The Economics of Desertification, Land Degradation, and Drought

More documents

Recommendations

Info

promotion of community forest management by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and international organizations (FAO 2011). As expected, however, performance of local communities in effectively managing natural resources depends on a variety of factors, and poor human capacity remains a key challenge. Hence, one condition for successful community resource management is organizational supply, which is determined by the presence of community members or organizations with substantial leadership or other assets (Ostrom 1990). A study in Uganda, for example, showed that communities with government programs or NGOs dealing with agriculture and the environment in communities had a higher propensity to enact bylaws on natural resource management (Nkonya, Pender and Kato 2008) The same study observed significantly higher compliance with laws and regulations enacted by local councils, as compared with those enacted by legislative bodies higher than the local council (Nkonya, Pender and Kato 2008). These findings further demonstrate the importance of local-level organizations in reducing enforcement costs and increasing sustainability. Nonetheless, land degradation cannot be changed by participatory approaches and community action alone; public investment in infrastructure and other policies that support land management are also needed (Koning and Smaling 2005). Government policies and institutions also play a big role in determining the effectiveness of local community institutions. The major policies have been discussed earlier. In this section, we show the role those policies play in fostering local institutions. Policies that foster and build capacity of local government generally enhance the effectiveness of local institutions. Decentralization, in particular, is key to achieving this goal. A study covering four African countries compared the number of bylaws related to natural resource management and observed a clear relationship between number of bylaws enacted and the effectiveness of decentralization (Ndegwa and Levy 2004) (see Figure 4.3). Figure 4.3—Effect of national-level decentralization policy on enactment of land and water management regulations Sources: Overall decentralization from Ndegwa and Levy 2004; SLWM bylaws from World Bank 2010. Notes: SLWM: sustainable land and water management. Overall decentralization includes 12 performance and structural indicators of decentralization. The larger the index, the greater the performance of decentralization. Horizontal and vertical linkages and cooperation foster strong and well-functioning institutions (Berkes 2002) (Figure 4.3). Horizontal linkage entails cooperation among institutions working at comparable levels of organization. For example, at the community level, there are formal and informal institutions that operate at village level, such as local government councils, religious organizations, and custom institutions and projects. As discussed earlier, the effectiveness of these institutions depends on their capacity to enact and enforce a set of regulations that define their organization. Institutions that are well networked horizontally tend to be more effective. 88 .
For local community institutions to work even more effectively, they need to have strong vertical linkages in order to provide the required support for capacity building, legal mandates, and financial resources. Past literature on institutions has emphasized the great advantage of nurturing local institutions to have the right to organize (see, for example, Ostrom 1990). This implies that national level institutions would establish an act that gives mandates and power to local and customary institutions to enact and enforce their own bylaws, which are fully recognized by the upper administrative organization. If such a mandate is missing, development of local institutions will be elusive. Linkage with NGOs supporting community-level institutions is also crucial to build the capacity to organize and take collective action. Figure 4.4 depicts how vertical and horizontal linkages connect institutions at different governmental levels. Figure 4.4—Institutional structure with horizontal and vertical linkages Source: Author’s creation. Key to the vertical linkage is the need for the higher institutions to foster a bottom-up approach that will increase the capacity of local institutions to manage lands and to operate on a longterm basis. The bottom-up, community-based natural resource management approach has largely become a panacea to the old poor performance of the centrally, top-down managed natural resource management programs (Berkes 2007). However, an improved top-down approach is required to ensure that ideas from the upper institutions are presented and accepted by lower-level institutions. For example, Qamar (2005) suggested that resource-poor farmers may not demand labor-intensive land management practices with long-term payoffs, such as soil conservation terraces or tree planting. In such cases, there is a need to provide supply-driven extension services, or the national-level government may need to work harder to convince communities to invest in tree planting or to invest in land improvement that they would otherwise not. Likewise, implementation of the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness may also require some prodding and persuasion from developed countries, since poor countries may not see the need for investing in development programs that have long-term payoffs. In such an environment, negotiations have to be made to convince countries or communities to invest in land improvement rather than in investments with immediate payoffs (see Box 4.4). 89
