RP-School of Environmental Studies

Permanent URI for this community

https://repository.ku.ac.ke/handle/123456789/1310

Browse

Browsing RP-School of Environmental Studies by Author "Ali, M."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    NGOs come and go but business continues: lessons from co-management institutional arrangements for governance of the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest Reserve in Kenya
    (Taylor & Francis, 2014) Ming’ate, F.L.M.; Hamish, G.R.; Ali, M.
    The objective of this paper is to examine the current institutional arrangements for governance of the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest Reserve (ASFR) and show their major contribution in the ASFR co-management business of conserving the forest and providing livelihoods to the poor forest-dependent communities. Despite the fact that funding from non-governmental organizations ended, the ASFR co-management business did not stall. The institutional arrangements for co-management were deemed to be the major component that contributed to the continuation of the ASFR co-management business. To demonstrate this hypothesis, the paper explores four main areas that shape the institutional arrangement of the ASFR co- management regime, informed by common property theories: (1) how governance arrangement structures for the ASFR are organized; (2) villagers perceptions and awareness of the co-management structure; (3) co-management arrangement for access, ownership and use of the various forest resources; and (4) importance of the forest resources to the households. The co-management piloting and non-piloting communities adjacent to the forest and who have been depending on the forest as a source of their livelihoods are compared in order to understand the role of the ASFR co-management institutional arrangements in the sustainability of its business
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Potential for co-management approaches to strengthen livelihoods of forest dependent communities: A Kenyan case
    (Elsevier B.V., 2016) Ming’ate, F.L.M.; Hamish G.R.; Ali, M.
    Many natural resource management researchers have focused either on institutional design and evaluation or on livelihood outcomes per se without explicitly acknowledging and rigorously examining linkages between the two. Thus, a major gap in the current literature on co-management institutional arrangements is the extent to which co-management has strengthened the livelihoods of poor forest-dependent communities. This gap is addressed in this paper by developing and testing an argument that well-designed co-management arrangements have strengthened the livelihood outcomes of poor forest-dependent communities in a Kenyan case study. The hybrid analytical framework developed for this analysis situates Ostrom's (1990) design criteria for co-management institutions in the broader context of the Sustainable Livelihood Framework. It then uses this analytical framework to evaluate the Arabuko-Sokoke Forest Reserve (ASFR) co-management initiative in Kenya, based on a three-step process. First, the paper provides an overview of current institutional arrangements for governance of the ASFR co-management regime. Second, it evaluates the extent to which these governance arrangements can be characterized as devolved collaborative governance, informed by Ostrom's (1990) design principles and; third, it evaluates the extent to which the livelihood outcomes of forest dependent communities that are participants in the co-management project have had their livelihoods strengthened as a result of the ASFR co-management governance arrangements. The paper demonstrates that the institutional arrangements for ASFR co-management are relatively nascent and emerging because the governance arrangements for the ASFR co-management project cannot be characterized as fully devolved de jure collaborative governance. Notwithstanding this, the findings reveal that participant forest-dependent communities in the co-management project had improved livelihoods compared to forest-dependent communities outside the co-management scheme. It is suggested that this is due to the de facto co-management arrangements.