World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

World Fisheries A Social-Ecological Analysis Ommer_ffirs.indd i 12/22/2010 4:41:55 PM Fish and Aquatic Resources Ser...

Author: Rosemary Ommer | Ian Perry | Kevern L. Cochrane | Philippe Cury

42 downloads 1828 Views 19MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

World Fisheries A Social-Ecological Analysis

Ommer_ffirs.indd i

12/22/2010 4:41:55 PM

Fish and Aquatic Resources Series Series Editor: Tony J. Pitcher Professor of Fisheries Policy and Ecosystem Restoration in Fisheries, Fisheries Centre, Aquatic Ecosystems Research Laboratory, University of British Columbia, Canada The Wiley-Blackwell Fish and Aquatic Resources Series is an initiative aimed at providing key books in this fast-moving field, published to a high international standard. The Series includes books that review major themes and issues in the science of fishes and the interdisciplinary study of their exploitation in human fisheries. Volumes in the Series combine a broad geographical scope with in-depth focus on concepts, research frontiers, and analytical frameworks. These books will be of interest to research workers in the biology, zoology, ichthyology, ecology, and physiology of fish and the economics, anthropology, sociology, and all aspects of fisheries. They will also appeal to non-specialists such as those with a commercial or industrial stake in fisheries. It is the aim of the editorial team that books in the Wiley-Blackwell Fish and Aquatic Resources Series should adhere to the highest academic standards through being fully peer reviewed and edited by specialists in the field. The Series books are produced by Wiley-Blackwell in a prestigious and distinctive format. The Series Editor, Professor Tony J. Pitcher, is an experienced international author, and founding editor of the leading journal in the field, Fish and Fisheries. The Series Editor, and Publisher at Wiley-Blackwell, Nigel Balmforth, will be pleased to discuss suggestions, advise on scope, and provide evaluations of proposals for books intended for the Series. Please see contact details listed below. Titles currently included in the Series 1. Effects of Fishing on Marine Ecosystems and Communities (S. Hall) 1999 2. Salmonid Fishes (Edited by Y. Altukhov et al.) 2000 3. Percid Fishes (J. Craig) 2000 4. Fisheries Oceanography (Edited by P. Harrison and T. Parsons) 2000 5. Sustainable Fishery Systems (A. Charles) 2000 6. Krill (Edited by I. Everson) 2000 7. Tropical Estuarine Fishes (S. Blaber) 2000 8. Recreational Fisheries (Edited by T. J. Pitcher and C. E. Hollingworth) 2002 9. Flatfishes (Edited by R. Gibson) 2005 10. Fisheries Acoustics (J. Simmonds and D. N. MacLennan) 2005 11. Fish Cognition and Behavior (Edited by C. Brown, K. Laland and J. Krause) 2006 12. Seamounts (Edited by T. J. Pitcher, T. Morato, P. J. B. Hart, M. R. Clark, N. Haggan and R. S. Santos) 2007 13. Sharks of the Open Ocean (Edited by M. D. Camhi, E. K. Pikitch and E. A. Babcock) 2008 14. World Fisheries (Edited by R. E. Ommer, R. I. Perry, K. Cochrane and P. Cury) 2011 15. Fish Cognition and Behavior, Second Edition (Edited by C. Brown, K. N. Laland and J. Krause) 2011 For further information concerning existing books in the series, please visit: www.wiley.com To discuss an idea for a new book, please contact: Nigel Balmforth, Life Sciences, Wiley-Blackwell, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK Tel: +44 (0) 1865 476501 Email: [email protected]

Ommer_ffirs.indd ii

12/22/2010 4:41:56 PM

World Fisheries A Social-Ecological Analysis Edited by

Rosemary E. Ommer Department of History, University of Victoria, Canada

R. Ian Perry Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Pacific Biological Station, Nanaimo, Canada

Kevern Cochrane United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, Rome, Italy

Philippe Cury Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, Centre de Recherche Halieutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale, IRD – IFREMER & Université Montpellier II, France

A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Publication

Ommer_ffirs.indd iii

12/22/2010 4:41:56 PM

This edition first published 2011 © 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell’s publishing programme has been merged with Wiley’s global Scientific, Technical, and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell. Registered Office John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK Editorial Offices 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, P019 8SQ, UK 2121 State Avenue, Ames, Iowa 50014-8300, USA For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell. The right of the authors to be identified as the authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher. Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books. Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data World fisheries : a social-ecological analysis / edited by Rosemary E. Ommer … [et al.] p. cm. — (Fish and aquatic resources series) Based on a symposium held in Rome in July 2008, sponsored by the Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics Program and other bodies Includes bibliographical references and index ISBN 978-1-4443-3467-8 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Fishery management. 2. Marine fishes—Ecology. 3. Fisheries—Environmental aspects. 4. Fisheries—Social aspects. 5. Sustainable fisheries. I. Ommer, Rosemary. II. Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics (Program) SH328.W67 2011 338.3′727—dc22 2010031135 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. This book is published in the following electronic formats: ePDF (9781444392227); Wiley Online Library (9781444392241); ePub (9781444392234) Set in 10/13 Times New Roman PS MT by SPi Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India 1

Ommer_ffirs.indd iv

2011

12/22/2010 4:41:56 PM

Contents

List of Contributors Series Foreword Acknowledgements Part I Social-Ecological Systems in Fisheries 1 Introduction Rosemary E. Ommer and R. Ian Perry

2

1 3

Reference

8

Restoring Unity: The Concept of Marine Social-Ecological Systems Fikret Berkes

9

Introduction Social-ecological systems concept and background Complexity, globalization, and social-ecological systems Participatory management and governance Conclusions Acknowledgements References Part II Modeling 3 Predicting the Impacts and Socio-Economic Consequences of Climate Change on Global Marine Ecosystems and Fisheries: The QUEST_Fish Framework Manuel Barange, Icarus Allen, Eddie Allison, Marie-Caroline Badjeck, Julia Blanchard, Benjamin Drakeford, Nicholas K. Dulvy, James Harle, Robert Holmes, Jason Holt, Simon Jennings, Jason Lowe, Gorka Merino, Christian Mullon, Graham Pilling, Lynda Rodwell, Emma Tompkins, and Francisco Werner Introduction Framing the problem Geographical and temporal framework The role of GCMs and RCMs Developing physical-biological models for the shelf seas

Ommer_ftoc.indd v

xiv xix xxii

10 11 14 19 22 24 24 29

31

32 35 35 36 37

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

vi

Contents

Estimating potential fish production Estimating socio-economic consequences Methodology for national vulnerability assessment Methodology for global assessment of a marine-based commodity: fishmeal Opportunities and boundaries of the QUEST_Fish approach Endnotes References 4

Fleets, Sites, and Conservation Goals: Game Theoretic Insights on Management Options for Multinational Tuna Fisheries Kathleen Miller, Peter Golubtsov, and Robert McKelvey Introduction Background – Tuna exploitation and management in the Western and Central Pacific The model The single-season subgame: The split-stream extensive model The two-fleet interior game The RFMO-guided seasonal game between distant-water fleets and coastal countries Simulations and implications Game structure of RFMO–sites–fleets interaction Policy choices for sustaining stocks Effects of coalition-formation Climate-related shifts in distribution of stocks Summary, policy implications and future directions Acknowledgement Endnotes References

5

Fishing the Food Web: Integrated Analysis of Changes and Drivers of Change in Fisheries of the Bay of Biscay Olivier Thébaud and Fabian Blanchard Introduction Patterns of change in fisheries landings by French fleets Drivers of change Institutional context: a case of “regulated open access” Increased competition in markets for fish Effects of sea warming on the fish community structure Perspectives Acknowledgements Endnotes References

