首页> 外文学位 >Co-management and Community-Based Organizations: Issues of Participation, Capacity Building, and Sustainability of Local Institutions in Fisheries Systems of Bangladesh.
【24h】

Co-management and Community-Based Organizations: Issues of Participation, Capacity Building, and Sustainability of Local Institutions in Fisheries Systems of Bangladesh.

机译:共同管理和基于社区的组织:孟加拉国渔业系统中地方机构的参与,能力建设和可持续性问题。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Co-management is a governance approach that emphasizes sharing of decision-making power and authority between communities and state agencies. Over the past decades, this approach has been applied to the management of various types of common pool resources including fisheries. However, several challenges remain to be analyzed, particularly in the fisheries sector, to strengthen co-management as a balanced governance approach that promotes community empowerment and government efficiency. This study attempts to evaluate the results from the implementation of fisheries co-management projects in Bangladesh, with particular attention to the development and sustainability of local forums, commonly known as Community-Based Organizations (CBOs). Furthermore, the study investigates six cases from three different wetland areas of Southern Bangladesh including floodplains, Ox-bow lakes (locally called Baors), and rivers. The main objectives and key research questions surround (i) institutional structure and process, (ii) community participation in CBOs, and (iii) capacity-building approaches used in the co-management of fisheries. A set of qualitative and participatory research approaches and methods were used over a period of 18 months to gather data in the field and office. Interviews were held with those involved in the co-management processes, including local participants, such as fishers, and external stakeholders, such as officials. In total, 111 respondents were included in data collection processes. Additionally, seven focus group discussions were conducted at the local level, and two at the official levels (both district and central levels). Findings from the research indicate that the establishment of local organizations was a key element across all six co-management sites. The local institutions, however, were not well supported in the process, especially after the completion of the project implementation period, due to their weak institutional base, and financial and institutional capacity constraints. In most cases, formal rights to manage designated fisheries areas were not established even though co-management programs were in force for well over a decade. Linkages with external authorities, which are fundamental to harness resources and funding, were found to be weak. The co-management sites also suffered from lower participation of poor fishers and women in leading organizational positions at local levels. Co-management could not influence the rigid power structures in the local communities, as local elites captured and dominated the CBO. Training for human resource development was not linked to the real needs of participants, and thus was not useful. In many cases, the local institutions were incapable of protecting local fish stocks. Livelihood returns from fishing were also unsatisfactory, leading to reduced participation of fishers in the activity of the CBOs. Moreover, corruption marred the CBOs, and ultimately their success. Given this experience, sustainability of co-management remains a challenge for fisheries systems, which places the CBO at higher risk of collapse, especially when external project support (i.e., funding and technical) from governments, or donors are discontinued. This research suggests that a strong institutional base with a small infusion of funds is needed to offer continuity to these local CBO forums, which may have bigger impacts on fisheries management and livelihoods in rural areas. A conclusion can be made that CBOs should be considered in a broader development context, and that a project-based approach may not help sustain this type of grassroots process of institutional building.;Key words: Co-management, CBOs, fisheries, leadership, institutions, members, organization, and participations..
机译:共同管理是一种治理方法,强调社区与国家机构之间共享决策权和权威。在过去的几十年中,此方法已应用于各种类型的公共资源池的管理,包括渔业。但是,仍然需要分析一些挑战,特别是在渔业部门,以加强共同管理,以一种平衡的治理方法来促进社区赋权和政府效率的提高。这项研究试图评估孟加拉国实施渔业共同管理项目的结果,特别关注当地论坛(通常称为社区组织)的发展和可持续性。此外,该研究还调查了孟加拉国南部三个不同湿地地区的六个案例,包括洪泛区,牛弓湖(当地称为Baors)和河流。主要目标和关键研究问题围绕(i)机构结构和过程,(ii)社区参与CBO,以及(iii)渔业共同管理中使用的能力建设方法。在18个月的时间里,使用了一套定性和参与性的研究方法和方法来收集现场和办公室的数据。与参与共同管理过程的人员进行了访谈,包括渔民等当地参与者,以及官员等外部利益相关者。数据收集过程中总共有111名受访者。此外,在地方层面进行了七次焦点小组讨论,在官方层面(地区和中央层面)进行了两次讨论。该研究的发现表明,在所有六个共同管理场所中,本地组织的建立是关键要素。但是,由于机构基础薄弱以及财政和机构能力的限制,地方机构在这一过程中没有得到很好的支持,特别是在项目执行期结束之后。在大多数情况下,即使共同管理计划实施了十多年,也没有确立管理指定渔业区的正式权利。人们发现,与利用外部资源和资金至关重要的外部机构之间的联系薄弱。共同管理的地点还因为贫穷的渔民和妇女较少参与地方一级的领导职务。共同管理不能影响当地社区僵化的权力结构,因为当地精英占领并主导了CBO。人力资源开发培训与参与者的实际需求没有联系,因此没有用。在许多情况下,当地机构无力保护当地鱼类资源。捕鱼的生计回报也不令人满意,导致渔民参与社区组织活动的减少。此外,腐败损害了CBO,并最终损害了CBO的成功。有了这种经验,共同管理的可持续性仍然是渔业系统的挑战,这使CBO面临更大的崩溃风险,尤其是在政府或捐助者的外部项目支持(即资金和技术)中断时。这项研究表明,需要有少量资金注入的强大机构基础,才能使这些地方CBO论坛具有连续性,这可能对农村地区的渔业管理和生计产生更大的影响。可以得出结论,应该在更广泛的发展背景下考虑社区组织,并且基于项目的方法可能无法帮助维持这种基层的制度建设过程。关键词:共同管理,社区组织,渔业,领导层,机构,成员,组织和参与。

著录项

  • 作者

    Mamun, Abdullah-Al.;

  • 作者单位

    Wilfrid Laurier University (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 Wilfrid Laurier University (Canada).;
  • 学科 Geography.;South Asian Studies.;Agriculture Fisheries and Aquaculture.;Sustainability.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2013
  • 页码 393 p.
  • 总页数 393
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:41:17

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号