Comparative capitalism and sustainable development: Stakeholder capitalism and co-management in the Kenyan fisheries sub sector

This paper argues that stakeholder capitalism is more appropriate to natural resource management and rural development in Africa than other varieties of capitalism. It examines different management arrangements in Kenyan Lake Victoria fisheries resources to argue that whilst stakeholder capitalism is still far from being the mainstream model of capitalism in Kenya, theoretically and empirically, it is more appropriate to sustainable development than the Anglo‐Saxon variety of capitalism that the country inherited from its British colonizers. The paper demonstrates that the concepts of ownership and management rights are social, economic and political constructs that are continuously contested, with huge implications for sustainable development and natural resource management.     

Exploring co-management theory: prospects for sociobiology and reciprocal altruism

Co-management has gained prominence due to the sustained interest in participatory forms of natural resource management. While theoretical development posed an initial challenge, it has become an integral part of the co-management literature. This paper comprehensively explores co-management theory. It begins with an investigation of theory itself. The major elements of theory (concepts, variables and relational propositions) are described and a typology of theoretical statements (formats) is conceptualized. Co-management theory is subsequently charted according to the four schemes (modelling, propositional, analytical and meta-theoretical) which make up the typology. Given the maturing nature of the co-management literature and the absence of any meta-theoretical schemes, we examine the central and underlying assumption of co-operation through the science of sociobiology. Reciprocal altruism is pursued to explain why non-kin co-operate, and is adapted to elucidate the potentials and pitfalls of co-management. This meta-theory enriches understanding of co-management, provides guidance to the other theoretical schemes, and offers a foundational basis upon which construction of subtle predications is possible.     

Assessing the impact of fisheries co-management interventions in developing countries: a meta-analysis

Co-management is now established as a mainstream approach to small-scale fisheries management across the developing world. A comprehensive review of 204 potential cases reveals a lack of impact assessments of fisheries co-management. This study reports on a meta-analysis of the impact of fisheries co-management in developing countries in 90 sites across 29 case-studies. The top five most frequently measured process indicators are participation, influence, rule compliance, control over resources, and conflict. The top five most frequently measured outcome indicators are access to resources, resource well-being, fishery yield, household well-being, and household income. To deal with the diversity of the 52 indicators measured and the different ways these data are collected and analysed, we apply a coding system to capture change over time. The results of the meta-analysis suggest that, overall fisheries co-management delivers benefits to end-users through improvements in key process and outcome indicators. However, the dataset as a whole is constituted primarily of data from the Philippines. When we exclude this body of work, few generalisations can be made about the impact of fisheries co-management. The lack of comparative data suitable for impact assessment and the difficulties in comparing data and generalising across countries and regions reiterates calls in other fields for more systematic approaches to understanding and evaluating governance frameworks.     

Monitoring Parks Through Remote Sensing: Studies in Nepal and Honduras

The effectiveness of parks as management regimes is hotly contested. Much of the current discussion centered around comparisons of management regimes can be traced to a dearth of cross-site quantitative evaluations. Remote sensing provides a particularly effective tool for this purpose, yet analysis of remotely sensed data requires fieldwork to interpret human activities and the socioeconomic and political contexts that relate to land cover change. This paper examines the effect of establishment of the Celaque National Park, Honduras, and the Royal Chitwan National Park buffer zone, Nepal, on limiting deforestation. In Celaque, the park itself has been largely successful in maintaining forest cover. However, recent changes in land use patterns have led to increasing pressure on the park boundaries, exacerbated by the lack of involvement of local residents. In the Royal Chitwan National Park, in contrast, participatory approaches towards co-management have been implemented over the past decade in the park buffer zone. With significant incomes derived from ecotourism, complete protection of the buffer zone forest has been adopted, leading to significant regrowth of tree cover. However, local decision-making power is limited, and buffer zone management has largely proven successful due to the investment and support provided by international donor agencies. These two case studies demonstrate the utility of remote sensing and Geographical Information Systems analysis in providing a spatiotemporal perspective for assessing management policies. They also demonstrate the importance of fieldwork to provide a nuanced understanding of the socioeconomic and institutional conditions affecting the outcomes of forest management regimes.     

Mekong River Fish Conservation Zones in Southern Laos: Assessing Effectiveness Using Local Ecological Knowledge

Small-scale fisheries are important in Laos, where rural people heavily depend upon Mekong River and tributary fish stocks for their livelihoods. Increasing pressures from human exploitation and habitat disturbance, however, have raised serious concerns about the potential depletion of various species. This has led to the establishment of large numbers of Fish Conservation Zones (FCZs) or “no-take” fish sanctuaries in southern Laos based on a “community-based fisheries co-management” framework. This study uses the local ecological knowledge (LEK) of fishers to assess the effectiveness of village-managed FCZs in enhancing fish stocks in the mainstream Mekong River in Khong District, Champasak Province. Focus group interviews about species that are believed to have benefited from different FCZs are compared with parameters such as FCZ area, age, depth, localized gradient, water velocity, and the presence of wetland forests nearby. The results suggest that no one aspect is likely to account for variations in fish stocks; rather, it is the interaction between numerous factors that has the largest impact. Secondly, the results indicate that microhabitat diversity and protection are critical for maintaining and enhancing Mekong fisheries. Deep-water pools are particularly important as dry season refuges for many fish species, and FCZ depth may be the single most important environmental factor affecting the success of FCZs in the Mekong River. FCZs have the most potential to benefit relatively sedentary species, but may also benefit highly migratory species, given the right conditions. This study shows that integrated approaches to stock assessment that employ LEK and scientific fisheries management have considerable potential for improving Mekong capture-fisheries management.     

