Local Communities as Learning Organizations

The case of the village of Toro, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia

Michael Fremerey

STORMA Discussion Paper Series

Sub-program A on Social and Economic Dynamics in Rain Forest Margins

No. 6 (September 2002)

Research Project on Stability of Rain Forest Margins (STORMA)

Funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under SFB 552

2

Editorial Board

Prof. Dr. Michael Fremerey Institute of Socio-cultural Studies, University of

Kassel, Germany Prof. Dr. Bunasor Sanim Faculty of Economics, Bogor Agricultural

University, Indonesia Dr. M.T. Felix Sitorus Department of Socio-Economic Sciences, Bogor

Agricultural University, Indonesia Prof. Dr. Manfred Zeller Institute of Rural Development, University of

Göttingen, Germany Managing editors Dr. Siawuch Amini Institute of Socio-cultural and Socio-economic

Studies, University of Kassel, Germany Dr. Regina Birner Institute of Rural Development, University of

Göttingen, Germany Dr. Günter Burkard Institute of Socio-cultural and Socio-economic

Studies, University of Kassel, Germany Dr. Heiko Faust Department of Geography, Division of Cultural

and Social Geography, University of Göttingen, Germany

Dr. Teunis van Rheenen Institute of Rural Development, University of Göttingen, Germany

The Author Prof. Dr. Michael Fremerey Vice-Speaker of STORMA Director, Institute for Socio-cultural Studies, University of Kassel Steinstr. 19, D-37213 Witzenhausen Tel.: xx49 (0)5542 981299 E-mail: fremerey@wiz.uni-kassel.de

3

Contents Summary 4 1 Introduction 4 2 Local organizations as agents of change 5 3 The “social actor” approach 6 4 The notion of local knowledge 7 5 The concept of the “learning organization” 8 6 Management of common pool resources as an organizational learning process 10 7 The village of Toro as a “learning organization” 11 7.1 A short village profile 12 7.2 External factors 13 7.3 Vision and leadership 14 7.4 Acquisition of knowledge 16 7.5 Dissemination of knowledge 17 7.6 Utilization of knowledge 18 8 Conclusions 20 References 22 Appendix 24

4

Local Communities as Learning Organizations. The case of the village of Toro, Central Sulawesi, Indonesia Summary In this paper the village of Toro is described as a ‘learning organization’, with reference to theoretical considerations on the concepts of ‘social actor’ and ‘local knowledge’. In view of the dominant communal issue, i.e. the autonomous management of forest resources, considerations are put in the frame of theoretical and empirical research on the governance of ‘common pool resources’. Though empirical data are still fragmentary, it is concluded that Toro, in terms of acquisition, dissemination and utilization of knowledge, shows good promise to develop an organizational learning pattern, which comes up to the prerequisites of sustainable environmental management. Keywords: local organization, organizational learning, common pool resources, rainforest, social actor, local knowledge, Indonesia. 1 Introduction The following considerations are related to the question as to how local communities adjacent to the Lore Lindu National Park internally manage the interaction between man and natural environment. The latter is essentially constituted by the forest area of the National Park, which, though officially determined as “prohibited area”, is regarded here in the villagers’ perception as “common pool resource” (Ostrom 1990). The villagers themselves are conceived as “appropriators” (ibid., 30), i.e. those who withdraw natural resources from the forest and transform the forest margin area into an intensively used source of livelihood. Fundamental to this is the issue of sustainability, and that in dual regard: on the one hand, the long-term capacity of the natural environment as a source of livelihood is at stake; on the other hand, local communities are challenged by the intention of government agencies to withdraw any rights of utilization and related self-determination, if reliable processes of resource management are not developed and implemented locally. The empirical basis of this paper is a limited field study in the village of Toro. This village has been selected for pragmatic reasons: Toro is widely known as a community which has developed concrete measures in order to meet the above mentioned challenges. Thus, relevant organizational processes are, in a way, more “tangible” than in many other local communities of the region. Accordingly, Toro is one of the few villages at the border of the Lore Lindu National Park which have been officially granted a certain degree of autonomy in planning and monitoring the utilization of natural resources in the forest area. Irrespective of this, it is not intended to portray Toro as a case of “best practice”. Firstly, the empirical data are far too fragmentary to cope with such demands. Secondly, it is more than doubtful whether the search for “best practice” models makes any sense under the given distinct diversity of local communities in the Lore Lindu region. Any attempt to do so would run the risk of implicitly recommending forms of external intervention which are not adjusted to specific local conditions.

5

Hence, Toro rather serves as an example from which approaches towards organizational research and guidelines for further investigation may be deduced. This objective is pursued in the light of a theoretical framework that goes beyond conventional structuralistic and normative paradigms, emphasizing the significance of collective learning processes in local communities. 2 Local organizations as agents of change It is a widely shared assumption that “forms of peasant or local organization can play a crucial role in processes of rural development” (Nuijten 1992, 189). There is every reason to believe that the neglect or misconception of the organizational factor accounts for the vast majority of failures in almost five decades of efforts towards sustainable rural development and natural resources utilization. One may resort to three broad issues in rural development, which indicate the necessity to found such processes on reliable and sustainable organizational structures and processes (Fremerey 2000, 97): Identifying and solving complex and interrelated problems Rural development and, in this context, the management of natural resources, are processes which always affect larger groups of people or whole communities; changes in one sector inevitably produce effects in others. Moreover, major efforts demand the strength, effectiveness and multiple competence contained in concerted planning and action. Integrating marginalized population groups Processes of socio-economic change often tend to aggravate the situation of already marginalized parts of the local population (e.g. women, poor), or to reinforce the boundaries between different population groups (e.g. ethnic communities). Without adequate integration into a responsive organizational setting or practice, socially or economically marginalized groups do not only suffer further discrimination, they also may constitute a major threat to the overall development process of the respective community. Safeguarding local autonomy and participation Failures in rural development are often conditioned by the lack of autonomy granted to the local communities in the process of decision making and implementation. More often than not, innovations are imposed on the communities from outside, and thus fail to attain legitimacy in the eyes of the local population (Braun & Fremerey 1991). Under such conditions, acceptance is jeopardized and genuine participation prevented. To counteract such a common “disease” in rural development efforts, the strengthening (or acknowledgement) of local organizations is indicated, which are based on the principle of legitimate representation are in a position to identify local objectives generate the knowledge required to define local development problems have the legitimacy, competence and power to set binding norms and enforce

corresponding sanctions. People in rural areas all over the world have long-standing traditions in collective planning and action to improve their social and economic existence. Beyond mere practicalities, organization in rural communities represents such fundamental issues as identity and socio-

6

cultural cohesiveness. Irrespective of this, the notion of organization in rural development has become remarkably narrow and utilitarian in the process of planned and centralized efforts of socio-economic change. Linked to these efforts, Monique Nuijten states a “striking lack of theoretical understanding of how people strategically organize themselves” (Nuijten 1992, 189), notwithstanding whether approaches of “intervention” or “empowerment” are concerned (ibid., 201). Both strategies generally fail to recognize the “different meanings that local forms of organization have for the people themselves”, and “to appreciate the role of existing forms of organizing”. Fundamental to such unilateral perceptions are preconceived goal orientations and the relation to “a strong belief in formal bureaucratic organization and rationality” (ibid., 202). 3 The “social actor” approach Against these misconceptions it has to be stated that the notion of organization is not limited to a set of manageable structural and procedural properties. In essence it is rather a continuous and dynamic process of interaction which, in its meanings and relevance, is peculiar and unique to the actors involved. Hence, similar organizational structures in different communities may produce quite divergent processes of interaction with corresponding variations in collective behaviour. This understanding of organization highlights the importance of peculiar local characteristics, if the functions, processes and achievements of collective decision making and action are to be investigated or evaluated. Faced with the diverging attitudes and approaches of village communities in the Western Ghats of India towards the protection of forest margin areas, Urs Geiser concluded that the individual local dynamics are often underestimated (Geiser 1998, 214). This conclusion derives from the fact that these villages shared common features with regard to their demographic and socio-economic situation. Accordingly, conventional structuralistic and generalizing approaches which, for instance, emphasize the impact of population pressure or poverty on the exploitation of natural resources, have little to contribute to the explanation of factual variations (ibid., 213). A quite similar situation emerges from our research in forest border communities around the Lore Lindu National Park, suggesting a research methodology which, at least for the first phases of investigation, focuses attention on the peculiarities of organizational processes in individual communities. This would correspond with the empirically validated recommendation of Norman Long and Jan Douwe van der Ploeg, not to see farmers “as the passive recipients or victims of planned change, nor as so routinized that they simply follow laid-down rules or conventions” (Long & v.d. Ploeg 1994, 69). Local communities rather tend to define their situation and strategies according to their particular socio-political and socio-cultural conditions. These, in turn, constitute a community-specific “mind map”, which filters and transforms external inputs in order to exclude them or to adjust them to the local parameters. The considerations described link up with an “actor-oriented” approach which accentuates the importance of “existing life-worlds” (ibid., 64) in attributing individual “meaning” (Blaikie 1997, 80) to external inputs and issues of everyday life. According to this approach, attitudes, intentions and behaviour can only be comprehended on the basis of such individual sets of meaning or “constructions”. Yet, with reference to Bourdieu’s concept of habitus (Bourdieu 1981, 305), Long and van der Ploeg reasonably argue that a pure actor-oriented approach implies the “tendency to adopt a voluntaristic view of decision making”, and pays “insufficient attention to examining how individual choices were shaped by larger frames of meaning and action” (Long & v.d. Ploeg 1994, 65). Consequently, they extend the original

7

actor-oriented approach to the concept of “social actor” or “agency” (ibid., 66). It focuses on “networks of actors”, which frame the conditions of interpersonal exchange in a clearly defined community (“agency”). The individual actor is thus transformed into a “socially constructed” actor, whose attitudes and behaviour are to a considerable extent determined by the local culture in which he is embedded. From this view, the virtues of the actor-orientation may be transferred to the level of local organization. This refers in particular to the recognition of capabilities of independent learning. Long and van der Ploeg give prominence to these learning capabilities, emphasizing that “social actors are ‘knowledgeable’ and ‘capable’. They attempt to solve problems, learn how to intervene in the flow of social events around them, and monitor continuously their own actions, observing how others react to their behaviour and taking note of the various contingent circumstances” (ibid., 66). In his guiding work on social organization in Javanese villages, Sediono Tjondronegoro (1984) is concerned with the difficulty of determining organizational structures and entities in the village which are meaningful for the inhabitants. He argues that post-traditional institutions invented and enforced by the central government have, by and large, “remained … beyond the scope of village life” (ibid., 14). In many cases, this may even include the institution of village (desa) itself, as far as it constitutes a somewhat artificial entity of diverse and self-contained neighbourhood communities (rukun kampung). In spite of this valid notion, we will tentatively refer to the village of Toro as a “social actor”. On the one hand, this is derived from the fact that the people of Toro, de facto, have a vital common concern, i.e. the sustainable management of the village’s forest resources. On the other hand, there are indications that the village leaders and the various sub-communities also perceive this issue as a joint one, and try to act accordingly. Subsequent empirical research will have to go into more detailed analysis, in order to discover such organizational entities which distinctively “denote feelings of affection, mutual responsibility, and obligation among members” (ibid., 17). Thus it can be expected that the profile of Toro in terms of social organization becomes much more differentiated. To what extent such differentiation impedes or enhances a process of organizational learning at the village level remains to be seen. 4 The notion of local knowledge The issue of learning in village communities is inseparably linked to the existence and generation of local or indigenous knowledge. In our understanding, this category of knowledge comprises both, the locally stored experience handed down and adapted from generation to generation, as well as knowledge acquired from external sources and transformed into locally meaningful bits of information. This transformation process is determined by special codes and categories, constituting a unique local ‘reality’ which may differ widely from the ‘reality’ of the original knowledge provider. The definition of borderlines between cultivated areas and protected forest in villages adjacent to the Lore Lindu National Park is an interesting case in point: the Park Authority, in the first instance, defined the border according to ‘superior’ imperatives of nature conservation and ecological stability. This information entered the villages and was there measured against local stocks of knowledge which varied according to different traditions, beliefs and communal practices. Many villages stick to the principle of ‘free access’ to the forest resources, referring to a quasi natural right which declares the forest as an economic ‘reserve’. Where such ‘knowledge’ prevails, the resistance against any externally imposed limits will be

