IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v29y2011i6p990-1003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Shifting Governance Modes in Wetland Management: A Case Study of Two Wetlands in Bogotá, Colombia

Author

Listed:
  • Ana Guzman Ruíz
  • Edwin Hes
  • Klaas Schwartz

Abstract

The concept of governance increasingly dominates the discourse on environmental management. The traditional hierarchical mode of governance has, in many locations, been replaced by other modes of governance in which the market, network, or community are dominant (without substituting the role of the state). In this paper we examine the shifts in the relative prominence of governance modes for the management of two wetlands in the city of Bogotá. In both cases the hierarchical mode of governance was prominent until the 1990s, when nonstate actors became involved in the management of the two wetlands. One wetland is characterized by a mix in which the community mode of governance is prominent, whilst in the other wetland the network mode of governance appears prominent. With the shift in predominant governance mode, the sources of legitimacy on which the predominant mode is based also change. In the case of community governance, legitimacy is linked to identity and shared values, whilst in the network mode aspects such as technical expertise and credentials form the basis for legitimacy. We suggest that the difference in the governance trajectories of the two wetlands can be linked to the different characteristics of the neighborhoods surrounding the wetland and the initial nature of their involvement in wetland management. The cases also highlight the importance of the relative power of the actors, which underlie the shift from one predominant mode of governance to another mode, as it impacts their ability to influence decision making. The cases illustrate the changing nature of this relative power in wetland management in Bogotá.

Suggested Citation

  • Ana Guzman Ruíz & Edwin Hes & Klaas Schwartz, 2011. "Shifting Governance Modes in Wetland Management: A Case Study of Two Wetlands in Bogotá, Colombia," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 29(6), pages 990-1003, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:29:y:2011:i:6:p:990-1003
    DOI: 10.1068/c10144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c10144
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c10144?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, Arun & Gibson, Clark C., 1999. "Enchantment and Disenchantment: The Role of Community in Natural Resource Conservation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 629-649, April.
    2. Blaikie, Piers, 2006. "Is Small Really Beautiful? Community-based Natural Resource Management in Malawi and Botswana," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1942-1957, November.
    3. Frances Cleaver, 1999. "Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 597-612.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Salisu Barau, Aliyu & Stringer, Lindsay C., 2015. "Access to and allocation of ecosystem services in Malaysia's Pulau Kukup Ramsar Site," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 167-173.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah Milne & Bill Adams, 2012. "Market Masquerades: Uncovering the Politics of Community-level Payments for Environmental Services in Cambodia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 43(1), pages 133-158, January.
    2. Siegelman, Ben & Haenn, Nora & Basurto, Xavier, 2019. "“Lies build trust”: Social capital, masculinity, and community-based resource management in a Mexican fishery," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Schusser, Carsten, 2013. "Who determines biodiversity? An analysis of actors' power and interests in community forestry in Namibia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 42-51.
    4. Zhan, Shaohua, 2015. "From Privatization to Deindustrialization: Implications of Chinese Rural Industry and the Ownership Debate Revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 108-122.
    5. Mengina Gilli & Muriel Côte & Gretchen Walters, 2020. "Gatekeeping Access: Shea Land Formalization and the Distribution of Market-Based Conservation Benefits in Ghana’s CREMA," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, September.
    6. Rasolofoson, Ranaivo A. & Nielsen, Martin R. & Jones, Julia P.G., 2018. "The potential of the Global Person Generated Index for evaluating the perceived impacts of conservation interventions on subjective well-being," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 107-118.
    7. Schusser, Carsten & Krott, Max & Yufanyi Movuh, Mbolo C. & Logmani, Jacqueline & Devkota, Rosan R. & Maryudi, Ahamad & Salla, Manjola & Bach, Ngo Duy, 2015. "Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results of an international study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 92-101.
    8. Sattler, Claudia & Schröter, Barbara & Jericó-Daminello, Camila & Sessin-Dilascio, Karla & Meyer, Claas & Matzdorf, Bettina & Wortmann, Lukas & de Almeida Sinisgalli, Paulo Antonio & Meyer, Angela & G, 2015. "Understanding governance structures in community management of ecosystems and natural resources: The Marujá case study in Brazil," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 182-191.
    9. Chan, Cheryl & Armitage, Derek & Alexander, Steven M. & Campbell, Donovan, 2019. "Examining linkages between ecosystem services and social wellbeing to improve governance for coastal conservation in Jamaica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    10. Senanayake, Nari & Mukherji, Aditi & Giordano, Mark, 2015. "Re-visiting what we know about Irrigation Management Transfer: A review of the evidence," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 175-186.
    11. Classen, Lauren & Humphries, Sally & FitzSimons, John & Kaaria, Susan & Jiménez, José & Sierra, Fredy & Gallardo, Omar, 2008. "Opening Participatory Spaces for the Most Marginal: Learning from Collective Action in the Honduran Hillsides," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(11), pages 2402-2420, November.
    12. Ojha, Hemant R. & Ford, Rebecca & Keenan, Rodney J. & Race, Digby & Carias Vega, Dora & Baral, Himlal & Sapkota, Prativa, 2016. "Delocalizing Communities: Changing Forms of Community Engagement in Natural Resources Governance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 274-290.
    13. Millner, Naomi & Peñagaricano, Irune & Fernandez, Maria & Snook, Laura K., 2020. "The politics of participation: Negotiating relationships through community forestry in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, Guatemala," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    14. Villamayor-Tomas, Sergio & García-López, Gustavo & Scholtens, Joeri, 2020. "Do commons management and movements reinforce each other? Comparative insights from Mexico and Sri Lanka," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    15. Leo Zulu, 2013. "Bringing People Back into Protected Forests in Developing Countries: Insights from Co-Management in Malawi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-27, May.
    16. Tantoh, Henry Bikwibili & Simatele, Danny, 2018. "Complexity and uncertainty in water resource governance in Northwest Cameroon: Reconnoitring the challenges and potential of community-based water resource management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 237-251.
    17. Stanzel, Jens & Krott, Max & Schusser, Carsten, 2020. "Power alliances for biodiversity—Results of an international study on community forestry," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    18. Koehler, Johanna & Thomson, Patrick & Hope, Robert, 2015. "Pump-Priming Payments for Sustainable Water Services in Rural Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 397-411.
    19. Chomba, Susan & Treue, Thorsten & Sinclair, Fergus, 2015. "The political economy of forest entitlements: can community based forest management reduce vulnerability at the forest margin?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 37-46.
    20. Van Hecken, Gert & Bastiaensen, Johan & Windey, Catherine, 2015. "The frontiers of the debate on Payments for Ecosystem Services: a proposal for innovative future research," IOB Discussion Papers 2015.05, Universiteit Antwerpen, Institute of Development Policy (IOB).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:29:y:2011:i:6:p:990-1003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.