and examined in interaction with each other. He maintains that such institutions constantly interact with one another both horizontally (i.e., at the same scale or level of social organization) and vertically (i.e., across scales, from the local through the national and international levels). Young presents a preliminary taxonomy of such interactions in 2 × 2 matrix form, which he titles “types of institutional interplay.” One dimension of the classification is separated into “functional” and “political” interplay, while the other dimension is divided into “horizontal” and “vertical” interplay. Young’s analysis is concerned primarily with vertical, functional interplay among local, national, and international institutions, but as is pointed out in the concluding chapter of this volume, horizontal interactions are becoming increasingly important in the current global context.

Young specifically examines vertical interplay in two distinct areas—terrestrial and marine ecosystems—and the contending positions of national and local institutions and the relationships between international regimes and individual nation states. There is great drama here stemming from the high number of recurring conflicts, clashes, and negotiations between/among actors at various scales or levels of social organization. Compounding the complexity of the interplay between and among these actors is the relative symmetry or asymmetry in the power they hold. Between national and local actors, clashes frequently involve the counterclaims of national governments to what is classified as “public property” and of local actors to what are perceived as common-pool resources. Between international and national organizations, conflicts can emanate from many factors, including a “bad fit” between international agreements and the capacity, compatibility, and competence of national organizations to implement these agreements. Young concludes with the hopeful suggestion that a greater understanding of the dynamics of institutional interplay can be used to design and revamp institutions in order to better ameliorate large-scale, negative environmental impacts.

Berkes’ chapter grows out of his decades-long empirical research on local institutions that are concerned with managing common-pool resources. His chapter adds local specificity to the concerns voiced by Young. Berkes delineates a number of cross-scale institutional forms and their effectiveness in being able to link levels of institutions. He begins with a review of the positive and negative effects of higher level institutions on local institutions as a way of demonstrating the importance of examining multiscale institutions and processes. These include impacts due to the centralization of decision making, to shifts in systems of knowledge, to colonization and decolonization, to nationalization of resources, to increased participation in markets, and to the implementation of development policies. Berkes then goes on to delineate a variety of institutional forms that show some promise to facilitate effective cross-scale interactions. Among these are the diverse forms categorized under the umbrella term, “co-management,” multistakeholder bodies, development/empowerment/co-management organizations, citizen science, policy communities, and social movement networks. Berkes is



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement