The objective of this paper is to identify prospects for stakeholder cooperation for effective implementation of enhanced rangeland restoration techniques under different land tenure status in Tataouine Governorate of southern Tunisia, through the rest technique locally called “Gdel.” This technique consists of leaving a given rangeland at rest to reconstitute the plant cover. A stakeholder analysis was conducted using the MACTOR methodological framework to analyze stakeholders’ strategies and their balance of power in terms of rangeland management decisions, specifically regarding the implementation of resting, which involves a high level of collective action. Data collection was based on two focus group discussions with the nine main stakeholders involved directly and indirectly in Tunisian rangeland management. Stakeholders’ perceptions about resting are compared across private and collective land tenure systems. Findings show a wide diversity in stakeholder relationships, in terms of influences, dependencies, and balance of power, with differences between collective and private tenure systems. In private rangelands, equal levels of stakeholder influence and power lead to a much more stable and flexible rangeland restoration process, with more alliances and consensual objectives among almost all stakeholders. The situation in collective rangelands is very different because the majority of stakeholders have a weak influence in terms of management decisions, with fewer alliances and more conflictual objectives among them. Pathways for stakeholder cooperation and long-term empowerment are suggested for effective implementation of rangeland restoration techniques involving collective action.

本文的目的是通过突尼斯南部的塔塔乌因省不同的土地保有权状况，确定与利益相关者合作以有效实施增强的牧场恢复技术的前景，方法是通过在当地称为“ Gdel”的其余技术。这项技术包括让给定的牧场静止不动，以重新种植植物。使用MACTOR方法论框架进行了利益相关者分析，根据牧场管理决策，特别是在涉及高级别集体行动的休息的实施方面，分析了利益相关者的策略及其力量平衡。数据收集是基于两个焦点小组的讨论，与直接和间接参与突尼斯牧场管理的九个主要利益相关者进行的。在私有和集体土地所有制中比较了利益相关者对休息的看法。调查结果表明，在影响力，依赖性和权力平衡方面，利益相关者关系存在很大差异，集体和私有权属制度之间存在差异。在私人牧场上 利益相关者的影响力和权力水平相等，导致牧场恢复过程更加稳定和灵活，几乎所有利益相关者之间都有更多的联盟和共识目标。集体牧场的情况大不相同，因为大多数利益相关者在管理决策方面影响力较弱，联盟较少，冲突目标更多。建议利益相关者合作和长期赋权的途径，以有效实施涉及集体行动的牧场恢复技术。集体牧场的情况大不相同，因为大多数利益相关者在管理决策方面影响力较弱，联盟较少，冲突目标更多。建议利益相关者合作和长期赋权的途径，以有效实施涉及集体行动的牧场恢复技术。集体牧场的情况大不相同，因为大多数利益相关者在管理决策方面影响力较弱，联盟较少，冲突目标更多。建议利益相关者合作和长期赋权的途径，以有效实施涉及集体行动的牧场恢复技术。