Group items tagged

Um ponto de partida de Ostrom é sua condenação as panaceias, em especial " Those researchers and practitioners who propose panaceas for solving complex environmental problems make two false assumptions. First they assume that all problems of a general type, such as air pollution or maintaining species diversity, are similar; and second, all of the people involved have the same preferences, information, and authority to act. Neither is true [...] . Mas, não cai no outro extremo, onde admite-se que "Sustaining natural resource systems is far too important a problem for scholars to espouse "doing nothing." We must make every effort to cope with these really wicked problems involved in avoiding ecological disasters." Sua posição é proativa, ainda que precavida: " But, we also need to recommend caution about overusing simple blueprints and to develop diagnostic theories drawing on the lessons that can be learned from theoretical and empirical research on why some governance systems lead to improved performance of social-ecological systems and others lead to failures (Ostrom 1990). " E apoiada em evidências, tal como as sistematizadas por Brock and Carpenter (2007) illustrate how models of adaptive control processes in the Northern Highlands Lake District of Wisconsin are prone to panacea traps [...] . We will continue doing more harm than good if panaceas are recommended to solve resource problems rather than learning how to match potential solutions to a serious diagnosis of specific problems in the ecological and social context in which they are nested. Similarly, assuming that effective property-rights systems will simply evolve as resource units become more valuable (e.g., Demsetz 1967) is not an adequate understanding of the challenge of matching property rights and governance systems to particular ecological systems (Fitzpatrick 2006) O desafio portanto, segundo ela é Moving beyond panaceas to develop a cumulative capacity to dia

Aqui a Elinor Ostrom ressalta as implicações econômica da distinção entre o estoque e fluxo de recursos de propriedade comum. O estoque ela associa a um bem público e o fluxo a um bem privado, mas dado os custos de estabelecer uma propriedade muitos dos recursos de propriedade comum são de fato de acesso livre. Para ela é, portanto necessário que, c.p, é necessário dar-se um tratamento institucional distinto ao estoque e ao fluxo (pode ser agasalhadas institucionalmente no direito de propriedade (ITQs,TURFs, e, em decorrência comprado e vendido), mas chama atenção que o mero estabelecimento de um direito de propriedade sobre o fluxo pode não ser suficiente para assegurar a sustentabilidade da exploração do estoque, por meio do que chama atenção para a relevância da de estrutura de governança por meio da qual se revela toda a hibridez das organizações e instituições necessárias . Ihering Guedes Alcolforado "Let me now provide some definitions, so we can share a common language for analysis. First, let us define common-pool resources. Common-pool resources (CPRs) are natural or human-made facilities (or stocks) that generate flows of usable resource units over time. CPRs share two characteristics: (1) it is costly to develop institutions to exclude potential beneficiaries from them, and (2) the resource units harvested by one individual are not available to others (E. Ostrom, Gardner, and Walker 1994; Gardner, Ostrom, and Walker 1990). The first characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as public goods. The second characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as private goods in the economics literature. Given that it is difficult and costly to design institutions that successfully exclude some potential beneficiaries from access to CPRs, many CPRs are in fact open-access resources where anyone who wishes can gain access and appropriate resource units. Given that

Evidenciada a natureza hibrida (nem mercado, nem estado) dos recursos de propriedade comum, Elinor Ostrom considera as instituições como um capital social que evolui ao longo do tempo: "[....] institutions are a form of social capital resulting from the time and effort invested by their creators in improving their productivity. The institutions, of course, have not remained entirely fixed over their lifetimes. Ali of them are complex and have had to change over time", mas chama atenção para sua relativa estabilidde, já que para ela as " institutions are, however "robust" or in "institutional equilibrium" in the sense defined by Shepsle (1989, 143), who regards "an institution as 'essentially' in equilibrium if changes transpired according to an ex ante plan (and hence part of the original institution) for institutional change." Esta estabilidade associa as rules-in-use (mas não associa a um conjunto de regras particlares) que se origina dos "[....] the appropriators (users) designed their own rules, created organizations to undertake the day-to-day management of their resources, and modified their own rules over time in light of past experience. The specific rules-in-use, however, differ markedly from one case to the next. Given the great variation in rules-in-use, the sustainability of these resources and their institutions cannot be cxplained by the presence or absence of particular rules. That the rules do differ partly explains the sustainability of these systems. By differing, the rules take into account specific attributes of the physical systems, cultural views of the world, and the economic and politicai relationships that exist in the setting. Without different rules, appropriators could not take advantage of the positive features of a local CPR or avoid potential pitfalls that could occur in one setting but not in others.

