Distributional performance of two different rights-based managed small-scale lobster fisheries: Individual and collective territorial use rights regimes

True insights or ticking boxes? Rapid assessment of rights‐based management in artisanal fisheries

“…However, cooperative membership only extends to direct male relatives (brothers and sons) of current members. Obviously, this creates clear gender inequities, because women who participate in the fishery—throughout capture, processing, and sales—are excluded from legal rights over resources (Villanueva et al, 2019). In some cooperatives, widows can ‘inherit’ access rights, but generally lease them to a male within the cooperative (Delgado‐Ramírez et al, 2022).…”

“…Of course, strategies are not mutually exclusive, as when traditional norms ( dinas , taboos, or elder councils) are integrated into formal community‐based fisheries area and temporal management (e.g., Madagascar, Barnes‐Mauthe et al, 2013; Pacific Islands, Bell et al, 2017; or through the legal concept of adjacency to support local power in transboundary fishery management, Dunn et al, 2016). In Mexico, formal RBFM systems exist as exclusive fishing concessions for particular groups of fishers and benthic stocks (Villanueva et al, 2019). An inherent challenge is that, under Mexican law, a concession granted to a group or individual in a given polygon to exploit a particular species might overlap with a different group for a different species.…”

“…Nonetheless, the relatively long duration of concessions has helped strengthen security of cooperative access, thereby leading to longer-term investments and adherence to regulations(Andrew et al, 2002). Concessions generally include high-value species, such as shrimp, abalone, lobster, and conch in the Baja California(McCay et al, 2014) and Yucatán(Méndez-Medina et al, 2015;Villanueva et al, 2019) peninsulas. Other management measures include minimum catch size, catch limits, effort limits, fishing gear, and seasonal or permanent area restrictions.…”