Abstract

There has been considerable research studying how the formal institutionalisation of community forests affects participation of local communities. This paper studies a historical commons in Galicia in order to provide insight into how formal institutions are enmeshed with a forestry logic and how this shapes community participation in historical commons in Europe. More specifically, we offer an alternative explanation for low levels of participation, which goes beyond the usual argument of the abandonment of traditional activities. We use an institutional bricolage framework to understand the causal mechanisms by which formal institutions shape participation patterns (both exclusion-inclusion dynamics and the type of participation, namely strategic or affective). Our results show that, during the first period of implementation, most powerful commoners aggregated exclusionary institutions to capture forestry benefits. Formal institutions incentivised the strategic engagement of commoners in exchange for a forestry ‘share’. Later, educated commoners accessed the governing board and aggregated more inclusive institutions that allowed affective engagement and higher levels of participation in the commons. This created new affective relations while creating new exclusions. We conclude by highlighting the responsibility of the State and regional government in installing a forestry profit-seeking and extractive mentality among commoners, which is problematic for an active participation.

Highlights

  • IntroductionSince the 1990’s, there has been considerable research studying participation dynamics in different forms of community forests- i.e. historical/indigenous/traditional commons or those emerging from new decentralised/participatory approaches to forest governance (Agarwal, 1997; Agrawal and Gupta, 2005; Basnyat et al, 2019; García-Lopez, 2019; Lise, 2000; Lund, 2015; Nightingale, 2005; Ribot et al, 2006)

  • This paper investigates a case of historical commons in Galicia (Spain), a region with large areas of historical commons (25%) that were devolved to communities and formally legislated during the 1970s after a massive state-led reforestation program (1941–1971) (Rico Boquete, 1995)

  • We undertook an inductive qualitative content analysis (Elo and Kyngas, 2008) focusing on periods corresponding to two major institu­ tional changes: (1) the period 1976–2007 corresponding to the imple­ mentation of the formal institutions devolving them rights over commonlands, and (2) the period 2007–2018 corresponding to the start of commoning

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Since the 1990’s, there has been considerable research studying participation dynamics in different forms of community forests- i.e. historical/indigenous/traditional commons or those emerging from new decentralised/participatory approaches to forest governance (Agarwal, 1997; Agrawal and Gupta, 2005; Basnyat et al, 2019; García-Lopez, 2019; Lise, 2000; Lund, 2015; Nightingale, 2005; Ribot et al, 2006). Formal institutions can install ‘passive entitlements’ (Thompson, 2015): rights linked to specific membership criteria that disregard commoners’ engagement in labour, exclude marginalised social groups such as women (Agarwal, 2001), and frame the participation of members as ‘passive shareholders’ (Sandstrom et al, 2016)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call