IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01386409.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management

Author

Listed:
  • Cécile Barnaud

    (DYNAFOR - Dynamiques Forestières dans l'Espace Rural - INRA - Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique - ENSAT - École nationale supérieure agronomique de Toulouse - Toulouse INP - Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) - UT - Université de Toulouse - Toulouse INP - Institut National Polytechnique (Toulouse) - UT - Université de Toulouse)

  • Annemarie van Paassen

    (WUR - Wageningen University and Research [Wageningen])

Abstract

Many papers in the recent literature on participatory approaches emphasize the need to take better account of the complexity of the social contexts in which they are conducted. Without attention to power asymmetries, there is a risk that the most powerful stakeholders will have greater influence on the outcomes of the participatory process than marginalized stakeholders. However, very few authors address the question of how to deal with such power asymmetries. This question puts designers of participatory processes in a dilemma. On the one hand, if they claim a neutral posture, they are accused of being naively manipulated by the most powerful stakeholders and of increasing initial power asymmetries; but, on the other hand, if they adopt a nonneutral posture and decide to empower some particular stakeholders, their legitimacy to do so is questioned. We test a particular posture to overcome this dilemma: that is, a "critical companion" posture, which strategically deals with power asymmetries to avoid increasing initial power asymmetries, and which suggests that designers should make explicit their assumptions and objectives regarding the social context so that local stakeholders can choose to accept them as legitimate or to reject them. Legitimacy is seen as the product of a coconstruction process between the designers and the participants. This posture was tested in the context of a participatory process conducted in northern Thailand to address a conflict between the creation of a national park and two local communities. While we show that this posture makes it possible for designers to be both strategic and legitimate at the same time, it also raises new questions and new dilemmas. Can we, and should we, really make all our assumptions explicit? How can we deal with stakeholders who refuse to engage in any form of dialog? We conclude that there is no "right" posture to adopt, but that designers need to be more reflexive about their own postures.

