OK, so we are moving one step further:
- Sustainable management does not always result in decentralization, AND
- Decentralization is not always consistent with sustainable practices.
Unlike European nations that have efficient and reliable power grids and choose distributed energy generation because it is more environmentally friendly, the motivations of developing countries to choose distributed/decentralized natural resource management are much more diverse and seldom driven by environmental concerns. Yet, creating a sustainable framework of resource management is even more critical in countries that face large social problems, such as extensive poverty and marginalization of certain groups.
The fact that these countries don't often have a functioning model of natural resource management hardly implies that they are starting from a clean slate. In fact, their resource management strategies might be even more deeply entrenched in these societies than in the European communities described in detail by Alanne and Saari (2006).
The Larson & Soto (2008) paper deals with the wide array of reasons why decentralization may be implemented in the developing world and the challenges it poses. This is a summary paper that touches on the strategies implemented by countries around the world and as such there are some generalizations that may not apply to individual Asian, African, or Latin American nations. There is also frequent mention to elites and NGOs in a manner that suggests more monolithic blocks than diverse groups with equally diverse objectives. In addition, their conclusion that the analysis for forest management can be extended to all other resources is clearly overreaching.
All that said, Larson & Soto (2008) provide a good summary of the many different goals and challenges that come with implementing decentralization across different types of resources, different cultures, and different regulatory frameworks.