Rethinking capitalist transformation of fisheries in South Africa and India

Abstract

The industrialization of fisheries and the growth of a capitalist sector within fisheries have received considerable scholarly attention. For the most part, scholars have emphasized how capitalism has led to privatization of the commons, forced small-scale resource users into wage labor, and marginalized the sector. This analysis does not, however, explain the continued presence of such a vibrant and important small-scale sector in fisheries throughout the world. Drawing on the notion of Foucauldian governmentality, other scholars have argued that the small-scale sector or what they term the "need economy" is a product of primitive accumulation. The state must, in conditions of democracy, address the welfare needs of all those who have been dispossessed in order to govern. We engage with this theorization in the context of fisheries and argue that seeing small-scale fisheries only as a product of primitive accumulation and Foucauldian governmentality ignores the moral economies of these fisheries. By analyzing capitalist transformation of fisheries in two "democratic" countries, South Africa and India, we highlight how small-scale fishers resist increasing marginalization and how governments have afforded a measure of protection to this sector, and confirm the importance of their moral economies to sustainable and equitable fisheries in the future.

A gender lens on women’s harvesting activities and interactions with local marine governance in a South Pacific fishing community

“…Ongoing land disputes have meant that residents have been unable to fully capitalise on the tourism boom while the threat of eviction poses an immediate threat to livelihood security. While there has been no clear case of land or coastal grabbing, or accumulation by dispossession-as residents continue to live there despite multiple pressures (cf Knudsen 2012;Menon et al 2018)-fishers hold limited rights to negotiate the tourism boom and obtain its full benefits. For example, by not maintaining clear ownership rights, residents are unable to sell their land and have been constrained in the ability to build new structures.…”

“…While there is a broader literature on livelihood transition in coastal communities (e.g. Belton and Thilsted 2014;Betcherman and Marschke 2016;Menon et al 2018), literature on the transition from fishing to tourism in coastal communities tends to focus on either the positive or negative livelihood effects. Among many environmentalists and policymakers, tourism is described as a potentially positive force that can generate income for local people in coastal communities in an environmentally sustainable way, such as through eco-tourism or user fees from dive tourism in marine protected areas (Depondt and Green 2006;Terk and Knowlton 2010).…”

Implications of legal pluralism for socio-technical transition studies – scrutinizing the ascendancy of the ring seine fishery in India

“…In the latter case, differences between legal systems go beyond law and legal procedure, and link to variations in social and economic structure, as well as knowledge. Such 'strong' variations are sometimes analysed as modes of production (Sanyal 2007), with contradictions occurring between capitalist and so-called moral economies (Menon et al 2018). A strong legal pluralism perspective thus draws attention to fundamental tensions that occur the very field in which a sociotechnical transition is taking place.…”

‘Re-grabbing’ marine resources: a blue degrowth agenda for the resurgence of small-scale fisheries in Malta

“…(Graham-Gibson et al, 2013). After all, the state must respond to the welfare needs of all those who have been dispossessed in order to be able to govern (Menon et al, 2018).…”