IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v25y2023i8d10.1007_s10668-022-02412-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Application of the 4Rs framework towards effective co-management of protected forests: case of aberdare forest in central Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Francisca Mutwa Kilonzi

    (Nagasaki University)

  • Takahiro Ota

    (Nagasaki University)

Abstract

Co-management has been promoted as a way of enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency in natural resource management. However, majority of the applied approaches have focused on one indicator independently overlooking other role indicators. This makes the co-management difficult. To enhance effectiveness, this study applied the 4Rs framework to analyse the role imbalances of the key stakeholders involved in the co-management of Aberdare forest ecosystem. The 4Rs provides analysis of the rights, responsibilities, revenues received and the relationships amongst co-managers for effective co-management. To improve on this framework our study expounded on the analysis of stakeholder roles according to priority which facilitated identification of the actual roles. The data was collected using mixed methods approach whereby 46 semi-structured interviews were conducted. Chain referral sampling was employed to ensure that the interviews resulted in sufficient theoretical saturation. Analysis of the listed and ranked responses for each R was done to identify the imbalance/balance. The results indicated role imbalances with conflicting responsibilities, revenues obtained and rights that jeopardized organizations efforts to deliver. Community-based organizations (CBO) accrued most revenues through forest livelihood improvement projects within the forest however; stakeholders whose mandate is to ensure in-situ conservation felt such policies compromised forests sustainability. Government organizations had the most responsibilities while CBO had the most revenues and rights. CBO collaborative management proposals were often neglected by government organizations which compromised the organizations’ relationships. Based on these findings, the 4Rs contributes to the identification of roles imbalance hence a potential indicator in enhancing effectiveness in co-managed ecosystems.

Suggested Citation

  • Francisca Mutwa Kilonzi & Takahiro Ota, 2023. "Application of the 4Rs framework towards effective co-management of protected forests: case of aberdare forest in central Kenya," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 8561-8584, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:25:y:2023:i:8:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02412-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02412-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-022-02412-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-022-02412-5?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stéphanie Missonier & Sabrina Loufrani-Fedida, 2014. "Stakeholder analysis and engagement in projects: from stakeholder relational perspective to stakeholder relational ontology," Post-Print halshs-01057834, HAL.
    2. Plummer, Ryan & Baird, Julia & Dzyundzyak, Angela & Armitage, Derek & Bodin, Örjan & Schultz, Lisen, 2017. "Is Adaptive Co-management Delivering? Examining Relationships Between Collaboration, Learning and Outcomes in UNESCO Biosphere Reserves," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 79-88.
    3. Schröter, Barbara & Hauck, Jennifer & Hackenberg, Isabel & Matzdorf, Bettina, 2018. "Bringing transparency into the process: Social network analysis as a tool to support the participatory design and implementation process of Payments for Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 206-217.
    4. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    5. Widman, Ulrika, 2015. "Shared responsibility for forest protection?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 220-227.
    6. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    7. Górriz-Mifsud, Elena & Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena, 2016. "Exploring the interlinkages between governance and social capital: A dynamic model for forestry," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 25-36.
    8. Diafas, Iason & Barkmann, Jan & Mburu, John, 2017. "Measurement of Bequest Value Using a Non-monetary Payment in a Choice Experiment—The Case of Improving Forest Ecosystem Services for the Benefit of Local Communities in Rural Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 157-165.
    9. Mutoko, Morgan C. & Hein, Lars & Shisanya, Chris A., 2015. "Tropical forest conservation versus conversion trade-offs: Insights from analysis of ecosystem services provided by Kakamega rainforest in Kenya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 1-11.
    10. Wynanda I. Van Enst & Peter P. J. Driessen & Hens A. C. Runhaar, 2017. "Working at the Boundary: An Empirical Study into the Goals and Strategies of Knowledge Brokers in the Field of Environmental Governance in the Netherlands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-14, October.
    11. García-Nieto, Ana P. & Quintas-Soriano, Cristina & García-Llorente, Marina & Palomo, Ignacio & Montes, Carlos & Martín-López, Berta, 2015. "Collaborative mapping of ecosystem services: The role of stakeholders׳ profiles," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 141-152.
    12. Barano Siswa Sulistyawan & C. Feger & Emily Mckenzie & Louise A. Gallagher & Pita A. Verweij & René Verburg, 2019. "Towards more effective landscape governance for sustainability: the case of RIMBA corridor, Central Sumatra, Indonesia," Post-Print hal-02376812, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bergstén, Sabina & Stjernström, Olof & Pettersson, Örjan, 2018. "Experiences and emotions among private forest owners versus public interests: Why ownership matters," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 801-811.
    2. Meina Cai & Ilia Murtazashvili & Jennifer Murtazashvili & Raufhon Salahodjaev, 2020. "Individualism and governance of the commons," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 175-195, July.
    3. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    4. Butler, Megan & Current, Dean, 2021. "Relationship between community capitals and governance: The perspective of local actors in the Maya Biosphere Reserve," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 21(C).
    5. Murtazashvili, Ilia & Murtazashvili, Jennifer & Salahodjaev, Raufhon, 2019. "Trust and deforestation: A cross-country comparison," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 111-119.
    6. Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena & Da Re, Riccardo & Rogelja, Todora & Burlando, Catie & Vicentini, Kamini & Pettenella, Davide & Masiero, Mauro & Miller, David & Nijnjk, Maria, 2019. "Towards a method of evaluating social innovation in forest-dependent rural communities: First suggestions from a science-stakeholder collaboration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 9-22.
    7. Butler, Megan, 2021. "Analyzing community forest enterprises in the Maya Biosphere Reserve using a modified capitals framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    8. David Aubin & Frédéric Varone, 2013. "Getting Access to Water: Property Rights or Public Policy Strategies?," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(1), pages 154-167, February.
    9. Gani, Azmat & Scrimgeour, Frank, 2014. "Modeling governance and water pollution using the institutional ecological economic framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 363-372.
    10. Rakotonarivo, O. Sarobidy & Bredahl Jacobsen, Jette & Poudyal, Mahesh & Rasoamanana, Alexandra & Hockley, Neal, 2018. "Estimating welfare impacts where property rights are contested: methodological and policy implications," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 71-83.
    11. Rémy Herrera & Poeura Tetoe, 2013. "The Papua Niugini Paradox. Land property archaism and Modernity of peasant resistance ?," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00786274, HAL.
    12. Olegas Beriozovas & Dalia Perkumienė & Mindaugas Škėma & Abdellah Saoualih & Larbi Safaa & Marius Aleinikovas, 2024. "Research Advancement in Forest Property Rights: A Thematic Review over Half a Decade Using Natural Language Processing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-28, September.
    13. Leibbrandt, Andreas & Lynham, John, 2018. "Does the allocation of property rights matter in the commons?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 201-217.
    14. Massimiliano Gambardella, 2011. "The Scope of Open Licenses in Cultural Contents Production and Distribution," Working Papers hal-04140977, HAL.
    15. Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    16. Rout, S., 2008. "Institutional and policy reforms in water sector in India: review of issues, concepts and trends," Conference Papers h042926, International Water Management Institute.
    17. Habibullah Magsi & Andre Torr & Yansui Liu & M. Javed Sheikh, 2017. "Land Use Conflicts in the Developing Countries: Proximate Driving Forces and Preventive Measures," The Pakistan Development Review, Pakistan Institute of Development Economics, vol. 56(1), pages 19-30.
    18. MAREK HUDON & BENJAMIN HUYBRECHTS & Anaïs PÉRILLEUX & Marthe NYSSENS, 2017. "Understanding Cooperative Finance As A New Common," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 88(2), pages 155-177, June.
    19. H.M. Tuihedur Rahman & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "An Analytical Framework for Assessing Context-Specific Rural Livelihood Vulnerability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-26, July.
    20. Julienne Brabet & Corinne Vercher- Chaptal & Lucy Taska, 2020. "From oligopolistic digital platforms to Open/Cooperative Ones?," Post-Print hal-03201454, HAL.

    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:spr:endesu:v:25:y:2023:i:8:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02412-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.