Though all things differ. Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests. Eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López - PDF

Description
Though all things differ Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests Eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López Though all things differ Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests Eva Wollenberg,

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 43
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information
Category:

Reviews

Publish on:

Views: 22 | Pages: 43

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Transcript
Though all things differ Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests Eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López Though all things differ Pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests Eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López 2005 by CIFOR All rights reserved. Published in 2005 Printed by SMK Grafika Desa Putera, Jakarta Design and layout by Eko Prianto and Gideon Suharyanto Cover drawing: detail of painted bark paper by Silvestre Adán from San Agustín Oapan, Guerrero, Mexico From the collection of Catherine Good Eshelman. The icon design on front and back covers and the watermark design on the back cover are from Dover Pictorial Archives Ancient Mexican Design of CD-ROM and Book. Dover Publications; Bk&CD- Rom edition. National Library of Indonesia Cataloging-in-Publication Data Wollenberg, Eva. Though all things differ: pluralism as a basis for cooperation in forests/eva Wollenberg, Jon Anderson and Citlalli López. Bogor, Indonesia: CIFOR, p. cm. ISBN CAB thesaurus: 1. pluralism 2. forest management 3. interest groups 4. diversity 5. decision-making 6. social participation 7. social interaction 8. community forestry 9. governance 10. guidelines I. Anderson, Jon II. Lopez, Citlalli III. Title Published by Center for International Forestry Research Jl. CIFOR, Situ Gede, Sindang Barang, Bogor Barat 16680, Indonesia Tel.: +62 (251) ; Fax: +62 (251) Web site: Table of Contents Preface vi Introduction 1 Chapter 1 Principles of Pluralism 5 The principles 5 Relevance of pluralism to forests 11 Pluralism as process, not event 14 Chapter 2 Differences 15 Wanting to be similar, but different 15 Which differences matter? 17 Interests, identities, institutions and practices 18 Who gets involved? 28 Policymakers prefer simplicity 32 Chapter 3 Legal Pluralism and Policies Supporting Pluralism 35 What is legal pluralism? 35 How do people coordinate among sets of laws? 36 Strengths and weaknesses of legal pluralism 39 Policies that support pluralism 40 Strengths and weaknesses of policies supporting pluralism 41 Summary: Analyzing legal pluralism and policies that support legal pluralism 41 iii Chapter 4 Multistakeholder Processes 45 Common features of multistakeholder processes 47 Characteristics of the stakeholders, conveners and facilitators 48 The context that frames the process 52 Shared principles and strategy 54 Cycles of conflict and cooperation 57 Built-in tensions for change, learning and adjusting 63 Power, marginalization and social justice 63 Strengths and weaknesses 72 Summary: Facilitating or participating in multistakeholder processes 72 Chapter 5 Working in Teams 75 What are teams? 75 Why pluralism in teams? 76 Differences that count in teams 76 Do opposites always attract? 78 Where agreements are needed 80 Strengths and weaknesses 82 Summary: Building and maintaining team diversity 82 Conclusion 85 Guiding questions to work towards pluralism 87 Additional Reading and Resources 89 Credits 101 iv Boxes 1. What is Pluralism? 4 2. The Origins of Pluralism 6 3. Relativism 8 4. Inclusiveness 9 5. A Theory of Pluralism According to John Kekes (1993) Some Arguments Against Pluralism Some Arguments in Support of Pluralism Values, Interests and Positions The 4 R s Approach Prejudice United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Bolivia s Forestry Reforms and Yuracare Indigenous People: Differences in Views of Competent Practice Stakeholder Salience Determining Stakeholder Legitimacy in Forests A Critique of Stakeholder Analysis Looking Beyond Similarities and Stability Recreating Community Ownership and Management: the Dina System, Madagascar United in Diversity, but Not Diverse in Unity Joint Forest Management in India Policies in Whose Best Interests? Why Not Government? The Mediator s Influence Opportunities and Limitations of the Self-Evolved Network Factors Beyond the Forest Sector Reframing Decisions Development of a Representative Board for the Chihuahua Model Forest, Mexico The Rise and Fall of Cooperation Between Government and Communities in the Tambopata-Candamo Reserved Area, Peru Remembering Relationships in Negotiations Spectrum of Possible Negotiated Outcomes to a Conflict Conflict and Collaboration in the Kilum-Ijim Forest, Cameroon Adaptive Collaborative Management that Strengthened Forest Management in the Philippines: Outcomes after 2 1/2 Years Learning about Learning Dealing Constructively with Diversity in Nepal Accommodating Staff from Plural Backgrounds at Seva Mandir, India Complementary