Fisheries co-management—an institutional innovation? Lessons from South East Asia and Southern Africa

Nielsen, Jesper Raakjær; Degnbol, Poul; Viswanathan, K. Kuperan; Ahmed, Mahfuzuddin; Hara, Mafaniso; Abdullah, Nik Mustapha Raja

doi:10.1016/s0308-597x(03)00083-6

Cited by 154 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Domínguez-Torreiro et al (2004), Jentoft (2005), Nielsen et al (2004) and Wilson et al (2003). Similarly to the argument above, it is considered that co-management approaches are essential given the evident failure of top-down approaches (Nielsen and Vedsmand 1999;Wilson 2002).…”

Section: Rights-based Approaches the Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?

Jones

2006

Rev Fish Biol Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent arguments for conventional fisheries management approaches (CFMAs) and against no-take marine protected areas (NTMPAs) are reviewed, i.e. CFMAs are more effective, density-dependent factors will lead to reduced fish stock production in and around NTMPAs, rights-based approaches in combination with CFMAs will be more effective, and natural refuges from fishing already exist. It is concluded that these are largely valid but only from a fisheries management perspective.

show abstract

Section: Rights-based Approaches the Way Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?

Jones

2006

Rev Fish Biol Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These are examples in which transaction costs have been very high following the implementation of co-management systems, because in the maritime extractive reserves there is little trust in government initiatives, minimal participatory involvement in the co-management design and projects, and little empowerment. Nielsen et al (2004) observed that one of the main reasons for the lack of success of the modern fisheries management approach was that the topdown approach left fishing communities completely out of the process.…”

Section: Territoriality Institutions and Co-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal Stability in Fishing Spots: Conservation and Co-Management in Brazilian Artisanal Coastal Fisheries

Begossi¹

2006

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The management of small-scale artisanal fisheries in Brazil should be a priority because of their importance as a source of food for internal markets and their location in sites with high biodiversity, such as the Atlantic Forest coast. Fishing spots, territories, and sea tenure have been widely studied within artisanal fisheries, and, in this study, a fishing spot of this type may be a defended area or an area that imposes rules for users, making the exclusion of outsiders feasible, or even a place in which fishing occurs with some exclusivity. This analysis takes into account the importance of fishing areas for the conservation of artisanal fishing in Brazil and the relative temporal stability of these areas. In particular, examples of the use of the marine space on the coast of Brazil in areas such as Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, and Bahia States are presented. Fishing spots used by artisanal fishers were marked using a Global Positioning System (GPS). An informal division of the marine space and high temporal stability, often in the range of 10-30 yr, in the use of the fishing spots were found. For some fishing areas, information published in the 1960s provided a relevant comparison for the current use of the fishing spots at sea. Such information is very helpful for the management of artisanal fishing in Brazil because tourism has increased in some areas, recreational fishers have been fishing in marine spots used by artisanal fishers, and industrial fishers are spread over a wide range of the marine space in these coastal waters. This stability in the use of marine space among artisanal fishers plus local rules support the case for local co-management of artisanal fisheries. Reserving areas for artisanal fishers and understanding the behavior of other users are essential aspects for the management and conservation of artisanal fishing in Brazil.

show abstract

“…Kelleher (1999) and Clifton (2003), and for marine fish stocks, e.g. Jentoft (2003), Nielsen and Vedsmend (1999), Nielsen et al (2004), Pomeroy et al (2001) and Wilson et al (2003). Pomeroy et al (2001) specifically identify the importance of establishing trust and mutual respect amongst partners, of involving fishers in problem recognition and objective setting, of empowering fishers, and of developing incentive structures to induce participation in collective action to manage fisheries.…”

Section: Governance Of Cprs and The Case For Co-managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building partnership capacity for the collaborative management of marine protected areas in the UK: A preliminary analysis

Jones

Burgess

2005

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports the findings of a preliminary analysis of fifteen case studies of inshore marine protected areas in the UK. It draws on the common-pool resource (CPR) literature and is premised on the thesis that building partnership capacity amongst relevant authorities and resource users provides a critical basis for overcoming collective action problems (CAPs), through the development of incentive structures and social capital, in order to achieve strategic objectives. Particular attention is paid to the influence of statutory marine biodiversity conservation obligations to the European Commission for marine special areas of conservation (MSACs), as these are an important external contextual factor. The risks of imposition and parochialism are outlined and the challenges of taking a balanced approach are discussed. The challenges posed by the attributes of the marine environment are considered, as are those posed by the policy framework for MSACs. The findings are discussed in relation to three questions: (i) which partnership models appear to have the potential to overcome the CAPs posed by inshore MSACs? (ii) what CAPs had to be addressed during the early phase of development of the MSAC co-management regimes? (iii) what are the likely future CAPs for the collaborative management of MSACs that each partnership will need to address? These preliminary findings will form the basis for future studies to analyse the outcomes of these fifteen initiatives, in order to assess the strengths, in various contexts, of different approaches for building resilient and balanced, thereby effective, institutions for the co-management of MSACs in the UK.

show abstract

Fisheries co-management—an institutional innovation? Lessons from South East Asia and Southern Africa

Cited by 154 publications

References 8 publications

Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?

Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?

Temporal Stability in Fishing Spots: Conservation and Co-Management in Brazilian Artisanal Coastal Fisheries

Building partnership capacity for the collaborative management of marine protected areas in the UK: A preliminary analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About