- Improving resource information alone has limited effect on decision-making processes.
- A formal participatory MSE allows for more transparency in the management process.
- It supports strategy design, communication and shared understanding about management issues.
- Participatory methods can help modify individual attitudes and group interactions.
Community-based and Participatory Management
This paper investigates how different kinds of knowledge are mobilised in interactions between the stakeholders, scientists and bureaucrats who are involved in EU fisheries management. It reports on an initiative led by the North Sea Regional Advisory Council aimed at making a long-term management plan for Nephrops fisheries in the North Sea. The sharing of knowledge between the actors is explored using insights from organisation management, focusing on the kinds of resources and efforts that are needed at different boundaries to allow knowledge sharing and knowledge production to occur. The findings point to the challenge of reaching a common understanding between actors when both novelty and high stakes are involved. Experiences gained during this pioneering initiative raise questions about how far it is possible to take a ‘bottom up’ collaborative process aimed at developing management instruments within a setting where there are conflicts of interests between the stakeholders involved.
Combating illegal and destructive resource exploitation in the Coral Triangle is central to ensuring the long-term effective management of fisheries, marine protected areas, and climate change adaptation efforts. This article presents results of an investigation of the perceived level of local compliance and enforcement with marine resource rules and regulations and evaluates the effectiveness or potential for community-supported enforcement efforts in the Coral Triangle region. The findings are consistent with those of the literature on compliance and enforcement that any compliance and enforcement system must not only use deterrence, but also be perceived by fishers as being legitimate, fair, accountable and equitable and the need for developing a personal morality and a social environment that supports compliance. There is an opportunity to strategically build on shared value and cultural norms that can promote collaborative fisheries management as a mechanism to increase compliance through non-coercive efforts. Strengthening the long-term capacity for consistent delivery of local support to marine management and enforcement will increase local compliance rates through time.
This article aims to identify conditions of success for European fisheries co-management and its integration in broader strategies for sustainable resource management. Co-management of fisheries, broadly defined as the involvement of users in management, developed in Europe in various experimental forms of participation of fishermen in the management process, in advisory roles or through delegation and sharing of power. During its history, fisheries co-management has been revealed as multi-functional, addressing different knowledge and resource management problems, with varying success. This analysis focuses on knowledge-related issues that are important for the functioning of co-management, especially the combination of scientific and local knowledge. First we review European literature on co-management and secondly we analyse two exemplary case studies (EU Regional Advisory Councils and Fisheries Local Action Groups). Thereupon the possibilities for future development of co-management in Europe are discussed with regard to knowledge integration and environmental governance. Under the influence of the ideas of adaptive governance and sustainable resource management, modifications of forms and functions of co-management systems are described.
Depending upon the institutional framework, coral reef ecosystems and local economic development can be synergistic. When managed properly through local institutions, coral reef systems can deliver ecosystem services that create livelihoods and increase local prosperity in dependent communities. This study compares two community-based reef management institutions. One is located in a community with a reef struggling to recover from destructive fishing, the other in a community that has experienced a remarkable recovery. Using mixed methods, long-form interviews, and surveys of reef tourism stakeholders, this uses institutional characteristics to predict reef quality. Certain institutional components hypothesized to predict reef quality did not; these include universal membership requirements for reef stakeholders, stakeholder familiarity with leadership and hierarchies, and transparent decision-making and implementation of management policy. This means that one size fits all prescriptions for local reef management institutions should be viewed with caution. Instead, the success of management institutions may depend upon both the path toward economic development, access to technology that facilitates coral recovery, and communication of conservation strategies to tourist visitors.