Abstract:
The goal of this dissertation is to advance the theory of common-pool resources in
three different but interrelated ways: (1) Common-pool resources theory has identified a
number of factors that play an important role on human groups' ability to engage in
successful institutional change. However it is still not clear which are their causal
relationships on specific contexts. This study looks at the relationship between two of the
aforementioned factors: local leadership and local autonomy. It does so in the context of
the decentralization of the governance of protected areas for biodiversity conservation in
Costa Rica. (2) Historically, common-pool resources theory has paid limited attention to
the interactions between local institutions and higher levels of governance. This study
incorporates the analysis of cross-scale institutional linkages into the assessment of
decentralization reforms in Costa Rica. (3) To do so it incorporates an analytical approach that allows for systematic and rigorous comparisons of small-to-moderate-sized
Ns and is apt at handling multiple-causality outcomes. Looking at these issues in the
context of the decentralization of biodiversity governance in Costa Rica is relevant
because it is the most biodiverse country per unit of area in the world, and during the last
twenty years has experimented with decentralization policies to create locally-based
institutions for biodiversity conservation. Among my most relevant findings are: (1) that
the presence of local leadership is positively related to institutions ability to gain local
autonomy from the central government. (2) However, in the context of a class-based
society with a strong urban-rural divide, the emergence of local leadership for conservation in rural settings is likely not able to take place by itself without support
from within the bureaucratic structure. (3) More diverse are better than less diverse sets
of cross-scale linkages in local institutions' ability to gain and maintain local autonomy
overtime. (4) Local autonomy can help local institutions increase their potential for
biodiversity conservation as long as there are well-defined institutional arrangements in
place. Otherwise, local institutions might find themselves pursuing other agendas that
might have an unclear relation with biodiversity conservation.
