Table 2. Major findings of the comparison of institutional fit and misfit in four pastoral commons in African Floodplains.

Case study Element of precolonial fit institutions Elements of postcolonial misfit Elements of postcolonial fit
Kafue Flats, Zambia - leaders regulate access,
- dynamic adaptation to floods,
- low transaction costs, win win solutions for user groups (reciprocal access)
- embedded in religious institutions
-loss of local institutions and ownership by state control (laws)
-centralized but de facto open access
not flood adapted
-reduction of pasture (dams)
-high relative prices for cattle
- resource conflicts
None present
Waza Logone, Cameroon -institutions lead by leaders, coordination between different groups
- adaptation to flooding pattern, mutual interest and win win solution for nomads and fishermen (trade)
- institutions embedded in religious institutions
-loss of local institutions and state governance
Tax payments and de facto open access
-increase in relative prices and attraction of area
-reduction of area (dams and PAs)
High relative prices
Resource conflicts
Return of flood (IUCN-Project), however with too little institutional incentives
Pangani, Tanzania - Separation of use and institutional setting for use of pasture and mountains
- Within groups clear institutional structures
adapted seasonally mobility patterns
- institutions embedded in religious institutions
- Merging of groups while cross cutting ecosystems for state management
- Loss of local institutions and reduction of mobility
- State property and reduction of land (settlers and PAs)
- Open access (ujamaa)
- High relative prices and resource conflicts
None for pasture, some collective action for new water regulations
Collective land act but no coordination between ethnic and economic groups
Rufiji, Tanzania - Local institutions by WaRufiji based on leaders
- Adapted to seasonal structure
- No use of pasture
- institutions embedded in religious institutions
- State control and dismantling many tradition rules BUT not affecting pasture - Mutual interests of two groups and economic benefits (Trade of goods and services between groups)
- Village authority tolerated by state: possibility for local people of crafting new institutions
- Leaders reducing transaction costs and trust building