Managing inequality or managing stocks? An ethnographic perspective on the governance of small‐scale fisheries

Abstract

A growing volume of recent research on small-scale fisheries governance has a focus on local perspectives and priorities of small-scale fisherfolk. This paper develops from this local perspective a novel focus on what is a fundamental priority of many small-scale fishers: concerns about inequality. The paper begins with a critical review of the literature on small-scale fisheries governance and suggests how a focus on inequality can make a useful contribution. The paper uses case-studies of small-scale fisheries in Papua New Guinea (PNG) and the Philippines to highlight local priorities about inequality and the implications for small-scale fisheries governance. PNG and the Philippines have very different social, political and environmental contexts, yet in both cases, local inequalities were a key pre-occupation of fisherfolk and posed major challenges for fisheries governance. While in both of the case-studies, fishers were aware of and keen to act on resource sustainability, this concern was overridden by concerns over: who obtained benefits from the fishery; who was responsible for resource degradation; and who should bear the costs of regulation. We conclude by discussing how our emphasis on the importance of inequality at a local level can potentially be integrated within many influential approaches to small-scale fisheries governance.

Social-ecological systems, social diversity, and power: insights from anthropology and political ecology

“…A better understanding of the discursive dimensions of power in SESs would encourage resilience scientists to deconstruct whose voices become privileged and whose voices are silenced, and why, in debates over resilient SESs. Such deconstruction does not have to descend into extreme forms of postmodernist philosophical debate in order to be a powerful corrective to technocratic viewpoints that elide the existence of inequality (Ferguson 1994, Li 2007, Easterly 2014, Fabinyi et al 2014. Despite some progress by resilience scholars in this direction, we argue that there remains much room for a greater engagement with these issues, and to make greater use of the approaches that help us understand them.…”

“…Third, methodologically, utilizing approaches that allow people to reflect on "the meaning of things" or their own interpretations of their and other's resilience, knowledge, adaptive capacity, and agency can add a new, little-explored dimension to resilience science (see Duit et al 2010 for further reflections on conceptual and methodological choices in SES research). This could, for example, involve a greater engagement with ethnographic and other qualitative research methods (Fabinyi et al 2010(Fabinyi et al , 2014. Finally, conscientiously steering away from the normative bias often associated with resilience thinking, and focusing on the practical application and empirical outcomes of resilience in practice (whether good or bad overall and for specific societies, groups, and individuals) could inform a more grounded understanding of SES resilience.…”

Artículo de Revisión/ Review Article Teorías y modelos aplicados al estudio de la conducta del pescador: implicaciones en procesos de gestión

“…No obstante, como se constató en esta revisión, la conducta del pescador es contexto-dependiente, lo que quiere decir que está supeditada a la gran heterogeneidad y dinamismo existente en las comunidades pesqueras definidas por aspectos geográficos, socioculturales y ambientales (Fabinyi et al 2013;Reed et al 2013). Esto hace que los pescadores tengan diferentes respuestas ante medidas de manejo y que su forma de interacción con el entorno sea compleja.…”

“Little kings”: community, change and conflict in Icelandic fisheries

“…In fisheries, power inequities also often exist between scientists and fishermen, as scientific knowledge is often given greater legitimacy than fishermen's knowledge (Finlayson 1994;Pálsson 1998). Imbalances in political power can differentially impact those in rural communities who do not have equal access to decision-making processes as those in urban communities (Bavinck 2015;Fabinyi et al 2015;Verelst 2013). The current trend of neoliberal fisheries resource management (Pinkerton and Davis 2015), such as Iceland's ITQ system, can lead to the creation of new social conflicts and the further entrenchment of existing inequalities (Benediktsson and Karlsdóttir 2011;Carothers 2010).…”