Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
BOX 14.1
Ecological Restoration and Poverty Reduction
The Working for Water (WfW) program in South Africa, which started in 1995, is a
public works program that aims to address three immediate challenges with one in-
tervention: removing invasive plants, especially South American pompom weed
(
Campuloclinium macrocephalum
), from riparian areas to improve the country's
scarce water resources while providing jobs and economic empowerment to rural
areas.
The WfW has grown into the single largest natural resource-based poverty relief
and public works expenditure in a country where one out of every four adults is un-
employed (Turpie, Marais, and Blignaut 2008). In 2005, the program employed
thirty-two thousand people from diverse backgrounds (60 percent women, 20 per-
cent youth, 2 percent disabled) on a budget of $66 million, and became one of the
most often cited examples of restoration-oriented poverty relief by advocates of eco-
logical restoration (Woodworth 2006). Restoration of natural ecosystems involves
long-term investments in repeated removals of invasive species and reseeding of na-
tive species, which may not be sustainable if the program relies solely on govern-
ment funding. To remain effective in this “ultralong distance race,” the WfW com-
pelled landowners to participate and share the costs by generating revenues and
indirect benefits (Koenig 2009). The program also made possible the production of
“eco-coffins” and school desks from the removed biomass, further generating eco-
nomic opportunities in rural areas. By offering the “poorest of the poor” stable jobs
manually clearing invasive plants in riparian areas, the program overcame the per-
ception that ecological restoration is a middle-class endeavor and attracted broader
support for conservation in the country (Woodworth 2006).
doing what is best for society. One of the fundamental principles of economics, “peo-
ple respond to incentives” (Mankiw 2001)—may prove to be useful here. We argue
that at least some of the difficulties in carrying out collectively rational actions today
are due to our current institutional setting that encourages us to behave as consumers.
Understanding the social contexts of collective actions helps us design institutional
and organizational settings that promote collective rationality as citizens and reduce
the chance of unexpected decision failures. It also suggests the key areas of social re-
search interests for postnormal ecological restoration studies.
Extensive literature about resource governance suggests that the motivation and
success of collective actions when managing common-pool resources involves three
dimensions: ecological sustainability, social equity, and economic efficiency (e.g.,
Hanna and Munasinghe 1995; Agrawal 2001). Although it is difficult to generalize the
factors that promote success, in their meta study of community forest management,
Pagdee, Kim, and Daugherty (2006) determined that the factors discussed most fre-
quently as necessary for success were (1) well-defined property rights, (2) effective in-
stitutional arrangements, and (3) community interests and incentives. Decentraliza-
