A Typology of Benefit Sharing Arrangements for the Governance of Social-Ecological Systems in Developing Countries

Nkhata, Bimo Abraham; Mosimane, Alfons W.; Downsborough, Linda; Breen, C. M.; Roux, Dirk J.

doi:10.5751/es-04662-170117

Cited by 38 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This also shows the challenge related to typologies of benefit sharing, that is, of assigning the benefit sharing arrangements to one or another type of benefit sharing. For example, following the typology suggested by Nkhata et al [18] would signal that most of the benefit sharing arrangements in complex socio-ecological systems would display characteristics from all of the three-co-management, market-oriented, and egalitarian-types of benefit sharing. This is while the varying emphasis on the environmental aspect of natural resources is largely considered as given.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Along similar lines of argument, Sadoff and Grey [11] state that among the advantages of the benefit sharing approach is that benefits from cooperation can be not only economic but also environmental, social, and political. From governance perspective, Nkhata et al [18] propose to distinguish among the following three types of benefit sharing: (a) co-management, where focus is on the relationships between state actors and local communities in the allocation of benefits from ecosystem services; (b) market-oriented, which uses economic instruments and involves voluntary exchange of mutually beneficial favors; and (c) egalitarian that focuses on making the sharing equitable. The typologies show how benefit sharing can be framed with differing emphasis.…”

Section: Many Faces Of Benefit Sharingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reframing the debate from competing interests and conflict into benefit sharing and cooperation has been increasingly suggested within various contexts of environmental governance (e.g., [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]). reiterating the complexity of the larger scale natural resource management systems, and highlighting diversity within and co-existence of conflict and cooperation [34][35][36][37][38][39].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Reframing for Sustainability: Exploring Transformative Power of Benefit Sharing

Soliev

Theesfeld

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is broadly agreed that development needs and effects from changing environment will increase pressure on the ways natural resources are utilized and shared at present. In most parts of the world, resource stress has already reached unprecedented levels setting resource sustainability high on the policy agenda on multiple governance levels. This paper aims to explain how the benefit sharing approach can help reframe the debate for sustainability, its advantages and disadvantages for transforming governance challenges and adapting to increasing resource stress. We bring together fragmented discussions of benefit sharing from three resource domains: water, land, and biodiversity. Both theoretical and empirical examples are provided to aid understanding of how benefit sharing can facilitate adaptive governance processes in complex socio-ecological systems. The findings highlight importance of integrating the long-term perspective when societies move from volumes toward values of shared natural resources, as well as setting environmental conservation and equitable allocation as the top priority for benefit sharing to be sustainable.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Many Faces Of Benefit Sharingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reframing for Sustainability: Exploring Transformative Power of Benefit Sharing

Soliev

Theesfeld

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Behaviours are indicative of how users perceive equity and sustainability as they realise what and how much they stand to benefit, or not, from the allocation and distribution of benefits. As demands for benefits grow, benefit sharing is increasingly characterised by complex trade-offs among beneficiaries (Rodríguez et al 2006;Nkhata et al 2012). As pressures grow and competition between potential beneficiaries intensifies, it is common for users to challenge the rules and decisions that underpin benefit sharing schemes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meanings and robustness: Propositions for enhancing benefit sharing in social-ecological systems

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given increased pressure on natural resources to deliver benefits, complex trade-offs and the regulation of behaviours in relation to benefits is of key concern. Behaviours that signify resistance to the rules according to which benefits are allocated prompt us to consider causal links and feedbacks between benefits, perceptions of benefits, meanings attached to the benefits, and the regulatory instruments that mediate the distribution of benefits. An understanding of how meanings influence the perception of benefits exposes the complexity inherent in how people perceive and allocate value to natural resource benefits. Meanings are personal, sometimes overlapping, context dependent and variable across space and time. A challenge in directing resource user behaviour in common pool resources is that the relationship between the resource and resource use is typically not interpreted to include the manner in which users associate resource benefits with meanings. We propose that collective ordering of meanings and associated rules help to direct behaviours and in doing so they contribute to the purposeful maintenance of desirable elements of a social-ecological system (i.e. robustness). Using an example, we illustrate how tensions around benefit sharing are rooted in the emergence and changing prioritisation of contexts and meanings over time. The importance of eliciting, ordering and sanctioning of meanings Meanings and robustness: Propositions for enhancing benefit sharing 577 is emphasised. We conclude by discussing the implications for robustness and benefit sharing in social-ecological systems and we comment on the usefulness and limitations of the framework.

show abstract

“…The introduction of the theme of benefit sharing in discussions around partnerships has led to research efforts aimed at exploring ways to promote and assess progress towards effective benefit sharing (Farley & Costanza, 2010;Howard, 2010;Nkhata et al, 2012), particularly in state owned protected areas. These efforts have incorporated analyses of broader aspects of benefit 10.2305/IUCN.CH.2013.PARKS-19-1.VRN.en sharing initiatives such as social and human development goals, recognition of social justice and the uniqueness of each country's indigenous culture, and acknowledgment of the limits imposed by natural resource management (Gruber, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaborative governance and benefit sharing in Liuwa Plain National Park, western Zambia

Nyirenda

Nkhata²

2013

PARKS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several models of public private partnerships have emerged focusing on wealth creation from high value resources, risk distribution through cost and benefit sharing, and prevention of loss of biodiversity through collaboration among members of the public and private sectors and local communities. However, there remain many information gaps underlying their social-ecological system performance. A case study of Liuwa Plain National Park (3,660 km 2 ), western Zambia, to demonstrate the relationship between social capital and operational management by multiple partners between 2004 and 2011 was carried out. Literature review, expert knowledge and interviews of 57 informants with historical perspectives of the area were employed. We determined that social-economic-ecological gains and benefit distribution were influenced by the capacity of partners to negotiate collective interests. Intra and inter-partnership networking, social learning and differential capacity were also important factors.

show abstract

A Typology of Benefit Sharing Arrangements for the Governance of Social-Ecological Systems in Developing Countries

Cited by 38 publications

References 35 publications

Reframing for Sustainability: Exploring Transformative Power of Benefit Sharing

Reframing for Sustainability: Exploring Transformative Power of Benefit Sharing

Meanings and robustness: Propositions for enhancing benefit sharing in social-ecological systems

Collaborative governance and benefit sharing in Liuwa Plain National Park, western Zambia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About