2 results
Social dimensions of local fisheries co-management in the Coral Triangle
- PHILIPPA JANE COHEN, DIRK JOHAN STEENBERGEN
-
- Journal:
- Environmental Conservation / Volume 42 / Issue 3 / September 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 20 January 2015, pp. 278-288
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The challenge to manage coastal resources within Asia-Pacific's Coral Triangle has gained global attention. Co-management is promoted as a key strategy to address this challenge. Contemporary community-based co-management often leads to ‘hybridization’ between local (customary) practices, and science-based management and conservation. However, the form of this hybrid has rarely been critically analysed. This paper presents examples of co-management practices in eastern Indonesia and Solomon Islands, focusing in particular on area closures. In contrast to the temporary closures used before the influx of sustainability discourses, contemporary closures are periodically-harvested but predominantly closed, reflecting attempts to reduce fishing effort and enhance ecological sustainability. When areas are opened, harvests are relatively short and largely triggered by the social and economic needs of particular individuals or whole communities. In all cases, engagement with environmental management interventions has led to more formalized access and use arrangements. The harvesting and management practices observed are influenced by these relatively recent interventions designed to promote sustainability, but also by religious institutions, increasing resource demand, and modernization. This study unpacks some of the contemporary influences, particularly environmental sustainability initiatives, on local management practices, and provides insights for co-management in practice.
10 - Dilemmas of participation: the National Community Empowerment Program
- from PART 3 - LOCAL-LEVEL PERSPECTIVES
-
- By John F. McCarthy, Australian National University, Canberra, Dirk Steenbergen, Murdoch University, Perth, Greg Acciaioli, University of Western Australia, Perth, Geoff Baker, Murdoch University, Perth, Anton Lucas, Flinders University, Adelaide, Vivianti Rambe, Murdoch University, Perth, Carol Warren, Murdoch University, Perth
- Edited by Hal Hill
-
- Book:
- Regional Dynamics in a Decentralized Indonesia
- Published by:
- ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute
- Published online:
- 21 October 2015
- Print publication:
- 20 May 2014, pp 233-259
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
INTRODUCTION
In 2006, the Indonesian government committed to a community-driven development program on a nationwide scale. Project planners subsequently rolled out this program across nearly 70,000 villages in 6,681 subdistricts (kecamatan) from Aceh to Papua. A scaled-up version of a program pioneered by the World Bank, the initiative created one of the largest and most publicized international examples of a ‘social capital’ turn in development programming. Over the period 2007–12, $1,200 million (Rp 1.2 trillion) was allocated to the program.
The National Community Empowerment Program (Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat, PNPM) came out of years of research and policy work on the need for beneficiary participation in development (Hickey and Mohan 2005), and followed the mainstreaming of social capital ideas in public policy (Bebbington et al. 2004; Fine 2010). This approach derives from the original argument that social capital not only facilitates collective action and economic development, but also is ultimately the mechanism that connects the two (Woolcock 2010: 481). Social capital, embedded in participatory groups and encompassing shared understandings of fairness, leadership, rights and duties, has come to represent a resource that can be mobilized and built upon for developmental ends (Nakagawa and Shaw 2004).
Through its Social Capital Initiative, the World Bank took up this idea and applied it across the globe in community-driven development (CDD) and social fund approaches. These aimed to get communities involved in choosing how funds might be spent and monitoring the progress of the projects they chose, thereby developing interventions that more effectively supported community development and fostered local accountability mechanisms. In some respects this represented a logical extension of the decentralization of government taking place across Indonesia. However, rather than devolving authority through state actors who were to be held downwardly accountable, the new CDD initiatives aimed to avoid accountability deficits within the state by establishing parallel frameworks to engage local participation. Accordingly, the PNPM program has two main components: facilitation of participation in the selection, design and implementation of local development projects, and accountability mechanisms to achieve this goal (King, Samii and Snilstveit 2010).