Suggested Citation

  • Cécile Barnaud & Annemarie van Paassen, 2013. "Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management," Post-Print hal-01386409, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01386409
    DOI: 10.5751/ES-05459-180221
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01386409
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01386409/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5751/ES-05459-180221?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. Piers Blaikie, 2000. "Development, Post-, Anti-, and Populist: A Critical Review," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(6), pages 1033-1050, June.
    2. Cees Leeuwis, 2000. "Reconceptualizing Participation for Sustainable Rural Development: Towards a Negotiation Approach," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 31(5), pages 931-959, November.
    3. M. Mazoyer & Laurence Roudart, 1997. "Histoire des agricultures du monde: Du Néolithique à la crise contemporaine," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/44782, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Mitlin, Diana & Hickey, Sam & Bebbington, Anthony, 2007. "Reclaiming Development? NGOs and the Challenge of Alternatives," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1699-1720, October.
    5. Pretty, Jules N., 1995. "Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 23(8), pages 1247-1263, August.
    6. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    7. Munoz, Ismael & Paredes, Maritza & Thorp, Rosemary, 2007. "Group Inequalities and the Nature and Power of Collective Action: Case Studies from Peru," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1929-1946, November.
    8. Agrawal, Arun & Gupta, Krishna, 2005. "Decentralization and Participation: The Governance of Common Pool Resources in Nepal's Terai," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(7), pages 1101-1114, July.
    9. Sikor, Thomas & Nguyen, Tan Quang, 2007. "Why May Forest Devolution Not Benefit the Rural Poor? Forest Entitlements in Vietnam's Central Highlands," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 2010-2025, November.
    10. W Ulrich, 2003. "Beyond methodology choice: critical systems thinking as critically systemic discourse," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(4), pages 325-342, April.
    11. David Edmunds & Eva Wollenberg, 2001. "A Strategic Approach to Multistakeholder Negotiations," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(2), pages 231-253, March.
    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. Benjamin T. Wood & Andrew J. Dougill & Lindsay C. Stringer & Claire H. Quinn, 2018. "Implementing Climate-Compatible Development in the Context of Power: Lessons for Encouraging Procedural Justice through Community-Based Projects," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Pissonnier, Solène & Dufils, Arnaud & Le Gal, Pierre-Yves, 2019. "A methodology for redesigning agroecological radical production systems at the farm level," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 161-171.
    3. Mahsa Mesgar & Diego Ramirez-Lovering & Mohamed El-Sioufi, 2021. "Tension, Conflict, and Negotiability of Land for Infrastructure Retrofit Practices in Informal Settlements," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Barnaud, Cécile & De Longueville, Florence & Gonella, Gabriel & Antona, Martine & Dendoncker, Nicolas & Waylen, Kerry A, 2023. "Participatory research on ecosystem services in the face of disputed values and other uncertainties: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Venot, Jean-Philippe & Jensen, Casper Bruun & Delay, Etienne & Daré, William's, 2022. "Mosaic glimpses: Serious games, generous constraints, and sustainable futures in Kandal, Cambodia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Daniel C. Kenny & Juan Castilla-Rho, 2022. "No Stakeholder Is an Island: Human Barriers and Enablers in Participatory Environmental Modelling," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-26, February.
    7. Thornton, Philip K. & Whitbread, Anthony & Baedeker, Tobias & Cairns, Jill & Claessens, Lieven & Baethgen, Walter & Bunn, Christian & Friedmann, Michael & Giller, Ken E. & Herrero, Mario & Howden, Mar, 2018. "A framework for priority-setting in climate smart agriculture research," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 161-175.
    8. Elsa T. Berthet & Sara Bosshardt & Lise Malicet-Chebbah & Gaëlle van Frank & Benoit Weil & Blanche Segrestin & Pierre Rivière & Léa Bernard & Elodie Baritaux & Isabelle Goldringer, 2020. "Designing Innovative Management for Cultivated Biodiversity: Lessons from a Pioneering Collaboration between French Farmers, Facilitators and Researchers around Participatory Bread Wheat Breeding," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    9. Kenny, Ursula & Regan, Áine & Hearne, Dave & O'Meara, Christine, 2021. "Empathising, defining and ideating with the farming community to develop a geotagged photo app for smart devices: A design thinking approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    10. Evelien M. de Olde & Henrik Moller & Fleur Marchand & Richard W. McDowell & Catriona J. MacLeod & Marion Sautier & Stephan Halloy & Andrew Barber & Jayson Benge & Christian Bockstaller & Eddie A. M. B, 2017. "When experts disagree: the need to rethink indicator selection for assessing sustainability of agriculture," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 1327-1342, August.
    11. Ramirez-Gomez, Sara O.I. & van Laerhoven, Frank & Boot, René & Biermann, Frank & Verweij, Pita A., 2020. "Assessing spatial equity in access to service-provisioning hotspots in data-scarce tropical forests regions under external pressure," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    12. Agathe Osinski, 2021. "Towards a Critical Sustainability Science? Participation of Disadvantaged Actors and Power Relations in Transdisciplinary Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-21, January.
    13. Jérôme Queste & Tom Wassenaar, 2019. "A practical dialogue protocol for sustainability science to contribute to regional resources management: its implementation in Réunion," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(1), pages 3-16, February.
    14. Elsa E. Berthet & Sara Bosshardt & Lise Malicet-Chebbah & Gaëlle van Frank & Benoit Weil & Blanche Segrestin & Pierre Riviere & Léa Bernard & Elodie Baritaux & Isabelle Goldringer, 2020. "Designing Innovative Management for Cultivated Biodiversity: Lessons from a Pioneering Collaboration between French Farmers, Facilitators and Researchers around Participatory Bread Wheat Breeding," Post-Print hal-02445107, HAL.
    15. Martin, G., 2015. "A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – Development and application with Forage Rummy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 52-61.
    16. Dolinska, Aleksandra, 2017. "Bringing farmers into the game. Strengthening farmers' role in the innovation process through a simulation game, a case from Tunisia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 129-139.
    17. Gerlak, Andrea K. & Guido, Zack & Owen, Gigi & McGoffin, Mariana Sofia Rodriguez & Louder, Elena & Davies, Julia & Smith, Kelly Jay & Zimmer, Andy & Murveit, Anna M. & Meadow, Alison & Shrestha, Padme, 2023. "Stakeholder engagement in the co-production of knowledge for environmental decision-making," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).