Ommer_ftoc.indd vi

40 44 44 48 52 54 54

60

61 62 66 68 68 70 72 72 73 80 84 86 87 87 88

90

91 92 93 94 95 97 101 102 102 103

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

Contents

6

7

Interdisciplinary Modeling for an Ecosystem Approach to Management in Marine Social-Ecological Systems Anthony M. Starfield and Astrid Jarre

105

Introduction Focusing attention and setting objectives A model of a model Rapid prototyping The question of balance Frame-based modeling People and resources Concluding remarks Acknowledgements References

105 106 108 109 111 112 115 117 118 118

People’s Seas: “Ethno-oceanography” as an Interdisciplinary Means to Approach Marine Ecosystem Change Maria A. Gasalla and Antonio C. S. Diegues

120

Introduction Defining “ethno-oceanography” Ethnoecology approach The significance of key communication: Ethno-oceanography and changes in marine social-ecological systems of Brazil “Ethno-oceanography” as a framework to approach climate and marine ecosystem change Looking beyond uncertainty: Implications of climate change to fisheries Redefining the reach of ethno-oceanography: a conceptual approach Concluding remarks Acknowledgements Endnotes References Part III Knowledge 8 The Utility of Economic Indicators to Promote Policy-Relevant Science for Climate Change Decisions Judith Kildow Introduction Indicators Economic indicators: a framework Economic indicators function in multiple ways The evidence from society Conclusion Endnotes References

Ommer_ftoc.indd vii

vii

120 122 122 124 128 129 130 132 132 133 133 137 139

139 141 143 143 146 148 149 149

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

viii

9

Contents

Scientific Advice for Fisheries Management in West Africa in the Context of Global Change Bora Masumbuko, Moctar Bâ, P. Morand, P. Chavance, and Pierre Failler Introduction West African context Method ECOST/ISTAM survey results Scientific advice: content and processes Use and non-use of scientific advice and its implications Improvement of the quality of scientific advice and its use in the decision process Discussion Conclusion Acknowledgements Endnotes References

10

Knowledge and Research on Chilean Fisheries Resources: Diagnosis and Recommendations for Sustainable Development Eleuterio Yáñez, Exequiel González, Luis Cubillos, Samuel Hormazábal, Héctor Trujillo, Lorena Álvarez, Alejandra Órdenes, Milton Pedraza, and Gustavo Aedo Introduction Framework System structure, elements, interactions, and knowledge to be considered Current status of knowledge Governance of the fisheries system (a system of problems) Discussion Future research path for fisheries management Endnotes References

11

Ommer_ftoc.indd viii

151

151 152 155 156 156 157 160 161 164 165 165 166

168

169 169 174 176 179 179 179 181 181

Moving Forward: Social-Ecological Interactivity, Global Marine Change and Knowledge for the Future Barbara Neis

182

Introduction Social-ecological knowledge Knowing where we want to go and finding our way there Conclusion Endnote References

182 183 190 195 197 197

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

Contents

Part IV Values 12 Unaccounted Values: Under-reporting Sardine Catches as a Strategy Against Poverty in the Bali Strait, Indonesia Eny Anggraini Buchary, Tony J. Pitcher, and Ussif Rashid Sumaila

13

14

Ommer_ftoc.indd ix

ix

201 203

Introduction Area description The Lemuru fishery Materials and methods Data collection Analytical methods Results and discussion Fate of landed lemuru and distribution of reported catch Estimated true catch Financial insecurity: lending schemes and debt-to-assets ratio Measuring relative poverty in fisheries Conclusions Acknowledgements Endnotes References

203 204 205 206 206 207 211 211 214 215 217 218 219 220 221

“You Don’t Know What You’ve Got ‘Til It’s Gone”: The Case for Spiritual Values in Marine Ecosystem Management Nigel Haggan

224

Introduction Golden Rule #1: Love your neighbor as yourself Golden Rule #2: The one with the gold makes the rules Golden Rule #3: The gold goes where the gold grows Concepts of value The roots of whole ecosystem evaluation Formal frameworks, 1987–1991 Measuring ecosystem value A bridge between intrinsic and instrumental value Conclusion Acknowledgements Appendix 1: Catagories used in total economic value and ecosystem services frameworks References

224 226 227 227 228 229 230 231 234 236 237

Social-Ecological Restructuring and Implications for Social Values Grant Murray

247

Introduction Approach and methods

248 249

237 239

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

x

Contents

Social-ecological restructuring: Putting climate change in context Changes in social structures and processes Size and connection with fishing industry Age structure Internal stratification Fishing as a way of life: Now and in the future Discussion Conclusion Endnotes References 15

Economic Valuation of Mangroves in the Niger Delta: An Interdisciplinary Approach Godstime K. James, Jimmy O. Adegoke, Ekechukwu Saba, Peter Nwilo, Joseph Akinyede, and Sylvester Osagie Introduction Study area Integration of remote sensing and socio-economic data Economic valuation of mangrove resources Methodology Remote sensing analysis Focus group analysis Household survey Empirical data processing Estimation of net income from the sale of mangrove resources Estimation of the mangrove area that supported mangrove income (Ak) Annual household net income at the community level Results and analysis Socio-economic characteristics of household survey respondents Area of mangrove that support income stream (Ak) Results from the economic valuation Conclusions References

16

Ommer_ftoc.indd x

249 251 251 252 253 258 259 261 262 262

265

265 266 267 268 269 269 270 271 271 271 272 273 274 274 274 274 277 278

US Marine Ecosystem Habitat Values Ussif Rashid Sumaila, Jackie Alder, G. Ishimura, William. W. L. Cheung, L. Dropkin, S. Hopkins, S. Sullivan, and A. Kitchingman

281

Introduction Geographical scope of study Assigning use and non-use values to habitat types Direct use: Habitat associated commercial values

281 282 283 283

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

Contents

Direct use: Habitat associated recreational values Non-use and indirect value: Habitat values based on iconic species The results Direct use: Habitat associated commercial values Direct use: Habitat associated recreational values Non-use and indirect value: Habitat values based on iconic species Concluding remarks Acknowledgements Endnotes References Part V Governance 17 Historical Transitions in Access to and Management of Alaska’s Commercial Fisheries, 1880–1980 Emilie Springer Introduction Early days: Gold and salmon; 1867–1919 1899 Report by Jefferson Moser, United States Navy Commander of the steam ship Albatross 1920–1939: The records of Hubbell and Waller The mid-century era of fisheries: 1940–1969 1954–1970 Total Catch Statistics Species shift, changing technology, improved access, and awareness of off-shore waters: 1970s–1980s Three Alaskan competitors: Japan, Russia/Soviet Union, and Korea Organization of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) Discussion and conclusions Endnotes References 18

Can Fishers’ Virtuous Behavior Improve Large Marine Ecosystem Health? Valentina Giannini Introduction Guatemala: A case study Vicious chains: Exploitation and degradation Virtous chains and the Red: A partial solution to conflict and overfishing Discussion Conclusions Acknowledgements References Useful websites

Ommer_ftoc.indd xi

xi

284 285 285 286 286 286 287 288 288 288 291 293

293 294 294 296 299 300 301 302 304 305 307 307

310

310 314 314 316 317 318 319 319 321

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

xii

19

20

21

22

Contents

Ecosystem-based Management in the Asia-Pacific Region Mitsutaku Makino and Hiroyuki Matsuda