"Scholars of common property resource theory (CPR) have long asserted that certain kinds of institutional arrangements based on collective action result in successful environmental stewardship, but feedback and the direct link between social and ecological systems remains poorly understood. This paper investigates how common property institutional arrangements contribute to sustainable mangrove fisheries in coastal Ecuador, focusing on the fishery for the mangrove cockle (Anadara tuberculosa and A. similis), a bivalve mollusk harvested from the roots of mangrove trees and of particular social, economic, and cultural importance for the communities that depend on it. Specifically, this study examines the emergence of new civil society institutions within the historical context of extensive mangrove deforestation for the expansion of shrimp farming, policy changes in the late 1990s that recognized "ancestral" rights of local communities to mangrove resources, and how custodias, community-managed mangrove concessions, affect the cockle fishery. Findings from interviews with shell collectors and analysis of catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) indicate that mangrove concessions as common property regimes promote community empowerment, local autonomy over resources, mangrove conservation and recovery, higher cockle catch shares, and larger shell sizes, but the benefits are not evenly distributed. Associations without custodias and independent cockle collectors feel further marginalized by the loss of gathering grounds, potentially deflecting problems of overexploitation to "open-access" areas, in which mangrove fisheries are weakly managed by the State. Using Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, the explicit link between social and ecological systems is studied at different levels, examining the relationship between collective action and the environment through quantitative approaches at the fishery level and qualitative analysis at the level

" 1 Introduction THE QUESTION OF 'philosophical foundations' of environmental thinking in law may strike the lawyer, as much as the legal philosopher, asa strange one. For while a search for the philosophical commitments of envi-ronmental thinking undoubtedly makes sense in the context of ethics, or political theory, environmental law (it might be felt) lacks any such philosophicalunderpinning: in the eyes of many professional lawyers, environmental regula-tion manifests itself almost exclusively through an array of statutory provisions,severally concerned with curbing certain negative consequences arising fromparticular spheres of human action. Although these various measures have thecommon purpose of achieving a reduction in the erosion of our quality of life,there is not (on this view) to be found any deeper rationale or overarchingprinciple beyond this purely instrumental concern with human wellbeing. Legalregulation of the environment is, therefore, largely a set of facts to be learnedabout the way the law deals with environmental issues. Particular statutoryprovisions and judicial decisions will, of course, raise some quite interestingquestions of interpretation or application, but such questions, it is felt, areresolved within the ordinary standards and criteria which influence legal argu-ment, and do not require deeper philosophical explication.Much of the intuitive appeal of this view derives from a related, though some-times implicit, claim about the nature of environmental law. Environmentallaw, it is sometimes said, is not in the strictest sense a distinctive area of the lawat all, but merely a convenient umbrella term for the collection of particularlegal provisions which are relevant to environmental protection. There may bemany reasons why it is useful and informative to group a set of legal provisionsin a certain way, but (we might say) the underlying motivation for so doing willalways be pedagogic rather than reflective of some penetrati

O artigo de Andres Thiel e sus companheiros segue em anexo. É do tipo um "achado". De um lado, a questão, Como as características dos recursos naturais renováveis e o framework regulatório (no caso o europeu) explica a infraestrutura institucional local (a estrutura de governança) ? Do outro o referencial neoinstitucionalista é usado com a precisão de um artesão, sem afetação, para develarmos como as características dos recursos afeta a transação, e, em seguida juntar com os condicionantes da regulação para enquadrar as instituições locais (a estrutura de governança). E como se não bastasse, faz uso do ABDUCTIVE APPROACH de forma criativa e com excelente resultado. "This paper scrutinizes determinants of regional-level institutions regulating the provisionof biodiversity and ecosystem services. Two cases of maintaining ecosystem services,provided by quite different resource systems, are compared: the protection of wolvesand the management of a high nature value agroforestry system, scattered fruit treemeadows. Taking an abductive approach, we suggest that the distinct characteristicsof resources - in particular the mobility of resource units - and differences in theoverarching European regulatory framework - the obligation to protect wolves versusvoluntary compensation payments to maintain scattered fruit tree meadows - largelyexplain the existing institutional structures at regional level. Cost-effectiveness considera-tions concerning the transaction costs of governance seem to act as determinants for thedesign and implementation of regional institutions. Livestock depredated by wolves isprotected by a liability rule and hierarchical governance structures. In turn, maintenance of scattered fruit trees is subject to a property rule and voluntary long-term agreements."

