Differences in the effects of social network, trust, and co-operation on fishery co-management

Kamiyama, Ryutaro; Miyata, Tsutom; Ferrer, Alice Joan G.; Kurokura, Hisashi; Ishikawa, Satoshi

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2017.10.033

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…. managers" [36], if most people in society can be trusted [37,38], and what the respondent's "trust level in government" is [38]. Although these studies draw interesting conclusions on trust levels, they do not explicitly articulate the different understandings of trust.…”

Section: Concept Familiaritymentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Interestingly some studies that seek to measure trust do not define trust or investigate its nuances, while appreciating the complexity and multi-dimensionality of other concepts in their interview or survey items, such as ecosystem services, livelihoods, and adaptive capacity [35]. In these cases, the researchers often use a reference to describe the variable, such as the number of organizations they belong to as representing the bonding network, or the number of people a person knows in their neighborhood as indicating bridging network [37]. In O'Leary et al [28], as the authors seek to assess "agency in the community", the concept "agency" is not used, instead the characteristics that comprise agency are examined through the questions, such as gauging a respondent's ability to influence decisions in their community, whether the respondent has control over decisions, or if the respondent perceives that the community supports their learning and development.…”

Section: Operationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methodological Challenges in Studying Trust in Natural Resources Management

Sohns

Hickey

Vries

et al. 2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust has been identified as a central characteristic of successful natural resource management (NRM), particularly in the context of implementing participatory approaches to stakeholder engagement. Trust is, however, a multi-dimensional and multi-level concept that is known to evolve recursively through time, challenging efforts to empirically measure its impact on collaboration in different NRM settings. In this communication we identify some of the challenges associated with conceptualizing and operationalizing trust in NRM field research, and pay particular attention to the inter-relationships between the concepts of trust, perceived risk and control due to their multi-dimensional and interacting roles in inter-organizational collaboration. The challenge of studying trust begins with its conceptualization, which impacts the terminology being used, thereby affecting the subsequent operationalization of trust in survey and interview measures, and the interpretation of these measures by engaged stakeholders. Building from this understanding, we highlight some of the key methodological considerations, including how trust is being conceptualized and how the associated measures are being developed, deployed, and validated in order to facilitate cross-context and cross-level comparisons. Until these key methodological issues are overcome, the nuanced roles of trust in NRM will remain unclear.

show abstract

Section: Concept Familiaritymentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Operationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological Challenges in Studying Trust in Natural Resources Management

Sohns

Hickey

Vries

et al. 2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the self-governance of fishers can lead to desirable social-ecological outcomes (Basurto, 2005;Crona et al, 2017;Quintana et al, 2021), these community-based institutions are vulnerable to collective action problems, notably the Tragedy of the Commons (Ostrom, 1990;Lindkvist et al, 2017;Kamiyama et al, 2018;Schlüter et al, 2021). For example, communication among small-scale fishers has been demonstrated to build trust and cooperation, reduce resource extraction (Ghate et al, 2013;Barnes et al, 2019), and improve income equality (Ertör-Akyazi, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social cohesion and self-governance arrangements among small-scale fisheries in Puerto Rico

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In small-scale fisheries that suffer from weak formal governance, fishers use a variety of institutional strategies to self-govern. These self-governance arrangements may or may not be forms of collective action, yet they rely on informal institutions (such as norms of reciprocity) in generating social cohesion among users so that common rules can be agreed upon. Social network perspectives have been used to understand the cohesiveness of fishers operating with different gear types or in different communities, yet less is known about how social cohesion differs between fishers that operate through formal cooperative arrangements, such as fishing associations, and independent fishers who operate solely at the community level through informal cooperation. Using mixed methods, we compared the social cohesion of commercial fishers arising from information-sharing and work-support networks in four fishing communities of north-eastern Puerto Rico, as they coped with prolonged hurricane recovery and the COVID-19 pandemic. A series of exponential random graph models (ERGMs) were applied to untangle the drivers of cohesion emerging from fisher’s information-sharing patterns. Fisher’s communication was driven not just by operating at the same landing site or using the same primary gear type, but also by choosing to organize their fishing under the same self-governance arrangement. Specifically, fishers that were members of fishing associations mostly communicated among themselves, while independent fishers talked across arrangements, indicating the role of fishing associations in fostering social cohesion. However, associated fishers were less likely to receive information than independent fishers, suggesting the need for targeted communication strategies within each group. Moreover, independent fishers had more work support ties and a greater diversity of supporting actors across the supply chain, suggesting their need for higher levels of linking social capital. Multiple social factors explained whether fishers choose to be members of fishing associations or remain independent, including trust in leaders and agreement on membership rules. These findings highlight the importance of knowing the cohesiveness of cooperation networks among small-scale fishers.

show abstract

The role of social capital in fishing community sustainability: Spiraling down and up in a rural California port

Richmond

Casali

2022

Marine Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differences in the effects of social network, trust, and co-operation on fishery co-management

Cited by 7 publications

References 23 publications

Methodological Challenges in Studying Trust in Natural Resources Management

Methodological Challenges in Studying Trust in Natural Resources Management

Social cohesion and self-governance arrangements among small-scale fisheries in Puerto Rico

The role of social capital in fishing community sustainability: Spiraling down and up in a rural California port

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About