Environmental Management

, Volume 45, Issue 1, pp 67–81

Stories and Maps, Images and Archives: Multimethod Approach to the Political Ecology of Native Property Rights and Natural Resource Management in Sabah, Malaysia

Article

Abstract

The study of human-environmental relations is complex and by nature draws on theories and practices from multiple disciplines. There is no single research strategy or universal set of methods to which researchers must adhere. Particularly for scholars interested in a political ecology approach to understanding human-environmental relationships, very little has been written examining the details of “how to” design a project, develop appropriate methods, produce data, and, finally, integrate multiple forms of data into an analysis. A great deal of attention has been paid, appropriately, to the theoretical foundations of political ecology, and numerous scholarly articles and books have been published recently. But beyond Andrew Vayda’s “progressive contextualization” and Piers Blaikie and Harold Brookfield’s “chains of explanation,” remarkably little is written that provides a research model to follow, modify, and expand. Perhaps one of the reasons for this gap in scholarship is that, as expected in interdisciplinary research, researchers use a variety of methods that are suitable (and perhaps unique) to the questions they are asking. To start a conversation on the methods available for researchers interested in adopting a political ecology perspective to human-environmental interactions, I use my own research project as a case study. This research is by no means flawless or inclusive of all possible methods, but by using the details of this particular research process as a case study I hope to provide insights into field research that will be valuable for future scholarship.

Keywords

Qualitative research Multimethod approach Political ecology Grounded theory Inductive reasoning Native customary land tenure 

References

  1. Agrawal A (2005) Environmentality: technologies of government and the making of subjects. Duke University Press, Durham, NCGoogle Scholar
  2. Agrawal A, Gibson C (eds) (2001) Communities and the environment: ethnicity, gender, and the state in community-based conservation. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJGoogle Scholar
  3. Agrawal A, Sivaramakrishnan K (2000) Agrarian environments: resources, representations, and rule in India. Duke University Press, Durham, NCGoogle Scholar
  4. Alvesson M, Skoldberg K (2004) Reflexive methodology: new vistas for qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  5. Babbie E (2004) The practice of social research. Thomson Learning, Belmont, CAGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrett C., Brandon, C. Gibson, H. Gjertsen (2001) Conserving tropical biodiversity amid weak institutions. BioScience 51(6):497–502Google Scholar
  7. Bernard HR (2006) Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. AltaMira Press, Lanham, MDGoogle Scholar
  8. Berry S (1993) No condition is permanent: the social dynamics of agrarian change in sub-Saharan Africa. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  9. Blaikie P, Brookfield H (1987) Land degradation and society. Methuen, LondonGoogle Scholar
  10. Booth WC, Colomb G, Williams J (2003) The craft of research. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  11. Brechin S, Wilshusen P, Fortwangler C, West P (eds) (2003) Contested nature: promoting international biodiversity with social justice in the twenty-first century. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  12. Brockington D (2002) Fortress conservation: the preservation of the Mkomazi Game Reserve, Tanzania. Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  13. Bryant R, Bailey S (1997) Third world political ecology. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Bryant R (1997) The political ecology of forestry in Burma, 1824–1994. University of Hawaii Press, HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  15. Case W (2001) Malaysia’s resilient pseudo-democracy. Journal of Democracy 12(1):43–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chandran SMD (1998) Shifting cultivation, sacred groves and conflict in colonial forest policy in western Ghats. In: Grove R, Damodaran V, Sangwan S (Eds) Nature and the Orient: the environmental history of South and Southeast Asia. Oxford University Press, Delhi, pp 674–707Google Scholar
  17. Comaroff J (1989) Images of empire, contests of conscience: models of colonial domination in South Africa. American Ethnologist 16:661–685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Conklin H (1957) Hanunoo agriculture: a report on an integral system of shifting cultivation in the Philippines. FAO Forestry Development Paper No. 12. FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  19. Creswell J (2003) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  20. Demerath P (2006) The science of context: Modes of response for qualitative researchers in education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 19(1):97–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Demsetz H (1967) Toward a theory of property rights. American Economic Review 57(2):347–359Google Scholar
  22. Denzin N, Lincoln Y (eds) (1998) Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  23. Doolittle A (2005) Property and politics in Sabah, Malaysia (North Borneo): a century of native struggles over land rights, 1881–1996. Nature and Culture Series. University of Washington Press, SeattleGoogle Scholar
  24. Dove MR (1983) Theories of swidden agriculture, and the political economy of ignorance. Agroforestry Systems 1:85–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dove MR (1998) Living rubber, dead land, and persisting systems in borneo: indigenous representations of sustainability. Bijdragen 154(1):1–35Google Scholar
  26. Dove MR, Sajise P, Doolittle A (eds) (2005) Biodiversity and society in Southeast Asia: case studies of the interface between nature and culture. Southeast Asia Monograph Series. Yale University, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  27. Dunlop, W. n.d. Personal diary of W. R. Dunlop, 1897. Sabah Archives, File SP/1Google Scholar
  28. Evans I (1922) Among primitive people in Borneo. Lippincott, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  29. Fine G (2004) The when of ethnographic theory. American Sociological Association Theory Section Newsletter 27(1):4–5, 11Google Scholar
  30. Forsyth T (2003) Critical political ecology: the politics of environmental science. Routledege, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Fortmann L (1996) Gendered knowledge, rights and space in two Zimbabwe villages: reflections on methods and findings. In: Rocheleau D, Thomas-Slayter B, Wangari E (eds) Feminist political ecology: global issues and local experiences. Routlege Press, New York, London, pp. 211–233Google Scholar
  32. Fox J, Truong DM, Rambo T, Tuyen NP, Cuc LT, Leisz S (2000) Shifting cultivation: a new paradigm for managing tropical forests. BioScience 50(6):521–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Frank AG (1967) Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America. Monthly Review Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Glaser B, Strauss A (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine, Hawthorne, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Government of North Borneo (1914) Circular No. 95. August 14, 1914. North Borneo Chartered Company Archives No. 284. State Archives, Kota Kinabalu, SabahGoogle Scholar
  36. Government of North Borneo (1937) The ordinances and rules of the state of North Borneo, 1881–1936. Government Printing Office, SandakanGoogle Scholar
  37. Guha R (1963) A rule of property for Bengal. Mouton and Co., ParisGoogle Scholar
  38. Guha R (1989) The unquiet woods: ecological change and peasant resistance in Himalaya. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  39. Guha R (1997) The authoritarian biologist and the arrogance of anti-humanism: wildlife conservation in the third world. Ecologist 27(1):14–20Google Scholar