Roles in Teams and Sustainability Some Important Ways in which People Differ in Work Teams 81 v Preface Beginning in the mid 1990s, practitioners and theoreticians working in forestry and rural development around the world observed that conflicting interests and increasingly different and independent perspectives on forests required a fundamentally new approach to forest decision-making. Relying on recommendations and decisions made by centralized forest departments and experts was no longer sufficient for meet the diverse needs of society. Pluralism offered an alternative that more closely matched social realities. Pluralism could also provide checks and balances to help learning and control power imbalances. In 1997 a working group on pluralism, sustainable forestry and rural development therefore met at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in Rome to explore the possibilities for developing cooperation among different groups in the forest sector. One of the conclusions of the workshop was the need for more research, including comparative analysis and detailed case studies (1999:8). To that end, the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and FAO commissioned case studies on the practice of pluralism in different regions of the world. The cases and a synthesis of their findings were published in a special issue on Accommodating Multiple Interests in Local Forest Management in the International Journal of Agricultural Resources, Governance and Ecology (Volume 1: 3/4) in 2001, with funding from the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). The cases looked at pluralism from the perspective of co-management, decentralization, the production of knowledge in extension work and multistakeholder processes. They showed the difficulty of defining people s interests, the nature of accommodation as an on-going process and not a single event, and the challenges of achieving social justice even where marginalized groups are directly involved in decision making. The cases were, however, written for a scholarly audience. The authors wanted to make sure the lessons learned were also available to a wider audience. The 1997 workshop had recommended the production of an introductory primer on pluralism. Several authors vi thus agreed to collaborate in writing a more popular version of the special journal issue. The authors met with donors, researchers and facilitators of multistakeholder processes in forestry to find out what they would like to see in such a volume. Their feedback helped the authors to know what to highlight from the journal issue and what additional information should be included. This guide is the result. Thirteen authors participated in the original publication (in alphabetical order): Jon Anderson, Martine Antona, Didier Babin, Amita Baviskar, David Edmunds, Paul Engel, James Fairhead, Anouk Hoeberichts, Melissa Leach, Ricardo Ramírez, Jesse Ribot, Laurent Umans and Eva Wollenberg. We are grateful to these authors for granting us permission to use their material for the guide. The guide draws directly on their ideas and language in many places. Citations for each article appear in the list of additional reading at the end. We also thank Budhita Kismadi, Dani W. Munggoro, Linda Yuliani, Antoinette Royo, Mike Arnold, Jon Dain, Tita (Diana) Alvira, Loy Van Crowder, Steven Daniels, Katherine Warner, Bob Fisher, Bhaskar Vira, Carol Colfer, Louise Buck, Marilyn Hoskins, Mary Hobley, Jutta Blauert, Jon Lindsey, Rosario Leon, Andrew Dragun, Mohammed Dorgham, Dina Hubudin, Gideon Suharyanto, Eko Prianto, April Mansyah and Cally Arthur for their support to this project. The project was funded by IFAD, FAO and CIFOR. vii Introduction Music, to create harmony, must investigate discord. Plutarch AD This guide is about how to meet the needs of different groups in forests, especially where they conflict. As the world s forests continue to decline in area and quality, clashes are rising. Loggers, miners, farmers, plantation managers, hunters, trekkers, conservationists, scientists, educators, indigenous people, mushroom collectors, water bottlers and global carbon traders all want their share of the forest. These different groups often have their own rules, agencies and authorities for making decisions, or bring different types of knowledge, perceptions and skills to how they use the forest. Three challenges arise from these differences: How can people manage the resulting disagreements and conflicts? How can people co-ordinate among themselves to meet a coherent set of objectives for managing a forest and generate synergy? How can the views and institutions of the less powerful be taken into account in a just manner? An exciting collection of approaches have been developed to meet the challenges including legal pluralism, social learning, multistakeholder processes, co-management of forests, teamwork, and conflict management. The approaches examine people s culture, identity, law, livelihoods, institutions, values and interests to understand differences among groups and then build a basis for cooperation or linking groups. Knowing and respecting differences becomes a foundation