Locating Power in Ostrom’s Design Principles: Watershed Management in India and the United States

Abstract

Ostrom’s design principles are considered to characterize robust institutions for managing common-pool resources. However, the design principles can conceal and perpetuate power asymmetries to limit socially just outcomes, even while improving environmental outcomes. This study integrates theories on power with Ostrom’s design principles to examine power dynamics in watershed management groups in India and the United States through case study methods. Results reveal that power does not always manifest itself in an environment of injustice, but processes of domination and empowerment occur concurrently. Negative aspects of power are not manifested through overt conflict, but through non-participation, inaction, and silence of non-dominant actors. This is not to say that non-dominant actors are devoid of agency, as they may respond to domination through solidarities and building capabilities. Paying attention to these interdependencies can shed light on the potential for collective action for achieving not only environmentally sustainable but also socially just outcomes.

Keywords:

• Common-pool resources
• Community
• Race
• Caste
• Social justice
• Sustainability

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the BAWA and the OCWA for hosting the first author. Abdul Gaffar and Krishna provided valuable field support in India. Dr. Gwen Arnold, University of California, Davis, Dr. Jake Brenner, Ithaca College, and Dr. Tiffany Morrison, James Cook University, Australia gave thoughtful feedback on previous drafts of the article. We thank the three anonymous reviewers and the editor for their constructive comments that made the manuscript stronger.

Notes

1 We follow Varughese and Ostrom (2001) who compute heterogeneity as,

A =1 − ${\sum }_{i=1}^n(Pi)$², where Pi is the proportion of the total population in the ith caste/race. A varies from 0 to 1 and measures the probability that two randomly selected persons will be from the same caste/race. In both cases, heterogeneity is 0.45.

2 The watershed group name has been masked to protect confidentiality.

3 District Census Handbook, Chamarajanagar, Karnataka

4 Bunds are small stone dams that prevent soil erosion and allow rainwater to percolate into the soil.

5 The watershed group name has been masked to protect confidentiality.

6 https://datausa.io/profile/geo/montgomery-wv

7 Hereafter, we refer to Lingayats and Whites as “dominant” and SCs and Blacks as “non-dominant.”

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, India and the Alumni Grants for Graduate Research and Scholarship (AGGRS), The Ohio State University.