  40. Guha R (1998) Radical American environmentalism and wilderness preservation. Environmental Ethics 11(1):71–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Hesse-Biber SN,Leavy P (2005) The practice of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  42. Kinzig A (2001) Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges. Ecosystems 4:709–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Leach M, Fairhead J (2000) Fashioned forest pasts, occluded histories: international environmental analysis in West African locales. Development and Change 31:35–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Leach M, Robins Mearns M, Scoones I (1999) Environmental entitlement: dynamics and institutions in community-based natural resources management. World Development 27(2):225–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lincoln Y, Denzin N (1994) The handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  46. Locke, J. 1690 [1963]. The second treatise of government. In Two treaties of government. P. Laslett, ed. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. MacPherson CB (eds) (1978) Property: mainstream and critical positions. University of Toronto Press, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  48. Merry SE (1988) Legal pluralism. Law and Society Review 22(5):867–896CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Merry SE (1991) Law and colonialism. Law and Society Review 25(4):890–922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Migdal J, Kohli A, Shue V (eds) (1994) State power and social forces: domination and transformation in the Third World. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. Moore SF (1986) Social facts and fabrication: customary law on Kilimanjaro, 1880–1980. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  52. Murphree MW (2005) Congruent objectives, competing interests, and strategic compromise: concept and process in the evolution of Zimbabwe’s CAMPFIRE, 1984–1996. In: Brosius P, Tsing A, Zerner C (eds) Communities and conservation: histories and politics of community-based natural resource management. AltaMira Press, Lantham, MD, pp 105–146Google Scholar
  53. Nais, J (1996) Kinablau Park and the surrounding indigenous communities. Working Paper No. 17. South-South Cooperation Programme on Environmentally Sound Socio-Economic Development in the Humid Tropics. United National Educational and Scientific OrganizationGoogle Scholar
  54. Nash R (2001) Wilderness and the American mind, 4th edn. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  55. Neumann R (1998) Imposing wilderness: struggles over livelihood and nature preservation in Africa. University of California, Berkeley, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  56. Neumann R (2005) Making political ecology. Hodder Arnold, New York, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  57. Ostrom E (1990) Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  58. Paulson S, Gezon L (eds) (2005) Political ecology across spaces, scales, and social groups. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, NJGoogle Scholar
  59. Pearson AC (1914) Memorandum on forestry in the Philippines. Colonial Office 874/711. Public Records Office, Kew, UKGoogle Scholar
  60. Peet R, Watts M (1996) Liberation ecology: development, sustainability, and environment in the age of market triumphalism. In: Peet R, Watts M (eds) Liberation ecologies: environment, development and social movements. Routledge, New York, pp 1–45Google Scholar
  61. Peluso N (1993) Coercing conservation: the politics of state resource control. Global Environmental Change 4(2):199–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Peters P (1994) Dividing the commons: politics, policy, and culture in Botswana. University Press of Virginia, CharlottesvilleGoogle Scholar
  63. Pouchepadaas J (1995) British attitudes towards shifting cultivation in colonial South India: case study of South Canara District 1800–1920. In: Arnold D, Guha R (eds) Nature, culture, imperialism: essays on the environmental history of South Asia. Oxford University Press, Delhi, pp 123–151Google Scholar
  64. Ragin C (1989) The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  65. Ragin C (1994) Constructing social research: the unity and diversity of method. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  66. Redford K, Robinson JG, Adams WM (2006) Parks as shibboleths. Conservation Biology 20:1–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Robbins P (2004) Political ecology: a critical introduction. Blackwell, Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
  68. Rocheleau D (1995) Maps, numbers, text and contest: mixing methods in feminist political ecology. Professional Geographers 47(4):458–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Rose C (1994) Property and persuasion: essays on the history, theory, and rhetoric of ownership. Westview Press, Boulder, COGoogle Scholar
  70. Russell D, Harshbarger C (2003) Ground work for community-based conservation: strategies for social research. AltaMira Press, Lanham, MDGoogle Scholar
  71. Rutter O (1922) British North Borneo: an account of its history, resources and native tribes. Constable & Company, LondonGoogle Scholar
  72. Scott J (1976) The moral economy of the peasant: subsistence and rebellion in Southeast Asia. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  73. Scott J (1985) Weapons of the weak: everyday forms of peasant resistance. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  74. Sivaramakrishnan K, Agrawal A (eds) (2003) Regional modernities: the cultural politics of development in India. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  75. Stake R (1995) The art of case study research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  76. Stoler A (1985) Capitalism and confrontation in Sumatra’s Plantation Belt: 1870–1979. Yale University Press, New Haven, CTGoogle Scholar
  77. Stott PA, Sullivan S (eds) (2000) Political ecology: science, myth and power. Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  78. Terborgh J (1999) Requiem for nature. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  79. Thompson EP (1971) The moral economy of the English crowd during the eighteenth century. Past and Present 50:76–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Treacher W (1890) British Borneo: sketches of Brunai, Sarawak, Labuan and North Borneo. Journal of the Straits Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society XXI:19–122Google Scholar
  81. Tsing A (1993) In the realm of the Diamond Queen: marginality in an out-of-the-way place. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  82. Vayda A (1983) Progressive contextualization: methods for research in human ecology. Human Ecology 11(3):265–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Verschuren P (2001) Holism versus reductionism in modern social science research. Quality & Quantity 35:389–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wallerstein I (1974) The rise and future demise of the world capitalist system: concepts for a comparative analysis. Comparative Studies in History and Society 16:387–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Weiss R (1994) Learning from strangers: the art and method of qualitative interview studies. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  86. Wells M, Brandon K (1992) People and parks: linking protected area management with local communities. World Bank, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  87. Yin R (2002) Case study research: design and methods. Sage Press, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  88. Zerner C (1994) Through a green lens: the construction of customary environmental law and community in Indonesia’s Maluku Islands. Law and Society Review 28(5):1079–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Zimmerer K, Bassett T (eds) (2003) Political ecology: an integrative approach to geography and environment-development studies. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Yale School of Forestry and Environmental StudiesNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations