Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Exploring decentralized forest management in Ethiopia using actor-power-accountability framework: case study in West Shoa zone

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Decentralized forest management is a pivotal approach in Ethiopia for balancing biodiversity conservation with demand for economic development, and for improving forest-dependent local peoples’ livelihoods. With the aim of filling the literature gap on Ethiopia, this paper explores the dynamics of decentralization in the forestry sector using the actor-power-accountability framework. Generally, three forms of decentralization are practiced: deconcentration to government administrative branches, devolution of selected decision-making power to local people, and delegation to enterprises. Although transfer of meaningful discretionary power to local people or to downwardly accountable lower-tier governments is a precondition for achieving positive outcomes from decentralization, this prerequisite has been realized in none of the three forms decentralization. Overall, three important trends emerged from the latest decentralization reform, which was a switch from the conservation-oriented deconcentration form of decentralization to the income generation-oriented delegation form of decentralization. Those trends are as follows: monetary income generation for local people through enterprise, albeit with possible risk of being deprived of income and subsistence opportunities on which local people depend for their livelihoods; moving decision-making power away from the grassroots; and lack of incentive to manage natural forests, a major source of biodiversity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The documents include Ethiopia policy and strategy on forest development, conservation, and utilization; federal proclamation to pronounce the coming into effect of the constitution of the federal democratic republic of Ethiopia; federal environmental impact assessment proclamation; federal environmental protection organs establishment proclamation; federal land administration and land use proclamation; federal proclamation to provide for the development, conservation, and utilization of forests; growth and transformation plan (GTP) 2010/2011–2014/2015 (draft); PASDEP: a plan for accelerated and sustained development to end poverty (PASDEP) (2005/2006–2009/2010); Oromia revised regional proclamation; forest proclamation of Oromia region; a proclamation for the reorganization and redefinition of the power and duties of the executive organs of Oromia regional state; a proclamation to provide for the establishment of Oromia bureau of land and environmental protection; a regulation to provide for the establishment of Oromia regional state forest and wildlife enterprise; an agreement signed between FUGs (cooperatives) and government representatives; and the internal bylaws of FUGs.

  2. The interviewees were from these organizations (numbers of interviewees are in brackets): Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (MARD) [3]; environmental protection authority (EPA)[1]; Oromia agriculture and rural development bureau (OARDB), natural resource core process [3]; Oromia bureau of land and environmental protection (OBLEP), environmental protection core process [1]; OBLEP, land use planning core process [1]; Oromia forest and wildlife enterprise (OFWE), head office [3]; OFWE, branch office [2]; OFWE, district office [4]; zone administrative office [1]; Woreda government [1]; Woreda judiciary [3]; Woreda agriculture and rural development office (WARDO) [4]; Woreda land and environmental protection office (WLEPO), Environmental protection work process [2]; WLEPO land use planning work process [1]; peasant associations (PAs) [3]; Melka Mahber NGO [1]; Oromia water work design and supervision enterprise [1]; and local people [upper class 3, lower class 6].

References

  • Acheson, J. (2006). Institutional failure in resource management. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35, 117–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ackerman, J. (2004). Co-governance for accountability: Beyond “exit” and “voice”. World Development, 32(3), 447–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal, A., & Ostrom, E. (2001). Collective action, property rights, and decentralization in resource use in India and Nepal. Politics and Society, 29, 485–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrawal, A., & Ribot, J. (1999). Accountability in decentralization: A framework with South Asian and West African environmental cases. Journal of Development Areas, 33, 473–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, H. (2000). Participation and accountability at the periphery: Democratic local governance in six countries. World Development, 28, 21–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, K., & Gibson, C. C. (2006). Decentralized governance and environmental change: Local institutional moderation of deforestation in Bolivia. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 26(1), 99–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromley, D. W. (Ed.). (1992). Making the commons work: Theory and practice. California: ICSG Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chhatre, A. (2008). Political articulation and accountability in decentralization: Theory and evidence from India. Conservation and Society, 6(1), 12–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, E. A., & Fleischman, F. (2011). Comparing forest decentralization and local institutional change in Bolivia, Kenya, Mexico, and Uganda. World Development, 40(4), 836–849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devarajan, S., Khemani, S., & Shah, S. (2007). The politics of partial decentralization. New York: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewees, P. A., Campbell, B. M., Katererec, Y., Sitoed, A., Cunninghame, A. B., Angelsenf, A., et al. (2010). Managing the Miombo woodlands of Southern Africa: Policies, incentives and options for the rural poor. Journal of natural resources policy research, 2(1), 57–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feyissa, N. (2007). Forest resources of Oromia national regional state. Paper presented in policy workshop to increase forest cover in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

