Suggestions for fixing top-down coastal fisheries management through participatory approaches

Lopes, Priscila F. M.; Rosa, Eliezer Mazzetti; Salyvonchyk, Svetlana; Nora, Vinícius; Begossi, Alpina

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.033

Cited by 75 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1). Interviews with expert fishers (more than 20 years of fishing in the area) in this region in a previous survey show that Trindade never uses islands that are part of the MPA, P. Grande uses a few islands inside the MPA, and Tarituba uses islands inside the MPA more often (Lopes et al 2013).…”

Section: Fishers' Socio-economic Profilementioning

confidence: 89%

“…Economic diversification is also one of the multiple livelihood strategies to deal with fisheries' unpredictability (McCay 1978;Allison and Ellis 2001) and could contribute to increasing the chances of success of some specific fisheries management (Pontecorvo and Schrank 2001), by decreasing the fishing pressure. Besides, Trindade's fishers follow their own fisheries' management rules, such as establishing minimal distances among gillnets, not allowing gillnets close to river mouths, and by returning young or under-sized fish alive to the water when these are caught in the trap nets (Lopes et al 2013). Perhaps, such local initiatives may have increased the availability of fishing resources and were detected as higher CPUEs, which do not necessarily have to result in higher income from fisheries as fishers could be restraining their fishing effort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other studies, including some done in Brazil, have shown that the choice of no-take areas is fundamental to the success of the nearby areas, because of the limited effectiveness of spillover effects due to the sub-optimal habitat quality of protected sites (FranciniFilho and Moura 2008) or due to limited management efficiency (Camargo et al 2009). Finally, it is not possible to rule out the chance of the islands inside the MPA in Tarituba being subjected more to poaching compared to those in the Paraty bay, as the former community not only has more full-time fishers but also shows the highest conflict level involving the MPA (Lopes et al 2013). It is known that conflicts with fishing communities have increased after management authorities enforced the MPA , as fishers disagree with the choice of some areas (Lopes et al 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, ''ill-planned'' MPAs may not achieve these desirable outcomes and instead can generate conflicts with fishers (Sale et al 2005). This happens largely due to ineffective designation of reserve boundaries established with no consideration for their legitimacy, undermining their potential from the beginning, depending on the local governance system (Lopes et al 2013). New boundaries can result in net economic loss to local users due to their socioeconomic dependency on some areas.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The coastal parks, which are supposed to work as MPAs, may have affected (positively or negatively) important fishing communities (Diegues 1999(Diegues , 2008. Furthermore, the ecological effectiveness of these MPAs is hard to validate because the criteria and indicators used to establish them were unclear (Lopes et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Transboundary Socio-Ecological Effects of a Marine Protected Area in the Southwest Atlantic

Lopes¹,

Silvano

Nora

et al. 2013

AMBIO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been regarded as an alternative to protect natural resources and to improve fisheries. However, MPAs may also have negative socio-economic consequences on fishing communities. We aimed to check the effectiveness of a socially conflicting MPA in Brazil by assessing target reef fish biomass in islands inside (n = 6) and outside (n = 6) the MPA, fisheries' productivity (biomass), catch per unit of effort (CPUE), and fishers' socioeconomic status (mainly fishers' income) in three fishing communities subjected to different degrees of influence (close, average, and long distance) of the MPA. The CPUE was higher in the fishing community that was further away from the MPA, fish biomass was higher in the islands located inside the MPA in the southern region and in the islands located outside the MPA in the northern region, while fishers were making the most money closest to the MPA, where conflicts are the highest, probably from practicing very intensive fisheries. This integrated approach showed that the studied MPA has not delivered ecological benefits, such as higher CPUE or more fish, while higher income closer to the MPA could not be clearly attributed to its effects.

show abstract

Section: Fishers' Socio-economic Profilementioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Transboundary Socio-Ecological Effects of a Marine Protected Area in the Southwest Atlantic

Lopes¹,

Silvano

Nora

et al. 2013

AMBIO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

References

2023

Sustainable Fishery Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Establishing marine protected areas through bottom‐up processes: insights from two contrasting initiatives in Chile

Oyanedel

Marín

Castilla

et al. 2015

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Bottom-up participatory processes to create and manage no-take marine protected areas have been proposed as a way to scale-up marine conservation and deal with the lack of support and compliance of top-down conservation approaches. However, bottom-up conservation does not always lead to positive outcomes, thus it is increasingly important to understand the conditions that determine the establishment and implementation of these initiatives.2. Establishment and implementation processes were compared empirically for two contrasting bottom-up no-take marine protected areas that have been developing under the same political setting, however, one has been successful and the other has stalled.3. Using mixed methods, stakeholders' (a) motivations to participate in the no-take marine protected area initiatives, (b) communication, support and information flow networks, (c) perceived participation, and (d) satisfaction with the establishment process of the bottom-up no-take marine protected areas, were assessed. 4. Non-significant differences were found between the two initiatives in terms of stakeholders' motivations to create a no-take marine protected area. 5. Significant differences were found in stakeholders' communication, support and information flow networks, in addition to differences in participation, and satisfaction with the establishment and implementation process.6. Results highlight that for the implementation and consolidation of bottom-up no-take marine protected areas initiatives, common interests do not necessarily lead to common action, partnerships will not emerge automatically in response to potential benefits. 7. Understanding disparities in participation, information sharing and communication are key aspects which must be considered for creating and supporting successful marine protected areas based on bottom-up participatory processes.

show abstract

Suggestions for fixing top-down coastal fisheries management through participatory approaches

Cited by 75 publications

References 38 publications

Transboundary Socio-Ecological Effects of a Marine Protected Area in the Southwest Atlantic

Transboundary Socio-Ecological Effects of a Marine Protected Area in the Southwest Atlantic

References

Establishing marine protected areas through bottom‐up processes: insights from two contrasting initiatives in Chile

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About