4.5 Article

Prophets and profits in Indonesia's social forestry partnership schemes: Introducing a sequential power analysis

期刊

FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS
卷 115, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102160

关键词

Social forestry; Partnership [kemitraan]; Indonesia; Sequential power analysis

资金

  1. Kemenristekdikti [1740/UN4.21/PL.00.00/2019]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studies on power dynamics have helped to develop a better understanding of the role of actors and interests influencing community forestry initiatives. This article introduces a sequential power analysis as a framework for expanding research on power dynamics to better understand the various stages that shape benefit sharing outcomes in community forestry. The research is based on the increasingly popular partnership scheme in Indonesia, but the framework is introduced as a method for potential application in other community forestry contexts. The framework is based on three parts. It first historicizes the actors in what we term the power background. Thereafter we examine the arrival of a partnership scheme described as power delivery. Third, we highlight a process of power adjustment, which serves to explain the way actors achieve benefit sharing outcomes. Our research draws from a diverse set of partnership schemes from four sites across five different comparative variables. We find that the framing of power delivery allows us to identify the key actors that serve as the messengers of partnership schemes (the prophets) promoting the terms of project implementation. In the latter stages however, power adjustment determines the outcomes, which are contingent upon benefit-sharing arrangements (profits). Not only does our sequential power analysis help to enrich studies of power dynamics in community forestry, we also show that the current implementation of the partnership scheme in Indonesia is unlikely to result in more equitable outcomes, but rather serves to strengthen the position of existing powerful actors.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据