Privatization and development: the case of the Dirol Plain

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

The first part of this chapter examines local tenure, the political economy of the Dirol Plain, and the proposed development. The second part draws out the specific and general development implications of the case. The contention is that the privatization ideology pushed by international funding agencies, although in this case it eventually was minimized by USAID, was seriously misguided and led to significant waste of resources. In the Dirol case, pushing this simple solution involved a serious undervaluation of the risk management benefits of collective tenure. -from Author

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationRisk and tenure in arid lands
EditorsT.K. Park
PublisherUniversity of Arizona Press
Pages224-254
Number of pages31
StatePublished - 1993
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

privatization
political economy
ideology
resource
plain
risk management

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Earth and Planetary Sciences(all)
  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Park, T. K. (1993). Privatization and development: the case of the Dirol Plain. In T. K. Park (Ed.), Risk and tenure in arid lands (pp. 224-254). University of Arizona Press.

Privatization and development : the case of the Dirol Plain. / Park, Thomas K.

Risk and tenure in arid lands. ed. / T.K. Park. University of Arizona Press, 1993. p. 224-254.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Park, TK 1993, Privatization and development: the case of the Dirol Plain. in TK Park (ed.), Risk and tenure in arid lands. University of Arizona Press, pp. 224-254.
Park TK. Privatization and development: the case of the Dirol Plain. In Park TK, editor, Risk and tenure in arid lands. University of Arizona Press. 1993. p. 224-254
Park, Thomas K. / Privatization and development : the case of the Dirol Plain. Risk and tenure in arid lands. editor / T.K. Park. University of Arizona Press, 1993. pp. 224-254
@inbook{123dd69b1ad1497e86fa19c3d98d9e94,
title = "Privatization and development: the case of the Dirol Plain",
abstract = "The first part of this chapter examines local tenure, the political economy of the Dirol Plain, and the proposed development. The second part draws out the specific and general development implications of the case. The contention is that the privatization ideology pushed by international funding agencies, although in this case it eventually was minimized by USAID, was seriously misguided and led to significant waste of resources. In the Dirol case, pushing this simple solution involved a serious undervaluation of the risk management benefits of collective tenure. -from Author",
author = "Park, {Thomas K}",
year = "1993",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "224--254",
editor = "T.K. Park",
booktitle = "Risk and tenure in arid lands",
publisher = "University of Arizona Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Privatization and development

T2 - the case of the Dirol Plain

AU - Park, Thomas K

PY - 1993

Y1 - 1993

N2 - The first part of this chapter examines local tenure, the political economy of the Dirol Plain, and the proposed development. The second part draws out the specific and general development implications of the case. The contention is that the privatization ideology pushed by international funding agencies, although in this case it eventually was minimized by USAID, was seriously misguided and led to significant waste of resources. In the Dirol case, pushing this simple solution involved a serious undervaluation of the risk management benefits of collective tenure. -from Author

AB - The first part of this chapter examines local tenure, the political economy of the Dirol Plain, and the proposed development. The second part draws out the specific and general development implications of the case. The contention is that the privatization ideology pushed by international funding agencies, although in this case it eventually was minimized by USAID, was seriously misguided and led to significant waste of resources. In the Dirol case, pushing this simple solution involved a serious undervaluation of the risk management benefits of collective tenure. -from Author

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0027880716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0027880716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:0027880716

SP - 224

EP - 254

BT - Risk and tenure in arid lands

A2 - Park, T.K.

PB - University of Arizona Press

ER -