Who should manage protected areas in the Swedish mountain region? A survey approach to co-management

This article investigates attitudes towards co-management of protected areas in Sweden, at the national, county and local level. In Sweden, protected areas are still primarily designated and managed hierarchically-a practice increasingly contested by people living close to them, including indigenous Sámi reindeer herders whose economic activities are located within protected areas. The general view could, on the contrary, be anticipated to be pro-state since protected areas are considered to be of national interest. For democratic reasons, however, the opinions of the whole population should be considered. In order to measure both local and general views, this study is based on a two-sample survey of 8868 respondents. The objectives are to map and explain attitudes regarding who should manage protected areas in Sweden, and to test the usefulness of a multi-level quantitative method. Such an approach is unusual in co-management literature that is empirically mainly based on local case studies. The explanatory ambition sets out to test three hypotheses drawn from common-pool resource theory; resource dependency, common understanding, and trust. Perhaps surprisingly, the results show that a considerable majority of the respondents (at all levels) wish to see self- or co-management. All three hypotheses are important to understand attitudes toward the management of protected areas, but not always in the way that the theory anticipates.     

Benefits, efforts and risks of participants in landscape co-management: an analytical framework and results from two case studies in Austria

Participatory processes in general and also in relation to managing landscape issues are gathering importance mostly due to arguments surrounding legitimacy and effectiveness in decision-making. The main aim of this research, based on a transaction costs perspective, is to present an integrated analytical framework in order to determine individual efforts (time, money), benefits and risks of participants in landscape co-management processes. Furthermore a reflection on the analytical approach developed and arising lessons to be learned for landscape co-management are presented. In the analytical framework benefit-components comprise of factors such as 'contributing to landscape maintenance/development and nature protection', 'representing one's interest group', 'co-deciding on relevant topics', 'providing and broadening one's knowledge' and 'building networks'. The risks of participation are related to a lack of information and agreements, missing support and actual decision-making power. The analytical framework is applied to two case studies in Austria: an EU LIFE-Nature project and a Cultural Landscape Project of the Provincial Government of Lower Austria. Analysis of the effort-benefit-relations provides an indication for a more effective design of co-management. Although the processes are rated as quite adequate, there is a low willingness of participants to commit additional time to co-management processes. In contrast to the Cultural Landscape Project, in the LIFE-Nature project, professionally involved persons participate next to partly and full volunteers. These uneven conditions of participation and an unfair distribution of transaction costs, jeopardize the promising chances co-management bears for landscape governance.     

The Key Role of the Barefoot Fisheries Advisors in the Co-managed TURF System of Galicia (NW Spain)

Many authors have pointed out the need for simpler assessment and management procedures for avoiding overexploitation in small-scale fisheries. Nevertheless, models for providing scientific advice for sustainable small-scale fisheries management have not yet been published. Here we present one model; the case of the Barefoot Fisheries Advisors (BFAs) in the Galician co-managed Territorial Users Rights for Fishing. Based on informal interviews, gray literature and our personal experience by being involved in this process, we have analyzed the historical development and evolution of roles of this novel and stimulating actor in small-scale fisheries management. The Galician BFA model allows the provision of good quality and organized fisheries data to facilitate and support decision-making processes. The BFAs also build robust social capital by acting as knowledge collectors and translators between fishers, managers, and scientists. The BFAs have become key actors in the small-scale fisheries management of Galicia and a case for learning lessons.     

Knowledge users’ perspectives and advice on how to improve knowledge exchange and mobilization in the case of a co-managed fishery

Environmental scientists have long been frustrated by the difficulties involved in transferring their research findings into policy-making, management, and public spheres. Despite increases in scientific knowledge about social-ecological systems, research has consistently shown that regulators and stakeholders draw on tacit, informal, and experiential knowledge far more than scientific knowledge in their decision-making. Social science research in the fields of knowledge exchange (KE) and knowledge mobilization (KMb) suggest that one of the major barriers to moving knowledge into practice is that scientists fail to align their communication strategies with the information-seeking behaviours and preferences of potential knowledge users. This article presents findings from in-depth qualitative research with government employees and stakeholders involved in co-managing Pacific salmon fisheries in Canada’s Fraser River. We investigate how members of these groups access, view, and use scientific information, finding both similarities and differences. Members of both groups express a strong interest in academic science, and self-report using scientific information regularly in their work and advocacy. However, the two groups engage in different information-seeking behaviours, and provide notably different advice to academic scientists about how to make research and communication more relevant to potential users. For example, government employees focus on the immediate applications of research to known problems, while stakeholders express greater concern for the political context and implications of scientific findings. We argue that scientists need to “go where the users are” in the behavioural and intellectual sense, and tailor their communications and engagement activities to match the habits, preferences, and expectations of multiple potential user groups. We conclude with recommendations on how this may be done.     

Constructing a policy and institutional framework for an ecosystem-based approach to managing the Lower Amazon floodplain

A regional experiment in co-management is underway in the Lower Amazon that is developing the basic policy and institutional elements for an ecosystem-based approach to floodplain management. This initiative grew out of the grassroots movement of floodplain communities who, concerned with excessive commercial fishing pressure on local fisheries, took control of local lakes and implemented collective agreements regulating fishing activity. This paper describes the main elements of the evolving regional management system. This process has focused on four main dimensions of floodplain settlement and resource use: development of sustainable management systems for floodplain resources, policies and institutions for fisheries co-management, collective agreements for grazing cattle on floodplain grasslands, and a land tenure policy consistent with the objectives of the evolving co-management system. Over the last year INCRA, the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform, has begun implementation of a comprehensive new land tenure policy that could resolve structural deficiencies in the existing co-management system and provide the basis for the ecosystem-based management of the Lower Amazon floodplain. Readers should send their comments on this paper to: BhaskarNath@aol.com within 3 months of publication of this issue.