Abstract
From a critical institutionalism and institutional bricolage perspective, this article analyses what drives institutional change in the commons and the outcomes for forest and people. It builds on the comparison of three neighbouring villages in Burkina Faso that in 1989, expecting higher returns, agreed to release their common lands for the creation of a community forest called Chantier d’Amenagement Forestier (CAF) within an international forestry project. The project created new bureaucratic institutions to replace the pre-existing customary and socially embedded system. Decades later, the three villages display different institutional change pathways and outcomes: one village abandoned the CAF, converted, and sold its forest and land; another maintained the CAF; and a third operates in-between. Using qualitative research methods, we ask why and how these different change trajectories and outcomes occurred among villages of identical cultural and sociopolitical background. The results show that poor design and implementation of the new bureaucratic institutions, as well as their disrespect of customary and socially embedded rules, led to forestland disputes between the villages. The bureaucratic institutions failed to solve those disputes, effectively manage the forest, and share the benefits equitably. This caused local people’s discontent and prompted actions for change. Actors in diverse ways made use of their social networks, agency, and power relations within and between the villages to either reshape, re-interpret or reject the new forest institutions. These processes of institutional bricolage led to highly diverse trajectories of change. The findings demonstrate the crucial role of locals as agents of change from below and question universal claims in institutional theory on how institutions induce rule-guided behaviour and create path dependencies.
Highlights
In the management of common property’s scholarship, the drivers, patterns and outcomes of institutional change remain controversial and one of the least understood areas
We analyse the observed institutional dynamics as a bricolage process taking place between actors, organizations and institutions. Focusing on these main explanatory factors—agency, networks and power—we examine the strategic actions and tactics used by the actors in forest management that change the forest institutions and the rationales driving these
We used the perspective of critical institutionalism and the concept of institutional bricolage to examine why and how institutions of the commons change over time
Summary
In the management of common property’s scholarship, the drivers, patterns and outcomes of institutional change remain controversial and one of the least understood areas. The three villages share similar socio-political and cultural contexts They experienced the same procedures for the creation and implementation of the CAF, yet they displayed three different institutional change trajectories and outcomes for the forest under management (Figure 1). Land tenure issues, poor design and implementation of the CAF project, ineffective forest management and unfair benefit sharing decisively drove the institutional change process These drivers were identical in all three cases; they produced different pathways of change because each village perceived and dealt with them in its own way. In village C, the actors changed their failed attempt to discard the bureaucracy of the CAF into claims over forestland They activated their networks and constructed narratives to argue that they would not have challenged and bent the forest institutions if the benefits were shared equitably. We can infer that the determinants of the differentiated trajectories of change lie within the workings of the networks, agency and power
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
