Madagascar's GELOSE resource-management transfers
Madagascar's 1996 GELOSE law lets the state, a commune, and a legally recognized local association negotiate management of forests, wildlife, water, fisheries, or grazing. The association can govern access, use, conservation, and sanctions through a contract and a locally grounded dina, but the state retains ownership, approval, evaluation, and withdrawal powers. Field evidence shows that recognition and exclusion rights can matter even when direct income does not; national forest and household studies find heterogeneous outcomes rather than an automatic conservation or livelihood gain.
Can a negotiated legal contract make customary resource governance publicly enforceable without turning community autonomy into unpaid implementation of an externally chosen conservation plan?