Step zero for fisheries co-management: What precedes implementation

In this paper we argue that what precedes the implementation of co-management is as important as what happens later in the process. To a selected group of fisheries and coastal co-management practitioners in various parts of the world, we posed questions about how the idea was conceived, who participated in the initial discussion, and the preparation required before implementation. Responses received suggest a wide range of possible beginnings. In some cases (e.g., Barbados, Mozambique, and Zambia/Lake Kariba), the government spearheaded the process, while in others (e.g., Brazil and Malawi), the process was initiated by local entrepreneurs. In other instances, the initial discussion took place between communities and researchers (e.g., South Africa) or environmental groups (e.g., the Philippines). Learning about the conditions and actions taken prior to co-management implementation can assist us in evaluating the likelihood of success. In addition, by taking the time to understand situations in a local context, researchers can avoid premature and hasty attempts to embrace co-management schemes.     

Cross-scale linkages and adaptive management: Fisheries co-management in Asia

The present paper reviews research done in Asian countries during the second phase of the Worldwide Collaborative Research Project on Fisheries Co-management. Building on the results of the first phase, the paper focuses on stakeholder conflict, and social and geographical scale. Several conclusions emerge from common patterns. Community motivations for co-management are often related more to the protection of fisheries resources from outsiders than to conservation. Access rights are important but exclusion from food resources in a context of widespread poverty should be approached carefully. Cross-scale institutional linkages make adaptive management possible by bringing together groups with broad local foci and ones with narrow trans-local mandates. The role of the government is balancing interactions between these various groups. This is not a role that is compatible with top-down management.     

Improving fisheries co-management through ecosystem-based spatial management: The Galapagos Marine Reserve

Ecosystem-based spatial management (EBSM) can provide a mechanism for a strategic and integrated plan-based approach to managing human activities in the marine environment. An EBSM approach was adopted in the Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) at the end of the 1990s with the adoption of marine zoning. The latter was created under a co-management regime to reduce conflicts among users arising over incompatible demands for ocean space, to mitigate the impact of human activities on sensitive ecological areas, and to contribute to the sustainability of Galapagos fisheries. Unfortunately, the promise of an EBSM approach in the GMR has not been matched by effectiveness in practice, in achieving the established management objectives. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the shortcomings and lessons learned related to planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and adaptation of the GMR's marine zoning scheme, and to provide recommendations to better realize the potential value of the EBSM approach to co-managing the shellfisheries of the GMR.     

Coastal and fisheries co-management in South Africa: an overview and analysis

The newly elected democratic government of South Africa, has promulgated new policies and legislation which advocate alternative approaches to resource management which involve user groups. Co-management has been identified as one such strategy. An overview and analysis of selected coastal and fisheries co-management case studies in South Africa is given and key lessons are highlighted. Research findings indicate that co-management in South Africa is still in its infancy, making it difficult to provide conclusive statements about its success or failure. Nevertheless, the paper highlights some of the key conditions that are required for co-management to operate effectively in South Africa and some of the existing obstacles to practical implementation.     

Safety at sea and fisheries management:: fishermen's attitudes and the need for co-management

Safety at sea is a serious issue for the commercial fishing industry; it ranks highly in all assessments of occupational dangers including risk-taking, injuries, and fatalities. This paper examines the impact of fisheries management on safety at sea and the use of fishermen's input in the safety regulatory and management process. Using case study techniques of analysis, 22 boatowners, captains and crew all with a minimum of 10 years experience in the commercial fishing industry and from a common New England port (New Bedford) are interviewed. Findings strongly suggest that regulations that have been primarily designed to reduce pressure on fish stocks may also result in increased pressure on fishermen and decreased safety at sea. Attitudes about the role of the New England Fisheries Management Council and improvements to the safety regulatory and management process particularly with regard to the increased participation by fishermen are also examined.     

Development of an integrated fisheries co-management framework for new and emerging commercial fisheries in the Canadian Beaufort Sea

The Canadian Beaufort Sea is one of the last places on Earth that has not experienced large-scale commercial fisheries. The aboriginal people of the western Canadian Arctic, the Inuvialuit, have become increasingly concerned about the potential effects of large-scale commercial operations on key subsistence species of fish and marine mammals and the marine ecosystem upon which they depend. A 1984 comprehensive land settlement agreement (treaty) between Canada and the Inuvialuit established a co-management regime for limited aspects of fish and marine mammal resource management, and gave the Inuvialuit rights to subsistence fisheries and existing commercial fisheries but no preference for new commercial fisheries. The Fisheries Joint Management Committee (the fisheries co-management body), the Canada Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation and the Inuvialuit Game Council have developed an integrated fisheries management framework agreement for the review and assessment of any proposed commercial fisheries within the Canadian Beaufort Sea. The agreement provides clarity and transparency for decision making and strengthens the protection of fish stocks. The development of the framework depended upon a history of cooperation between the parties and a bridging initiative by the Fisheries Joint Management Committee and an NGO that brought together the Inuvialuit and the government.     

