MANAGING COMMON RESOURCES IN LOCAL AND GLOBAL SYSTEMS applying theory across scales edited by Sylvia Karlsson FORBGXSAlgSJSSSwb* OST/ Research Report No. 9 from EPOS Environmental Policy and Society Linkoping University < Managing common resources in local and global systems Applying theoryacross scales Edited by Sylvia Karlsson Research Report No. 9 fromEPOS, Research Programme on Environmental Policy and Society Institute of Tema Research, Linkoping University ISSN 1104-4403 ISBN 91-7871-988-7 © 1997 the authors, EPOS and the Department of Water and Environmental Studies, Linkoping University Layout and typesetting: TiiaRiitta Granfelt Printed in Sweden by Motala Grafiska, Motala, 1997 DISCLAIMER Portions of this document may be illegible in electronic image products. Images are produced from the best available original document. CONTENTS Preface v Introduction: 1 Managing common resources in local and global systems: Applying theory across scales Sylvia Karlsson Thou should not know too much... 13 When lack of information promotes co-operative behaviour: The case of oil fields in Wyoming, Oklahoma and Texas Bjorn Hassler Three different CPR management models for 33 riverine nitrogen polluters in Sweden Berit Arheimer Recycling of sewage in Swedish municipalities: 52 Policy implications Henriette Soderberg Bridge over troubled waters? 65 The state-NGO interface in governing urban environments Hakan Tropp Forest management in India: Local vs. state control 97 of forest resources Julie Wilk Protecting International Commons: 110 Brief comments on current attempts at establishing new international institutions on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) Henrik Selin The global commons and United Nations reform 132 Sylvia Karlsson PREFACE The idea to this publication came up during a course in Common Prop ­ erty Resource Management for PhD students at the Department of Water and Environmental Studies, Institute of Tema Research, Linkoping Uni­ versity, Sweden, in the spring of 1996. Essays written during the course covered a broad range of different common resources and represented approaches from research students with backgrounds in disciplines as varied as political science, natural geography, ecology and hydrology. However, despite the diversity of focus and empirical entry points, the seminar discussions and contents of the essays brought up several com ­ mon aspects that we felt would contribute to the development of possi ­ ble further research topics in the area of common property resource management. In this respect, we feel it would be appropriate to share these with a larger audience. The above course participants all had extensive experience in inter­ disciplinary communication and exchange since that is what character­ ises their department. This fact yielded particularly fruitful results when we started digging into the theoretical and empirical aspects of man­ agement of common property resources. The seminar discussions were intensive, basic concepts were widened in scope or challenged and new ones tested. We realise that the angles and ideas reflected in the essays to follow afford more questions than answers but this is a crucial part of the research process. The introduction is intended to bring forward some of the key con ­ cepts raised in the essays, furthermore, it includes some of the points that came up in the seminars that preceded the writing of the essays. These discussions constituted the intellectual framework for individual contributions to the publication and will hopefully aid the reader to find the main threads of the ideas presented. For taking the initiative to and organising the course, for taking part in the review process and for continuous encouragement to proceed with this publication, thanks are due to Professor Anders Hjort af Omas. This publication came into existence in cooperation with the Depart­ ment of Water and Environmental Studies, and with support from the research network Environmental Policy and Society, which is gratefully acknowledged. Sylvia Karlsson Linkoping, April 1997 INTRODUCTION MANAGING COMMON RESOURCES IN LOCAL AND GLOBAL SYSTEMS APPLYING THEORY ACROSS SCALES Sylvia Karlsson Introduction The main point brought forward in this publication is the productive ­ ness of applying theoretical elements, developed within common prop ­ erty resource (CPR) literature, to a broader field of cases on different scales. The common framework for the contributions is a series of semi­ nars held at the Department of Water and Environmental Studies in the spring of 1996, covering expanding work during the last decade on com ­ mon property resource (CPR) management 1. It is obvious that there were a broad range of definitions of the concept CPR in the literature. The common pool / property 2 resource concepts are both used, often depend ­ ing on the resource studied, and authors in this volume have used both terms accordingly. The term common resources as a common denomina ­ tor for a resource which is or could be managed as common property will be used in this introductorychapter. Certain points are raised from empirical cases presented in this vol ­ ume that are partly missing or not thoroughly stressed in other work in the area of CPR management and which crystallised much clearer when contrasting the situation for cases from different scales. Issues of scale and generalisation Common resources around the globe Common resources are generally seen to include all cases where a re­ source is not under the exclusive ownership of either one private actor or the state, and where one actor's individual rational decision may 1 Managing Common Resources in Local and Global Systems lead to suboptimal collective outcomes. However, cases where the re­ source is formally owned by one actor e.g. the state, but user rights and management responsibilities are given to at least two appropriators are also included in the definition. The concept of CPR is used mostly for situations where there is some form of joint management of a local re­ source. The global commons are referred to as those areas that fall out ­ side the jurisdiction of any one state and as those resources which by their very nature transcend state boundaries and over which it is im­ possible to hold physical control. The first three essays are located in the industrialised world. Hassler starts theempirical journey with decision-making dilemmas for hold ­ ers of drilling rights to privately owned oil-wells in the American states of Wyoming, Oklahoma and Texas. The physical characteristics of the resource are such that collectively inefficient resource utilisation results when there are no possibilities to make enforceable controls between individual right holders. Focusing on the decision-making process, Hassler deliberates the favourable role that lack of information may have under certain conditions. In the second essay Arheimer discusses the management of water resources at national and regional level in Sweden where the ten year political goal of reducing the amount of nitrogen transported by rivers to the Baltic Sea by 50 per cent has failed. In her comparative analysis of three proposed models for water management, Arheimer approaches the problem of riverine nitrogen from the CPR perspective, since the issue has the necessary characteristics of undefined property rights and possibility for inefficient levels of cooperation. She argues for the crea­ tion of regional water administration boards in every river catchment with decentralised choices of locally adapted models of management in each sub-basin. The industrialised world is still the centre of attention in the third contribution. Soderberg approaches the case of sewage management in Swedish municipalities from an institutional perspective. In several municipalities in Sweden, for example on the island community of Gotland, policy makers are starting to change their view of sewage as a problem to be discarded, to one where it is considered that sewage con ­ tains enough valuable resources to motivate recycling. Soderberg dis ­ cusses what such a fundamental change of view entails in terms of new institutional set-ups; changes of techniques to locally specific solutions, decision making transfer from experts to politicians and revolutionary instead of reformatory process strategies. Focus is switched to the developing countries in the fourth essay where Tropp explores the efforts of NGOs to collaborate with the state 2 Introduction to manage the polluted waterways of thecity of Madras, India. View­ ing urban environment as a common resource, he analyses its manage ­ ment from the normative call for good governance. When arguing that lack of proper governance structures is one reason for theinability to deal with environmental problems, a proposed solution is often to form a partnership between the state, thelocal NGO sector and communi ­ ties. This may face considerable difficulties in the case of Madras due to the self-interest of the ruling elite where, inter alia, vested interest and lack of transparency diminish both the capacity and legitimacy of the state to govern. In the fifth contribution the context is still India, this time regarding the diminishing forests, the focus of Wilk's paper. In response to the loss of forest cover the Indian government has changed its forestry management strategy which now includes the right of local populations to participate. Wilk claims that measures taken so far will prove insuf ­ ficient to create real participation of local