The University of Leipzig
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
INSTITUTIONAL DILEMMAS IN TROPICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT A CASE STUDY OF KAKAMEGA FOREST, KENYA Der Fakultät für Geschichte, Kunst- und Orientwissenschaften der Universität Leipzig eingereichte DISSERTATION zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades DOCTOR PHILOSOPHIAE (Dr. phil.) vorgelegt von FREDRICK KISEKKA–NTALE geboren am 27. Juli 1976 in Mengo, Uganda Gutachter: Prof. Dr. Ulf Engel Prof. Dr. Robert Kappel Prof. Dr. Siegmar Schmidt Tag der Verteidgung: den 22. Januar 2008 Abstract The study examines the institutional dilemmas in the management of tropical resources. Specifically, this study is interested in forest biodiversity as the resource in question. The main objective of this study is to establish and ascertain whether there are conflicting notions of biodiversity in Kenya and if there are, we are interested in finding out how such conflicting positions are institutionalised. In pursuit of the above objective, the study uses a case study of Kakamega forest. The study primarily used institutional mapping methods in generating and collecting data at the national and regional and local levels. The findings reveal that forest biodiversity in a tropical country like Kenya is associated with a number of benefits and these are central in the framing and/or shaping of the institutions at both the national, regional and local levels. Because these are structurally different, in most cases they represent the cause of institutional conflict. What is most intriguing however, is that the Kakamega scenario demonstrates that one of the biggest challenges in the management of tropical resources lies in the absence of institutional mediation mechanisms at both national/regional and local levels. The analysis from this study has revealed that this is the central cause of institutional dysfunctioning in tropical resource management. This also illuminates the dilemmas that bedevil many natural resource rich countries especially in the tropics. In that regard, institutional options especially those targeting forest biodiversity management should be locally adapted and therefore centrally/regionally mediated, because of the role local forest resources play in the lives of local communities around the forest. In the same respect institutionalised participation and mediation in the decision-making/taking is a necessary prerequisite. II Dedication This work is dedicated it to my dear Mother. Your advice has been a great inspiration to me. III Table of Contents LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................................VI ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ................................................................................................................................VIII 1 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM STATEMENT ................................................. 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 INTERNATIONAL CONTEXT OF INSTITUTIONALISM, BIODIVERSITY AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION ........ 3 1.3 A BRIEF OVERVIEW ABOUT KENYA ........................................................................................................... 5 1.4 PROBLEM STATEMENT............................................................................................................................ 12 1.5 OBJECTIVES OF STUDY.......................................................................................................................... 13 1.6 DEFINITION OF CENTRAL CONCEPTS ...................................................................................................... 14 1.7 BIODIVERSITY: AN INSIGHT INTO THE CONTEMPORARY DEBATES AND NOTIONS................................. 16 1.8 METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................................................... 25 1.9 ORGANISATION OF THE STUDY............................................................................................................... 29 2 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS.................................................................................................... 31 2.1 INSTITUTIONS AND INSTITUTIONALISM .................................................................................................... 31 2.2 INSTITUTIONS DEFINED........................................................................................................................... 31 2.3 UNPACKING INSTITUTIONALISM .............................................................................................................. 35 3 PERCEIVING BIODIVERSITY AND NATURAL RESOURCE REGIMES IN KENYA .................. 52 3.1 BIODIVERSITY AS NARURAL RESOURCE CAPITAL........................................................................... 