Network approach for understanding small-scale fisheries governance: The case of the Chilean coastal co-management system

Recent studies have focused on the study of social networks among local resource users, but few have attempted to study co-management networks. The objective of the research was to assess the Chilean shellfish co-management system from an organizational network perspective. Starting with one detailed case study, representatives of 38 small-scale fisher associations from two administrative regions were interviewed to investigate: (1) networks of actors in each co-management case, (2) the functions of these actors in co-management, and (3) fisher perceptions about Chile's co-management arrangement. Results indicate that decision-making is highly centralized and power is concentrated in government, with little horizontal exchange and cooperation among fisher associations. However, the network approach indicates the presence of a rich set of players, some seven sets of actors by function. Grassroots management innovations are hampered by the existing co-management structure, suggesting that the system may benefit from a modification of the policy to allow greater learning-by-doing and flexibility.     

Moral discourse in fisheries co-management: A case study of the Senja fishery,northern Norway

Communication is essential to co-management. This paper examines how the outcome of management processes in a fisheries co-management system in northern Norway depends on communicative interaction between the fishermen. Legitimacy is held as an essential condition for well functioning user-based regulation in the fishery, and is often seen as a result when user-groups are involved in the management process. This paper argues that involving user-groups is not enough for legitimating regulations. Legitimacy also depends on the nature of communication in the decision-making process. In the terminology of Habermas, management institutions having a communicative design that encourages moral discourse would have a higher degree of legitimacy than institutions having an instrumental design. Not only because the decision-making process is emphasized, but also because it has potential to give room for other communities of interests beyond the use of fishing gears. The paper also discusses how fishermen may act communicatively in ways that include normative and moral issues of fisheries management.     

Fishery control and regulation compliance: a case for co-management in Swedish commercial fisheries

The results from a survey of Swedish commercial fishers on regulation compliance and attitudes to control and restrictions are reported. According to the responding fishers, 90% of all Swedish catches are reported, in spite of limited control efforts. From an economic perspective we would expect substantially lower levels of compliance. The results also show that the majority of Swedish fishers are in favour of co-management on a regional basis. However, on this and other management issues opinions divert significantly between large vessel operators and small vessel operators, which reveals conflicting interests for such and similar changes in Swedish management of fisheries.     

Market regulation versus co-management?: Two perspectives on regulating fisheries compared

The crisis of fisheries management is also a crisis of governability; somehow governments almost everywhere seem to run into trouble while managing fisheries. This article compares two alternative styles of regulation that are put forward as solutions to this crisis: market-based regulation and comanagement. In particular the contradiction is analyzed between an apparently strong theoretical basis for market-based regulation and actual practice which often opts for co-management. The theoretical basis of the market-based perspective is challenged and on the basis of an analysis of flatfishery management in the Netherlands, it is concluded that there are often sound arguments for restructuring the management responsibilities between public authorities and civil society.     

Measuring management success: Experience with United States fisheries

Many articles have been published in recent years criticizing the management of living marine resources based solely on biological stock conservation criteria. In the United States and in many parts of the rest of the world, multiple management objectives and goals in addition to stock conservation must be met by fishery managers responsible for the marine resources under their control. An alternative management metric, conservation efficiency, is recommended based instead on a multi-disciplinary scientific framework that captures these different goals and the behavior of participants in the fishery. On the basis of the constraints facing managers, resources can be conserved and the quality of life of consumptive and nonconsumptive fishery participants improved.     

Property relations and the co-management of small-scale fisheries in Costa Rica: Lessons from Marine Areas for Responsible Fishing in the Gulf of Nicoya

Marine fisheries in Costa Rica have become characterized by overexploitation, ineffective centralized management and increased conflict among fishing sectors. Despite high economic and socio-cultural importance of small-scale fisheries, no formal mechanisms existed until recently to facilitate the participation of fishers in management. Marine Areas for Responsible Fishing (Áreas Marinas para la Pesca Responsable, AMPR) were legally recognized in 2009 as a co-management approach, enabling the designation of spatial management areas to be implemented collaboratively by artisanal fishers and government agencies. In this paper, we examine property and access relations shaping this emerging participatory management model using case studies primarily from the Gulf of Nicoya region. The policy demonstrably improves upon some aspects of management, for instance, by allowing artisanal fishers to determine gear restrictions within designated areas. However, the model lacks other attributes of more successful co-management scenarios, particularly exclusive access. The fugitive nature of resources further complicates property relations over these fisheries. The cases explored also illustrate broader institutional and systemic issues that preclude effective participatory management. Lessons from the region are used to propose significant shifts to the management of small-scale fisheries in Costa Rica.     

Moving beyond a top-down fisheries management approach in the northwestern Mediterranean: Some lessons from the Philippines

The management of fisheries resources in the northwestern Mediterranean is traditionally centralized and developed within the framework of coastal states and European Union common policies. In general, it has not been sufficiently effective in reversing the declining situation of fisheries resources and fishers in this region. This paper discusses the feasibility of moving away from a top-down approach in fisheries management towards a more participative and convergent mode of governance in the region. More specifically, the study focuses on MPAs as a fisheries management tool and evaluates their current establishment and management system in the French Mediterranean as a case study for the region. A brief review of the experiences on fisheries and MPA management in the Philippines is also presented to obtain insights on bottom-up and collaborative management approaches. Finally, possible opportunities for adopting a more decentralized and coordinated approach in fisheries management within the French socio-political system, and possibly in the northwestern Mediterranean region, are discussed. These include the existence of fishing community organizations in the region, such as the prud'homies in France and cofradias in Spain, starting with management strategies that are simpler to enforce and more acceptable to direct users, e.g., fishery reserves, and exploring co-management arrangements to manage fisheries at ecologically meaningful but operationally manageable scales as has been proposed by some development organizations. However, effective changes in the system would require major national policy and institutional reforms, social preparation and organizational strengthening which would take time and resources.     

Expanding fisheries co-management to ecosystem-based management: A case in the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage area,Japan

Fisheries co-management in the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage area was expanded to ecosystem-based management, in which the fisheries sector plays an essential role in management. A marine management plan was drawn up to define the management objectives, strategies to maintain major species, and methods for ecosystem monitoring. A network of coordinating organizations from a wide range of sectors was established to integrate policy measures. Experience from this case could inform ecosystem-based management in other countries where large numbers of small-scale fishers take a wide range of species under a fisheries co-management regime.     

Hana Pa'a: Challenges and lessons for early phases of co-management

This case study provides in depth analysis of an early phase of natural resources co-management, rule making. Co-management involves shared management responsibility between resource users or community groups and governmental agencies, and is recommended as a key management approach for nearshore marine resources. This article explores collaborative rulemaking based on traditional management practices for a small, rural nearshore Hawaiian fishery important for local subsistence. Legislation mandated the state of Hawai‘i's natural resource management agency work with community residents to co-create and enforce rules for the fishery. By selecting a model case in which rule making has taken seven years longer than predicted, despite the presence of many established enabling conditions, this study elucidates new factors for consideration in early phases of co-management. These include legal uncertainty regarding statutory mandates, the role of bridging organizations in capacity building, cross-generational leadership development, and connection of the co-management rule-making process to the target geography. Through in depth analysis of a model collaborative rule making effort and the delays it faced, this research reveals new critical challenges while also offering suggestions to address them to build lasting collaborative capacity in other fledgling co-management efforts.     

Towards a functional typology of small-scale fisheries co-management informed by stakeholder perceptions: A coral reef case study

Co-management has gained significant traction in small-scale fisheries as part of the solution for resolving economic inefficiency, unsustainable harvesting and unequal distribution of benefits derived from fisheries, generating some promising results. Most studies, however, present co-management as the sharing of power between resource users and centralised government, and do not explicitly consider the role of a more diverse set of stakeholders, or what roles different stakeholder types are best positioned to perform. This paper contributes to our understanding of stakeholder diversity by determining, through surveys with 133 fishery stakeholders in Solomon Islands, which stakeholder types are perceived as most suited to particular co-management roles, and which stakeholder types should be collaborating to increase fishery stocks. The effect of respondent socio-demographics, on perceived roles, is tested to explore the value of the role typology. Ten dominant roles were identified across seven stakeholder types, including collaboration and raising awareness, which were perceived to be dominantly the domain of auxiliary stakeholders that are not explicitly recognised in the co-management literature, including NGOs and church leaders. Of the socio-demographic variables tested, only site explained some of the variation in stakeholder roles perceived by respondents. The primary value of the typology lies in its potential to be used as a basis for dialogue on strengths and weaknesses of allocated roles for increasing fish stocks in existing co-management systems.     

River fisheries management in Bangladesh: Drawing lessons from Community Based Fisheries Management (CBFM) experiences

River fisheries in Bangladesh is characterized as “open-access” and the history of administrative and legislative measures bear “contradiction and dilemmas” in resource extraction. The 1950 Fisheries act, the proclamation of 1973 that restricted lease to the registered fisher cooperatives and the experimental New Fisheries Management Policy (NFMP) of 1986 could not contribute to devolve into any participatory institution to introduce sustainable fisheries management. Because of the persistent dilemma in government policy, continued increase in fishing pressure and other anthropogenic reasons, the River resources degraded substantially. Over the past ten years, the Department of Fisheries (DOF) in collaboration with NGOs implemented community based fisheries management (CBFM) approaches with the technical assistance from the WorldFish Center. The principal goal of the approaches was to provide access rights to the fishers through organizing poor fishers and the community to introduce sustainable fisheries management in beels, floodplains and River sections. The CBFM experiences suggest that management and institution building process in river management is complex, and require participation of all concerned stakeholders including local government institutions and administration. CBFM-2 river fisheries management developed a broad-based institutional framework that include community and local government along with the direct beneficiaries and resource users. A positive feature of such institutions is its ability to facilitate flow of information among agents, which is a key to maintain solidarity within and across groups. This paper draws lessons from the CBFM experiences in Bangladesh to manage river fisheries resources in Bangladesh.     

On crafting a fisheries co-management arrangement in the estuary of Patos Lagoon (Brazil): opportunities and challenges faced through implementation

This paper aims to analyze a fisheries co-management regime in Brazil. The Forum of the Patos Lagoon, a collaborative partnership among communities, governmental and non-governmental organizations, was established to move fisheries management toward a negotiation-style decision processes. We find that while many successes are evident including the delegation of decision power, greater protection of artisanal fisheries, and greater legitimacy assigned the Forum as a decision-making body, several problems remain. These include conflicting institutional arrangements; minimal recognition of local fishers’ interests as concerns rules established; and less than optimal participation of fishers in the Forum. The paper closes with multiple suggestions for improvements of this co-management regime.     

Fish wars: Conflict and collaboration in fisheries management in Southeast Asia

As a result of declining and overfished small-scale nearshore fisheries in Southeast Asia, there are increasing conflicts and social tensions between and among different user groups, leading to coastal “fish wars”. A challenge facing fishers, resource managers and national decision makers in the region is to identify more appropriate governance and public policy mechanisms to manage conflicts over fishery resources and to resolve them productively in the interests of both long-term sustainability and short-term economic feasibility. A quantitative analysis undertaken in selected coastal communities in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam with and without co-management indicate that co-management does lead to reduced resource conflict levels. The analysis has also shown that when resource conflicts are reduced, food security improves.     

Perceptions and costs of seal impacts on Atlantic salmon fisheries in the Moray Firth,Scotland: Implications for the adaptive co-management of seal-fishery conflict

The Moray Firth Seal Management Plan (MFSMP) was introduced in Scotland in 2005 as a pilot for resolving conflict between Atlantic salmon fisheries and conservation imperatives for protected harbour and grey seals. This adaptive co-management model is now being applied nationally through the Marine (Scotland) Act (2010). However, no information exists on salmon fishery stakeholders’ perceptions of seal predation impacts and related costs, which could influence the success of the MFSMP and other similar initiatives. In 2006 a questionnaire survey of the 95 salmon rod fisheries in seven major Moray Firth rivers was undertaken, and all 20 active salmon netting stations in the Firth. Forty-five fishery owners, 39 ghillies, 120 anglers and 11 netsmen (representing 17 netting stations) responded. The majority (81%) believed that seals had a significant or moderate impact on stocks and catches, 77% believed that all seals were responsible and 47% supported seal culling. Seals were sighted by 38% of rod fisheries, and 18% lost angler days from seal interference. Overall, 0.2% of total reported angler days were lost annually. The estimated direct cost of seal interference for responding rod fisheries was £14,960 annum⁻¹, and losses of catches and damage to nets was £16,500 annum⁻¹ for responding netsmen. Stakeholders’ perceptions were largely inconsistent with their low direct costs and the aims of the MFSMP. Possible reasons for this are discussed, and implications for the governance of future adaptive co-management initiatives for seal-fishery conflict.