The Digital Observatory for Protected Areas "Providing the right information to the right people with the right tools" Supporting GEO's Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO-BON), the Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) is conceived as a set of distributed Critical Biodiversity Informatics Infrastructures (databases, web modeling services, broadcasting services, ...) combined with interoperable web services to provide a large variety of endusers including park managers, decision-makers and researchers with means to assess, monitor and possibly forecast the state and pressure of protected areas at the global scale. DOPA has three main objectives: 1) Provide best available material (data, indicators, models) agreed on by contributing institutions which can serve for establishing baselines for research & reporting; 2) Provide free web based tools (databases, portals, modeling services) designed to generate the best available material but also for research purposes, decision making and capacity building activities for conservation; 3) Provide an interoperable and, as much as possible, open source framework to allow institutions to get their own means to assess, monitor and forecast the state and pressure of protected areas and help these to further engage with the organizations hosting critical biodiversity informatics infrastructures. Developped in collaboration by major institutions active in the field of biodiversity conservation (UNEP-WCMC, BirdLife International, GBIF, IUCN, ...), DOPA is designed to encourage a multi-scale cross-disciplinary approach to biodiversity without being exposed to excessive risks coming from mixing data from undocumented sources and/or with undocumented uncertainties. - See more at: http://dopa.jrc.ec.europa.eu/#sthash.63zAz2Cx.dpuf Supporting GEO's Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO-BON), the Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) is conceived as a set of distributed Critical Biodiversity Informatics Infrastr

Special Issue: The Commons and The Common Call for Papers The Commons (or the common) is of interest to radicals on the left for many reasons. Most obvious at present is the condition of the earth we share-everyone's common. Global warming and environmental degradation threaten human existence and that of other living creatures and things. Yet agreement on how to better treat planet Earth has proven elusive. Another reason for interest in the commons is the left's fight against privatization, for decades now a hallmark of neoliberalism. Enclosure of common space and resources was part of the development of the capitalist system, and it continues today. Can this process be stopped; reversed? The terms commons and common do not simply refer to open access resources (res nullins). This category of common resource is the air we breathe, or the ocean. Another category of the commons is res communis, a commonly held resource. It has figured prominently in projects and aspirations of socialists, anarchists, feminists, and communists. Privatization can be associated with a world of scarcity, and the common with abundance. In addition, more than property is held in common. Language, stories, images, humor, culture and other aspects of communal interaction share this root. In addition, more than property is held in common. Language, stories, images, humor, culture and other aspects of communal interaction share this root. How can a clearer sense of the commons help inform a renewal of left trajectories: a more egalitarian and sustainable world? While advocated to overcome problems presumed to be inherent in managing the commons, privatization substitutes problems fundamental to an individualized world. One of the most obvious of these problems is inequality: of access, control, income, and resources. Inequality is reflected in class-riven societies, as well as those characterized by differential a

O ponto de partida do artigo é a constatação que "Privatization is often viewed to provide positive stimulus for the economy that can lead to the better-ment of society", o que se pode complementar, com a constatação de E Ostrom, segundo a qual, em algumas situações o regime privado se coloca como uma panancéia. Naste mesma linha, os autores chamam atenção que que qando " the appropriate governance systems are not functionally in place, the unwanted effects of privatization can have deleterious consequences." "This paper highlights the conse-quences of undesirable privatization and the emergent unwanted privatization tendencies of the coastal commons, particularly in the developing countries such as the Philippines. The lack of coherent policies,standards, and weak enforcement of policies in leasing the coastal commons (e.g. various unregulatedaqua culture) in the Philippines in particular, have resulted to alarming displacement, deprivation and marginalization of fishing and farming communities and have degraded many coastal zone areas. Os autores tratam do usos multiplos do solo, In addition, poorly planned coastal tourism and housing development projects in the foreshore areas,inappropriate reclamation of coastal areas, illegal usurpation of indigenous peoples rights over ancestral domain areas, and conversion of fishing and fish farming zones into ecotourism zones further aggravated this scenario. Equitable access to resources is of paramount importance to afford concerned stakeholders greater participation in terms of developing greater capacity for coastal communities to engage and demand for improved coastal governance e an important facet of public dministration often identifiedas one of the challenges in managing the commons. Co-management with an Ecosystem-Based Management approach as core operational mechanism provides opportunities to enhance policy formulation and implementation, secure community safety nets, and facilitate the crea

"To halt degradation of benthic resources in Chile, management areas (MAs) were set up under the Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) framework in the late 1990s. Integrated into the global market, MAs have since expanded along the Chilean coast, involving thousands of small-scale artisanal fishers. This paper analyses how economic criteria relates to social and ecological performance of Chilean MAs, by applying TURFs, commons and co-management theory to two cases: MAs Peñuelas and Chigualoco. To collect and analyse data Participatory Rural Appraisal tools, interviews and official statistics and reports were used. Our results show that MAs' economic benefits are connected to fluctuations on the global market. Adapting to changing world market prices then becomes paramount. TURFs' main goal is ecological conservation, but achieving this seems to depend on meeting fishers' livelihoods; failure to do so likely results in failure to meet conservation objectives. A serious weakness of the Chilean TURFs system is that it does not pay enough attention to fishers' livelihoods or to the global market context. Furthermore, there is a strong relationship between good economic benefits and social sustainability. But irrespective of economic performance, fisher organizations have been empowered and gained increased resource control with the TURFs system. At policy level, a differentiated and more flexible system could be more suitable for existing heterogeneous MAs and their particular economic, social and ecological challenges. For improved economic sustainability and resource conservation, a system with multiple-species managing MAs could be promoted as well. Finally, to enhance theory of commons, co-management and TURFs, we argue for greater acknowledgement of TURFs' social benefits in addition to economic assessments. More attention should also be paid to global market conditions of which MAs are dependent and in which they are embedded: macrostructures tha

Ao nos debruçarmos sobre a questão pesqueira, salta a vista a problemática associada a estrutura de governança seja ela baseada nas especies ou nos territórios. A marca distintiva é a existência de múltiplos níveis regulatórios, os quais se consideram , ora como excludente, ora como complementar. A nossa hipótese é que sua configuração deve refletir a situação e, portanto, em principio todas as alternativas combinadas ou não, são plausíveis. Este argumento ganha evidência quando consideramos a literatura que trabalha a Teoria das redes de governança, a exemplo do que se pode extrair do artigo "Governance network theory:past, present and future de Erik-Hans Klijn and Joop Koppenjan, disponibilizado acima. "The reallocation of authority upwards, downwards, and sideways from central states hasdrawn attention from a growing number of scholars in political science. Yet beyondagreement that governance has become (and should be) multi-level, there is no consensusabout how it should be organized. This article draws on several literatures to distinguish twotypes of multi-level governance. One type conceives of dispersion of authority to general-purpose, non-intersecting, and durable jurisdictions. A second type of governance conceivesof task-specific, intersecting, and flexible jurisdictions. We conclude by specifying the virtuesof each type of governance"

Fundamental. The term "common-property resource" is an example of a term repeatedly used to refer to property owned by a government or by no one. It is also used for property owned by a community of resource users. Such usage leads to confusion in scientific study and policy analysis. In this paper we develop a conceptual schema for arraying property-rights regimes that distinguishes among diverse bundles of rights ranging from authorized user, to claimant, to proprietor, and to owner. We apply this conceptual schema to analyze findings from a variety of empirical settings including the Maine lobster industry.

Em Neither Market nor State - Governance of Common-Pool Resource in the Twenty-First Century, Elinor Ostrom volta a problemática semantica dos recursos de propriedade comum, tendo como base uma distinção entre estoque e fluxo do recurso natural renovavel, ressaltando as implicações econômica da distinção entre o estoque e fluxo de recursos de propriedade comum. O estoque ela associa a um bem público e o fluxo a um bem privado, mas dado os custos de estabelecer uma propriedade muitos dos recursos de propriedade comum são de fato de acesso livre. Para ela é, portanto necessário que, c.p, é necessário dar-se um tratamento institucional distinto ao estoque e ao fluxo (pode ser agasalhadas institucionalmente no direito de propriedade (ITQs,TURFs, e, em decorrência comprado e vendido), mas chama atenção que o mero estabelecimento de um direito de propriedade sobre o fluxo pode não ser suficiente para assegurar a sustentabilidade da exploração do estoque, por meio do que chama atenção para a relevância da de estrutura de governança por meio da qual se revela toda a hibridez das organizações e instituições necessárias . Ihering Guedes Alcolforado "Let me now provide some definitions, so we can share a common language for analysis. First, let us define common-pool resources. Common-pool resources (CPRs) are natural or human-made facilities (or stocks) that generate flows of usable resource units over time. CPRs share two characteristics: (1) it is costly to develop institutions to exclude potential beneficiaries from them, and (2) the resource units harvested by one individual are not available to others (E. Ostrom, Gardner, and Walker 1994; Gardner, Ostrom, and Walker 1990). The first characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as public goods. The second characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as private goods in the economics literature. Given that it is diff

Ontem na Banca de Jéssica Cruz, no Instituto de Biologia da UFBA inciamos uma interloculação em torno da institucionalização das funções ecosistêmicas embutidas nos Sistemas Socioecológico. O ponto de partida da discussão foi a instrumentalização e problematização da tipologia de funções ecosistêmicas proposta por DE GROOT et al A typology for the clasification, description and valuation of ecosystems functions, goods and services in Ecological Economics, 2002. v.42, pp. 393-408. A problematização foi feita por um dos orientadores, em cuja tese de doutoramento descontrói a compreensão vigente da função ecosistêmica da biodiversidade e da especie, ancorando-a no organismo (Ver NUNES-NETO, Function in Ecology: an organizational approach in Biol. PHilophy, 2013 (no prelo). A partir da sua reconstrução das funções ecosistêmicas, chamamos atenção para a possibilidade de considerar, do ponto de vista do policymaking, os diferentes tipos de funções, não como concorrentes, mas como complementar, e assim poder considerá-las com funções associadas aos estoques e as funções vinculadas ao fluxo, integrando no programa de pesquisa dos sistemas socioecológicos a Teoria das Funções Ecosistêmicos. Resultado: ponto de pauta para um grupo em processo de articulação que deverá tratar da relação da Economia Ecológica com a Teoria da Funções Ecosistêmicas.

"n response to the growing discrepancy between the steadily rising steering ambitions and theincreasing fragmentation of social and political life, governance networks are mushrooming. Gov-ernance through the formation of networks composed of public and private actors might help solvewicked problems and enhance democratic participation in public policy-making, but it may alsocreate conflicts and deadlocks and make public governance less transparent and accountable. Inorder to ensure that governance networks contribute to an effective and democratic governing of society, careful metagovernance by politicians, public managers and other relevant actors is neces-sary. In this paper, we discuss how to assess the effective performance and democratic quality of governance networks. We also describe how different metagovernance tools can be used in thepursuit of effective and democratic network governance. Finally, we argue that public metagover-nors must develop their strategic and collaborative competences in order to become able to meta-govern governance networks"

FORMS OF PROPERTY IN RIGHTS-BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Management measures may be classed as input and output controls.Input controls regulate fishing effort. Output controls directly controlcatch amounts. Input controls such as licensing may create limited prop-erty rights, although more sophisticated output control mechanismshave been adopted by a number of countries. These include territorialuse rights in fisheries (TURFS), stock use rights in fisheries (SURFS), andcommunity development quotas (CDQs). Increasingly common are quota based systems, such as the individual quota (IQ), the individual fishingquota (IFQ), individual vessel quotas (IVQ), the individual transferableshare quota (ITSQ), and the individual transferable quota (ITQ). Each of these approaches shall be considered in turn. DOMESTIC IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPERTY RIGHTS-BASED MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS A number of States have implemented, in varying degrees, rights-basedfishing entitlements. These include Australia, Canada, Iceland, NewZealand, and the United States. The domestic implementation and sta-tus of these measures is considered for each country in turn. AN APPRAISAL OF RIGHTS-BASED MEASURES In light of domestic experiences of property rights-based instruments it isappropriate to remark upon the success of quota systems to date. Quotas systems have attracted critical comment in three broad areas: economic success, conservation and management effectiveness, and allocationalconcerns. At this point it is worth emphasising that because legal reason-ing is consequence sensitive, these factors have a role to play in the law-making process. These are considered in turn, before some final remarksare made on how the legal construction of property rights more generally has influenced the development and operation of rights-based fishing measures.

"While most of the attention in the scientific and policy literature onrights-based institutions has been devoted to Individual Transferable Quotas(ITQs), there are alternatives that involve different configurations of use rights.One such alternative is a space-based option commonly referred to as Territo-rial Use Rights Fisheries (TURFs). TURFs have been utilized in island fisheriesoff Southeast Asia for decades, and they have been well studied, particularly byanthropologists and sociologists. This paper discusses case studies of TURF or-ganizations in Japan and Chile from an economics perspective. We discuss thehistorical origins of each system, outline the legal and institutional structures of the systems, and then discuss how each system manages nearshore coastal re-sources. We discuss similarities and differences across the many specific collectivemanagement structures adopted by Japanese and Chilean TURF organizations.We then discuss how outcomes differ from what might emerge under ITQs"

Uma boa parte da contribuição da comunidade dos economistas a gestão dos recursos pesqueiros se assenta nos pressupostos do individualismo metodológico, o que implica a desconsideração da pluralidade do valores que se expressam nos complexos processos de tomada de decisão. O autor atento a este detalhe, e, sensível aos preceitos da economia ecológica sugere e argumenta que " [....] the new approach to environmental problems by economists will have to be a political economy of Nature." O "norte" de Spash é claro e instigante, além de ter subjacente o programa da economia ecológica, eis suas palavras: "Within the field of environmental and resource economics discontent with the policy relevance of prescriptions is often evident, but neoclassical theory still seems to maintain a dominant role. That was true until the late 1980s when ecologists and economists started to talk in a more formal fashion. The result has been the formation of ecological economics, which is attempting to take a fresh look at how economic systems interact with Nature. The methodology of this newer approach is still refreshingly open, and part of the thrust of this paper is to suggest the direction that it should take."

Artisanal fisheries are of great importance in Brazil, as they are responsible for more than 50% of national fish production. This importance, associated with the necessity of conserving marine environments threatened by multiple competing uses, leads us to propose mechanisms for co-management of fisheries by users and public authorities. This proposal takes into account: a) local conflicts between artisanal and industrial fishers; b) local rules overthe use of fishing areas established by artisanal fishers; c) the advent of protectedareas that close ac-cess to some fishing areas used by artisanal fisheries; and d) co-management options being explored betweengovernment and fishers. This study suggests policy and technical alternatives under consideration to managethe artisanal fisheries of southeastern Brazil with a focus on Ilha Grande bay in Rio de Janeiro. In our casestudy, based on field research conducted in 2009, we show that artisanal fishers are squeezed into a marinespace between protected areas and industrial fishing. We suggest that a combination of fishing agreements(FAs),based on experience in Amazonian fisheries and extractive reserves,and payment for environmental ser-vices(PES),based onforest and related ate rresource experience,could improve management and livelihoods for local artisanal fisheries by stimulatin gandre warding fsher swho participate in conservation efforts.The two instruments (FAs and PES) are the subject of considerable research and practical experience.Their integration in an instrument mix represents a contribution from transdisciplinary fields of human ecology and ecological economics.

Richard Hovitt e seu companheiros colocam o conflito de interesses no âmbito dos sistemas interclultural de gestão dos recursos naturais na Australia e Malaysia. Eles exploram as maneiras pelas quais o " ontological pluralism and the interplay of socio-cultural, political-economic and biophysical influences shape NRM systems", uma problemática muito próxima aos nossos territórios pesqueiros. O objetivo dos autores é ampliar " discursive space in which to reframe the challenges of capacity building in the rapidly changing spaces of intercultural NRM systems." Para nós a relevância do texto deve-se em boa parte porque eles "...synthesizes the conceptual arguments of field research to conclude that capacity deficits of dominant institutions, processes and knowledge systems drive many systemic failures in land and sea management affecting Indigenous peoples. We advocate urgent action to build intercultural competence and new capacities and competencies in those institutions." Enfim, segundo eles, " The paper reframes intercultural NRM in terms of coexistence an and invites wider debate about these 'new geographies of coexistence' in intercultural NRM systems"

: The social-ecological systems framework was designed to provide a common research tool for interdisciplinary investigations of social-ecological systems. However, its origin in institutional studies of the commons belies its interdisciplinary ambitions and highlights its relatively limited attention to ecology and natural scientific knowledge. This paper considers the biophysical components of the framework and its epistemological foundations as it relates to the incorporation of knowledge from the natural sciences.