Decentralization in the Kyrgyz Agricultural Sector
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Decentralization in the Kyrgyz agricultural sector. An institutional analysis Dissertation zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doctor rerum agriculturarum Eingereicht an der Lebenswissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin von M.Sc. Wibke Crewett Präsident der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Prof. Dr. Jan-Hendrik Olbertz Dekan der Lebenswissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin Prof. Dr. Richard Lucius Gutachter 1. Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Konrad Hagedorn 2. Jun.-Prof. Dr. Andrea Knierim Datum der mündlichen Prüfung: 25.01.2015 Contents Summary ...................................................................................................... ii Contents ...................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ...............................................................................................vii List of Figures ..............................................................................................ix Abbreviations ................................................................................................ i 1 Decentralization and agricultural service provision in post-socialist Kyrgyzstan: an institutional analysis ..................................................... 1 1.1 Decentralization, institutional change and agricultural services ..............1 1.2 Decentralization in post-Soviet environments. The example of Kyrgyzstan ..........................................................................................4 2 Exploring decentralization ................................................................... 12 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................... 12 2.2 Exploring decentralization – a study framework .................................. 12 2.2.1 Actors ........................................................................................... 14 2.2.2 Power ............................................................................................ 16 2.2.3 Accountability ............................................................................... 18 2.2.4 The literature on decentralization and agricultural services .............. 20 2.2.5 Laws and regulations on decentralization ........................................ 21 2.3 Governance reforms and decentralization ........................................... 24 2.3.1 Actors invo lved in decentralization ................................................. 30 2.3.2 Distribution of tasks and responsibilities as a result of decentralization.............................................................................. 35 2.3.3 Accountability relationships among the different actor groups ......... 50 2.4 Impact of decentralization on agricultural service provision in Kyrgyzstan ........................................................................................ 56 2.4.1 Agricultural reforms....................................................................... 57 2.4.2 Impact on agricultural service provision.......................................... 58 2.5 Summary of findings ......................................................................... 63 2.6 Conclusions and knowledge gaps ....................................................... 64 3 Decentralization of agricultural service provision ............................... 69 3.1 Kyrgyzstan – a case study for the decentralization of publicly provided agricultural services ............................................................. 69 3.2 The case studies ................................................................................. 70 3.2.1 Case study selection ....................................................................... 70 3.2.2 Socio-economic conditions............................................................. 72 3.2.3 Agricultural production patterns ..................................................... 73 3.2.4 Constraints on agricultural production ............................................ 75 3.3 Local governance............................................................................... 80 3.3.1 The municipality government ......................................................... 80 3.3.2 Local organizations and groups ...................................................... 80 3.3.3 Non-governmental Organizations ................................................... 85 3.4 Power resources................................................................................. 88 3.4.1 Land rights allocated to municipality residents ................................ 88 3.4.2 Munic ipality-level budgets ............................................................. 89 3.4.3 Municipality property..................................................................... 89 3.4.4 Land redistribution fund ................................................................. 92 3.4.5 Pasture .......................................................................................... 93 3.5 Accountability ................................................................................... 93 3.5.1 Local government – local state administration ................................. 93 3.5.2 Local government – donors ............................................................ 95 3.5.3 Local government – citizens ........................................................... 96 3.6 Decentralized service provision .......................................................... 97 3.6.1 The provision of agricultural services ............................................. 97 3.6.2 Formal rules versus local practice ................................................. 105 3.7 Service evaluation............................................................................ 106 3.8 Discussion and Conclusions ............................................................. 108 4 Improving the sustainability of pasture use in Kyrgyzstan. The impact of pasture governance reforms on livestock migration .......... 113 4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 113 4.2 The debate on migration................................................................... 114 4.3 Methods and case study selection ..................................................... 115 4.4 The first pasture reform approach: 1999-2009 ................................... 119 4.4.1 Working rules for pasture use and access since 2002 ..................... 119 4.4.2 The impact of administrative practices .......................................... 120 4.5 The second reform approach: community-based management............ 122 5 Introducing decentralized pasture governance in Kyrgyzstan. Designing implementation rules ......................................................... 124 5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 124 5.2 Theory and analytical framework ..................................................... 125 5.2.1 Levels of institutional analysis ...................................................... 125 5.2.2 Street-level bureaucrats as authorized decision maker.................... 127 5.3 Method and case study selection....................................................... 128 5.4 Exploring the multiple actor action situation for boundary rule design ............................................................................................. 131 5.4.1 Formal collective-choice boundary rules for Pasture Committee establishment in the new pasture law ............................................ 131 5.4.2 Collective choice working rules designed by municipality administrations ............................................................................ 131 5.4.3 The implementing agency as designer of collective-choice boundary rules ............................................................................. 136 5.5 Collective choice working rules – routines designed by the implementing agencies’ Community Development Support Officers.. 136 5.6 Drivers of institutional design .......................................................... 139 5.7 Discussion and conclusion ............................................................... 140 6 Street Level Bureaucrats at work. A municipality-level institutional analysis of community-based natural resource management implementation practice in the pasture sector of Kyrgyzstan ......................................................................................... 143 6.1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 143 6.2 Analytical framework ...................................................................... 145 6.3 Material and methods....................................................................... 148 6.4 Results ............................................................................................ 156 6.4.1 Formal rules for implementing a pasture management reform ........ 156 6.4.2 Governance structures and Street-level Bureaucrats at work .......... 162 6.4.3 Outcomes of the information campaign......................................... 166 6.4.4 Working rules for resource user mobilization ................................ 168 6.4.5 Determinants of working rule design ............................................ 171 6.5 Discussion and conclusions .............................................................. 172 7 Conclusions .......................................................................................