Table 2 List of potential effect modifiers and reasons for heterogeneity
From: What are the environmental impacts of property rights regimes in forests, fisheries and rangelands?
Contextual factor | Hypothesis | Direction of hypothesized environmental impacts | Information collected from the articles |
|---|---|---|---|
Environmental context | |||
Location | No specific hypotheses. High variation confounds results | None | Subnational |
Country | |||
World region as classified by UN Stats | |||
Ecosystem type | A specific description of the ecosystem | ||
Spatial extent of resource area | Larger areas are associated with better environmental outcomes (especially for community regimes) | + | Size of the area |
Elevation | Resources at higher altitudes are often less accessible and thus likely to have better environmental outcomes | + | Elevation stated in the article |
Accessibility | Proximity to roads and cities facilitates resource extraction as well as increases resource use pressure | − | Proximity to roads and cities |
Quality of baseline resource condition | Resources with better baseline conditions are likely to have better environmental outcomes | + | Baseline resource conditions |
Existence of external environmental management interventions | Presence of previous environmental projects such as conservation programs may lead to greater awareness about environmental issues by resource managers and local populations, which in turn may lead to better environmental outcomes | + | Presence of previous environmental initiatives, such as conservation projects |
Additional regime characteristics | |||
Clarity of rights | Clearly defined property rights allows for better management which leads to better environmental outcomes | + | Defined as “clear”, if the study had information on both de jure and de facto rights and no disagreements or conflicts between users were cited |
− | Defined as “unclear”, if the study mentioned several right holders and presence of disagreements or conflicts over rights | ||
Stability of rights | Greater stability of rights (e.g. security of tenure) encourages greater investment in management which leads to better environmental outcomes | + | Defined as “stable”, if the study had no information on the likelihood of revocation of rights or limitation to the duration of rights. Rights limited in scope (e.g. rights only to NTFP products) were not considered as part of the stability question |
− | Defined as “unstable”, if the study mentioned conflicts and had information on the likelihood of revocation of rights or limitation to the duration of rights | ||
Level of enforcement | Presence of high levels of enforcement will lead to better environmental outcomes | + | Information on enforcement (e.g. patrolling and monitoring) |
Legitimacy of decision-making authority over rights | High legitimacy of decision-making authorities will lead to higher compliance with resource management rules which will affect environmental outcomes | + | Information regarding internal decision making processes, and to what extent was the decision making inclusive (not excluding certain groups) |
Gender equity of property rights | Gender equity in the distribution of property rights provides greater incentives for women to participate in decision-making over resource management and use. When women are involved in decision-making, levels of compliance among the community should increase, reducing the occurrence of disruptive conflicts and thus may lead to better environmental outcomes | + | Information on gender equity in the distribution of property rights |
Presence of external support | Greater external support for property rights regime (with objective of environmental benefits) will lead to better environmental outcomes | + | Information regarding support by external actors such as NGOs, donors, or companies for the property regime was noted |
Protection status | If area is formally protected by law, designation, or customary practice, better environmental outcomes are expected | + | Classified by the following designations: IUCN protection category and other kinds of formal protection; informal or private protection (without state recognition); not a protected area |
Socio-economic context | |||
Population | High population density may result in higher surrounding resource use, leading to resource degradation | − | Population density and change in population in the study/resource area |
Market demand on resource | High local and external demand results in greater resource use, leading to resource degradation | − | Local and external market demand |
Economic inequality | High economic inequality may result in conflict and undermine incentives for sustainable resource use, and may result in worse environmental outcomes | − | Measures of economic inequality as stated in the study and as reported by Gini index |
Presence of environmental education initiatives | Education may lead to greater environmental awareness and thus to better environmental outcomes | + | Information on environmental education initiatives,such as a conservation programme with educational component |
Presence of public infrastructure | Presence of public infrastructure may facilitate greater access, demand and use of natural resources and thus lead to worse environmental outcomes | − | Information on presence of infrastructure e.g. roads, ports, power supply |
Political context | |||
World Bank income level | No specific hypotheses. High variation confounds results. Income-level used simply to classify countries | Classified as low, middle or upper middle income countries | |
History and presence of decentralization | Successful decentralization of resource management may result in greater local accountability, resulting in better environmental outcomes | + (if decentralization is successful) | History and presence of decentralization |
Nature of the political regime | The presence of democratic political processes and freedoms may allow for greater participation in decision-making, resulting in improved environmental policy formulation and implementation which leads to better environmental goals | + | Nature of political regime |
Corruption | The presence and level of corruption may undermine incentives for sustainable resource use and lead to worse environmental outcomes | − | Presence of corruption in the study and as reported by the Transparency International corruption index |