for developing the networks, trust and mutual understanding necessary for people to act together, whether to manage a forest or generate a social movement. Some approaches are used in government policy, while others are facilitated outside of government. Each reflects to differing degrees the principle of pluralism, to recognize different peoples values, interests, identities, institutions or practices as legitimate and autonomous, while facilitating people to work together in a coherent, mutually beneficial way. 1 Though all things differ Although a number of methods for improving pluralism in forest and resource management are emerging, people s understanding of pluralism as a political philosophy and approach to governance has been weak. Current forest practices do not go far enough in acknowledging the legitimacy of different people s values or providing a solid, strong basis for coordinating them. Interest in building consensus has predominated, with many inequities persisting. The role of pluralism in fostering cooperation has been especially poorly understood. Yet, pluralism offers well-thought out and practical ways for bringing people s differences together. Taking a pluralistic approach to people s values, interests, identities, institutions and practices in forest management is perhaps the only way to assure that certain groups have their legitimacy and rights to forests recognized, especially customary groups or weaker local forest users. Pluralism can provide checks and balances against any one group pursuing their interests to the harm of others. Bringing together diverse groups also has the potential to enrich the knowledge and human resources supporting forest management. The purpose of this guide is to deepen people s understanding of pluralism as a concept and principle of governance. The aim is to stimulate the reader to think critically about pluralism s implications for supporting cooperation in natural resource governance and present some approaches for achieving pluralism to excite the reader about its possibilities. After reading this guide, the reader should be able to see these methods in a new light based on a deeper understanding of the principles of pluralism. The guide should be useful in a range of contexts, from centralized and local political systems to different kinds of project and team environments, provided there is some space for individual initiative and voice. Chapter 1 of the guide provides an introduction of the assumptions and concepts underpinning pluralism and its relevance to forests. Chapter 2 examines the forces underlying people s differences and the way people categorize themselves. Chapters 3 through 5 describe different ways people have put pluralism into practice. Three approaches are reviewed: legal pluralism and policies that support pluralism, multistakeholder processes, and diversity in work teams. Brief case studies are provided in each section to show how the principles translate into practice. Although the authors provide examples of practical steps that might be taken to increase pluralism, the guide is intended to catalyze interest, rather than provide comprehensive how-to instructions. The approaches differ in their scale, formality and appropriateness to different contexts. Each addresses specific opportunities and each has its own challenges. The conclusion offers a set of questions to help guide your own efforts in making room for people s different interests in forests. The guide gives special attention to how powerful majority and less powerful minority groups can make decisions together in more socially just ways. It highlights possibilities for accommodating the interests of local forest users as groups who are most often marginalized by larger society. Although examples are drawn from forests, the concepts and principles presented here are broadly applicable to other types of natural resources. 2 Introduction By asking questions rather than outlining steps, the users of this guide should be able to adapt the concepts and methods to their own circumstances. The authors urge users to build on what exists already and be responsive to the needs of the changing situation. Users should encourage debate about assumptions and decisions and help people to develop independent perspectives. Pluralism comes with its own limits and opportunities, and each group will have to decide for itself which trade-offs to make. A list of additional reading and resources is provided for those interested in learning more. 3 Box 1. What is Pluralism? Pluralism is a theory about the nature of the values whose realization would make lives good. John Kekes 1993 Websters New World Dictionary, 2nd ed, 1984: 1. Being plural, or existing in more than one part or form. 2. The existence within society of groups that differ ethnically, culturally etc. 3. The theory that reality is composed of a number of ultimate beings, principles or substances. There is a plurality of values which men can and do seek and these values differ. There is not an infinity of them: the number of human values is finite And the difference it makes is that if a man pursues one of these values, I, who do not, am able to understand why Isaiah Berlin 1998 The doctrine that any substantial question admits of a variety of plausible, but mutually conflicting responses. Nicholas Rescher 1993 the recognition that choice is valuable. Richard Wentzell 2003 [In pluralism] perspectives [are] co-ordered and not just coexisting Audrey Thompson Chapter 1 Principles of Pluralism Good is not a general term corresponding to a single idea. Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, 350 BCE The organizing principle that places all the bits and pieces into an integrated whole is the overarching concern with enhancing individual freedoms and the social commitment to help bring that about. That unity is important, but at the same time we cannot lose sight of the fact that freedom is inherently a diverse concept Amartya Sen 1999 The more the merrier. Common English saying The principles Pluralism refers to the co-existence of many values or other human traits in a society with the purpose of enabling individuals to pursue happiness (Box 1). It views the coexistence of differences in values as real, unavoidable and potentially useful and good. Although pluralism has its roots in a number of cultural and philosophical traditions around the world, it only emerged as a coherent and documented ethical doctrine in the 20th century (Box 2). According to this doctrine, no single set of values can make all people happy all the time. People are inherently different from each other, and even the same person can have different desires at different times and places. Having choices and being exposed to different values enriches people s lives. People should therefore help each other pursue happiness by making available the widest possible choice of values and organizing society to make those choices possible. 5 Though all things differ Box 2. The Origins of Pluralism The origins of pluralism can be found historically among religious and political thinkers around the globe, particularly with the rise of organized religions and democratic states. Many religious texts promote tolerance and social cohesion despite differences. The Qur an, for example, states Unto every one of you we have appointed a [different] law and way of life, and if Allah had so willed he could have surely made you all one community, but [he willed it otherwise] to test you. Vie then with one another to do good works! (5:48) and Oh mankind, surely we have created you from a male and female, and made you nations and tribes that you might know each other (49:13). The Bhagavad-Gita promises that the person who experiences the unity of life, sees his own self in all beings and all beings in his own self, and looks on everything with an impartial eye (VI, 29). And the Bible directs people to be tolerant with one another and forgiving (Colossians 3:13). Political philosophers trace the origins of the concept of pluralism to Aristotle in 350 BCE. In Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle wrote that the ultimate aim of life is for individuals to find happiness in living well and doing well. According to Aristotle, happiness depends on virtue (arete), and on how society makes choices that allow that happiness to occur. There are different ways of achieving virtue and organizing society to make that happiness possible. But not all ways are equally good. Aristotle suggested that choices about how to achieve happiness should be consistent with practical wisdom (phronesis), maintaining the viability of the social group, allowing reflection and the search for knowledge, achieving that which is noble or beautiful, and doing the right thing at the right time in the right amount. Aristotle thus tried to define a medium ground where people could achieve a balance in their pursuit of individual happiness with the benefits they gained from cooperation in society. Despite Aristotle s writings, before the 18th century (as in some societies today), the existence of a variety of opinions, religions or values was generally seen as a threat to the security of society. There was only one right way to do things. Elements of pluralism grew popular in the 1700s with the development of political concepts by David Hume, John Stuart Mill, Charles Montesquieu and others. As global trade and concerns about war and religious fanaticism increased in Europe, people began to believe that a society where many opinions existed and where people tolerated each others opinions was better than a society where everyone had to share a single belief. Variety was considered good for society. Voltaire wrote If there are a dozen caterers, each of whom has a different recipe, must we on that account cut each other s throats instead of dining? On the contrary every man will eat well in his fashion with the cook who pleases him best. These views were widely held. El Hadj Oumar ( ), a prominent Timbuktu scholar & leader, wrote Tragedy is due to divergence and because of lack of tolerance. Glory to who creates greatness from difference and makes peace and reconciliation. The term pluralism was introduced duri
Related Search
Similar documents
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks