Interesting analysis. Based on this summary (I have not read the paper), an alternative argument would be based on the statement that the guidelines limited the range of stakeholders in WMOs: if government had left this open to local communities to decide, WMOs might have proved more effective. I carry this argument further: government should allow communities to decide whether they wish to management resources through UMOs or create purposeful institutions through which they can manage resources. I take an 'institutional creativity' perspective drawn from Cleaver--this paper's solution remains too prescriptive [based on this summary].
Interesting analysis. Based on this summary (I have not read the paper), an alternative argument would be based on the statement that the guidelines limited the range of stakeholders in WMOs: if government had left this open to local communities to decide, WMOs might have proved more effective. I carry this argument further: government should allow communities to decide whether they wish to management resources through UMOs or create purposeful institutions through which they can manage resources. I take an 'institutional creativity' perspective drawn from Cleaver--this paper's solution remains too prescriptive [based on this summary].