Fragmented participation in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish in South Africa – inclusion of small-rights holders is a complex matter

Abstract

Hara, M. et al. 2014. Fragmented participation in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish in South Africa -inclusion of small-rights holders is a complex matter. AbstractThe reasons why most small-rights holders do not participate in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish ('small pelagics') in South Africa, despite legislation and policy encouraging their participation, were analysed. Membership of the Small Pelagics Management Working Group (SPMWG), the main participatory governance organ, is limited to representatives of recognised stakeholder associations. Rights holders therefore have to belong to a stakeholder association, which then selects a member or members to represent them on the SPMWG. Small quotas and the difficulties of sourcing capital mean that small-rights holders are not able to invest in infrastructure. Besides, most of the small-rights holders and their companies lack experience and management skills to survive independently in this highly competitive industry, which is based on high volume and low profit margins. As a result, most of the small-rights holders have no option but to enter into complex catching and processing agreements with vessel-and factory owners belonging to the existing recognised stakeholder associations. For the small-rights holders, it does not make sense to join these associations or even to form their own if they cannot actively participate in the industry independently. Greater participation by small-rights holders should start with their genuine integration into the industry through improved ability to invest in infrastructure and through management skills development. Most likely, this will require an interventionist approach by government.

Strong fisheries management and governance positively impact ecosystem status

“…Norton and Gammage for overviews) and mistrust among stakeholders (Hara et al . ; Duggan et al . ; Ragaller ).…”

“…A closer look, however, reveals that some of its important fisheries are problematic with respect to governance issues, such as stakeholder representation (Hara et al . ; Norton ), transparent and defensible rights allocation process, for example, in small‐scale fisheries (see, e.g. Norton and Gammage for overviews) and mistrust among stakeholders (Hara et al .…”

A Literature Review on Stakeholder Participation in Coastal and Marine Fisheries

“…In total, four publications defined the term participation (Brzezinski et al 2010;Tiller et al 2015;Pristupa et al 2016;Sampedro et al 2017); three publications described participation-related terms (Kittinger 2013;Hara et al 2014;Trimble and Lazaro 2014) (Fig. 2.2a).…”

“…Within three case-study publications, participatoryrelated terms had been described, e.g. participatory management (PM, Hara et al 2014), participatory research (Trimble and Lazaro 2014) and participatory action research (PAR, Kittinger 2013). PM or co-management was defined as an institutional and organizational arrangement for effective management between government and user groups (Hara et al 2014).…”

“…participatory management (PM, Hara et al 2014), participatory research (Trimble and Lazaro 2014) and participatory action research (PAR, Kittinger 2013). PM or co-management was defined as an institutional and organizational arrangement for effective management between government and user groups (Hara et al 2014). The function of PM was described as the sharing of power and the responsibility for the management decisionmaking, the encouragement of partnerships and provision of user incentives for sustainable use of resources (Wilson et al 2003;Hara et al 2014).…”