Local and regional strategies for rebuilding fisheries management institutions in coastal British Columbia: what components of comanagement are most critical?

Abstract

In both cases, we found favorable conditions in the communities, the external political arena, and in government to support the rebuilding goals of the organizations working in the two regions. Although both areas would benefit from greater financial resources, the most critical need is for external support in the form of alliances, issue networks, and access to multiple sources of power.

Making the transition to co-management governance arrangements in Hawai‘i: a framework for understanding transaction and transformation costs

“…The Ka'ūpūlehu community on Hawai'i Island recently employed similar strategies to successfully pass regulations prohibiting fishing for ten years in their adjacent marine area to allow the recovery of key species. As previously evidenced in British Columbia and Washington State (Pinkerton 1992;Pinkerton et al 2014), recent successes in Hā'ena and Ka'ūpūlehu demonstrate that specific, targeted strategies can overcome many of the barriers to co-management transitions.…”

“…In Washington State, co-management agreements between Indian tribes and the State were facilitated by issue networks, advocacy coalitions or alliances, legislation, threat of court action, and citizen-led initiatives to prevent further environmental degradation (Pinkerton 1992;Pinkerton et al 2014). Similar initiatives were integral to success in Hā'ena, Kaua'i.…”

“…Building co-management regimes in the developed world can be particularly challenging, due to: conflicting legal mandates and overlapping regulatory structures (Crowder et al 2006); legal systems that prevent devolution of rights or local autonomy (Finkbeiner et al 2015); or bureaucratic and political inertia (Pinkerton 1992). Co-management processes may also be encumbered by a lack of government capacity for collaborative management (Pinkerton et al 2014); rent-seeking behavior (Imperial and Yandle 2005); and lengthy public planning processes where stakeholders have multiple opportunities to influence policymaking (Vaughan and Caldwell 2015). Given the barriers associated with co-management transitions, it is worth understanding how communities may overcome them.…”

Introduction to the Special Feature on rebuilding fisheries and threatened communities

“…These processes include power dynamics that disconnect already vulnerable small-scale fishers from access to their fisheries and from the basis for their identities, thus leading, in some cases, to their displacement. Pinkerton et al (2014) report on the efforts of aboriginal and nonaboriginal fishery organizations in the fisheries of coastal British Columbia, Canada, to rebuild local and regional institutions that were badly eroded by external management initiatives and loss of access to resources. They use these case studies to identify some prerequisites for successful rebuilding, pointing to the complexities of required access to power in efforts to establish and develop co-management fishing practices.…”

“…Ten addressed the first question (Bennett et al 2014, Blythe et al 2014, Broderstad and Eythórsson 2014, Dawe and Schneider 2014, Foley and McCay 2014, Johnsen and Hersoug 2014, Nayak et al 2014, Paterson and Kainge 2014, Pinkerton et al 2014, Power et al 2014; nine addressed the second question either directly or implicitly (Bennett et al 2014, Blythe et al 2014, Brodestad and Eythórsson 2014, Foley and McCay 2014, Lowitt 2014, Nayak et al 2014, Paterson and Kainge 2014, Pinkerton et al 2014, Power et al 2014; and eight implicitly addressed the last question (Bennett et al 2014, Broderstad and Eythórsson 2014, Foley and McCay 2014, Johnsen and Hersoug 2014, Nayak et al 2014, Paterson and Kainge 2014, Pinkerton et al 2014, Power et al 2014.…”