322

Introduction Global comparison of fisheries sectors Ecosystem-based management at the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage, Japan Discussion Conclusion Acknowledgement Endnotes References

322 323

A Network Approach to Understanding Coastal Management and Governance of Small-scale Fisheries in the Eastern Caribbean Kemraj Parsram and Patrick McConney

334

Introduction Coastal and fisheries resources Governance issues Network governance thinking Tuna fishery management Fisheries science networks Regional fisher folk organization Conclusion References

334 335 337 340 341 343 346 347 348

Uncertainty Demands an Adaptive Management Approach to the Use of Marine Protected Areas as Management Tools Michel J. Kaiser

351

Introduction Quantifying the performance of MPAs The “plaice-box” as a case study Climate effects on MPA performance metrics Dealing with future uncertainty References

351 352 353 355 356 357

Building Resilience to Climatic and Global Change in High-Latitude Fishing Communities: Three Case Studies from Iceland and Alaska James R. McGoodwin

359

Introduction Impacts that are forecast for marine ecosystems and the world’s coastal fishing communities Case studies from three high-latitude fishing communities

Ommer_ftoc.indd xii

329 331 332 332 332 333

360 361 364

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

Contents

Case Study 1: Heimaey, Iceland Case Study 2: Dillingham, Southwest Alaska Case Study 3: The Yup’ik community, Southwest Alaska Conclusion: recommendations for increasing the resilience of the three high-latitude coastal fishing communities Recommendations for Heimaey, Iceland Recommendations for Dillingham, Southwest Alaska Recommendations for the Yup’ik community, Southwest Alaska General recommendations Regarding ordinary climatic variability Regarding severe coastal storms and extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and saltwater intrusion Regarding changes in marine ecosystem compositions Regarding building the capacity of fisheries-management systems to more effectively deal with global warming and change Regarding future fisheries research Regarding regional fisheries management organizations Acknowledgements Endnotes References 23

xiii

365 367 369 372 372 373 373 373 373 374 374 375 375 376 377 377 378

Coping with Environmental Change: Systemic Responses and the Roles of Property and Community in Three Fisheries Bonnie J. McCay, Wendy Weisman, and Carolyn Creed

381

Introduction Case Study 1: Fogo Island, Newfoundland, Canada Case Study 2: Pacifico Norte, Baja California Sur, Mexico Case Study 3: US Surfclam Fishery Conclusion: Enclosures, feedback, and the future Acknowledgements References

381 383 386 391 394 396 397

Part VI Conclusions 24 Conclusion: Hierarchy, Power, and Potential Regime Shifts in Marine Social-Ecological Systems Rosemary E. Ommer and R. Ian Perry References Index

401 403

406 407

A color plate section falls between pages 208 and 209

Ommer_ftoc.indd xiii

12/22/2010 4:40:55 PM

List of Contributors

Jimmy O. Adegoke Department of Geosciences University of Missouri Kansas City, Missouri, USA Gustavo Aedo Universidad de Concepción Box 160-C, Concepción Chile Joseph Akinyede Space Application Department Nigerian Space Research and Development Agency Garki-Abuja, Nigeria Jackie Alder United Nations Environment Programme United Nations Drive Gigiri, Nairobi, Kenya Icarus Allen Plymouth Marine Laboratory Prospect Place, Plymouth, PL13DH, UK Eddie Allison The WorldFish Center PO Box 500 GPO, 10670 Penang, Malaysia Lorena Álvarez Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso Box 1020, Valparaíso, Chile

Ommer_flast.indd xiv

Moctar Bâ Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) Research Unit Osiris, Route des Hydrocarbures, BP 1386, Dakar, Senegal Email: [email protected] Marie-Caroline Badjeck The WorldFish Center PO Box 500 GPO, 10670 Penang, Malaysia Email: [email protected] Manuel Barange Plymouth Marine Laboratory Prospect Place, Plymouth, PL13DH, UK Email: [email protected] Fikret Berkes Natural Resources Institute University of Manitoba Winnipeg MB R3T 2N2, Canada Email: [email protected] Fabian Blanchard IFREMER Laboratoire des Ressources Halieutiques BP 477, 97331 Cayenne Cedex, French Guyana Julia Blanchard Centre for the Environment, Fisheries and Aquatic Science Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road Lowestoft NR33 0HT, UK

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM


Eny Anggraini Buchary Fisheries Centre University of British Columbia 2202 Main Mall Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4, Canada Email: [email protected]

Antonio C. S. Diegues Graduate Course of Environmental Sciences/NUPAUB University of São Paulo (USP) Cidade Universitária, 05508-060 SP Brazil

P. Chavance Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) CRH IRD Avenue Jean Monnet 34200 Sète France Email: [email protected]

Benjamin Drakeford Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources University of Portsmouth St George’s Building Portsmouth PO1 2HY, UK

William W. L. Cheung School of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK Kevern L. Cochrane Fisheries and Aquaculture Department Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, via delle Terme di Caracalla Rome 00153 Email: [email protected] Carolyn Creed Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA Luis Cubillos Universidad de Concepción Box 160-C, Concepción, Chile Philippe Cury IRD UMR EME-212 (Ecosystème Marins Exploités-Exploited Marine Ecosystems) CRH (Centre de Recherche Halieutique Méditerranéenne et Tropicale IDR, Ifremer & Université Montpellier II Avenue Jean Monnet, BP 171 34203 Sète Cedex France

Ommer_flast.indd xv

xv

L. Dropkin EdgeResearch 1901 N Ft. Myer Road, Suite 702 Arlington, VA, USA Nicholas K. Dulvy Department of Biological Sciences Simon Fraser University Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada Pierre Failler Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources (CEMARE) University of Portsmouth, St George’s Building 141 High Street Portsmouth, PO1 2HY, UK Email: [email protected] Maria A. Gasalla Fisheries Ecosystems Laboratory (LabPesq) Department of Biological Oceanography Instituto Oceanográfico, University of São Paulo (USP) Cidade Universitária, 055080-900 SP, Brazil Email: [email protected] Valentina Giannini Ca’ Foscari University Cannaregio 873, I-30121 Venice, Italy Email: [email protected]

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM

xvi


Peter Golubtsov Physics Department Lomonosov Moscow State University Leninskiye Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia Exequiel González Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso Box 1020, Valparaíso, Chile Nigel Haggan UBC Fisheries Centre 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4 Email: [email protected] James Harle Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory Joseph Proudman Building 6 Brownlow Street, Liverpool L3 5DA, UK Robert Holmes Plymouth Marine Laboratory Prospect Place, Plymouth, PL1 3DH, UK Jason Holt Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory Joseph Proudman building 6 Brownlow Street, Liverpool L3 5DA, UK

Godstime K. James Space Application Department Nigerian Space Research and Development Agency Garki-Abuja, Nigeria Email: [email protected] Astrid Jarre Marine Research (MA-RE) Institute University of Cape Town Private Bag X3, Rondebosch 7701, South Africa Email: [email protected] Simon Jennings Centre for the Environment, Fisheries and Aquatic Science Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road Lowestoft NR33 0HT, UK Michel J. Kaiser School of Ocean Sciences College of Natural Sciences Bangor University, Menai Bridge, UK Email: [email protected] Judith Kildow National Ocean Economics Program 12645 Summit Ridge Road Nevada City, CA 95959, USA Email: [email protected]