8

considerably strong. Other villages base their knowledge of borderlines on traditional regulations of customary law (adat). No matter how ‘accurate’ this knowledge is, it determines the perceptions of villagers as to the ‘correct’ boundaries between areas of utilization and protected forest. Finally, there are a few villages which have defined ecologically well-founded zones of graded utilization or non-utilization in the forest. These definitions may be partly supported by the local adat; in essence, however, they are based on the generation of detailed local knowledge about the composition of the ecosystem and the threats by which it is affected. Such villages will try to convince the Park Authority that their local knowledge is superior to the information on which the official establishment of the boundary was based. It is futile to discuss whether, ‘objectively’ speaking, these different stocks of knowledge are right or wrong, or which one is more accurate than others. The essential point is that the protagonists have a clear idea as to which knowledge is right or wrong. This perception determines intentions and behaviour and, simultaneously, establishes some exclusiveness. In other words: “…knowledge is constructive in the sense that it is the result of a great number of decisions and selective incorporations of previous ideas, beliefs and images, but at the same time deconstructive of other possible frames of conceptualisation and understanding” (Arce & Long 1992, 211). The attempt to discover “the real facts” (ibid.) would not lead very far in assessing the importance of local knowledge for processes of development and change. It may be very interesting, however, to investigate which forms of local knowledge are more likely to successfully compete or enter a symbiosis with external knowledge and thus gain in impact and persuasiveness. In this regard, it should be presumed that knowledge which, as represented by the last given example, has emanated from a continuous learning process, has a clear edge on the more static and ‘conservative’ forms of indigenous knowledge. The case of the village of Toro, which will be outlined later on, may admit of some relevant conclusions. 5 The concept of the “learning organization” From both scenarios, social actor and local knowledge, though documented here in a rather selective form, we can deduce the importance of gaining more insight into the process of learning in defined communities. Such insight could lead to an identification of locally relevant “cognitive maps” (ibid., 212) and hence to a better understanding of the communities’ reality. Consequently, these efforts may enhance the appreciation of different autochthonous ways of coping with problems which affect the socio-economic security of villages. At a different level of analysis, investigations into the collective learning process could expose barriers which impede the continuous growth and completion of local knowledge. Proceeding from here, measures for overcoming such barriers may be finally discussed. Concerning the last two aspects it should be emphasized, however, that at these stages of investigation a conflict of realities (i.e. the reality of the researcher and the one of the investigated community) could thrust the perspective of the local community into the background and thereby initiate an intervention which, in itself, may constitute a major barrier for a locally ‘meaningful’ process of learning. One is justified in assuming that the abundance of failures of rural development schemes during the past decades are, to a substantial degree, to be attributed to premature interventions, which cut short the understanding of local learning processes and their underlying realities. This holds true even for many benevolent and ‘neo-populist’ approaches, which highlight the importance of participation and locally generated knowledge but, in effect, determine externally which

9

knowledge and what kind of participation is conducive for achieving the pre-set goals (Nuijten 1992, 202). Complementing the ideas of “social actor” and “local knowledge”, modern communication and organization theory has opened new dimensions for the investigation and understanding of collective learning processes. This applies in particular to the newly developed concept of the “learning organization”. On the one hand, it provides a theoretical framework which claims adaptability to different cultural settings. On the other hand, this concept supplies us with analytical tools to investigate attributes, which characterize organizational processes rather than structures (Fremerey 2000). At first sight, one is tempted to associate “learning” with a process that occurs only in the mind of an individual person. There is, however, little reason to reject the assumption that learning is also continuously taking place in organizational entities – either in the form of accumulated individual learning or as a collective process characterizing a distinct corporate culture and outlook. Whatever line of thinking one tends to adhere to (for details see Cohen & Sproull 1996), one can hardly escape the realization that learning in or of organizations is vital to their effective and responsive functioning – in short: for their long-term survival. As in the case of individuals, organizational learning comprises the acquisition of knowledge and competence, as well as the development of awareness and attitudes. The focus of learning is threefold and concentrates on the organization itself, its environment and, last but not least, on the relationship between the organization and its environment. While there is a wide-spread agreement on such basic characteristics of organizational learning, the individual approaches towards understanding, assessing and promoting such learning processes differ considerably. This becomes obvious in the various attempts to define “organizational learning” or “learning organizations”, some of which are cited below: Anthony DiBella and Edwin Nevis define “organizational learning as the capacity or

processes within an organization to maintain or improve performance based on experience” (DiBella & Nevis 1998, 28).

According to Peter Senge, a learning organization is “an organization that is continually expanding its capacity to create its future” (Senge 1990, 14).

James March et al. differentiate between reliability and validity in processes of organizational learning: “a reliable learning process” is “one by which an organization develops common understandings of its experience and makes its interpretations public, stable, and shared”. A “valid learning process (is) one by which an organization is able to understand, predict, and control its environment” (March et al. 1996, 8).

One could add many other definitions and thereby extend the complexity of nuances in the perception of learning organizations – an exercise which would hardly produce relevant information in our concern. One may, however, refer to a more general feature which separates the various perspectives into two broad groups, the first of which tends more to “diagnosis” and the second to “therapy”. The first rests on the assumption, that “organizations as social systems are by their very nature environments in which learning takes place … The focus is not on some future vision of becoming a learning organization, but on the learning processes that already exist” (DiBella & Nevis 1998, 12). This notion consciously takes into account the above mentioned temptation to intervene in autochthonous learning processes and thereby deprive them of their authenticity and relevance. In contrast to this, the second perception proceeds from the view that organizations have to develop (or be helped to develop) particular qualities in order to become learning organizations – a line of thinking

10

which, among others, has been most effectively and popularly adopted by Peter Senge (1990). Such differentiations which somehow distinguish between “learning” (being able to stand on one’s own feet) and “educating” (guiding somebody out of ignorance) are not to be undervalued. They are directly related to the recognition of basic organizational values like autonomy and integrity. However, the borderlines between these two conceptions are getting permeable in cases where urgent and goal-oriented intervention is required. Even protagonists of a distinct non-directive approach concede that under unstable environmental conditions the “normative perspective affirms the legitimacy for change and provides clear direction” (DiBella & Nevis 1998, 18). In the next paragraph we will deal with such a scenario in greater detail. 6 Management of common pool resources as an organizational learning process As explained at the outset, a major challenge local communities bordering the Lore Lindu National Park have to meet, is to manage the use of forest areas – even beyond the officially recognized zones of utilization in the forest margin. Following Elinor Ostrom (1990), we refer to these areas as “common pool resources” (CPRs). Though most government authorities would presumably reject this notion and, indeed, the institution of common property of natural resources is widely unknown in the Lore Lindu region, it seems to be justified to regard the forest as a CPR. This is not only in conformity with the unequivocal perception of villagers that the forest is an important and jointly utilized source of their livelihood. Some government agencies, as in particular the Park Authority, are also inclined to shift from their restrictive viewpoint towards more understanding of the socio-economic realities in the villages. Herewith, the actual situation in the Lore Lindu National Park largely corresponds with Ostrom’s definition of a CPR as “a natural … resource system that is sufficiently large as to make it costly … to exclude potential beneficiaries from obtaining benefits from its use” (Ostrom 1990, 30). Prominent theories on the utilization of common pool resources have cast a lurid light on the capability of villagers to manage the utilization of natural resources in a sustainable way. Among the most influential ones are Hardin’s “tragedy of the commons” (Hardin 1968) and Olson’s “logic of collective action” (Olson 1965). These sweeping theories are not devoid of empirical evidence, and it is indeed not difficult to present plenty of examples which demonstrate the collapse of local CPR planning and monitoring systems due to the pursuit of individual economic benefits or the lack of involved and responsive leadership. However, aside from some questionable generalizations on human (in)capabilities and motives, they manifest two major shortcomings: (1) The implicit or explicit call for intervention in order to solve the local CPR problems can not be substantiated by any evidence that external regulations and control could do any better than internal ones. (2) These theories provide no explanation for the successful performance of those communities which have not fallen victims to the “tragedy of the commons” or the (assumed) “logic of collective action”. Hence, in correspondence with Urs Geiser’s (1998) creative inquisitiveness, we should turn our attention to the organizational dynamics and subsequently to the processes of organizational learning in such communities. In both regards, Elinor Ostrom gives us some lead based on a substantial amount of empirical data. As to the organizational aspect, she identifies a couple of “design principles” for CPR-related rules, which help to gain voluntary compliance and to promote effective monitoring (Ostrom 1990, 185 f). Three of these principles are of special significance in our context: (1)

11

such rules should be designed “at least in part by local appropriators”; (2) monitoring should be performed “by individuals accountable to local appropriators”; (3) sanctioning should be guided by the principle of “graduated punishment”. The foundation for effectively organizing the common pool resources, however, is the capacity to generate relevant knowledge or, in other words, to initiate and maintain a collective learning process. According to Ostrom, it refers, among others, to “the exact structure of the resource system”, “its boundary and internal characteristics”, “careful observation” and the preservation and passing along of knowledge (ibid., 33). As we will see in our further analysis, these properties are of crucial relevance in the case of the village of Toro. Yet, they undoubtedly bear some imprints of normative assumptions, as far as they suggest that particular organizational and learning characteristics should be met if local CPR management is to be successful. In line with our discussion above, it may be further assumed that such normative assertions could easily induce us to fall back upon an interventionist approach, i.e. to make village communities perform according to a blueprint scheme. This would exclude any autochthonous solutions, which apply different parameters (e.g. traditional autocratic leadership, non-graduated severe punishment, vague but culturally deep-rooted knowledge about the functioning of the eco-system) from consideration. It may even be suspected that we as Western oriented scholars tend to look for such ‘success stories’ which fit into our ‘enlightened’ frame of reference, and then declare them as exemplary models. The danger of walking into these kinds of traps should not be underestimated. However, Elinor Ostrom seems to be very much aware of such pitfalls, as expressed by her explicit doubts regarding the validity of models: “To make a model tractable, theorists must make simplifying assumptions. Many of these assumptions are equivalent to setting a parameter … equal to a constant … Apparent simplicity and generality are not, however, equivalent. Setting a variable equal to a constant usually narrows … the range of applicability of a model” (Ostrom 1990, 184). Consistently, she refers to her treatise on ‘Governing the Commons’ as a “framework” and not as a “model” (ibid., 214). 7 The village of Toro as a “learning organization” The preceding considerations should waken our curiosity to a variety of approaches towards organizational learning in CPR-contexts. In the introduction of this paper the reasons for selecting Toro as one example have been briefly explained. It needs to be added that the objective is not just to understand how the organizational learning process in this particular community is functioning. The analysis should rather include the specific goal to which learning is directed, i.e. ensuring sustainability of forest resources, which, in effect, means achieving compatibility of human utilization on the one hand and maintenance of biodiversity, nutrient cycles and regeneration capacities on the other. In view of the severely threatened equilibrium and the pending restrictive government intervention, this undeniably constitutes a scenario which falls under the above mentioned category of ‘unstable environmental conditions’. Accordingly, the normative impact from individual examples of successful forest resources management may be considerably high. In our tentative analysis of organizational learning in Toro, we will resort to a methodological concept which has been developed by Anthony DiBella and Edwin Nevis (1998). It ideally combines a non-directive way of assessment with the identification of indicators for potential intervention. Thus it appears to be particularly suited for organizational settings which

12

demand respect of autonomy and integrity on the one hand, and care for survival (and against external encroachment) under adverse environmental conditions on the other. DiBella and Nevis base their approach on an ‘organizational learning cycle’ which contains the (interlinked) phases of ‘acquisition’, ‘dissemination’ and ‘utilization’ of information and knowledge: To each stage they relate particular ‘learning orientations’ and ‘facilitating factors’ which characterize the mode of learning as well as respective learning capabilities. Besides that, they have identified certain core orientations and factors (joint vision, involved leadership and system perspective), which have an impact on all three stages mentioned. The complete model is shown in the appendix. It may help to design in-depth investigations into the preconditions and practice of organizational learning in selected communities. Due to the still limited data base for Toro, we will follow only the broadest categories. 7.1 A short village profile Toro is located above the Kulawi valley at the Western part of the Lore Lindu region, 86 km from the provincial capital of Palu. Being surrounded by protected forest in the South, East and North, it almost has the characteristics of an enclave in the National Park. The 536 households, with a total of slightly more than 2000 inhabitants, are composed of a variety of different religious and ethnic groups: The majority (463 households) are Christians of various Protestant denominations. Most of them belong to the dominant ethnic group of Toro, others descent from South Sulawesi (Rampi) or from neighbouring areas (Winatu). The 73 Muslim households are partly of Buginese origin (South Sulawesi), the majority, however, are Toro who converted from Christianity during recent decades. According to oral history, the village was founded in the 16th century by tribal war refugees, coming from the South-eastern part of the Lore Lindu region. After a long odyssey they finally settled at the present place, which they called ‘Toro’ – literally ‘the last’. The arrival of other ethnic groups from neighbouring areas dates only back to the 1950ies. Migrants from more remote regions (Toraja, Bugis, Minahasa) did not enter the village before 1965. Besides Bahasa Indonesia as a lingua franca, the common language of the villagers is Kulawi or Moma. Irrespective of the religious and ethnic diversity, the communal life in Toro is known as peaceful and cooperative. The village area comprises a total of 22,950 ha, of which only about 1000 ha are permanently cultivated *. The rest is forest land and part of the National Park. 475 ha of the permanent cultivated area is covered by wet rice fields (sawah), the other 525 ha are grown, in equal shares, with seasonal crops (palawija) or perennials (in particular cacao and coffee). Shifting cultivation came to an end in the early 1970ies. With a few exceptions, all households in Toro live from agriculture, agroforestry and some fresh-water fishery, supplemented by collection of forest products. The latter includes hunting, collecting of wood (fuel, housing) and nutrient plants, as well as harvesting of rattan (rotan) and resin (damar). Animal husbandry is of minor importance, though water buffaloes (about 50), cattle (about 200), pigs (about 150) and chicken are kept for field-work and consumption. Ownership of animals plays a major role in life-cycle rites where the host family is expected to immolate a number of buffaloes or cattle according to its social and economic status. Socio-economic stratification among the villagers is visible, though it is not extreme. Only a few households own more than 5 ha of cultivated land, whereby individual sawah property, as the economically most valuable asset (the rice of Toro is known in the