    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. Tanzi Smith, 2011. "Using critical systems thinking to foster an integrated approach to sustainability: a proposal for development practitioners," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Nicolas Faysse, 2006. "Troubles on the way: An analysis of the challenges faced by multi‐stakeholder platforms," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 30(3), pages 219-229, August.
    3. Adhikari, Sunit & Kingi, Tanira & Ganesh, Siva, 2014. "Incentives for community participation in the governance and management of common property resources: the case of community forest management in Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 1-9.
    4. Emadul Islam & Haris Bin Abd Wahab & Odessa Gonzalez Benson, 2022. "Community Participation in Disaster Recovery Programs: A Study of a Coastal Area in Bangladesh," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(5), pages 2438-2462, October.
    5. 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).
    6. Mbeche, Robert & Ateka, Josiah & Herrmann, Raoul & Grote, Ulrike, 2021. "Understanding forest users' participation in participatory forest management (PFM): Insights from Mt. Elgon forest ecosystem, Kenya," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    7. García-López, Gustavo A., 2019. "Rethinking elite persistence in neoliberalism: Foresters and techno-bureaucratic logics in Mexico’s community forestry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 169-181.
    8. Barnaud, Cécile & De Longueville, Florence & Gonella, Gabriel & Antona, Martine & Dendoncker, Nicolas & Waylen, Kerry A, 2023. "Participatory research on ecosystem services in the face of disputed values and other uncertainties: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    9. Anthony Patt & Nicole Peterson & Michael Carter & Maria Velez & Ulrich Hess & Pablo Suarez, 2009. "Making index insurance attractive to farmers," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 14(8), pages 737-753, December.
    10. Colleen M. Eidt & Laxmi P. Pant & Gordon M. Hickey, 2020. "Platform, Participation, and Power: How Dominant and Minority Stakeholders Shape Agricultural Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-21, January.
    11. Kenny, Daniel C. & Bakhanova, Elena & Hämäläinen, Raimo P. & Voinov, Alexey, 2022. "Participatory modelling and systems intelligence: A systems-based and transdisciplinary partnership," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    12. repec:ags:ijag24:346838 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Andrea Knierim & Fanos M. Birke, 2023. "Visualised AKIS Diagnosis – an Instrumental Approach to Support AKIS Appraisal," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 22(2), pages 59-70, August.
    14. Andrea Pronti, 2020. "The bottom-up approach is teetering. When sustainability does not match public participation: The case of an urban re-greening project in a small town in Northern Italy," RIVISTA DI STUDI SULLA SOSTENIBILITA', FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 0(1), pages 129-157.
    15. Nicolas Faysse & Mostafa Errahj & Catherine Dumora & Hassan Kemmoun & Marcel Kuper, 2012. "Linking research and public engagement: weaving an alternative narrative of Moroccan family farmers’ collective action," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 29(3), pages 413-426, September.
    16. Nicole Peterson, 2011. "Excluding to include: (Non)participation in Mexican natural resource management," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 28(1), pages 99-107, February.
    17. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Bulte, Erwin, 2021. "Internal versus top-down monitoring in community resource management: Experimental evidence from Ethiopia," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 111-131.
    18. Martin, G., 2015. "A conceptual framework to support adaptation of farming systems – Development and application with Forage Rummy," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 52-61.
    19. Jérôme Queste & Tom Wassenaar, 2019. "A practical dialogue protocol for sustainability science to contribute to regional resources management: its implementation in Réunion," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(1), pages 3-16, February.
    20. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    21. Krott, Max & Bader, Axel & Schusser, Carsten & Devkota, Rosan & Maryudi, Ahmad & Giessen, Lukas & Aurenhammer, Helene, 2014. "Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 34-42.

    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:hal:journl:hal-01386409. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.