Page 1 and 2:
IFPRI Discussion Paper 01086 May 20
Page 3 and 4:
Contents Abstract vii Acknowledgmen
Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures 1.1—Conceptual fr
Page 7 and 8:
ABSTRACT Attention to land degradat
Page 9 and 10:
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADB Asia
Page 11:
SCAR Soil Conservation in Agricultu
Page 14 and 15:
In the present report, the conceptu
Page 16 and 17:
Framework: Confronting Action versu
Page 18 and 19:
understand these arrangements in or
Page 20 and 21:
Figure 1.3—Prevention, mitigation
Page 22 and 23:
on assessments at the micro level (
Page 24 and 25:
does not clearly distinguish betwee
Page 26 and 27:
Figure 2.1—GLASOD (1991) global a
Page 28 and 29:
International Earth Science Informa
Page 30 and 31:
Box 2.1—Continued Normalized Diff
Page 32 and 33:
Figure 2.4—Loss of annual NPP, GL
Page 34 and 35:
Figure 2.7—Annual loss of NPP in
Page 36 and 37:
Table 2.2—Nitrogen application ra
Page 38 and 39:
Figure 2.12—Areas affected by hum
Page 40 and 41:
output—which is a selection of su
Page 42 and 43:
GLADIS also underlines the linkage
Page 44 and 45:
Box 2.2—Continued A map on global
Page 46 and 47:
Table 2.3—Global land degradation
Page 48 and 49:
Table 2.3—Continued Project and d
Page 50 and 51: Table 2.4—Continued Location 10 2
Page 52 and 53: Table 2.6—Extent and severity of
Page 54 and 55: National Level Policies As discusse
Page 56 and 57: Such support has also been directed
Page 58 and 59: Migration, either as outmigration o
Page 60 and 61: The preceding discussion shows the
Page 62 and 63: Results Correlation Analysis Consis
Page 64 and 65: Figure 2.23—Relationship between
Page 66 and 67: Effects of Land Degradation On-Site
Page 68 and 69: soils and higher land productivity.
Page 70 and 71: Acknowledging the work of GLADIS, a
Page 72 and 73: health, education, security, enviro
Page 74 and 75: Box 3.1—Recent major economic ass
Page 76 and 77: An appropriate economic tool for a
Page 78 and 79: Figure 3.4—Cost of action and cos
Page 80 and 81: enefit—for example, income. This
Page 82 and 83: Figure 3.6—Ecosystem services fra
Page 84 and 85: Replacement Cost Approaches The rep
Page 86 and 87: Box 3.2—Measuring land degradatio
Page 88 and 89: land degradation and conservation m
Page 90 and 91: Flooding and Aquifer Recharge Richa
Page 92 and 93: year (Diao and Sarpong 2007). Sonne
Page 94 and 95: Bringing together the different cos
Page 96 and 97: This section discusses the most imp
Page 98 and 99: governing land use patterns (Leeman
Page 102 and 103: Box 4.3—Reducing emissions from d
Page 104 and 105: Soil Nutrient Depletion Soil nutrie
Page 106 and 107: that the yields of salt-tolerant wh
Page 108 and 109: Figure 5.3—Forest area as a perce
Page 110 and 111: Figure 5.5—Per capita water stora
Page 112 and 113: Introduction 6. CASE STUDIES Five c
Page 114 and 115: Salinity The effects of salinity on
Page 116 and 117: Third, to correctly decide which ac
Page 118 and 119: Costs of Action and Inaction We eva
Page 120 and 121: The NGOs and religious organization
Page 122 and 123: have a strong influence on NRM (And
Page 124 and 125: We estimated the cost of action (de
Page 126 and 127: Figure 6.15—Costs of action and i
Page 128 and 129: Of interest to us is the strategy t
Page 130 and 131: 7. PARTNERSHIP CONCEPT The review o
Page 132 and 133: degradation. All this should be don
Page 134 and 135: Finally, the global assessment of D
Page 136 and 137: the experience of and lessons learn
Page 138 and 139: Table 7.3—Example of E-DLDD resea
Page 140 and 141: 8. CONCLUSIONS Since the publicatio
Page 142 and 143: lowest in the region. From a socioe
Page 144 and 145: Table A.1—Land degradation assess
Page 146 and 147: Table A.2—Continued Author Region
Page 148 and 149: Table A.3—Continued Author Countr
Page 150 and 151:
Table A.3—Continued Author Countr
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Table A.5—Costs of land degradati
Page 158 and 159:
Figure B.1—Land use systems of th
Page 160 and 161:
REFERENCES Abelson, P. 1979. Cost B
Page 162 and 163:
Benin S., E. Nkonya, G. Okecho, J.
Page 164 and 165:
Clark, E. H. 1985. The Off-Site Cos
Page 166 and 167:
De Jager a., D. Onduru and C. Walag
Page 168 and 169:
Foster, V., and C. Briceño-Garmend
Page 170 and 171:
Holden, S. and H. Lofgren. 2005. As
Page 172 and 173:
Lapar, M. L., and S. Pandey. 1999.
Page 174 and 175:
Nachtergaele, F., M. Petri, R. Bian
Page 176 and 177:
Pender, J. L. 2009. “Food Crisis
Page 178 and 179:
Sauer, J., and H. Tchale. 2006. Alt
Page 180 and 181:
Tan, Z. X., R. Lal, and K. D. Wiebe
Page 182 and 183:
———. 2010. “Assessment of L
Page 187 and 188:
RECENT IFPRI DISCUSSION PAPERS For
show all

The Economics of Desertification, Land Degradation, and Drought

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?