* Some of the data in this paragraph are taken from: STORMA, Survei Sosial Ekonomi Tingkat Desa, 2001

13

region for its particularly high quality), hardly exceeds 2 ha. Yet, there are cases of impoverishment in Toro which have led to more than 30 cases of land sale within the last decade. The fact that some of this land went to external owners is a particular concern of the village leaders. For those approximately 80 households who own less than 0,5 ha of cultivable land, the access to the forest resources is of particular importance for securing their livelihood. However, this may hold also true for a considerable part of the more than 200 families, who have less than 1 ha at their disposal, particularly if their land does not include sawah fields. The villagers’ access to the forest resources was officially suspended in 1982, when government authorities drew a borderline between the newly defined village lands and the protected forest. As in the case of many other villages adjacent to the National Park, extension of this border was rather arbitrary, not taking into account customary regulations or even actual patterns of utilization. Violations against the access ban were punished with severe (though hardly executed) sanctions. The situation dramatically changed in 2001, when Toro was granted a wide autonomy to regulate and monitor the forest utilization of the villagers. The area falling under the agreement signed in 2000 covers the whole 22.950 ha claimed as customary village land by the Toro people. The foundation of this agreement is an accurately drawn map of the forest area concerned, containing details of coverage and clearly defined grades of access, utilization and protection. Complemented by regulations of monitoring, control and sanctioning, it finally came up to the Park Authority’s demands for an adequate protection of the National Park. What happened in Toro between 1982 and 2001 is evidence of an intensive and, up to this stage, apparently successful organizational learning process. 7.2 External factors Local processes of organizational learning can not be evaluated without taking into account external factors which, in various ways, have an impact on the readiness and the capabilities to learn and, last but not least, on the effects of learning. Referring to the management of common pool resources, Elinor Ostrom emphasizes that “a theory of self-organization and self-governance of smaller units within larger political systems must overtly take the activities of surrounding political systems into account in explaining behavior and outcomes” (Ostrom 1990, 190). A major impetus towards intensifying a learning process in Toro was doubtlessly given by the official act in 1982, which deprived many villagers of indispensable sources of livelihood. At the same time, it severely interfered with traditional rights and customs which constitute an important part of Toro’s communal identity. Yet, this serious external intervention could as well have led into the opposite direction, i.e. to silent or overt resistance and, considering the weak controlling capacity of the Park rangers, to calculated violations of the law. And it may be assumed that many villagers from Toro have actually turned to this resort. In view of the aim to preserve the forest resources, ultimately also to the benefit of the villagers, this behaviour contradicts any conception of learning. There were other external factors, however, which have facilitated a learning process to develop in Toro. The most important one is the promulgation of National Law No.22, 1999 (Undang² Autonomi Daerah) which, superseding a long period of extreme administrative centralism and political tutelage, grants a substantial amount of autonomy to the sub-national units. At the village level, this law, among others, delegates more participatory rights to the villagers in regulating their administrative and political affairs, it allows new village

14

institutions to grow and old ones (as the adat councils) to be re-established, and it puts the village leadership under democratic control. So far, these new regulations have not yet been fully implemented in the Lore Lindu region, and it will take a considerable time until they have fully penetrated the political life in the villages. This is not surprising, as established power structures in villages tend to be quite persistent and cannot easily be removed by external legislation. But it can be taken for granted that in Toro the new law has largely contributed to create a mood of ‘awakening’. Another conducive factor is a basically ‘human’ orientation of the Park Authority, which tries to reconcile the issue of forest protection with the needs of the adjacent communities. This may not be felt in the same way by all villages concerned, as they perceive the Park Authority and its in-built objective as an immediate threat. Yet, it consistently tries to keep contact with the local communities in order to sort out acceptable solutions. Finally, a few non-governmental organizations have to be mentioned, which assist the local communities in defending their (perceived) rights of forest utilization against unilateral determinations of the government. One of them, Yayasan Tanah Merdeka (YTM), helped the Toro people to draw the map of Toro’s customary forest borders, including a multitude of ecologically relevant details. To be sure, the Park Authority does not represent all relevant government agencies, nor does YTM stand for the large variety of environmental NGOs operating in the Lore Lindu area. In both regards there are much more radical ‘conservancy’ and less socially compatible approaches being advocated. However, in the case of Toro these basically benevolent external institutions had a facilitating influence in initiating a collective learning process. Regardless of the undeniable influence of external factors on local processes of learning, it is difficult to determine in the given context: Toro is one of only three villages (from altogether 70) in the Lore Lindu region which so far have reached an agreement for autonomous forest utilization and monitoring with the Park Authority. Hence, Toro must have developed a considerable amount of dynamics which are to be attributed to internal potentials. In the following we will try to elucidate some of them. 7.3 Vision and leadership A ‘vision’ could be defined as a deeper meaning of one’s existence and behaviour and, at the same time, a persistent driving force which calls for continuous and active commitment towards the attainment of set objectives (see Senge 1990, 205-232). A group of people may have a joint vision. It is either developed in a process of sharing in which individual visions merge into a collective one, or it assumes the character of a given ‘credo’, which is decisive for all group members. In many cases, a joint vision builds up on both, a common sharing and an existing fundamental belief. What is important in our context is the recognition that a joint vision provides direction as well as energy for the collective learning process, both being indispensable if a group of people wants to define and reach long-term objectives. It must be stated, however, that the impact of a vision on learning may turn into the negative, once it has become immobile and dogmatic. Visions which are strongly determined by a fundamental belief or mission are particularly susceptible to that kind of malfunction. Therefore it has to be emphasized that a joint vision needs continuous reflection and discussion among the group members, leading to adjustments once it ceases to be relevant with regard to changed environmental conditions or perspectives of individual group members. A vision is quite difficult to be determined empirically. Its actual meaning and relevance can hardly be disclosed by conventional techniques of interrogation. More often than not, such

