Economic incentives for natural resources management

Technical, off-the-shelf, solutions exist in abundance. Few, however, are implementable in the field because they are either too costly, too time consuming, or because policy, economic, sociological or cultural constraints preclude their successful implementation. In the past, project planning has suffered from inadequate attention to important detail. Too often, simplistic cost-benefit calculations fail to capture differences in land quality or the goals and motivations of African households. The results of such cost-benefit analyses have nonetheless been used to decide the merits of potential projects. Numerous field studies have shown that there is much more to NRM than cost-benefit analyses can accommodate. Analyses need to be richer both quantitatively and qualitatively. More planning precision from the farmer, donor, and host country perspectives is required if a new generation of NRM strategies is to be credible. The first and most important focus of the study is to understand the local perspective and to incorporate this understanding into the design of NRM projects or programs. The second and third foci are to address donor and host country investment requirements and benefits in the context of NRM field interventions. The emphasis of the study is economic (or financial) in the sense that the results are expressed in economic terms. Standard cost-benefit analysis is a useful tool for assessing the relative attractiveness of alternative NRM interventions. NRM projects must and should compete with alternative investment opportunities without having to be "subsidized" to make them more attractive. The level of detail and care with which the assumptions are developed for cost-benefit analysis from the farmer"s perspective, however, should be considerably higher than the norm. In Africa, the difference between what will or will not work, or between financial feasibility or non-feasibility, can often be traced to one or several sociological details that many analysts would rarely consider, let alone take into account in an analytical context, such as the social status, age and gender of participants, and the distinction between the value of wage and non-wage labor. (Author abstract)