S. Hopkins EdgeResearch 1901 N Ft. Myer Road, Suite 702 Arlington, VA, USA

A. Kitchingman UBC Fisheries Centre 2202 Main Mall Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4

Samuel Hormazábal Universidad de Concepción Box 160-C, Concepción, Chile

Jason Lowe Met Office, Hadley Centre FitzRoy Road Exeter, EX1 3PB, UK

G. Ishimura School of Environmental Sciences University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Ommer_flast.indd xvi

Mitsutaku Makino Fisheries Research Agency, Japan Email: [email protected]

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM


Bora Masumbuko BP 1618 Ouagadougou Burkina Faso Email: [email protected] Hiroyuki Matsuda Yokohama National University, Japan Bonnie J. McCay Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers University 55 Dudley Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA Email: [email protected] Patrick McConney Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus, Barbados Email: [email protected] James R. McGoodwin Department of Anthropology 233 UCB, University of Colorado Boulder, CO 80309 USA E-mail: [email protected] Robert McKelvey Professor Emeritus of Mathematical Sciences, University of Montana, USA Gorka Merino School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Sciences University of Plymouth Drake Circus, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK Kathleen Miller Climate Science and Applications Program, National Center for Atmospheric Research PO Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307, USA Email: [email protected]

Ommer_flast.indd xvii

xvii

P. Morand Département Ressources Vivantes Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD) 93143 Bondy Cedex, France Christian Mullon Unité de Recherche Ecosystèmes d’Upwelling Centre de Recherches Halieutiques Avenue Jean Monnet, 34200, Sète, France Grant Murray Institute for Coastal Research Vancouver Island University Nanaimo, BC V9R 5S5, Canada Email: [email protected] Barbara Neis Department of Sociology Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John’s NL A1C 5S7, Canada Email: [email protected] Peter Nwilo Department of Surveying and Geoinformatics University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria Rosemary E. Ommer Department of History University of Victoria PO Box 1700 STN CSC Victoria BC V8W 2Y2, Canada Email: [email protected] Alejandra Órdenes Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso Box 1020, Valparaíso, Chile Sylvester Osagie Department of Labor Relations The Pennsylvania State University Altoona, PA

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM

xviii


Kemraj Parsram Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus, Barbados Email: [email protected] Milton Pedraza Universidad de Concepción Box 160-C, Concepción Chile R. Ian Perry Fisheries and Oceans Canada Pacific Biological Station 3190 Hammond Bay Road Nanaimo, BC, V9T 6N7, Canada Email: [email protected] Graham Pilling Centre for the Environment, Fisheries and Aquatic Science Lowestoft Laboratory, Pakefield Road Lowestoft, NR33 0HT, UK Tony J. Pitcher University of Brirish Columbia Fisheries Centre 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4 Email: [email protected] Lynda Rodwell School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Sciences University of Plymouth Drake Circus, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK Ekechukwu Saba Map and Image System Ogunu Road, Warri Delta State, Nigeria Emilie Springer Department of Anthropology University of Alaska Fairbanks 310 Eielson Building, Fairbanks, AK 99775, USA. Email: [email protected]

Ommer_flast.indd xviii

Anthony M. Starfield 6080 Thursby Avenue Dallas, TX 75252, USA S. Sullivan EdgeResearch 1901 N Ft. Myer Road, Suite 702 Arlington, VA, USA Ussif Rashid Sumaila Fisheries Centre University of British Columbia 2202 Main Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z4 Canada Email: [email protected] Olivier Thébaud CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research 233 Middle Street Cleveland, 4163, QLD, Australia Emma Tompkins School of Earth and Environment University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK Héctor Trujillo Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso Box 1020, Valparaíso, Chile Wendy Weisman Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA Francisco Werner Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences Rutgers University 71 Dudley Road New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA Eleuterio Yáñez Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso Box 1020, Valparaíso, Chile

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM

Series Foreword

Hari Seldon and the order of consilience It is the custom of scholars when addressing behavior and culture to speak variously of anthropological explanations, psychological explanations, biological explanations, and other explanations appropriate to the perspective of individual disciplines. I have argued that there is intrinsically only one class of explanation. It traverses the scales of space, time and complexity to unite the disparate facts of the disciplines by consilience, the perception of a seamless web of cause and effect. E.O. Wilson It has long been known that, to manage fisheries, we have to manage people, a notoriously messy process, as well as deal with the natural world of ecology and all its uncertainties, another set of messy processes. Yet, reflecting Wilson’s strictures, the understanding of fisheries systems has proceeded largely in the separate solitudes of social and natural sciences and this has meant a lack of integrative solutions to chronic fisheries problems. And until recently, practical ways of moving towards Wilson’s consilience have been inept at best, and disastrous in the worst cases (Pitcher and Lam, 2010). Many seeking consilience of the social and ecological aspects of humans look enviously at the Foundation series of books, classics of 1950s science fiction, in which Isaac Asimov’s protagonist, Hari Seldon, spends his life developing psychohistory, a concept of mathematical sociology analogous to mathematical physics.1 Using the law of mass action, Seldon’s algorithm can predict the future, but only on a large scale. It works on the principle that the behaviour of a mass of people is predictable if the quantity of this mass is very large (quadrillions in Asimov’s envisioned galaxy of humans, inhabiting millions of star systems throughout the Milky Way). The larger the number, the more predictable is the future. Using his algorithm, Seldon foresees the imminent fall of the Galactic Empire, and a dark age lasting 30,000 years before a second great empire arises. To shorten the period of barbarism, he creates two Foundations, small, secluded havens of all human knowledge, at “opposite ends of the galaxy” and the stories follow the fortunes of this venture. If only we understood Seldon’s math, all would be well in the world of fisheries ecosystems and their embedded fish and fishers. Barbasi (2005) suggests that something along the lines of the Seldon formula may emerge from interdisciplinary team research on a vibrant consumer society that has developed webs of myriad electronic tags. But while Asimov’s fictional Seldon solved E.O.Wilson’s unity of knowledge, unfortunately, in real life things

Ommer_flast.indd xix

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM

xx

Series Foreword

are not so easy and we are still waiting for the critical theory to be invented. In the meantime, the social-ecological approach fostered by this book points a hopeful way forward. In Asimov’s stories, Seldon’s theory could not handle innovation. To make sure that the predictions worked, the Foundation tried to freeze technological development and was ultimately unsuccessful. In fisheries, technological innovation has changed the ground rules for traditional coastal fishing societies where a sustainability ethic may emerge (Trosper 2009). The process has led to massive serial depletion of most of the world’s major fisheries resources (Pitcher 2001, and for example, deep water and seamount fisheries, Pitcher et al., 2010), This process has prejudiced ecological sustainability and the very existence of many linked human livelihoods. The principal sufferers have been small-scale coastal communities, largely the subjects of this book. This pioneering book, bringing together social and natural science into a fresh socialecological perspective, presents case studies and concepts that point the way forward. The 24 chapters derive originally from a conference held at the Rome headquarters of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations in 2008 that attracted over 200 of the world’s leading researchers in this field. While there are significant other challenges, for example in establishing safe operating limits for the major biogeochemical global systems (Rockstrom et al., 2009), socialecological systems may be key to human survival of the coming eco-crisis. Although they are vulnerable to disruptions of the biogeochemical norms, social-ecological systems nevertheless have significant adaptive capacity and may be able to sustain human well-being through difficult changes (Chapin et al., 2009). On a 50-year time-scale, many forecast a dark age of mayhem and destruction, while the human population grapples with serious food shortages of all kinds caused by ignoring the mismatch between ecology and unfettered human behaviour. This includes the catastrophic loss of the productive capacity of the world’s oceans and fisheries. We can hope that the insight provided by the social-ecological approach will be analogous to Asimov’s Foundation in averting or at least mitigating this impending catastrophe.

Endnote 1. Asimov’s publisher, John W. Campbell of Astounding magazine (where Foundation first appeared), reported that Asimov’s inspiration came from the logical analysis of historical trends in Gibbon’s 1776 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Asimov said he used, “a little bit of cribbin’ from the works of Edward Gibbon.”

References Barbasi, A. -L. (2005) Network Theory – the emergence of the creative enterprise. Science 308, 639–641. Chapin, T., Carpenter, S. R., Kofinas, G. P., Folke, C., Abel, N., Clark, W. C., Olsson, P., Smith, D. M., Walker, B., Young, O. R., Berkes, F., Biggs, R., Grove, J. M., Naylor, R. L., Pinkerton, E., Steffen, W. and Swanson, F. J. (2009) Ecosystem stewardship: sustainability strategies for a rapidly changing planet. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 25(4), 241–249

Ommer_flast.indd xx

12/22/2010 3:40:33 AM

Series Foreword

xxi

Pitcher, T. J. (2001) Fisheries managed to rebuild ecosystems: reconstructing the past to salvage the future. Ecological Applications 11(2), 601–617. Pitcher, T. J. and Lam, M. (2010) Fishful thinking: rhetoric, reality and the sea before us. Ecology and Society 15(2), 12, 27pp. Pitcher, T. J., Clark, M. R., Morato, T. and Watson. R. (2010) Seamount Fisheries: do they have a future? Oceanography 23(1), 134–144. Rockstrom, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, A., Chapin, F. S., Lambin, E. F., Lenton, T. M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., Schellnhuber, H. J., Nykvist, B., de Wit, C. A., Hughes, T., van der Leeuw, S., Rodhe, H., Sorlin, S., Snyder, P. K., Costanza, R., Svedin, U., Falkenmark, M., Karlberg, L., Corell R. W., Fabry, V. J., Hansen. J., Walker, B., Liverman, D., Richardson, K., Crutzen, P. and Foley, J. A. (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475. Trosper, R. L. (2009) Resilience, reciprocity and ecological economics: Northwest coast sustainability. Routledge, London, UK and New York, New York, USA. Wilson, E. O. (1998) Consilience. Knopf, NY, 332 pp.

Professor Tony J. Pitcher Series Editor, Wiley-Blackwell Fish and Aquatic Resources Series Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC, Canada

Ommer_flast.indd xxi

12/22/2010 3:40:34 AM

Acknowledgements

An international symposium on “Coping with global change in marine social-ecological systems” was held at the Rome headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), 8–11 July 2008. It was sponsored by the Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics Program (GLOBEC: a core project of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research, and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation), the European Network of Excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis, and FAO. The central goals of the symposium were to: 1. explore conceptual issues relating to social-ecological responses in marine systems to global changes; 2. analyse case studies of specific examples of social-ecological responses in marine systems to significant environmental changes manifested locally; 3. synthesise the work of natural and social scientists and build comparisons of socialecological responses in marine ecosystems subjected to major environmental variability; 4. develop innovative approaches to the use of science and knowledge in management, policy and advice; and to 5. identify policy initiatives that would enhance marine governance structures such that they would encourage the building of resilient social-ecological systems. The symposium was supported by the French Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), Institut Francais de Recherché pour l’Exploitation de la Mer (IFREMER), the Institute for Coastal and Oceans Research (University of Victoria, Canada), the Scientific Committee for Oceanic Research(SCOR), the North Pacific Marine Science Organisation (PICES), the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas(ICES), the Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research program(IMBER), the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), and the International Human Dimensions Program (IHDP). The editors of this book, along with convenors of the symposium wish to thank each of these organisations for their generosity. The editors also wish to thank Joy Austin, Kari Marks and Graeme Bock of ICOR, and Andrew P. Delaney of St. John’s, Newfoundland, for secretarial and technical assistance with text and index preparation. They also wish to thank Raschad Al Khafaji, Cassandra de Young, Michel Lamboeuf, Susana Siar, Jogeir Toppe and Rine Sola of the local FAO symposium organising committee. Finally, the convenors also thank GLOBEC, Eur-OCEANS and FAO for their support and funding.

Ommer_flast.indd xxii

12/22/2010 3:40:34 AM

Plate 1 The QUEST_FISH domains defined by the 800m contour plus 200 km of open ocean.

World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_bins.indd 1

12/22/2010 4:36:04 AM

Plate 2 Proudman Oceanographic Laboratory Coastal-Ocean Modelling System (POLCOMS) – European Regional Seas Ecosystem Model (ERSEM) diagram.

Ommer_bins.indd 2

12/22/2010 4:36:06 AM

Plate 3 Simulated (a) and satellite-derived (b) climatologies of mean net primary production (mg C m–2 d–1) in the Humboldt domain. Also shown (c) are areas within the domain with a statistically significant difference between primary production under pre-industrial climate forcing, and primary production under the SRES A1B emissions scenario (years 2085 to 2094).

Ommer_bins.indd 3

12/22/2010 4:36:08 AM

Sole Cuttlefish Sardine Hake Pollack Nephrops Monkfish Seabass Anchovy

70000 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000

Year

Sardine Hake Pollack

300000 200000

Nephrops Monkfish Seabass

100000

Anchovy 02

00

04 20

20

20

96

98 19

94

92

19

19

90

19

19

02

04 20

00

20

20

96

94

98 19

19

92

19

19

90

Sole Cuttlefish

400000

0

0 19

Landings in value (KEuros)

Landings in volume (Tons)

80000

Year

Plate 4 Patterns of change in fisheries landings from the Bay of Biscay by French fleets for nine key commercial species, 1990–2005 (see Steinmetz et al., 2008 for a longer-term analysis including a larger set of species, and showing similar trends). Top left: total landings in volume for the major species landed by French fleets; Top right: total first sale value of landings for these species; Bottom: evolution of the composition of landings per year (x-axis) and per average first-sale price of species ( y-axis, in Euro/kg); darker colour indicates a greater tonnage landed for a given year at a given annual average price. Source: data from FranceAgriMer; bottom graph by C. Mullon (see www.projet-chaloupe.fr, Atlas).

Plate 5 Typical bio-geographic distribution area of boreal (left map), temperate (central map) and subtropical species (right map) encountered in the Bay of Biscay as sampled by the bottom-trawl surveys carried out yearly by Ifremer since 1987.

Ommer_bins.indd 4

12/22/2010 4:36:09 AM

60° 45° 30° 15° (b)

0° –15° –30°

–45° –60° Plate 6 Global map of altimeter-derived SSH trends from the difference of two means between periods 1993–99 and 1999–2006 divided by the time difference (from Polito and Sato, 2008. Global Interannual Trends and Amplitude Modulations of the Sea Surface Height Anomaly from the TOPEX/Jason-1 Altimeters. Journal of Climate, 21: 2824–2834. ©American Meteorological Society. Reproduced with permission). See the increasing trend for the South Atlantic circled area as a possible scientific correspondence to fisher’s perception on sea-level rise in Figure 7.2.

NAO – SE

NINO – SE –15

–15 0.3

–20

0.2

0 –20

–0.2

0.1 –25

–25 0

–30 –50 –45 –40 –35

–0.1

–0.1

–0.3 –0.4

–30 –50 –45 –40 –35

Plate 7 Correlation between the AVHRR sea surface temperature anomalies from the Pathfinder project v5 and interannual indices of El Nino and the NAO for the period 1985–2006. The anomalies are estimated by removing the annual and semi-annual signals from the time series (From Sato and Constantino- Courtesy of Olga Sato). See different correlations inside the bight and offshore as possible eventual correspondence of the different perceptions of both small-scale and canoe fishers from the industrial fishers in terms of cooling or warming between fishing zones.