  • Gibson, C. (1999). Politicians and poachers: The political economy of wildlife policy in Africa. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hajjar, R. F., Kozak, R. A., & Innes, J. L. (2012). Is decentralization leading to “real” decision-making power for forest-dependent communities? Case studies from Mexico and Brazil. Ecology and Society, 17(1), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagger, P., Pender, J., & Gebremehin, B. (2005). Trading off environmental sustainability for empowerment and income: Woodlot devolution in Northern Ethiopia. World Development, 33(9), 1491–1510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinuthia-Njenga, C. (2002). Defining local democracy and decentralization. In C. Kinuthia-Njenga, et al. (Eds.), Local democracy and decentralization in East and South Africa: Experiences from Uganda, Kenya, Botswana, Tanzania and Ethiopia (pp. 1–12). Nairobi, Kenya: UN-HABITAT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A. M. (2003). Decentralization and forest management in Latin America: Toward a working model. Public Administration and Development, 23, 211–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A. M. (2005). Democratic decentralization in the forestry sector: Lessons learned from Africa, Asia and Latin America. In C. J. Pierce Colfer & D. Capistrano (Eds.), The politics of decentralization: Forests, people and power (pp. 32–62). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A. M., & Ribot, J. (2004). Democratic decentralisation through a natural resource lens: An introduction. The European Journal of Development Research, 16(1), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, A. M., & Soto, F. (2008). Decentralization of natural resource governance regimes. Environmental Resource, 33, 213–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, A. J., & Inoue, M. (2011). Drawbacks of decentralized natural resource management: Experience from Chilimo participatory forest management project. Ethiopia, Journal of forest research,. doi:10.1007/s10310-011-0270-9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, A. J., & Inoue, M. (2012). Explaining disparity in outcome from community-based natural resource management (CBNRM): A case study in Chilimo Forest, Ethiopia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1–19.

  • Oyono, P. R. (2004). One step forward, two steps backward? Paradoxes of natural resources management decentralisation in Cameroon. Journal of Modern African Studies, 42(1), 91–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribot, J. C. (2002). Democratic decentralization of natural resource: Institutionalizing popular participation. Washington: World Resource Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribot, J. C. (2003). Democratic decentralization of natural resources: Institutional choice and discretionary power transfers in Sub-Saharan Africa. Public Administration and Development, 23, 53–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ribot, J. C. (2004). Waiting for democracy: The politics of choice in natural resource decentralization. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ribot, J. C., Agrawal, A., & Larson, A. M. (2006). Recentralizing while decentralizing: How national governments reappropriate forest resources. World Development, 34, 1864–1886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sayer, J., Elliott, C., Barrow, E., Gretzinger, S., Maginnis, S., McShane, T., et al. (2005). Implication for biodiversity conservation of decentralized forest resource management. In C. J. Pierce Colfer & D. Capistrano (Eds.), The politics of decentralization: Forests, people and power (pp. 121–138). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlager, E., & Ostrom, E. (1992). Property-rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Economics, 68(3), 249–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smoke, P. (2003). Decentralization in Africa: Goals, dimensions, myths and challenges. Public Administration and Development, 23, 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tacconi, L. (2007). Decentralization, forest and livelihoods: Theory and narrative. Global Environment Change, 12, 338–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tegegne, G. (2007). A brief overview of decentralization in Ethiopia. In A. Taye & G. Tegegn (Eds.), decentralization in Ethiopia (pp. 1–8). Addis Ababa: Forum for Social Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz, S., Beris, Y., & Serrano-Berthet, R. (2010). Linking local government discretion and accountability in decentralization. Development Policy Review, 28(3), 259–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods. London: SAGE publication.

  • Zewdu, M. (2002). Sustainable development in Ethiopia: Report of assessment of activities and issues relevant to the review process of the Earth Summit 2002 in Ethiopia. Ethiopia: Institute of Biodiversity Conservation and Research.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The fieldwork for this research was supported financially by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A) supported by the Government of Japan (No. 19208014, project leader: Makoto Inoue). It does not represent the views of the Japanese government.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abrar Juhar Mohammed.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mohammed, A.J., Inoue, M. Exploring decentralized forest management in Ethiopia using actor-power-accountability framework: case study in West Shoa zone. Environ Dev Sustain 15, 807–825 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-012-9407-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-012-9407-z

Keywords

Navigation