Svein Jentoft

Fisheries co-management: Delegating government responsibility to fishermen's organizations☆☆☆

The division of responsibility between the state and the fishing industry in fisheries management is discussed, particularly the role of fishermens organizations and the degree to which such organizations can handle regulatory functions. The problems involved in a cooperative management approach are examined, as is the comparative advantageousness of such an approach. The circumstances that might favor the success of co-management are noted. The authors conclusions concerning the efficacy of a cooperative management regime draw upon analagous international experiences.

Social theory and fisheries co-management

Abstract Co-management is a tool of fisheries management that has received much attention in recent years. Although there are great hopes about what it may accomplish, there are also serious doubts, questions and criticisms regarding its general applicability. We believe that many of these concerns are valid ones. However, many of the negative predictions reflect overly narrow perspectives on the role and nature of institutions. Other, no less valid, presuppositions lead to more optimistic hypotheses concerning the outcomes of co-management arrangements. The institutional problems associated with co-management have been analyzed from the perspective of rational choice. We offer another perspective by analyzing these problems from the standpoint of how institutions are embedded in human community.

User participation in fisheries management: lessons drawn from international experiences☆

This paper summarizes the findings of two partly overlapping comparative international projects on government-industry interaction in fisheries management in the seven Nordic countries, the USA, Canada, Spain, France and New Zealand. Fisheries management agencies often rely on inputs from user groups in planning, implementation and enforcement of regulatory systems. User involvement in fisheries management is a controversial subject in most of the countries represented here. Too much or too little involvement seem equally problematic. The issue is not so much if and why user groups should be involved, as how, which is basically a political question. User participation is a means through which users are empowered, and there is always a possibility that some will win while others will lose or be left out entirely. However, the question of how user groups should be incorporated in the management process is also a question of institutional design. In this respect, great diversity is demonstrated in our case studies. This suggests that the question of how users should be involved has many possible answers - none of them easy.

The community: a missing link of fisheries management

Fisheries management, as it is currently done in most countries, ignores the community level. Instead, it is almost exclusively based on a relationship between a government agency and individual users. This paper calls for a stronger emphasis on the roles that communities can play in fisheries management. Effective resource management is a necessary condition for the viability of fisheries communities, but I argue that viable communities are also an important contribution to the preservation of healthy fish stocks. Thus, before one can hope to rebuild fish stocks, one must start to rebuild communities; one cannot succeed without the other. The paper also offers some reflections on solutions and strategies, in particular on co-management as a potential community-building institution and how communities can play a supportive role in fisheries co-management.

From the bottom up: Participatory issues in fisheries management

“Co‐management”; is among several slogans used to indicate a dissatisfaction with present systems and a movement to more decentralized systems of marine resource management. The authors note the necessary distinction between decentralization and participatory management and use comparative analyses of case studies of fisheries management systems in Scandinavian and North American countries and New Zealand to explore potentials for both decentralization and delegation of authority in fisheries management. The article focuses on issues of representation, domain, and communication in the design of fisheries management systems. It notes the value of the concept of subsidiarity, recently adopted in the process of European integration, and raises the question of sources of more “communicative rationality”; in the social and political processes surrounding fisheries MANAgement.

From user-groups to stakeholders? The public interest in fisheries management

Fisheries management has long been characterised by strong user-group involvement, created to enhance the legitimacy and proficiency of decisions. Due to perennial problems of overfishing and resource depletion, the privileged position of users are increasingly being challenged, and there have been calls for more inclusive and democratic institutions. Fish, it is argued, is a public resource and should be managed through institutional arrangements that take the public interest into account. Taking the demands for more inclusive and transparent management institutions as our starting point, the article addresses some of the issues emanating from a stakeholder approach to fisheries management. Against the backdrop of stakeholder theory, as it has been developed in the literature on business management, we attempt to identify--and classify--those with a legitimate stake in the fisheries. We also address some of the problems and complexities of stakeholder management, and conclude with a discussion of some of the central issues and challenges pertaining to the creation of more inclusive and transparent institutions in fisheries management.

Poverty mosaics : realities and prospects in small-scale fisheries

Chapter 1 - Setting the Stage By Svein Jentoft and Arne Eide Introduction.- Chapter 2 - Avoiding Poverty Chapter 2 - Avoiding Poverty Distributing Wealth in Fisheries By Arne Eide, Maarten Bavinck and Jesper Raakjaer.- Chapter 3 - Situating Poverty A Chain Analysis of Small-Scale Fisheries By Ratana Chuenpagdee and Svein Jentoft.- Chapter 4 - The Meaning of Poverty Conceptual Issues in Small-Scale Fisheries Research By Svein Jentoft and Georges Midre.- Chapter 5 - Living on the Margin The Poverty-Vulnerability Nexus in the Small-Scale Fisheries of Bangladesh By Mohammad Mahmudul Islam.- Chapter 6 - Occupation of Last Resort? Small-Scale Fishing in Lake Victoria, Tanzania By Paul O. Onyango.- Chapter 7 - Vanished Prosperity Poverty and Marginalization in a Small Polish Fishing Community By Boguslaw Marciniak.- Chapter 8 - More than Income Alone The Anlo-Ewe Beach Seine Fishery in Ghana By Marloes Kraan.- Chapter 9 - Wealth, Poverty and Immigration The Role of Institutions in the Fisheries of Tamil Nadu, India By Maarten Bavinck.- Chapter 10 - Addressing Vulnerability Coping Strategies of Fishing Communities in Yucatan, Mexico By Silvia Salas, Maiken Bjorkan, Felipe Bobadilla and Miguel A. Cabrera.- Chapter 11 - Through Boom and Bust Coping with Poverty in Sea Snail Fisheries on the Turkish Black Sea Coast By Stale Knudsen and Hakan Kocak.- Chapter 12 - Community Response Decline of the Chambo in Lake Malawis Southeast Arm By Mafaniso Hara.- Chapter 13 - To Make a Fishing Life Community Empowerment in Small-Scale Fisheries in the Pearl Lagoon, Nicaragua By Miguel Gonzalez.- Chapter 14 - Learning from the Experts Attaining Sufficiency in Small-Scale Fishing Communities in Thailand By Ratana Chuenpagdee and Kungwan Juntarashote.- Chapter 15 - Facilitating Change A Mekong Vietnamese Small-Scale Fishing Community By Kim Anh Thi Nguyen and Ola Flaaaten.- Chapter 16 - Creating Action Space Small-Scale Fisheries Policy Reform in South Africa By Moenieba Isaacs.- Chapter 17 - Building Resilience Fisheries Cooperatives in Southern Sri Lanka By Oscar Amarasinghe and Maarten Bavinck.- Chapter 18 - Moving out of Poverty Conditions for Wealth Creation in Small-Scale Fisheries in Mozambique By Ana Menezes, Arne Eide and Jesper Raakjaer.- Chapter 19 - The Merits of Consensus Small-Scale Fisheries as a Livelihood Buffer in Livingston Town, Guatemala By Hector Andrade and Georges Midre.- Chapter 20 - A Better Future Prospects for Small-Scale Fishing People By Svein Jentoft, Arne Eide, Maarten Bavinck, Ratana Chuenpagdee and Jesper Raakjaer.- Biographies of the PovFish Team.- Index of Keywords.

If science is not the answer, what is? An alternative governance model for the world's fisheries

Worldwide, management of fisheries has repeatedly failed, despite substantial investment in scientific research, primarily in the natural sciences. We argue that the way in which ecosystems are viewed and the lack of explicit consideration of three key elements – corporate responsibility, social justice, and ethics –have contributed to this dismal history. Here, we turn classical ecosystem thinking on its head, proposing an alternative image of an “inverted trophic pyramid” that places humans at the bottom. The inverted pyramid encapsulates ecosystem-based management and the interdependent relationship between humans and the ecosystem. It requires business incentives, ethics, and a balance of power to prevent the pyramid from toppling and to avert a crisis.

Marine spatial planning: risk or opportunity for fisheries in the North Sea?

The North Sea is one of the busiest marine areas in the world. It is also a major fisheries ground. Bordered by seven countries with their own spatial uses and claims, the stage is set for complex and demanding governance challenges. Recent decades have also seen user groups multiply, competition for space and resources increase, and the pressure on the marine environment and its living natural resources grow. As governments strive to balance conservation and economic development needs, they also have to deal with inter-as well as intra-national user conflicts. Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) has arrived as a new approach to these issues. It is argued that for North Sea fishing people and their communities MSP holds risks as well as opportunities, depending on which institutions are formed and what role they are allowed to play in the planning process.

Limits to participation? On the history, structure and reform of Norwegian fisheries management

Norwegian fisheries management is best characterized as a system of centralized consultation. The ultimate authority to manage lies with central government, albeit with a significant element of power sharing through corporatist arrangements facilitating the participation-in management decision-making--of a select group of stakeholders. This structure has been criticized for fostering a decision-making process that favours user-groups at the expense of other legitimate stakeholders. Transparency and inclusiveness are currently being hailed as core values of the ideal management process, and there are demands for broader representation in management decision-making. In this paper we address some of the questions and dilemmas pertaining to institutional reform in Norwegian fisheries management, tracing the roots as well as the core structures and procedures of the current system. We identify the major challenges being faced by established institutions, and conclude with a discussion of the pros and cons of a more transparent and democratic process.