52 3.2 AN ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL RESOURCES REGIMES IN KENYA .............................................................. 60 3.3 BIODIVERSITY GOVERNANCE: BETWEEN RESTORATION AND PRESERVATION ..................................... 61 3.4 RESOURCE ACTORS, AND LOCAL PERSPECTIVES ON BIODIVERSITY IN KENYA ..................................... 68 4 BIODIVERSITY, LOCAL DECENTRALISATION AND THE POLITICS OF NEO- PATRIMONIALISM IN KENYA................................................................................................................... 73 4.1 BIODIVERSITY AND THE POLITICS OF NEO-PATRIMONIALISM IN KENYA................................................. 73 4.2 INSTITUTIONALISM, LOCAL DECENTRALISATION AND BIODIVERSITY RESOURCE USAGE IN KAKAMEGA .81 4.3 INSTITUTIONALISM AND BIOETHICS IN BIODIVERSITY RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ............................... 87 4.4 MAPPING AN INSTITUTIONALIST, SOCIAL COGNITIVE-DIMENSION FOR BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT IN KENYA ..................................................................................................................................................... 92 5 NATIONAL AND SUB-NATIONAL LEVEL MAPPING...................................................................... 98 5.1 INSTITUTIONAL MAPPING OF THE BIODIVERSITY SECTOR IN KENYA ..................................................... 98 5.2 BIODIVERSITY IN THE KENYAN CONSTITUTION..................................................................................... 100 5.3 THE OWNERSHIP AND USAGE OF BIODIVERSITY IN THE KENYAN CONTEXT ....................................... 102 5.4 EVOLUTION OF LEGAL REGIMES AND LEGAL REFORMS RELATING TO BIODIVERSITY........................ 106 5.5 CURRENT LEGAL AND POLICY REGIMES IN CONSERVATION OF BIODIVERSITY .................................. 110 5.6 FORMAL RULE DESIGN AND MEDIATION: BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL INTERESTS ............. 119 5.7 THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL INTERESTS IN BIODIVERSITY RESTORATION IN KENYA ...................... 121 5.8 BIODIVERSITY AND INSTITUTIONAL REFORMS IN KENYA: A SHIFT TOWARDS A DEMAND RESPONSIVE APPROACH?............................................................................................................... 124 6 INSTITUTIONAL MAPPING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL..................................................................... 126 6.1 SAMPLE SIZE DETERMINATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF CLUSTERS .................................................... 126 6.2 LOCAL PERCEPTIONS OF BIODIVERSITY IN KAKAMEGA........................................................................ 130 6.3 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE OF KAKAMEGA DISTRICT AND WESTERN KENYA ..................................... 136 6.4 BIODIVERSITY AND RESOURCE USAGE IN KAKAMEGA FOREST .......................................................... 138 6.5 THE PEOPLE OF KAKAMEGA ................................................................................................................. 140 6.6 LOCAL INSTITUTIONS AND FARMING SYSTEMS IN KAKAMEGA DISTRICT ............................................. 144 6.7 LOCAL KNOWLEDGE AND BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION: THE INTERFACE............................................ 150 7 HISTORICAL AND SOCIOLOGICAL INSTITUTIONS IN KAKAMEGA DISTRICT.................... 155 7.1 INSTITUTIONALISM AND CUSTOMARY LAW ........................................................................................... 155 7.2 LOCAL ECOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE AND LOCAL PERCEPTION OF NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY LAWS ........ 161 7.3 FOREST BIODIVERSITY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE IN KAKAMEGA ........................................................ 164 IV 7.4 COLLECTIVE COMMUNITY ACTION AND BIODIVERSITY IN KAKAMEGA................................................... 169 7.5 BIODIVERSITY AND PROPERTY RIGHTS IN KAKAMEGA.......................................................................... 171 8 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................... 177 8.1 RECAP OF FINDINGS: LINKING RESEARCH QUESTIONS TO STUDY FINDINGS ....................................... 177 8.2 TOWARDS INSTITUTIONALISED PARTICIPATION AND LOCAL RESOURCE GOVERNANCE IN KAKAMEGA 182 8.3 RE-VISITING AND RE-CONCEPTUALIZING INSTITUTIONALISM AND PARTICIPATION IN KAKAMEGA ...... 184 8.4 INSTITUTIONALISM AND PARTICIPATION IN KAKAMEGA: AN OUT LOOK TO FUTURE............................. 188 8.5 SUMMARY.............................................................................................................................................. 197 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................