Search

Conflicts over natural resources are likely to escalate under changing socio-economic contexts and climate change. This paper tests the effectiveness of what we term Adaptive Learning and Deliberation (ALD) in understanding and addressing conflicts over the local management of forests and water, drawing on experimental work in Nepal. Based on a three-year action research project, the paper offers policy and practical insights on how complex and protracted conflicts can be addressed through the researcher-facilitated enquiry and deliberative processes that form the core of the ALD approach. The conflicts included in the study are a result of diverse environmental, political and economic factors. We analyze experimental practices in two sites, where our research team facilitated the ALD process, gathering evidence in relation to conflicting institutional issues, all of which was then fed into researcher-mediated and evidence-informed deliberations on conflict management. The analysis shows that the ALD process was helpful in rearranging local institutions to accommodate the interests of the conflicting groups and, to some extent, to challenge some of the underlying exclusionary provisions of forest and water institutions in Nepalese society. We also identify three key limitations of this approach – transaction costs, the need for strong research and facilitative capacity within the research team, and researchers' engagement with the conflicting stakeholders. Key policy insights Natural resource-based conflicts are intensifying in Nepal in recent years, due to heavy reliance of people on these resources for livelihoods, poor governance, and protection-oriented policies. Improved ways to facilitate cooperation among conflicting stakeholders are needed, as standard methods have often failed to address socio-environmental drivers of conflicts. The ALD approach can potentially help mitigate conflict and foster cooperation in natural resource management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the 1990s, climate change impact discourse has highlighted potential for large scale violent conflicts. However, the role of climate stresses on local conflicts over natural resources, the role of policies and adaptation in these conflicts, and opportunities to enhance cooperation have been neglected. These gaps are addressed in this paper using evidence from participatory action research on 79 cases of local collective action over natural resources that experience conflicts in Bangladesh and Nepal. Climate trends and stresses contributed to just under half of these conflict cases. Nine factors that enable greater cooperation and transformation of conflict are identified. Participatory dialogue and negotiation processes, while not sufficient, changed understanding, attitudes and positions of actors. Many of the communities innovated physical measures to overcome natural resource constraints, underlying conflict, and/or institutional reforms. These changes were informed by improving understanding of resource limitations and indigenous knowledge. Learning networks among community organizations encouraged collective action by sharing successes and creating peer pressure. Incentives for cooperation were important. For example, when community organizations formally permitted excluded traditional resource users to access resources, those actors complied with rules and paid towards management costs. However, elites were able to use policy gaps to capture resources with changed characteristics due to climate change. In most of the cases where conflict persisted, power, policy and institutional barriers prevented community-based organizations from taking up potential adaptations and innovations. Policy frameworks recognizing collective action and supporting flexible innovation in governance and adaptation would enable wider transformation of natural resource conflicts into cooperation. Key policy insights Climate stresses, policy gaps and interventions can all worsen local natural resource conflicts. Sectoral knowledge and technical approaches to adaptation are open to elite capture and can foster conflicts. Many local natural resource conflicts can be resolved but this requires an enabling environment for participatory dialogue, external facilitation, flexible responses to context, and recognition of disadvantaged stakeholder interests. Transforming conflict to greater cooperation mostly involves social and institutional changes, so adaptation policies should focus less on physical works and more on enabling factors such as negotiation, local institutions, knowledge, and incentives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]