15

techniques bring to light stereotypes and lip-service which are of little explanatory value for actual behaviour. Visions rather disclose themselves in dialogic situations which concern everyday-life, including past experiences and future perspectives. In Toro, plain answers to direct questions on the village’s vision relate to quite common ‘surface’-statements as “welfare for all” or “living in an integrated community”. A more intensive dialogue with groups and individual opinion leaders, however, unearths deeper and more goal-directed meanings of such seemingly simple statements. One gets the impression that Toro is trying to consciously regain a cultural identity in striving for autonomy in the context of autonomous natural resources management. This cultural identity has been destroyed by more than a century of external interventions by government and church, which deprived the village of its hereditary institutions as in particular the adat council (lembaga adat), and of its traditional ways of communication, cooperation and decision making. Until a few years ago Toro, like most villages in Indonesia, had largely the character of an administrative unit in a larger system with standardized forms of socio-cultural and political life. Confronted with the withdrawal of vital resources for living, the people of Toro have developed the vision of a unified community, which has the internal strengths and capacities to autonomously manage its common pool resources in a sustainable way. The assumption of Shohibuddin that the community of Toro is in a process of “redefinition of cultural meanings and values”, whereby the man-nature interaction and its impact on socio-economic security of the village is of particular concern, appears to be quite valid (Shohibuddin 2002, 3). The vision of a community which has linked up to old traditions of cooperation and, at the same time, is culturally integrated and capable of dealing with ‘modern’ challenges of natural resources management, excludes a simple replication of traditional modes of village governance. From involved leadership in the case of Toro one should expect, first of all, a perception of the community and its environment as a system which is constituted by indissoluble interrelationships. This concerns both man-man and man-nature interaction. Further on, it implies the setting of adequate norms and enforcing of effective sanctions where the equilibrium of this system is at stake. It seems that Toro has found interesting solutions of these issues which, however, still depend to a considerable extent on profiles of individual protagonists and thus can’t be regarded as fully institutionalised. In other words: they still have to stand the test of sustainability. Leadership in Toro is shared between three major ‘pillars’ of the community which, until recently, have been widely regarded as incompatible: secular administration, traditional law (adat) and religious congregations. Their protagonists are the kepala desa as head of the village administration, the kepala adat as head of the adat council (both are formally elected, but de facto trace their position to hereditary rights of their families), and the tokoh² agama (religious leaders) from the Christian and Muslim congregations. It was the kepala desa who, of his own accord, paved the way for the establishment of this kind of representative leadership by transferring a substantial part of his power to the lembaga adat. In this forum he shares the power of setting norms and enforcing sanctions with the kepala adat, the tokoh² agama and a few other communal representatives. As an elected legislative and controlling body, the lembaga adat up to now substitutes the Badan Perwakilan Desa (BPD) which has been newly established by Law No. 22, 1999, as a representative and democratic body at the village level. It has not yet been decided when or whether the BPD will be elected in Toro. It is quite conceivable that Toro, referring to the same law which grants some autonomy to the villages in designing their own institutional setting, decides to delegate all BPD functions to the lembaga adat, and thus refrains from implementing this institutional regulation of the central government altogether. This would comply with the intention to trace back to the ‘roots’ without neglecting present concerns and requirements.

16

In view of the limited empirical data it is difficult to indicate the role and impact of individual leaders with regard to moving towards the described vision. Beside the kepala desa and the kepala adat, there are some other personalities who apparently are of major importance, and whose role needs further investigation – as for instance the Protestant pastor who has specialized on ‘ecological theology’ in his studies, the young and highly engaged leader of the women’s group, the secretaris desa (village secretary), or the members of the environmental monitoring teams. What is important at this point is the fact that all these protagonists share the above described vision, and that they jointly launch and support a collective learning process which aims at acquiring and distributing relevant knowledge on Toro’s forest resources and their utilization. 7.4 Acquisition of knowledge The capacity to acquire knowledge is largely dependent on a “scanning capacity” (DiBella & Nevis 1998, 63-65), i.e. institutions, networks and persons providing relevant information. The most important ‘scanning device’ in Toro consists of two five-headed forest monitoring teams which have been installed by the lembaga adat. They tour Toro’s extended forest area 4 days a month each, in order to observe all kinds of relevant changes in the ecological system and notify illegal human interventions. Upon return they write concise reports which are presented to the lembaga adat for further consideration. Beside this controlling function, the monitoring teams have contributed largely to the definition and demarcation of the traditional borderlines, and to the identification of a multitude of plants and animals within these boundaries. This knowledge is continuously updated and recorded in the teams’ regular reports. Until recently, the expenses for this sacrificing and hazardous work have been taken over by The Nature Conservancy (TNC), a US-funded NGO with a branch office in Palu. Its withdrawal from the region leaves some concern as to the continuation of this indispensable scanning performance. In the context of knowledge acquisition one has to distinguish between internal and external sources of knowledge (ibid., 85-89). It is assumed that a one-sided dependence on knowledge generated outside the local community may lead to a critical loss of self-determination and self-esteem and innovative competence. On the other hand, to be completely left to one’s own resources of knowledge means to be cut off from alternative, complementary and corrective information, which could lead ultimately to a state of paralysis. As mentioned above, Toro has invested a lot of energy in tapping own sources of knowledge as well as generating new knowledge by local efforts. At the same time, Toro has been open to information coming from external sources, as in particular from sympathizing NGOs. The drawing of the detailed village map would not have been possible without such informative assistance, and the same may be true for the process of political mobilization with its complex legal and administrative implications. Yet, there is a wide range of relevant knowledge still to be developed jointly by internal and external actors and institutions. This concerns in particular the environmental effects of different forms of forest utilization. The leaders of Toro explicitly mention the tapping of damar (resin), the harvesting and cultivation of rotan and the use of the gaharu bark which is used for perfume production. A considerable amount of local knowledge has been collected and recorded on these issues, but it is strongly felt that this knowledge has to be complemented by external sources. In other words: There is a felt need for linking up with ‘scientific’ knowledge which could fill in still existing gaps of relevant information.

17

These gaps concern in particular the generation of exact data which are needed for an adequate environmental monitoring (ibid., 67-68). A considerable amount of local knowledge has been tapped and generated in the course of defining ecological zones in the forest. They are ranked according to their status of protection: (1) Wana Ngkiki, the ‘nuclear’ and ecologically most fragile zone of the National Park (2.300 ha), covered by primary forest where any use of it is strictly prohibited; (2) Wana, primary forest area (11.300 ha), where agricultural activities are forbidden but wood and non-wood products may selectively be taken for own use and consumption upon permission of the lembaga adat; (3) Pangale (3 000 ha), secondary forest which once has been used for shifting cultivation and now is reserved for various kinds of non-agricultural activities according to regulations of the lembaga adat; (4) Oma (5.400 ha), forest area (sub-divided into three different zones according to age of forest) allocated for dry land farming (seasonal and perennial crops), subject to certain protective conditions. By defining these ecological zones, including the collection of a wide range of information on biodiversity, the people of Toro have contributed substantially to establishing a balance in man-nature interaction. It is doubtful, however, whether the knowledge generated so far comes up to the challenge of making this balance durable in face of the fragility of the ecosystem and the instability of external conditions. To provide exact data on changes in biodiversity, nutrient cycles, (world)market conditions or relevant policies may be asking too much of a village community, whose traditional learning process is largely characterized by long-term observation and a trial-and-error pattern. There is no doubt that, in the last analysis, these traditional methodologies have produced very exact and reliable results. But facing a tremendous acceleration of change in natural as well as in socio-economic and political systems, it needs the recourse to complementary scientific methodology in order to put the local environmental monitoring on a sound base. 7.5 Dissemination of knowledge The sharing of information and knowledge among members of the village community is an important consecutive step following the acquisition or generation of knowledge (DiBella & Nevis 1998, 32-35). It is a process of communication which ‘knits’ a group of people together, giving them a common basis for joint action, which is communal and responsive in character. If this essential link is missing in the organizational learning cycle, individualization may gain ground, ending, in the worst cases, in a destructive ‘zero-sum’ pattern of development – i.e. a development where the gain of one person entails the loss of another, and vice versa. It may be assumed that participation of the individual members is a primary source of information and energy, vital to the proper functioning of a communal learning process. This assumption needs, however, some clarification as to the quality of participation. Active involvement in defining local problems and needs, as well as in the planning and decision making on innovations and change is of special relevance. This quality of participation presupposes a climate of openness. It concedes equal participatory rights to all members of the community, and allows public discussion of communal issues. Until the mid of last century, the ‘socialization’ of local knowledge in Indonesian villages was the task and function of the adat leaders. This way of knowledge dissemination (which may have had its own shortcomings in terms of inclusiveness) has been step by step destroyed through external intervention by the central government. The political system of the Orde Baru (New Order under President Suharto) has been particularly sweeping in curtailing traditional communication and information systems and replacing them by centrally prescribed channels. This has drastically reduced the flow of information in local communities and, in many cases, brought public participation in community affairs to almost

18

zero. Under the new law, Toro has taken immediate initiative to revitalize a culture of communal sharing and participation, facilitated by the institution of lembaga adat which integrates all relevant social groups of the village. A new and important component of knowledge dissemination is the detailed recording and publicizing of environmental data, making them accessible to the entire community. The increased flow of information raises public awareness concerning the fragility of the ecosystem and its repercussion on socio-economic security. At the same time, it helps to foster a climate of social control as an indispensable supplement to the official monitoring efforts. A major gap is left by the formal educational system which, so far, has turned out to be unable to meaningfully contribute to this process of socialization. The lembaga adat has submitted a number of proposals, which aim to adjust the curricula of the local school to the felt needs of the community, including subjects in local natural resources, impact of resource utilization and local history. So far, these initiatives have been doomed to failure due to the lack of corresponding qualifications of teachers and the still unchanged top-down pattern in curriculum decisions. In the long run, the incapacity of this crucial agency to integrate the youngest generation into the flow of local knowledge may have detrimental consequences. Besides internal dissemination of knowledge, the Toro leaders have made considerable efforts to include neighbouring villages in the information network. This endeavour is not totally unselfish, as the effectiveness and sustainability of local forest resources management in Toro depends to a large extent on the corresponding performance of adjacent communities. Any unpunished encroachment of neighbouring villagers into the forest area of Toro is likely to find imitators here, endangering the whole system of autonomous forest management. The response of some villages in the Kulawi region to the initiative of Toro was quite favourable. In the case of the immediate neighbour, the village of Hunku, it has materialized in setting up joint working groups, which have dealt with Toro’s experience in writing a village history, exploring local knowledge and adat, participatory mapping, reactivating the lembaga adat and achieving a village agreement on the utilization of natural resources. Though it is premature to assess the effects of these dissemination attempts, the efforts to extend the organizational learning process to a wider region must be appreciated in face of the given tasks and challenges. 7.6 Utilization of knowledge The utilization of knowledge refers first of all to the capability of internal problem solving (DiBella & Nevis 1998, 36-38), signifying the determination and competence to rely as much as possible on own resources in planning, decision making, implementation and conflict resolution. The generation and utilization of such capabilities strengthen local autonomy and self-reliance and minimize the needs for external intervention – two factors which have a strong impact on the depth and sustainability of learning processes. After the forest had been declared as state property, the lembaga adat in Toro, as in all the other Lore Lindu villages, refrained from taking any initiative towards the resolution of conflicts related to illegal use of forest resources. Such involvement was considered as too risky in face of pending state intervention. As the notoriously understaffed Park Authority was unable to adequately control and sanction the violation of rules by local people, encroachment into the forest became rampant. Today, conflict resolution on forest issues in Toro is exclusively handled by the lembaga adat. Though the practice of internal regulation is quite common in villages of the Lore Lindu region, the case of Toro shows some peculiarities. The fact that, due to its composition, the lembaga adat represents the traditional, the religious

19

and the modern/secular ‘powers’, its jurisdiction is perceived as highly legitimate and incontestable. Even more important is the refined system of graduated punishment which has been developed in the past years, and which rests on intimate ecological knowledge. Sanctions for environmental offences include lasting support (in cash, kind or work) for families affected by land slide or flooding due to illegal forest encroachment, sacrificing of animals (buffalo, cow, chicken) according to the gravity of offence, or simply cash punishments. The only offence which is not sanctioned with a defined penalty is the encroachment into ‘holy places’. One expects ‘divine’ punishments in such cases, and the fact that this kind of offence had not happened within the last 100 years may confirm the belief of people of Toro in the effectiveness of this ‘jurisdiction’. A learning process reveals itself in the continuous updating of the catalogue of sanctions, according to ecological as well as to socio-economic considerations. On the one hand, care is taken that the sanctions remain sufficiently deterrent, on the other hand importance is attached to the implementability of sanctions. In other words: the sanctions must be related to the socio-economic state of the community as a whole, as well as to the personal situation of the offender. Sacrificing a buffalo, for instance, in most cases has been ‘downgraded’ to a cow, as the stock of buffalos has dramatically declined in Toro and, in case an equivalent fine has to be paid, offenders may fall into serious debt causing them to sell parts of their land. This is considered in Toro as counterproductive, because loss of land automatically increases the dependence on forest resources. Under the same consideration, sanctions for one and the same offence may vary according to different individual potentials and needs of offenders. Correspondingly, a poor farmer who has been convicted of illegally tapping damar may plead mitigating circumstances, and thus punished less severe than a well-to-do one. The practice of setting rules and sanctions for forest utilization in Toro seems to be considerably more appropriate and effective than former state regulations. These did not only disregard the actual life situation of villagers, they were also lacking proper execution. However, it would be rushing to conclusions to assess traditional adat practices as per se superior to modern state procedures. We have, for example, witnessed adat practices among Dayaks in West-Kalimantan, who penalised the illegal felling of an old and precious tree with only one chicken (Braun & Fremerey 1995, 65). We were told that would-be offenders paid this fine in advance and later sold the tree for a spectacular prize. In that case, learning was certainly not a characteristic of the traditional system. At this point the wheel comes full circle, as the visionary and involved leadership reappears as an important pre-condition for appropriate and effective organizational learning. It is ultimately the role of local leaders to think in the context of the whole system, i.e. of a sustainable interaction between the community and its environment, and to design corresponding regulatory measures. They are, in a way, the key learners in a given community, who determine the information gaps to be filled by the acquisition of knowledge, the mode of knowledge dissemination and, last but not least, the ways of knowledge utilization. Without minimizing the importance of leadership in the first two steps of the organizational learning cycle, the leaders’ role in the utilization of knowledge seems to be particularly relevant. This is the part where they exert exclusive power, and where it is finally determined whether the learning process produces relevant effects. In Toro, it appears, these key learners have mastered their task by completing the learning cycle with a well defined and, at the same time, flexible - which means: open towards new inputs from learning - set of norms and sanctions.

20

8 Conclusions As attractive as the case of Toro may appear, the continuity and long-term effectiveness of its collective learning process still needs to be proved by more detailed and longitudinal data. This, and the fact that each village community has its own peculiar characteristics in terms of demographic structure, history, traditions, distribution of power and leadership patterns, excludes the reference to a ‘model’ village. Yet, the concept of ‘learning organization’ offers a conceptual framework, which can help to understand, how and with which effects different village communities organize themselves in order to manage their environmental resources. Further investigations, particularly in Toro’s neighbouring villages, may reveal the Toro approach as valid for a wider group of local communities. They may also disclose different conceptions of learning, or learning incapacities with corresponding deficits in environmental management. Irrespective of local peculiarities we may conclude that knowledge which emanates from a continuous process of autonomous organizational learning, integrating the stages or dimensions of learning described, is likely to have a lasting impact on the community’s capabilities to manage its natural resources. This has to be seen against a pattern of learning, which is strongly determined by external agents or by reference to traditional stocks of information and practices. Yet, we have focused so far mainly on organizational learning which refers to the immediate natural environment and to the relationship between the community and its natural environment. To fully understand the organizational learning capacity, there is a need to investigate whether and how knowledge is acquired, disseminated and utilized, which concerns the structures and processes of the organization itself as well as the wider environment, including in particular relevant issues of politics, administration and markets. This finally leads us to some considerations regarding intensification and extension of research on organizational learning in villages of the Lore Lindu region. As to the range of investigations, two priorities are indicated: Completion of research in Toro, differentiating the treated dimensions of learning by a

variety of “learning orientations” and “facilitating factors” (see DiBella & Nevis in the appendix), and including learning about the organization itself and the wider environment.

Extension of research to other selected Lore Lindu communities, in order to identify

similarities and differences in their learning patterns, and relate these to their performance in natural resources management.

In this context, the following issues deserve special attention: Definition of internal and external factors that constitute barriers to the process of

organizational learning. The role of leadership patterns and power structures in determining the modes of

knowledge acquisition, dissemination and utilization. The limits of autonomous acquisition of knowledge and the related complementary role of

external agencies, in particular ‘scientific’ researchers and NGO-facilitators.

21

The definition of boundaries between “epistemic communities” (Arce & Long 1992, 245) within individual villages, i.e. population groups which differ from each other with regard to sources and sharing of knowledge, and the effects of such boundaries on the learning process of the total community.

Methodologically this research should be guided by the principle of discovering “existing life worlds” (Long & van der Ploeg 1994, 64), as opposed to looking for preconceived models. The “analysis of discourses” (Nuijten 1992, 205), which discloses actual organizational processes and their meanings, would come closest to this principle. It is hoped that by such investigations some further insights could be provided which “help identify variables that must be included in any effort to explain and predict when appropriators using … CPRs are more likely to self-organize and effectively govern their own CPRs, and when they are likely to fail” (Ostrom 1990, 183).

22

References Arce, A. & N. Long (1992): The dynamics of knowledge. Interfaces between bureaucrats and peasants. In: Long, N. & A.Long (eds.) Battlefields of knowledge. The interlocking of theory and practice in social research and development. London. pp. 211-246. Blaikie, P. (1987): Classics in human geography revisited. In: Progress of Human Geography 21 (1). Bourdieu, P. (1981): Men and machines. In: Knorr-Cetina, K.D. & A.V. Cicourel (eds.): Advances in social theory and methodology: toward an integration of micro- and macro-sociologies. Boston. Braun, G. & M. Fremerey (1991): Soziokulturelle Faktoren in der Entwicklungspraxis. In: Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit 9/91. pp. 8-10. Braun, G. & M. Fremerey (1995): Ansätze zur autonomen Selbstorganisation in Projekten ländlicher Entwicklung. Eine soziokulturelle Themenevaluierung. Rostock/ Witzenhausen (Institut für soziokulturelle Studien). Cohen, M. D. & L. S. Sproull (eds.) (1996): Organizational learning. London. DiBella, A. J. & E. C. Nevis (1998): How organizations learn. An integrated strategy for building learning capability. San Francisco. Fremerey, M. (2000): Creating the future of village communities: Organizational learning in the Sundarban islands of West Bengal, India. In: B. Overwien (ed.): Lernen und Handeln im globalen Kontext. Frankfurt. pp. 93-111. Geiser, U. (1998): Die „soziale Produktion“ der Waldgrenze entlang der Western Ghats in Kerala, Südindien. In: Tübinger Geographische Schriften, Heft 119. pp. 209-240. Hardin, G. (1968): The tragedy of the commons. In: Science 162. pp. 1243-8 Long, N. & J. D. van der Ploeg (1994): Heterogeneity, actor and structure: towards a Reconstitution of the concept of structure. In: Booth, D. (ed.): Rethinking structural development. Theory research and practice. Essex. pp. 62-89. March, J. G., L. S. Sproull & M. Tamuz (1996): Learning from samples of one or fewer. In: Cohen & Sproull. pp.1-19. Nuijten, M. (1992): Local organization as organizing practices. Rethinking rural institutions. In: Long, N. & A. Long (eds.). pp. 189-207. Olson, M. (1965): The logic of collective action. Public goods and the theory of groups. Cambridge, Mass. Ostrom, E. (1990): Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective

23

action. Cambridge. Senge, P. (1990): The fifth discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization. New York. Shohibuddin, M. (2002): Cultural reproduction in the context of natural resource Management. Study of Toro community in the enclave of Lore Lindu National Park, Central Sulawesi. Unpubl. research design. Bogor. Tjondronegoro, Sediono M.P. (1984): Social organization and planned development in rural Java. A study of the organizational phenomenon in Kecamatan Cibadak, West Java, And Kecamatan Kendal, Central Java. Singapore.

24

Appendix

The Organizational Learning Cycle DiBella & Nevis 1998, 38