Premium
Beyond utopia and a ‘power‐full’ state: a reply to N uesiri
Author(s) -
Asiyanbi Adeniyi P
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
the geographical journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.071
H-Index - 64
eISSN - 1475-4959
pISSN - 0016-7398
DOI - 10.1111/geoj.12146
Subject(s) - framing (construction) , rhetoric , decentralization , utopia , opposition (politics) , power (physics) , loyalty , political science , political economy , state (computer science) , law and economics , sociology , law , philosophy , politics , geography , theology , physics , archaeology , algorithm , quantum mechanics , computer science
Struggles of communities for rights and control over forests continue despite the rhetoric about decentralisation. Nuesiri suggests that a failing of decentralised forest management stems from its pure utopian vision that attracts both loyalty and opposition. I argue that such framing is as novel as it is problematic. A utopian frame unhelpfully purifies. It assumes that the often declared proponents of decentralisation were thoroughly ambitious about ‘creating space for communities’. Explanations suggesting that the state selectively shares its power risk portraying non‐state actors as passively waiting for a ‘power‐full’ state to share power. I show, through an example of an I ntegrated C onservation and D evelopment P roject in N igeria, how the often declared proponents of decentralisation may not have been as ambitious as a utopian frame suggests. I argue that a failing of decentralised forest management might be precisely that it probably never was a utopia. A reply to Nuesiri (2014)