CONTEXTUAL FACTORS, PROPERTY REGIMES, AND ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMESApplying a realist synthesis approach to a systematic review of marine protected areas
REBECCA MCLAIN1, STEVEN LAWRY2, MARIA OJANEN2 1Institute for Sustainable Solutions, Portland State University, USA2Center for International Forestry Research
2017 WORLD BANK CONFERENCE ON LAND AND POVERTYWashington DC, March 20-24, 2017
Often research focuses on one place (or two or three) to get that rich
information.
Understanding why some interventions succeed and some failA realist synthesis approach
Behavior is influenced by the people, social structures, history &
natural environment around us.
But it’s difficult to identify patterns from separate case
studies...
??? ?
?
?
And understanding patterns in behavior & outcomes is
important to designing policy that works.
??
??
Understanding why some interventions succeed and some failA realist synthesis approach
Understanding why some interventions succeed and some failA realist synthesis approach
Meta-analyses and systematic reviews are
good tools for measuring variations in outcomes
across a large number of studies...
...but struggle to identify how differing social and
environmental contexts influence those outcomes.
??
Understanding why some interventions succeed and some failA realist synthesis approach
policy interventions are likely to result in particular
outcomes.In other words:
Why policy interventions work in some contexts, but
not others.
It helps to answer
when
how where
whyand for whom
Realist synthesis – a technique for reviewing evidence alongside relevant contextual factors from many studies –
offers a solution.
Policy interventions in natural resource management
STATE
How people use and manage natural resources is influenced by the property regime.That is, who owns the resource, who makes the decisions about how it is used, and who benefits from it. There is a lot of variation within different property regimes
COMMUNITY
HYBRID
+
...the mechanism of action......affects...
The context...
Perceptions about the property regime:“Is it ecologically credible, socially acceptable,& recognized as having legal authority?” (legitimacy)“Can the rules be enforced?” (enforcement capacity)“Will benefits go to the right people?” (likelihood benefits)
All the parts that together make a place unique...
...the property regime&
+
A realist synthesis theory of change applied
...which all affect...
...the outcome.How
people behave
The resource condition
Realist Synthesis in action: A spotlight on fisheries managementCase selection:Using a realist synthesis approach, we identified factors that affect environmental outcomes of fisheries management under different types of property regimes.
34984 possible articles in initial search
31 articles match selection criteria, covering:
49 fisheries management cases:
9 from Africa 18 from Latin America/Caribbean 22 from Asia/Pacific
Filtered using selection criteria:a) quantitative description of environmental outcomes; b) clear description of distribution of bundle of rights
A realist synthesis theory of change applied
14 state regimes
% cases with better outcomes than their control sites:
Selected cases by property regime:
69%
58%
43%
16 customary regimes
+ 19 hybrid regimes
Analysis, Phase 1:Overview
A realist synthesis theory of change applied
Analysis, Phase 2: 15 cases of in-depth analysis Sample case shown here:Roviana Lagoon, Solomon Islands study by Aswani and Weiant 2004
Outcome:- Most of
the community respects the closure
- Shellfish size & numbers improve
- However, communities are consideringformal surveillance measures
Intervention context:Shellfish collecting closed from September to April. Recommending permanent closures for some areas- Backed by
respected church leader
- Transparent, participative approach to the change
- Harvesters can see shell beds recovering rapidly
- However, illegal harvesting is a problem
Mechanisms:- “I recognize that
community leaders have the authority to make these new rules and believe they will lead to more shellfish”
- “It’s reasonably likely that I will be caught if I poach”
- “I will benefit from these new rules and so will the community”
Community context:- Two distinct,
generations-old customary regimes
- Traditional property regimes recognized by national law
- Tension between and within clans
- Remote location
- Women are the primary shellfish collectors
CONTEXT MECHANISM+ OUTCOME=
A realist synthesis theory of change applied
What we learned
People’s perceptions of the legitimacy, enforcement capacity and likelihood of benefits from an intervention can both strengthen and weaken protection efforts.Perceptions of legitimacy are the most complex, involving the interaction of legally recognized authority, social acceptability, and ecological credibility.Perceptions of legitimacy, enforcement capacity, and likelihood of benefits do not operate independently of each other but rather function as a set of interacting components.Understanding these perceptions and how they interact will increase the likelihood of successful and sustainable introduced conservation practices.
Referenc esAgrawal, A., & Benson, C.S. (2011). Common property theory and resource governance institutions: strengthening explanations of multiple outcomes. Environmental Conservation, 38(2), 199-210. doi:10.1017/S0376892910000925Brooks, J., Waylen, K.A., & Borgerhoff Mulder, M. (2013). Assessing community-based conservation projects: A systematic review and multilevel analysis of attitudinal, behavioral, ecological, and economic outcomes. Environmental Evidence, 2(2). Dalkin, S.M., Greenhalgh, J., Jones, D., Cunningham, B., & Lhuissier, M. (2015). What’s in a mechanism? Development of a key concept in realist evaluation. Implementation Science, 10, 49. Durham, J., & Bains, A. (2015). Research protocol: a realist synthesis of contestability in community-based mental health markets. Systematic Reviews, 4, 32. Lawry, S. Samii, C., Hall, R., Leopold, A., Hornby, D., & Mtero F. (2016). The impact of land property rights interventions on investment and agricultural productivity in developing countries: a systematic review. Journal of Development Effectiveness.
Nilsson, D., Baxter, G., Butler, J.R.A., & McAlpine, C.A. (2016). How do community-based conservation programs in developing countries change human behavior? A realist synthesis. Biological Conservation, 200, 93-103. Ojanen, M., Zhou, W., Mshale, B., Nieto, S.H., Durey, L., Miller, D.C., Mwangi, E., & Petrokofsky, G. (2015). Environmental impacts of different property regimes in forests, fisheries and rangelands: preliminary findings from a systematic review. Paper presented at the International Association for the Study of the Commons annual conference, Alberta, Canada. On file with lead author.Ojanen, M., Zhou, W., Miller, D.C., Petrokofsky, G., Nieto, S.H., & Mshale, B. (In review). Environmental impacts of different property regimes in forests, fisheries and rangelands: a systematic review. Environmental Evidence.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London, SAGE. Robinson, B.E., Holland, M.B., & Naughton-Treves, L. (2014). Does secure land tenure save forests? A meta-analysis of the relationship between land tenure and tropical deforestation. Global Environmental Change, 29, 281-293. Rycroft-Malone, J., McCormack, B., Hutchinson, A.M., DeCorby, K., Bucknall, T.K., Kent, B., Schultz, A., Senlgrove-Clarke, E., Stetler, C.B., Titler, M., Wallin, L., & Wilson, V. (2012). Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research. Implementation Science, 7(33). Schlager, E., & Ostrom, E. (1992). Property rights regimes and natural resources: A conceptual analysis. Land Economics, 68(3), 249-262. Yin, R., Zulu, L., Qi, J., Freudenberger, M., & Sommerville, M. (2016). Empirical linkages between devolved tenure systems and forest conditions: Challenges, findings, and recommendations. Forest Policy and Economics, 73, 294-299.
cifor.orgblog.cifor.orgForestsTreesAgroforestry.org
THANK YOUFunding: International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) and CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions and Markets (PIM) (Activity Number 176)