A tragedy of errors? Institutional dynamics and land tenure in Finnmark, Norway

Abstract

Abstract:Reindeer herding in Finnmark has been widely perceived during the last few decades as a perfect example of the tragedy of the commons. The present article claims that this discourse relies on flawed assumption regarding land tenure. Our historical analysis of the term 'common' in relation to resources in Finnmark shows the term to reflect a misunderstanding of local categories, practices, and concerns related to pastures, territories, and natural resources more generally. In this sense, it exposes a case of 'mistaken identity' between the formal legal conception of 'commons' and the customary rules and thinking of reindeer herders. We turn to different strands of critical institutionalism to analyse the processes of institutional change that have allowed these errors and misunderstandings to be formalised and naturalised in the current governance system. We show that a process of institutional bargaining between the Norwegian Parliament, the Sámi Parliament, and the International Labour Organisation has recently re-enforced an alien conception of a 'commons' to which ambiguous groups of people have equivocal rights. In parallel, a process of institutional layering of new regulatory actors and rules on top of existing ones has taken place. This regulatory ratcheting has resulted in the blurring of the authorities and jurisdictions intrinsic in the customary tenure system. Moreover, the new layers of regulations have actively overemphasized the Sámi customary obligation of sharing resources to legitimize 1 The "Results" section of the present article is developed from our book chapter "Er Finnmarksvidda en allmenning?" forthcoming in Norwegian in Benjaminsen et al. (2015). 20Andrei Marin and Ivar Bjørklund the new, ambiguous, conception of commons. This process is explained as one of institutional bricolage based on naturalisation by analogy and authority processes that allow certain powerful actors to influence the production of institutional arrangements favourable to them. All three processes underline the negotiated, dynamic nature of institutional change. We propose this integrative analysis of institutional and general social dynamics is beneficial in studying commons as everyday practices affecting natural resource governance.

Furthering critical institutionalism

“…As De Koning (2011), adapting Levi-Strauss, suggests; the bricoleur might make a lampshade out of an umbrella stand but the same umbrella stand cannot be made into a space shuttle. The layering of these arrangements over time, changes in policy environments and in political and social discourses also ensure that the mechanisms that form institutions can be pieced together from a variety of sources (Sehring 2009;Marin and Bjorkland 2015). Institutions so formed are therefore a patchwork of the new and second hand and they include: habitual ways of doing things; well-worn practices adapted to new conditions; organisational arrangements invented or borrowed from elsewhere.…”

“…It can be difficult to capture the dynamic nature of institutional evolution and functioning without in-depth longitudinal studies. Papers in this volume show the need for understanding the varying logics and intensity of different strands of governance arrangements operating concurrently (Ingram et al 2015;Marin and Bjorkland 2015) and the need to study different modes of governance using one framework (Jones 2015).…”

Cultural group selection and the evolution of reindeer herding in Norway

“…The Reindeer Husbandry Law of 1933 opened for a district division in the North. Finnmark county was, however, divided not only into district but also into parishes (Norwegian: 'reinsogn', Marin and Bjørklund 2015). In 1934 the County Governor in Finnmark finalised the distribution of pastures through e.g.…”

“…Territorial expansion of one siida will often be considered as trespassing by other siidas (Marin and Bjørklund 2015). This again might sever relations with neighbouring siidas and bring about sanctions, spanning from withholding information to slaughtering of the most valuable females (Riseth and Vatn 2009, see also Paine 2009).…”

“…At the same time, herders accept that "lucky" reindeer owners experiencing increased herd size need larger pastures. This is, however, constrained by an important caveat: expansion should not take place at the expense of the original users (Marin and Bjørklund 2015). With the designation of winter pastures as "commons", accusations of encroachment became prevalent (Marin and Bjørklund 2015).…”