Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-xbgml Total loading time: 0.285 Render date: 2022-08-10T01:27:17.562Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF GOVERNANCE OF LOCAL COMMON POOL RESOURCES ON LIVESTOCK WATER PRODUCTIVITY IN ETHIOPIA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2011

TILAYE TEKLEWOLD DENEKE*
Affiliation:
Humboldt-University Zu Berlin, Division of Resource Economics, Philippstr.13, 10099 Berlin, Germany
EVERISTO MAPEDZA
Affiliation:
International Water Management InstituteP.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
TILAHUN AMEDE
Affiliation:
International Water Management InstituteP.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia International Livestock Research InstituteP.O. Box 5689, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
*
Corresponding author: ttddeneke@yahoo.com

Summary

Improving water productivity depends on how local communal water and grazing resources are governed. This involves institutional and organizational issues. In the mixed farming systems of the Amhara Regional State, Ethiopia, non-participatory water users’ associations, neglect of traditional water rights, corruption, village power relations, inequitable allocation of irrigated land and free-grazing practice impact the governance of local common pool resources (CPR). Indigenous governance structures for CPR such as the kire are participatory and effective in terms of rule enforcement. Externally initiated governance structures lack acceptance by farmers and sufficient support from local government. In order to improve water productivity in the mixed farming systems, institutional deficiencies need attention and existing indigenous governance structures require recognition and support.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agrawal, A. (2001). Common property institutions and sustainable governance of resources. World Development 29:16491672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, A. (2003). Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: Context, methods, and politics. Annual Review of Anthropology. 32:243262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amede, T., Geheb, K. and Douthwaite, B. (2009). Enabling the uptake of livestock–water productivity interventions in the crop–livestock systems of sub-Saharan Africa. The Rangeland Journal 31: 223230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baland, J. M. and Platteau, J. P. (1996). Halting Degradation of Natural Resources: Is There a Role for Rural Communities? Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bardhan, P. K. (1993). Analytics of the institutions of informal cooperation in rural development. World Development 21:633639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardhan, P. K. (2000). Irrigation and cooperation: An empirical analysis of 48 irrigation communities in Southern India. Economic Development and Cultural Change 48:847–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bromley, D. W. and Feeney, D. (1992). Making the Commons Work: Theory, Practice, and Policy San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.Google Scholar
Dayton-Johnson, J. (2000). Determinants of collective action on the local commons: A model with evidence from Mexico. Journal of Development Economics 62:181208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Fraiture, C., Wichelns, D., Rockström, J. and Kemp-Benedict, K. (2007). Looking ahead to 2050: Scenarios of Alternative Investment Approaches. In Water for Food Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, 91145 (Ed. Molden, D.) London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Delgado, C., Mark, R., Henning, S., Simeon, E. and Claude, C. (2003). Livestock to 2020: The next food revolution. Food, Agriculture and Environment. Discussion Paper 28, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Hagedorn, K., Arzt, K. and Peters, U. (2002). Institutional arrangements for environmental co-operatives: a conceptual framework. In Environmental Cooperation and Institutional Change: Theories and Policies for European Agriculture, 325 (Ed. Hagedorn, K.) Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
Hagedorn, K. (2008). Particular requirements for institutional analyses in nature-related sectors. European Review of Agricultural Economics 35:357384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haileslassie, A., Peden, D., Gebresilassie, S., Amede, T., Wagnew, A. and Taddesse, G. (2009). Livestock water productivity in the Blue Nile Basin: Assessment of farm scale heterogeneity. The Rangeland Journal 31:213222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:12431248.Google ScholarPubMed
Hoekstra, A. Y., Chapagain, A. K. (2007). Water footprints of nations: water use by people as a function of their consumption pattern. Water Resources Management 21:3548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, J. (1992). Institutions and Social Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons. The Evolution of Istitutions for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1992). Crafting Institutions for Self Governance Irrigation Systems. San Francisco, CA, USA: Institute for Contemporary Studies Press.Google Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1998). A behavioural approach to the rational choice theory of collective action, American Political Science Review 92:122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Peden, D., Tadesse, G. and Misra, A. K. (2007). Water and livestock for human development. In Water for Food, Water for Life: A Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in Agriculture, 485514 (Ed. Molden, D.) London: EarthscanGoogle Scholar
Robbins, P. (2000). The rotten institution: corruption in natural resource management. Political Geography 19: 423443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wade, R. (1994). Village Republics, Economic Conditions for Collective Action in South India. San Francisco, CA:, USA International Center for Self-Governance Press and Institute for Contemporary Studies.Google Scholar
7
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@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 saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved 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.

INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF GOVERNANCE OF LOCAL COMMON POOL RESOURCES ON LIVESTOCK WATER PRODUCTIVITY IN ETHIOPIA
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save 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 used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF GOVERNANCE OF LOCAL COMMON POOL RESOURCES ON LIVESTOCK WATER PRODUCTIVITY IN ETHIOPIA
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save 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 used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

INSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF GOVERNANCE OF LOCAL COMMON POOL RESOURCES ON LIVESTOCK WATER PRODUCTIVITY IN ETHIOPIA
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? *