Ommer_bins.indd 5

12/22/2010 4:36:10 AM

Float

Purse line Boats

Plate 8 Bali Strait-style purse seines, locally known as Slerek, are usually composed of a pair of boats, the net boat (left, see photo) and the fish boat (right, see photo) that work in tandem (see diagram). Net hauling is operated manually by 25 to 50+ crew (in 2004), and fish schools are eye-spotted by the skipper/Captain sitting at the high bench, also called ‘the stage’ (see arrow) of the net boat. Schematic diagram from Wudianto (2001), modified and reprinted here with permission. Photo credit: Eny Buchary, 2004.

Plate 9 Ceremonial cedar doors at the University of British Columbia Longhouse carved by Heiltsuk Nation artist Bradley Hunt show how people, salmon and cedar trees contain and support each other. Photo A. Rivera, with permission.

Ommer_bins.indd 6

12/22/2010 4:36:12 AM

Large Marine Ecosystems

California Current East Bering Sea Gulf of Alaska Gulf of Mexico Northeast U.S. Continental Shelf Southeast U.S. Continental Shelf

Plate 10 Map of US Large Marine Ecosystems.

Ommer_bins.indd 7

12/22/2010 4:36:16 AM

6

Brown bear

Sea eagles Fisheries

Steller sea lion

5

Toothed whales

SnailsSeabirds Sharks

S

Snails Rays Trophic level

Yellowtail 4

O OP

Cods

G

BT

R

Walleye pollock

F

3

Squids

A.G. SC Prawn

Sea cucumber

Bivalves

Snails

Sardine

Other fishes Sea squirt

Baleen Anchovy whales

PS

PH SL

2 Echinoids

Mackerel

SF

Starfish Crabs

Tuna

Salmonids

Polychaetes

Zooplankton (copepods, euphausiids)

1 Sea weed and Sea grass

Phytoplankton (ice algae)

Detritus

Plate 11 Food web of the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage area (as depicted by the Marine Area Working Group of the Scientific Council). AG: arabesque greenling; BT: bighand thornyhead; F: flatfishes; G: greenlings; O: octopus; OP: ocean perch; PH: Pacific herring; PS: Pacific saury; R: rockfish; S: seals; SC: saffron cod; SF: sandfish; SL: sand-lance.

Subsistence Catch Total, all four villages

Number of fish

50,000 Chinook

40,000

Sockeye

30,000

Coho

20,000

Chum Pink

10,000 0 1980

Total Salmon 1985

1990

1995

2000

Year Plate 12 Subsistence catch of Pacific salmon in four native Yup’ik communities in Alaska. Source: Alaska Department of Fish and Game – Division of Subsistence.

Ommer_bins.indd 8

12/22/2010 4:36:16 AM

Part I

Social-Ecological Systems in Fisheries

Ommer_p01.indd 1

12/22/2010 3:44:40 AM

Chapter 1

Introduction Rosemary E. Ommer and R. Ian Perry

The ocean is fundamental to life on this planet, covering 70% of its surface and playing a major role in regulating the Earth’s climate and the biogeochemical cycling of key elements. Yet it remains comparatively little understood, while being hugely exploited in response to human food requirements, and the need for other resources such as oil and gas. Human beings are having a huge impact on our oceans, without understanding the long-term consequences of our actions; the oceans also impact on human beings. The relationship between human beings and the oceans is two-way: humanity and the sea are inter-dependent, and we will not manage marine matters wisely until we make that an everyday part of our thinking. It is important to look at the linkages between oceans and ourselves, and to start to understand these linkages as part of how we think about, and act as stewards of, our oceans. Failure to recognize the full implications of this humans-in-nature concept (Berkes and Folke, 1998) has left oceans, and many fish-dependent communities in both the developed and the less-developed world, in trouble, since both industrial and artisanal or small-scale fisheries are stressed as more and more fish stocks shrink or even become endangered. Fishing nations are now becoming more concerned about “species at risk”, but there has been insufficient analysis that ties people and fish together in ways that will alter management thinking about the ways in which non-industrial and “industrial” coastal communities are also at risk. In short, the management of the world’s fish and fishers remains deeply problematic, not least because, by separating fish from fishers and by not recognizing the interdependence of these two, what are really interdependent problems have been thought of in separate spheres. There are two distinct modes of management that exist in today’s fisheries. The first concerns the technologically-sophisticated deepwater ocean fleets that may be nationally based, but operate internationally. They are managed, for the most part, through quotas and regulations aimed at servicing the needs of the multinational and commercially important business enterprises. They fish their own territorial waters but are also invited into the waters of some nations that are resource-rich but fiscally less well endowed, with access granted World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c01.indd 3

12/22/2010 3:17:41 PM

4

World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis

them for a sum of money that boosts national wealth over the short term, while depleting national resources over the longer term. The second concerns the management of small-scale and artisanal fisheries, usually thought of as commercially less important or important only in the less-developed world, although small-scale fisheries also exist in the developed world (e.g., Newfoundland and Norway). As a result, an analytical divide exists in the academic (natural and social scientific) and management policy literatures. All too often, analysis of “small coastal”, “small boat”, “inshore”, or “artisanal” fisheries, and that of industrial high technology, large-scale fleets are not found in the same journals. The debate about management at the national level in the developed world, and to some degree globally, is found mostly in policy and management journals, national and international. They focus on regulatory concerns to do with the equitable access of large-scale fleets to the world’s fish. By contrast, the literature on small-scale fisheries is to be found more often in the development, resilience, and ecological literatures. This reflects a perception that the big fleets are the important fisheries sector contributors to national wealth, and hence of primary concern to national and international regulators. By contrast, small-scale fisheries seem to be perceived to be primarily subsistent in purpose, and thus not of equal status, since the “wealth” they may generate is of a different scale and nature, frequently not going into national employment statistics and tax coffers or contributing to industrial profits, expenditures, and wages. This “separate silos” approach to different scales of fishing activity ignores the fact that subsistent economies relieve the state of the need to provide other kinds of costly support, be that in welfare payments or the costs of crime that are so often the downstream result of unremitting poverty. In this book, therefore, we take a different view, dismissing neither the importance of industrial fleets nor that of local fisheries. Instead, while acknowledging the significant distinctions between them, we also recognize that both are part of the world’s interdependent social-ecological systems (see Berkes, Chapter 2). This means that they must bear responsibilities as well as rights when prosecuting global marine resources on which they ultimately depend and on which they have significant impacts. By extension, then, not only are they subject to quota regulations and international agreements, but they also bear responsibility for impacts that are all too often seen as “externalities” – costs to the ecological part of the global social-ecological system that are frequently ignored or seen as impossible to regulate. This book grew out of an international symposium on these topics, lead by the Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics (GLOBEC) program, by Eur-OCEANS Work Package 6 on the Ecosystem Approach to Marine Resources, and by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO), and held at FAO Headquarters in Rome in July 2008. It is not just a collection of papers from that symposium, however. Rather, the central goal of the publication is to bring together work on social-ecological marine research that cuts across disciplines, identifies key common elements and approaches that promote resilience of marine social-ecological systems in the face of global changes, and points to next steps. The book comprises contributions on conceptual issues relating to social-ecological responses in marine systems to global changes; offers illustrative case studies of specific examples of social-ecological responses in marine systems to significant environmental changes manifested locally; develops a synthesis between natural and social scientists on the topic; and points the way forward with innovative approaches to the use of science and knowledge in management, policy, and advice.

