2026-09-19T12:44:18Zhttps://ecommons.cornell.edu/server/oai/requestoai:ecommons.cornell.edu:1813/593922026-05-15T19:43:03Zcom_1813_35col_1813_47
Robinson, Ewan Scott
Wolford, Wendy W.
Leonard, Lori
2018-10-23T13:22:28Z
2018-10-23T13:22:28Z
2018-05-30
ProQuest Submission ID: 10292
ProQuest Publication ID: 10816718
https://hdl.handle.net/1813/59392
https://doi.org/10.7298/X4TM78BC
10489477
In the last two decades, legal reforms and development projects in Senegal have purported to transfer authority over thousands of hectares of forests, pastures, and fisheries from state agencies to local elected councils, customary chiefs, and user committees. Yet in addition to transferring official powers, these efforts have introduced new spatial categories and legal techniques such as local conventions and village protected sites. These tools alter the terrain on which state agencies, politicians, commercial interests, and customary leaders – not to mention the numerous groups whose livelihoods depend on these resources – seek to access and control natural resources. By tracing the evolution of one of Senegal’s first community forestry initiatives over a 17-year history, this article argues that decentralization has fixed forests in place and privatized common-property, while also disrupting the presumption of separate domains of “state” and “community”. Rather than creating territories governed by communities, the creation of village forests drew together customary authorities, local politicians, and forestry technicians in relations of mutual dependence and informal collaboration. One effect of decentralization has been the incorporation of new resources and property relations into networks of informalized and privatized state power.
en_US
land politics
territorialization
Decentralization
State Formation
Sociology
Geography
community-based natural resource management
community forestry
Village properties, state negotiations: Decentralization and territorialization of Senegal's forests
dissertation or thesis
application/pdf
Development Sociology
Cornell University
Master of Science
M.S., Development Sociology
https://hdl.handle.net/1813/59810
Publication
Cornell Theses and Dissertations
Robinson, Ewan Scott
5893a6ea-7af3-41d7-abc6-04bcd26ab5df
open.access
open.access
<Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="0c749641-0ab0-46e3-b116-2559e4cc3b03">
<Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type>
<Language>en_US</Language>
<Title>Village properties, state negotiations: Decentralization and territorialization of Senegal's forests</Title>
<PublishedIn>
<Publication>
</Publication>
</PublishedIn>
<PublicationDate>2018-05-30</PublicationDate>
<DOI>https://doi.org/10.7298/X4TM78BC</DOI>
<Authors>
<Author>
<DisplayName>Robinson, Ewan Scott</DisplayName>
<Affiliation>
<OrgUnit>
</OrgUnit>
</Affiliation>
</Author>
</Authors>
<Editors>
</Editors>
<Publishers>
<Publisher>
<OrgUnit />
</Publisher>
</Publishers>
<Keyword>land politics</Keyword>
<Keyword>territorialization</Keyword>
<Keyword>Decentralization</Keyword>
<Keyword>State Formation</Keyword>
<Keyword>Sociology</Keyword>
<Keyword>Geography</Keyword>
<Keyword>community-based natural resource management</Keyword>
<Keyword>community forestry</Keyword>
<Abstract>In the last two decades, legal reforms and development projects in Senegal have purported to transfer authority over thousands of hectares of forests, pastures, and fisheries from state agencies to local elected councils, customary chiefs, and user committees. Yet in addition to transferring official powers, these efforts have introduced new spatial categories and legal techniques such as local conventions and village protected sites. These tools alter the terrain on which state agencies, politicians, commercial interests, and customary leaders – not to mention the numerous groups whose livelihoods depend on these resources – seek to access and control natural resources. By tracing the evolution of one of Senegal’s first community forestry initiatives over a 17-year history, this article argues that decentralization has fixed forests in place and privatized common-property, while also disrupting the presumption of separate domains of “state” and “community”. Rather than creating territories governed by communities, the creation of village forests drew together customary authorities, local politicians, and forestry technicians in relations of mutual dependence and informal collaboration. One effect of decentralization has been the incorporation of new resources and property relations into networks of informalized and privatized state power.</Abstract>
<Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right"
>
</Access>
</Publication>