This contribution explores the management methods of the commons (fisheries and forestry) among the Niominkas in the Saloum Delta in Senegal. The delta area of the Atlantic coast is rich in biodiversity but weakened by climate change. Socioeconomic and biophysical vulnerabilities Legion. From Ostrom’s perspective from the angle of complexity and ethnoanthropological knowledge, we study the agency of social actors and the formalism of institutional actors around the rules of conservation and exploitation of resources. revealed the political dimension of management due to conflicts of social representations within the normative framework. The results of the field survey show the existence of popular initiatives inherited from the system of pre-colonial authority that reappeared through community organizations of women and young people (FELOGIE and COGRN), nevertheless supported by NGOs, organizations and the local community them in the name of sustainability. The State has created in parallel its management instruments (CLPA and AMP), certainly participatory, but which are more formalization of customary standards than a novelty; thereby creating a grip on the self-supporting community. We perceive through the socio-institutional connectedness of the actors a relationship of action and interaction which can constitute the means of the resilience of the territory. This multiplicity of actors is an asset for the rich mix of public and community institutions, even if the territory would benefit more from having an efficient governance scale to overcome the issues that remain and the challenges that persist. Already, social transactions within community organizations have resulted in the sharing of collective benefits through social investments at the local level that reflect some public action. At the end of all this ambiguous collective action, this results in successful management and, hence, an adaptation to climate change rooted in the historicity of the Niominkas.
Bonjour et félicitation Serigne pour votre présentation tout à fait clair.
J’ai une réflexion qui me vient à l’esprit et qui se réfère à votre référence aux retombées économiques partagées suite à la gestion concertée de cet écosystème particulier. Toutes les composantes de la communauté en ont pour leur compte? qui perd ou qui gagne dans le processus. Sur un autre plan quel engagement de l’Etat ou des organes décentralisés en appui aux projets à part les mécanismes internationaux de la finance climat?
Comments are closed.