Ommer_c01.indd 4

12/22/2010 3:17:41 PM

Introduction

5

The book has six parts. Part I introduces the concept of marine social-ecological systems with a chapter by Berkes. Part II presents examples of conceptual and numerical modeling approaches to marine social-ecological systems, including integrated models from climate to people, bio-economic models, and conceptual models for developing true inter-disciplinary studies of marine ecosystems and global change. Part III is about knowledge, and how knowledge relates to understanding, management, and the power which provides the basis for wise use of ocean systems in a world of social and environmental change. Part IV discusses values, the economic values of marine habitats and ecosystems but goes further to consider social and spiritual values. Part V addresses issues of governance, and includes case studies of how marine social-ecological systems have addressed (or not) global changes. Part VI provides a synthesis of the lessons learned and the next steps towards developing integrated and adaptive marine social-ecological systems for a changing world. In Part I, Berkes describes how fisheries are not purely ecological systems isolated from human influence, nor are they purely social systems that function independently of the ecosystems that support them. Rather, fisheries are linked social-ecological systems in which human activities modify the ecological subsystem; the nature of resources and their availability in turn modifies the social subsystem. The necessity of considering natural and social systems together is a conceptual development that has implications for adapting to global change. Some of the key elements of these conceptual shifts include: 1. changing perspectives on the notions of resources and their management; 2. formulation of fishery objectives that consider ecological, economic, and social concerns, including livelihood needs, responding to the broader notion of sustainability; 3. expansion of the scope of management information to include fishers’ knowledge and learning, and the use of deliberative methods and multiple epistemologies to deal with complexity; and 4. development of participatory governance with community-based institutions and attention to multi-scale linkages from local to global as a way of dealing with complexity and change. Conceptual and numerical modeling approaches to marine social-ecological systems are presented in Part II. In the first chapter, Barange et al. describe a large-scale modeling approach in which results from global climate models are down-scaled to regional marine ecosystem models, which then simulate the implications of climate change for the productivity of these ecosystems. Barange et al. then extend these regional ecosystem models to include their impacts upon humans, by assessing the vulnerability of fisheries in national economies and fish-based global commodity markets to climate change. Their results provide a new framework and new insights into the complex interactions between nature and humans under climate change. Miller et al. provide a specific example of bio-economic modeling as applied to the management of tuna fisheries in the Pacific Ocean. This situation involves fish which migrate between the exclusive economic zones of coastal and small island nations and the high seas, and the allocation of fishing privileges and benefits between these coastal and island nations and distant-water fishing nations. The study illustrates well the interplay between climate variability, fish distributions, alternative

Ommer_c01.indd 5

12/22/2010 3:17:41 PM

6


management strategies, and the division of benefits among distant-water fishing nations and small island and coastal nations. Thébaud and Blanchard provide an integrated biophysical and economic analysis of changes in fish production and fisheries, and the drivers of these changes, at multiple scales from the northeast Atlantic to the Bay of Biscay. They demonstrate how ecosystem modifications caused by both the direct and ecosystem effects of fishing can be reinforced by biophysical impacts of climate change (i.e., warming sea temperatures) and large-scale economic changes relating to declining prices for fish. The last two chapters of this part address the issues of how to do interdisciplinary modeling of these complex marine social-ecological systems. Starfield and Jarre describe the inherent difficulties, but also the opportunities, in developing such models, which cut across and involve many (often very different) scientific disciplines. They discuss six crucial considerations for interdisciplinary modeling, and propose frame-based modeling as one suitable approach. Gasalla and Diegues describe an approach to interdisciplinary modeling that goes further than Starfield and Jarre, to include interactions with fishers and to incorporate their environmental knowledge. Gasalla and Diegues call their approach “Ethno-oceanography”. It represents an interdisciplinary feedback framework combining fishers (“bottom-up”) and science (“top-down”) systems of knowledge. It leads to Part III of this book, on knowledge. Part III considers knowledge about marine social-ecological systems: who has it, and how it can be used to promote a better future. It begins with the chapter by Kildow, in which she draws a comparison between environmental “tipping points” or thresholds and those in human social systems. Perceptions of economic risk help to create societal “tipping points”, and economic indicators can provide evidence of the pace and direction of these changes. What these economic indicators cannot get at, however, are issues of culture, education, and social cohesion, which underlie the shifts that these indicators measure. This is followed by Masumbuko et al., who describe the role that scientific knowledge plays in fisheries management in West Africa, in particular when faced with the uncertainties of climate change. They highlight important needs for improved scientific information, in particular as fisheries are impacted by global changes, needs for human resources in order to obtain scientific information, and for mechanisms to move scientific information from professionals to knowledge users such as decision-makers. Yanez et al. present a case study of the knowledge needs in Chile to ensure the sustainable use of fisheries resources. They find that research in Chile has focused on fish biology studies, with little work on oceanographic, economic, social, or governance factors. They conclude that work which integrates the social and governance aspects with oceanographic, biological, technical, and economic factors of Chilean fisheries is essential to ensure their sustainability. The final chapter in this part, by Neis, is an important reminder that all knowledge is context-dependent, patchy and partial, and derives in part from the social-ecology of those who produce it. She argues in particular for stronger institutional recognition and support for the value of collaborative knowledge production from a variety of different sources, that can cut across disciplinary and expert/local divides to allow knowledge to inform wise action and valued outcomes. Part IV considers the values of marine social-ecological systems, in which “value” is defined to include much more than the purely economic. This part begins with a chapter by Buchary et al., who examine illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing in Indonesia in the context of fisheries management practices and poverty. They conclude that financial

Ommer_c01.indd 6

12/22/2010 3:17:41 PM

Introduction

7

insecurity is the principal reason fishers under-report their catches: they value the necessary income more than the regulations. Buchary et al. therefore suggest social management approaches, which may reduce this problem. Haggan begins with a discussion of ecosystem economic valuation, but expands this to include spiritual values. He concludes that including non-economic consideration in the valuation of marine social-ecological systems has significant potential to express the intrinsic value of species and seascapes. Murray expands on these ideas, but emphasizes the social values concerned, using comparative case studies in Canada and the United States to illustrate how social values and ecosystem services are altered and shaped by their interactions with global changes. He shows how these marine social-ecological systems have been restructured by global environmental and social changes, and how these changes in turn have altered human community structures and processes and their associated social values. The final two chapters of this part on values, by James et al. and Sumaila et al., provide case-study examples of techniques and methods for assessing the economic values of marine social-ecological systems, including direct and indirect uses. Part V examines the governance issues of marine social-ecological systems, largely using a case study, contrast and compare, approach. The first three chapters (Springer, Giannini, and Makino and Matsuda) provide case studies of the drivers of change in marine social-ecological systems in Alaska, Guatemala, and the Asia-Pacific-Japan region, respectively, and the governance responses to these changes. They conclude that the involvement of local stakeholders (fishers) is essential to providing the flexibility for governance systems to be able to adjust to changes. Parsram and McConney build on this conclusion, by illustrating the necessity of coastal and fisheries networks to facilitate the governance and adaptive capacities of small-scale fisheries in the Eastern Caribbean. They find that smallscale fisheries are often marginalized and excluded from governance and public sector policy development in the region. They illustrate how application of a network perspective to coastal and marine resource governance can help to analyse and design effective governance systems. The chapter by Kaiser provides an example of one type of tool for managing ocean fisheries that currently is very popular as a hedge against uncertainty, that being marine protected areas. He notes that the ability of marine protected areas to deliver their stated objectives and targets is likely to be challenged under a rapidly changing climate. Such changes will be greatest in shallow coastal areas where multiple physical and human stressors impinge on marine habitats and species. Links between fish abundance and prey biomass mediated by physical stress highlight the sensitivity of coastal carrying capacity to changes in the physical environment. Adaptive management approaches are required to accommodate changes in the capacity of coastal systems to deliver desired objectives. The final two chapters of this part (McGoodwin, McCay et al.) compare how marine socialecological systems in Alaska and Iceland, and Atlantic Canada and the United States and Pacific Mexico, respond to significant global changes, and the governance challenges that build (“deviation-mitigating”) or reduce (“deviation-amplifying”) the adaptability of these systems. They conclude by affirming the importance of increased preparedness (planning and coordination) for future changes (uncertainty), including enhanced observations, monitoring, and integration of large- and local-scale management approaches, and exclusive and secure property rights and community-oriented decision-making. Part VI provides the conclusions to this social-ecological analysis of world fisheries. It illustrates that we need to study all the aspects of human-ocean interactions, since this is

