Multi-level governance in community-based natural resource management A case study comparison from Latin America Claudia Sattler1*, Barbara Schröter1, Bettina Matzdorf1, Claas Meyer1, Lukas Wortmann1, Angela Meyer2 and Gregor Giersch2 1 = ZALF - Leibniz-Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research, Müncheberg, Germany 2 = IDC - Organisation for International Dialogue and Conflict Management, Vienna, Austria Ecosystem Service Partnership (ESP) Conference ‘Local action for the common good’ San José, Costa Rica , September 8-12, 2014 Links between presentations …  previous presentation: focus was on hybrid forms of governance Hierarchies Markets Osa Marujá Tocantins Santa Catarina Community management  this presentation: focus is on multi-level involvement of governance actors Characteristics of multi-level governance • contains a vertical and horizontal dimension: actors work across and within different territorial levels and jurisdictions • actors no longer restricted to the public domain, role of non-state actors is growing! • actors bring in their specific competencies and expertise • is the outcome of a process of devolution and decentralization and the upward, downward and sideway re-assignment of competences (cf. Bache and Flinders 2004, Marks and Hooghe 2004) Data and methods Data -> collected from 4 case studies: • examples of governance models for community-based solutions for natural resource management/ES provision • located in Latin America (Costa Rica + Brazil) Methods: • Field visits • Face-to-face interviews • Document study Community-based solutions -> improved livelihoods + conservation: • Marujá: Management plan (‘nogrow’ strategy, eco-tourism) • Santa Catarina: Improved grassland management (Voisin system) • Tocantins: Energy source switch ceramic industries (native firewood to rice husk, SOCIALCARBON®) • Osa: Blue carbon (mangrove reforestation, environmental education, community capacitation) Multi-level structure of governance models - scheme Multi-level structure of governance models - results Marujá Santa Catarina Tocantins Osa Different roles (doers vs. providers) of actors - scheme ‘Doers’ -> do ‘on the ground’ activities vs. ‘Providers’ -> provide knowledge, resources (human, financial), the legislative framework Different roles (doers vs. providers) of actors - results Marujá Santa Catarina Tocantins Osa Involvement of decision makers and takers - scheme (e.g. Reed et al 2009) Involvement of decision makers and takers - results Marujá Santa Catarina Tocantins Osa Conclusions • actors involved in the governance originate from more than one societal sector (-> hybrid governance) • actors operate at least on three different territorial levels (-> nested governance) • in the process of developing the solution some actors have been created, to perform new tasks in governance • actors’ roles complement each other (‘doers’ + ‘providers’) • civil society actors sit rather in-between levels (-> bridge) • governance includes decision makers and takers Links between presentations …  this presentation: focus was on multi-level involvement of governance actors Hierarchies Markets  next presentation: focus will be on special roles of civil society actors! Contact: Claudia Sattler P: +49 (0) 33432 82-439 E: csattler@zalf.de W: www.zalf.de / www.civinet.eu