Abstract:
This dissertation explores the effects of democratic competition among political
parties in India on natural resources and the ability of local communities to cooperate
for natural resource management. A significant number of decentralization policies in
developing countries depend for their success on local collective action for the provision
of public goods. At the same time, democratization generates multiple impulses in
society, and understanding its effects on the prospects for local cooperation is important
for explaining the variation in success of decentralization policies for natural resource
management.
I use historical and ethnographic data to understand the influence of political
competition on natural resource outcomes and local collective action. The descriptive
analysis draws upon theoretical and empirical literatures on political competition,
collective action, and property rights, and is used as the basis for generating hypotheses
as well as specifying context-specific measurements of the relevant variables for
statistical analysis. I test the hypotheses on two sets of dependent variables – local
cooperation and forest condition – and three datasets covering community-based
irrigation and forest management systems, co-management institutions for irrigation,
soil conservation, and forest management, as well as state-managed forests as the null
category without decentralized management.
The findings show that an inclusive pattern of political mobilization and party
competition have increased the salience of environment and forests in the public domain
and democratic politics, with a positive effect on resource outcomes. Further, natural
resources are better managed by decentralized institutions, compared to state
management. However, communities located in highly competitive electoral districts
find it significantly more difficult to cooperate due to interference from political parties.
Moreover, communities that are heterogeneous along the salient issue dimension in
democratic politics are the worst affected. On the other hand, better representation of
sub-group interests in community affairs, prevalence of democratic practices, and
linkages of community leaders to multiple political parties are associated with higher
levels of local cooperation. In conclusion, the findings demonstrate that communities are
better at natural resource management than state agencies, but the impulses generated
by democratization can constrain the ability of local communities to manage natural
resources.
