Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5cfd469876-tkzrn Total loading time: 0.21 Render date: 2021-06-24T04:48:26.520Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Beyond elite capture? Community-based natural resource management and power in Mohammed Nagar village, Andhra Pradesh, India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2010

MOEKO SAITO-JENSEN
Affiliation:
Forest and Landscape Denmark, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
IBEN NATHAN
Affiliation:
Forest and Landscape Denmark, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
THORSTEN TREUE
Affiliation:
Forest and Landscape Denmark, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 23, 1958 Frederiksberg C, Denmark
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Summary

Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) projects and policies often aim to improve the livelihoods of rural people who depend on natural resources, and to promote democratic decision making and equitable benefit distribution at the local level. However, a growing number of critics argue that CBNRM is susceptible to elite capture. This paper contributes to the debate on elite capture under CBNRM by studying joint forest management (JFM) in Andhra Pradesh (India) and, in particular, the case of Mohammed Nagar village. The paper addresses the following four questions: (1) How has the Indian Government formally addressed the risk of elite capture? (2) What actually happened over time when formal structures of JFM interacted with the pre-existing social structure in Mohammed Nagar? (3) When JFM results in elite capture, is this owing to the formal structures and/or the pre-existing social structure? (4) How can CBNRM be designed to avoid or minimize elite capture? Based on a reading of official government documents, the Indian Government has addressed the risk of elite capture, by ensuring representation of different social groups in the decision making bodies, regular elections, collective action in rule making and implementation, and transparency in record keeping. Nevertheless, during Mohammed Nagar's 10 years of JFM history elite capture did occur. This confirms that elite capture is a possible outcome of CBNRM. Yet, the subsequent fall of elite capture in the village also indicates that this is not necessarily a permanent outcome, and that CBNRM may in fact promote democratic and equitable resource management in the long-term. In Mohammed Nagar elite capture was largely owing to pre-existing social structures and to weaknesses in the official rules that were meant to safeguard the interests of marginalized groups. Accordingly, in CBNRM project design and implementation, pre-existing social structures' potential promotion of elite capture need to be taken into account and formal measures that might alleviate the adverse effects and/or reduce this risk must be identified.

Type
THEMATIC SECTION: Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM): designing the next generation (Part 2)
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Agarwal, B. (1997) Environmental action, gender equity and women's participation. Development and Change 28: 144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, A. (2005) Environmentality: Technologies of Government and the Making of Subjects. Durham, NC, USA: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Agrawal, A. & Gibson, C.C. (1999) Enchantment and disenchantment: the role of community in natural resource conservation. World Development 27: 629649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brosius, J.P., Tsing, A.L. & Zerner, C. (1998) Representing communities: histories and politics of community-based natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources 11: 157168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, B., Mandondo, A., Nemarundwe, N., Sithole, B., de Jong, W., Luckert, M. & Matose, F. (2001) Challenges to proponents of common property resource systems: despairing voices from the social forests of Zimbabwe. World Development 29: 589600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cernea, M.M., ed. (1985) Putting People First: Sociological Variables it Rural Development. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, R. (1983) Rural Development: Putting the Last First. London, UK: Longman.Google Scholar
Cleaver, F. (1999) Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development 11: 597612.3.0.CO;2-Q>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleaver, F. (2005) The inequality of social capital and the reproduction of chronic poverty. World Development 33: 893906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, B. & Kothari, U. (2001) The case for participation as tyranny. In: Participation: The New Tyranny?, ed. Cooke, B. & Kothari, U., pp. 115. London, UK: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Government of Andhra Pradesh (1996) Government Order G.O.MS.NO. 173. Dt: 07.12.1996. Andhra Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Government of Andhra Pradesh (2002) Government Order G.O.MS.No. 13. Dt.: 12–02-2002. Andhra Pradesh, India.Google Scholar
Government of India (1990) Involving of village communities and voluntary agencies for regeneration of degraded forest lands (Letter no. 6–21/89-PP, June 1, 1990). Government of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
Government of India (2001) Census 2001. Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
Government of India (2005) State of Forest Report 2005. Ministry of Environment and Forests, New Delhi, India.Google Scholar
Guijt, I. & Shah, M., eds (1998) The Myth of Community: Gender Issues in Participatory Development. London, UK: Intermediate Technology Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, S. (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 30: 763782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action. How to Follow Engineers and Scientists through Society. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Long, N. (2001) Development Sociology: Actor Perspectives. London, UK and New York, NY, USA: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansuri, G. & Rao, V. (2004) Community-based and driven development: a critical review. The World Bank Research Observer 19: 139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Narula, S. (2008) Equal by law, unequal by caste: the ‘untouchable’ condition in critical race perspective. Wisconsin International Law Journal 26: 255343.Google Scholar
Ribot, J.C. (2004) Waiting for Democracy: the Politics of Choice in Natural Resource Decentralization. Washington, DC, USA: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
Scott, J.C. (1976) The Moral Economy of the Peasant: Rebellion and Subsistence in Southeast Asia. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Scott, J.C. (1985) Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Springate-Baginsky, O. & Blaikie, P., eds (2007) Forests, People & Power; The Political Ecology of Reform in South Asia. London, UK: Earthscan.Google Scholar
World Bank (2005) The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven Development An OED Evaluation. Washington, DC, USA: World Bank.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Saito-Jensen supplementary material

Questionnaire.doc

Download Saito-Jensen supplementary material(File)
File 219 KB
46
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Beyond elite capture? Community-based natural resource management and power in Mohammed Nagar village, Andhra Pradesh, India
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Beyond elite capture? Community-based natural resource management and power in Mohammed Nagar village, Andhra Pradesh, India
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Beyond elite capture? Community-based natural resource management and power in Mohammed Nagar village, Andhra Pradesh, India
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *