of a food security project in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1189-1201, December.
    10. Jean-François Ruault & Alice Dupré La Tour & André Evette & Sandrine Allain & Jean-Marc Callois, 2022. "A biodiversity-employment framework to protect biodiversity," Post-Print hal-03365820, HAL.
    11. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    12. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    14. Kitti, Mitri & Heikkila, Jaakko & Huhtala, Anni, 2006. "Fair policies for the coffee trade - protecting people or biodiversity?," Discussion Papers 11858, MTT Agrifood Research Finland.
    15. Raphael Hoerler & Fabian Haerri & Merja Hoppe, 2019. "New Solutions in Sustainable Commuting—The Attitudes and Experience of European Stakeholders and Experts in Switzerland," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.
    16. Saint Ville, Arlette S. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Phillip, Leroy E., 2017. "How do stakeholder interactions influence national food security policy in the Caribbean? The case of Saint Lucia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 53-64.
    17. Edossa, D. C. & Babel, M. S. & Das Gupta, A. & Awulachew, Seleshi Bekele, 2005. "Indigenous systems of conflict resolution in Oromia, Ethiopia," IWMI Books, Reports H038765, International Water Management Institute.
    18. Baral, Nabin & Stern, Marc J. & Bhattarai, Ranju, 2008. "Contingent valuation of ecotourism in Annapurna conservation area, Nepal: Implications for sustainable park finance and local development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2-3), pages 218-227, June.
    19. Iritié, Bi Goli Jean Jacques, 2015. "Economic growth and biodiversity: An overview. Conservation policies in Africa," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 8(2), pages 196-208.

    More about this item

    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:wly:natres:v:28:y:2004:i:3:p:224-233. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1477-8947 .

    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.