Constitutionality and the Co-Management of Protected Areas: Reflections from Cameroon and Myanmar

Tobias Haller,Jürgen Pretzsch,Pyi Soe Aung,Jude Ndzifon Kimengsi,Eckhard Auch

doi:10.5334/ijc.934

Tobias Haller, Jürgen Pretzsch + Show 3 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.5334/ijc.934

Copy DOI

Abstract

This article discusses the co-management experiences of two tropical protected areas – the Korup National Park (KNP) in Cameroon, and the Natma Taung National Park (NTNP) in Myanmar. The discussion is anchored on the constitutionality construct and opens up reflections to guide future management processes and outcomes for protected areas. Based on a review of articles and institutional reports, complemented by interviews and focus group discussions, we comparatively analyze the manifestations of two constitutionality principles in co-management around the KNP and NTNP, and discuss future co-management perspectives. The paper concludes with reflections on how local level institutions could be activated in protected area management, especially with respect to enforcing catalyzing agents and improving state motivation and recognition of local institutional processes. The results do not only provide necessary ingredients to improve the institution-building process if co-management must become adaptive, but equally opens up new research avenues in the context of local power play and social learning. We argue that further studies should seek to understand conditions, under which catalyzing agents and the state could support and recognize endogenous institution-building processes to improve resource management outcomes.

Highlights

Research on the social issues of conservation has been at the centre of scientific and policy discussions for a long time; it is argued that this aspect provides a promising path to understand power asymmetries, and identify conflict resolution and effective conservation engagements (Lund and Bluwstein 2018)
Having been applied for over two decades in several contexts, the co-management concept is viewed as a power and responsibility sharing process, which is geared towards improving protected area management efforts (Frame et al 2004; Armitage et al 2008; Schultz et al 2011; Plummer et al 2017a)
This paper is inspired by the participation of the authors in previous participatory natural resource management arrangements in tropical countries: In Cameroon, Kimengsi served as a conservation consultant for World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), GIZ and the Programme for the Sustainable Management of Natural Resources (PSMNR)3 between 2013 and 2017, where he participated in a series of co-management activities

Summary

Introduction

Research on the social issues of conservation has been at the centre of scientific and policy discussions for a long time; it is argued that this aspect provides a promising path to understand power asymmetries, and identify conflict resolution and effective conservation engagements (Lund and Bluwstein 2018). Co-management, in its “ideal form”, presupposes a Kimengsi et al: Constitutionality and the Co-Management of Protected Areas negotiation process involving two or more social actors who define and guarantee amongst themselves a fair sharing of the management functions, rights and obligations in the management of natural resources (Borrini-Feyerabend et al 2007). In some cases, it presupposes a legal obligation, with state actors grudgingly participating (Meek 2013).. It presupposes a legal obligation, with state actors grudgingly participating (Meek 2013). co-management involves some form of agreement on power-sharing between multiple local and state actors, it can best be viewed as a state-community relationship (Carlsson and Berkes 2005; Ballet et al 2009)

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion