No abstract

This study was conducted with the financial support of the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), Colombo, Sri Lanka. The authors acknowledge the contribution and support of the staff of the Department of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Sri Lanka, other local officials around the country, fishermen, the army personnel during the field visits for the data collection, the reviewers who helped improve the report by providing constructive comments and Samanmalee Thanuja Fernando of Central Environmental Authority, Sri Lanka for painstakingly doing line drawings of maps and the calculations therein under the supervision of Prof. J. Katupotha.

No abstract

This article presents findings on the current state of fisheries governance in South Asia from the perspective of legal pluralism. It is based on ethnographic fieldwork in six coastal districts of India and Sri Lanka and focuses on resource health and allocation. We suggest that interactions between state and non-state systems vary, and include indifference, conflict, accommodation and mutual support. None of the studied governance patterns appear to have been able to halt or reverse overfishing, though we identify some positive local innovations. The situation is more promising with regard to resource allocation. Fairness in allocation emerges as a prime concern of most non-state legal systems in South Asian fisheries, and state agencies do tend to become involved in resource allocation if non-state fishery authorities fail to achieve it. We conclude by arguing that addressing resource health and allocation concerns will require increased state and non-state cooperation.Cet article se penche sur l 0 e´tat actuel de la gouvernance des peˆches en Asie du Sud, dans la perspective du pluralisme juridique. Il s 0 appuie sur des recherches ethnographiques effectue´es dans six districts coˆtiers de l 0 Inde et du Sri Lanka et s 0 inte´resse plus particulie`rement a`l'e´tat et la distribution des ressources. Nous notons que les interactions entre les syste`mes e´tatiques et non-e´tatiques varient entre l 0 indiffe´rence, le conflit, le compromis et le soutien mutuel. Aucun des modes de gouvernance e´tudie´s ne semble eˆtre en mesure de stopper ou inverser la tendance a`la surpeˆche, malgre´certaines innovations positives constate´es au niveau local. La situation est plus encourageante en ce qui concerne la distribution des ressources. Nous notons que l 0 e´quite´dans la re´partition constitue une pre´occupation majeure pour la plupart des syste`mes juridiques non-e´tatiques des peˆcheries d 0 Asie du Sud, et que les organismes d 0 É tat ont tendance a`intervenir lorsque les autorite´s de la peˆche non-e´tatiques e´chouent dans leurs efforts redistributifs. Nous concluons que tant la pre´servation que la distribution des ressources ne´cessitent une coope´ration accrue entre les organisations e´tatiques et non gouvernementales.

No abstract