The proliferation of a nongovernmental sector held the promise of linking local actors with national and international ones, thereby contributing to a highly participatory, Habermasian ideal in which the formerly marginalized would find greater participation and expression. Yet the role of international agents in community‐based resource management projects has recently come under scrutiny. In addressing these issues in this article, I consider the roles of different interlocutors in two contrastive phases in an Amazonian community's movement to preserve its endangered fisheries. The comparative exercise demonstrates how institutional agents, by establishing a discourse that structures the criteria through which collective demands may be problematized, may inadvertently shift from mediation to domination, and from local partnering to local production.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Janet Chernela (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: