Community governance in Vanuatu through a critical institutionalist lens

For many rural Vanuatu communities, local collective action institutions are the only option to govern services and natural resources. To address this need, the Vanuatu government is introducing generic committee structures, which rarely work as expected. This model of introducing committees has become the foundation of many projects aimed at improving local governance in developing countries despite widespread accounts of poor performance. This thesis explores the overall question: What does the application of critical institutionalism through the lens of institutional bricolage reveal about community governance in Vanuatu? Drawing on critical institutionalist literature and the concept of institutional bricolage, I use the case of three rural communities in Vanuatu to analyse mechanisms behind different forms of institutional change. I explore challenges to institutional design and ways to facilitate the development of enduring and equitable institutions. Data were collected through storian conversations with community members (27f, 28m) and key stakeholder interviews (4f, 13m) and analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Chapter 4 uses an institutional bricolage lens to unpack how the study communities adapted or rejected introduced water governance arrangements in response to diverse local contexts. Chapter 5 explores the underlying mechanisms that shape autonomous change processes in traditional institutions. It reveals the centrality of two established institutional bricolage processes – elite capture and leakage of meaning – in opening up and closing down spaces for change. Chapter 6 identifies the phenomenon of ghost committees that do not exist in practice yet are referred to as if they were performing their intended roles. I argue that a feedback loop between ghost committees and discourse in favour of the committee model contributes to the persistence of both committees and the model. Chapter 7 draws on the preceding analytical chapters to argue that institutional bricolage and agonistic methods can be combined to support communities in developing enduring and equitable institutions.