Search

The study sought to expose the underlying complexity of benefit sharing of ecosystem goods and services among multiple actors in the Barotse Floodplains of Zambia. This case study is based on the rationale that theories of property rights have not been adequately used to understand and implement benefit sharing arrangements in natural resources governance. The study was descriptive, longitudinal and qualitative in nature. Data collection techniques used in the study included in-depth interviews and documentary sources using thematic analysis for coding and analysis. The study revealed an overwhelming variation of benefit sharing outcomes between eras as a result of varying configuration of bundles of property rights. The variation in eras illustrates a critical relationship between the establishment and enforcement of bundles of property rights and benefit sharing outcomes. This consequently provides insights into the consequences of failing to recognize, establish and enforce bundles of rights in benefit sharing arrangements. In this way, the case study illustrates how the theory of property rights offer a useful perspective through which to better understand and manage benefit sharing arrangements for socio-ecological systems.

Although REDD+ was conceived as a national approach to reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation, many of the early advances have been at the subnational level. It is critical to link these subnational efforts to emerging national REDD+ frameworks, including with respect to finance and benefit distribution, setting reference levels, measurement, reporting and verification (MRV), land policy and safeguards. We use evidence from interviews with proponents from 23 subnational REDD+ initiatives in six countries to characterize the multilevel governance challenges for REDD+. We analyse the differences in perceived challenges between subnational jurisdictional programs and project-based initiatives, and then analyse proponents’ perceptions of the relationship between government policies at multiple levels and these REDD+ initiatives. We find important multilevel governance challenges related to vertical coordination and information sharing and horizontal and inter-sectoral tensions, as well as concerns over accountability, equity and justice. Though the shift to a nested, jurisdictional or national REDD+ is sometimes approached as a technical design issue, this must be accompanied by an understanding of the interests and power relations among actors at different levels. We outline challenges and suggest priority areas for future research and policy, as countries move towards a national REDD+ system.

Given increased pressure on natural resources to deliver benefits, complex trade-offs and the regulation of behaviours in relation to benefits is of key concern. Behaviours that signify resistance to the rules according to which benefits are allocated prompt us to consider causal links and feedbacks between benefits, perceptions of benefits, meanings attached to the benefits, and the regulatory instruments that mediate the distribution of benefits. An understanding of how meanings influence the perception of benefits exposes the complexity inherent in how people perceive and allocate value to natural resource benefits. Meanings are personal, sometimes overlapping, context dependent and variable across space and time. A challenge in directing resource user behaviour in common pool resources is that the relationship between the resource and resource use is typically not interpreted to include the manner in which users associate resource benefits with meanings. We propose that collective ordering of meanings and associated rules help to direct behaviours and in doing so they contribute to the purposeful maintenance of desirable elements of a social-ecological system (i.e. robustness). Using an example, we illustrate how tensions around benefit sharing are rooted in the emergence and changing prioritisation of contexts and meanings over time. The importance of eliciting, ordering and sanctioning of meanings is emphasised. We conclude by discussing the implications for robustness and benefit sharing in social-ecological systems and we comment on the usefulness and limitations of the framework.

This article discusses the research relevance of benefit sharing and its implications for natural resource policy research in developing countries. It argues that the research challenge is how to improve understanding of benefit sharing policies by way of identifying the basic principles which underlie these policies. While benefit sharing is to a large extent context dependent, the central question we raise is whether we can identify a set of principles to enable one to describe, explain, understand and predict outcomes in relevant policy settings.

The study sought to expose the underlying complexity of benefit sharing of ecosystem goods and services among multiple actors in the Barotse Floodplains of Zambia. This case study is based on the rationale that theories of property rights have not been adequately used to understand and implement benefit sharing arrangements in natural resources governance. The study was descriptive, longitudinal and qualitative in nature. Data collection techniques used in the study included in-depth interviews and documentary sources using thematic analysis for coding and analysis. The study revealed an overwhelming variation of benefit sharing outcomes between eras as a result of varying configuration of bundles of property rights. The variation in eras illustrates a critical relationship between the establishment and enforcement of bundles of property rights and benefit sharing outcomes. This consequently provides insights into the consequences of failing to recognize, establish and enforce bundles of rights in benefit sharing arrangements. In this way, the case study illustrates how the theory of property rights offer a useful perspective through which to better understand and manage benefit sharing arrangements for socio-ecological systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although REDD+ was conceived as a national approach to reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, many of the early advances have been at the subnational level. It is critical to link these subnational efforts to emerging national REDD+ frameworks, including with respect to finance and benefit distribution, setting reference levels, measurement, reporting and verification (MRV), land policy and safeguards. We use evidence from interviews with proponents from 23 subnational REDD+ initiatives in six countries to characterize the multilevel governance challenges for REDD+. We analyse the differences in perceived challenges between subnational jurisdictional programs and project-based initiatives, and then analyse proponents' perceptions of the relationship between government policies at multiple levels and these REDD+ initiatives. We find important multilevel governance challenges related to vertical coordination and information sharing and horizontal and inter-sectoral tensions, as well as concerns over accountability, equity and justice. Though the shift to a nested, jurisdictional or national REDD+ is sometimes approached as a technical design issue, this must be accompanied by an understanding of the interests and power relations among actors at different levels. We outline challenges and suggest priority areas for future research and policy, as countries move towards a national REDD+ system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given increased pressure on natural resources to deliver benefits, complex trade-offs and the regulation of behaviours in relation to benefits is of key concern. Behaviours that signify resistance to the rules according to which benefits are allocated prompt us to consider causal links and feedbacks between benefits, perceptions of benefits, meanings attached to the benefits, and the regulatory instruments that mediate the distribution of benefits. An understanding of how meanings influence the perception of benefits exposes the complexity inherent in how people perceive and allocate value to natural resource benefits. Meanings are personal, sometimes overlapping, context dependent and variable across space and time. A challenge in directing resource user behaviour in common pool resources is that the relationship between the resource and resource use is typically not interpreted to include the manner in which users associate resource benefits with meanings. We propose that collective ordering of meanings and associated rules help to direct behaviours and in doing so they contribute to the purposeful maintenance of desirable elements of a social-ecological system (i.e. robustness). Using an example, we illustrate how tensions around benefit sharing are rooted in the emergence and changing prioritisation of contexts and meanings over time. The importance of eliciting, ordering and sanctioning of meanings is emphasised. We conclude by discussing the implications for robustness and benefit sharing in social-ecological systems and we comment on the usefulness and limitations of the framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the research relevance of benefit sharing and its implications for natural resource policy research in developing countries. It argues that the research challenge is how to improve understanding of benefit sharing policies by way of identifying the basic principles which underlie these policies. While benefit sharing is to a large extent context dependent, the central question we raise is whether we can identify a set of principles to enable one to describe, explain, understand and predict outcomes in relevant policy settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]