Abstract
The use of multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs) in territorial planning has gained global popularity. These MSFs aim to bring diverse actors together to collaboratively and equitably develop a plan that assigns optimal land uses to a territory. However, as promoting particular land uses and benefits for some actors often comes at a cost to others, territorial planning MSFs may reproduce or even exacerbate, rather than mitigate, conflicts and asymmetries. We comparatively analyze collaboration, power relations and sustainability goals in the Ecological-Economic Zoning commissions of Acre and Mato Grosso, Brazil, which fall under the same federal mandate but operate in contrasting contexts. We show how territorial planning MSFs have better chances of meeting their goals when they are understood as political processes: in this case, when they emerge from and are nourished by powerful local social-environmental movements and alliances, rather than being technocratic initiatives opposed by powerful local production-business alliances.
Highlights
Territorial planning often refers to an ideal vision of the future: assigning – and, assuming the existence of – optimal or best land uses, rules and rights, with collective benefit, for different portions or geographies of a certain territory (Da Silva Schröeder and Belisário Finamore 2012, Di Gregorio and Jansen 2005, Rudel and Meyfroidt 2014)
As promoting particular land uses and benefits for some actors often comes at a cost to others, territorial planning multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs) may reproduce or even exacerbate, rather than mitigate, conflicts and asymmetries
Power relations and sustainability goals in the Ecological-Economic Zoning commissions of Acre and Mato Grosso, Brazil, which fall under the same federal mandate but operate in contrasting contexts
Summary
Territorial planning often refers to an ideal vision of the future: assigning – and, assuming the existence of – optimal or best land uses, rules and rights, with collective benefit, for different portions or geographies of a certain territory (Da Silva Schröeder and Belisário Finamore 2012, Di Gregorio and Jansen 2005, Rudel and Meyfroidt 2014). Starting with calls in the 1980s for participatory land-use planning and the so-called ‘good’ land governance, the use of multi-stakeholder forums (MSFs), commissions, or committees in territorial planning was advocated by researchers, governments and practitioners (e.g., Kusters et al 2018, FAO 2014, ILC 2017) The goal of this planning method constitutes a political, technical and institutional ideal: to bring representatives of actors from diverse levels and sectors together, to coordinate and collaborate as equals, to discuss, produce, approve and/or implement a territorial map/plan, in order to solve land conflicts and environmental problems and promote sustainable development (Kohne 2014, Stead 2014, Nolte et al 2017, Cote et al 2010, Comerma 2010, Ardiansyah et al 2015).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