Ommer_c01.indd 7

12/22/2010 3:17:41 PM

8


what will provide compelling insights into a better future, in which the oceans are recognized as an integral part of our planetary home. Our understanding should not be limited to the purely economic and scientific, forgetting about culture, spirituality, psychology, and the lessons of the past. It has become urgent that we try to understand how our oceans function, and what might be the wisest ways to acknowledge and manage the interdependence of human interactions with marine resources so as to sustain both fish and fisheries in a more sustainable future. The symposium in Rome in July 2008 was sponsored by the Global Ocean Ecosystem Dynamics program (GLOBEC: a core project of the International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research, and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation), the European Network of Excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis, and FAO. It was supported by the French Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (IRD), Institut français de recherche pour l’exploitation de la mer (IFREMER), Scientific Committee for Oceanic Research (SCOR), the North Pacific Marine Science Organisation (PICES), the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas (ICES), the Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research program (IMBER), the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), and the International Human Dimensions Program (IHDP). We thank each of these organizations for their generosity. We also thank our five anonymous reviewers (one per part of the book, excluding Part VI), who vastly improved it, and Joy Austin, Kari Marks, and Graeme Bock (of the Institute of Coastal and Oceans Research at the University of Victoria) for the index, typing, and technical assistance.

Reference Berkes, F. and Folke, C. (eds) (1998) Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.

Ommer_c01.indd 8

12/22/2010 3:17:41 PM

Chapter 2

Restoring Unity The Concept of Marine Social-Ecological Systems Fikret Berkes

Abstract The term “social-ecological system” is used to emphasize the integrated concept of humans-in-nature, and to stress that the delineation between social and ecological systems is artificial and arbitrary. Social-ecological systems may be defined as integrated complex systems that include social (human) and ecological (biophysical) subsystems in a two-way feedback relationship. The term emphasizes that the two parts (social system and ecological system) are equally important, and they function as a coupled, interdependent, and co-evolutionary system. To restore unity in managing marine social-ecological systems, there is a need to reconnect natural science, social science, and humanities perspectives, and reconcile the various disciplines with largely different scientific traditions. In place of conventional fishery approaches, the ongoing search for alternatives involves: 1. recognizing the significance and implications of the interconnected nature of the social and ecological subsystems; 2. developing complex adaptive systems approaches to deal with these social-ecological systems for a contextualized understanding of the drivers of change, from local to global levels; and 3. integrating participatory methodologies at all levels for knowledge production, adaptive management, and social learning for the governance of marine ecosystems. Keywords: Social-ecological systems, governance, complexity, globalization, drivers, fisher knowledge, adaptive management, co-management, social learning


Ommer_c02.indd 9

12/22/2010 3:18:00 PM

10


Introduction Humans are integral components of marine ecosystems, especially in an age in which human activities have started to play a decisive role in influencing natural systems at all levels from local to global. Marine ecosystems have biophysical subsystems and human subsystems, including economic, political, social and cultural components, management, and governance. As fisheries science became more specialized in the last century, the study of biophysical subsystems became largely disconnected from the study of human subsystems. Yet these two major components are highly interconnected and interactive, not only in the bio-economic realm (Hilborn and Walters, 1992), but also across the full range of biophysical and human subsystems (Berkes et al., 2001; Kooiman et al., 2005; Cochrane and Garcia, 2009). Thus, one point of departure in this chapter, and the book, is to reconnect natural science, social science, and humanities perspectives. Rather than seeing the biophysical and the social as separate and distinct systems, the two should be considered inseparable and intertwined. This requires reconciling the various disciplines with largely different scientific traditions (natural scientists vs. social scientists vs. humanists). Obviously, much of the research on marine ecosystems will still pursue disciplinary traditions, but understanding global issues will require collaborating with other disciplines to interpret causes, to deal with consequences, and to design policies for mitigation and adaptation. As driving forces of change are increasingly internationalized, the impacts of these drivers emerge independent of the place where they are produced (MA, 2005). This necessitates the pursuit of a science of sustainability in which understanding the impacts of drivers uses contextualized, place-based cases studied by interdisciplinary teams (Kates et al., 2001; Turner et al., 2003). A second point of departure is that the two major subsystems are interconnected with two-way relationships. The dominant biophysical discourse on global environmental change tends to investigate how human activities are affecting ecosystem conditions and processes, with social science input often limited to information on population change, economic growth, technology, and development. However, to deal fully with the interconnections of the two subsystems, it is not sufficient to regard humans as merely stressors and/or managers of the ecosystem. Rather, the analysis needs to seek a detailed understanding of the mechanisms of this two-way relationship. The discourse needs to expand into a discussion of vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity, along with an exploration of the various ways in which the dynamics of the social subsystem can match the dynamics of the biophysical subsystem. The conceptual tools to do so include adaptive management, co-management, social and institutional learning, collaborative research and monitoring, partnerships for capacity building, and multi-level governance (Folke et al., 2005; Kooiman et al., 2005; Armitage et al., 2007). Related to the first two, a third point of departure is that the approach to re-integrate social and ecological subsystems in world fisheries also needs to reconcile global environmental change (largely in the purview of natural scientists) with globalization (largely in the purview of social scientists and humanists). Both are important. Marine ecosystems are increasingly coming under the impacts of global environmental change. For example, climate-related changes are already occurring in marine ecosystems. Biodiversity loss,

Ommer_c02.indd 10

12/22/2010 3:18:00 PM

Restoring Unity

11

habitat destruction, and pollution – which used to be predominantly local and regional – are becoming global in nature. In addition to these, global changes are taking place in human systems – globalization, sometimes defined as the compression of space and time-scales with regards to flows of information, people, goods, and services (Young et al., 2006). Such changes, including the globalization of trade in marine products, are also impacting marine ecosystems. Furthermore, these two categories of major impacts (global environmental change and globalization) are actually themselves crucially interconnected and interactive (Leichenko and O’Brien, 2008). There is no common agreement on the way ahead, but there is an ongoing search for alternative approaches. These approaches entail: ●

●

●

recognizing the significance and implications of the interconnected nature of the social and ecological subsystems; developing complex adaptive systems approaches to deal with these social-ecological systems for a contextualized understanding of the drivers of change, from local to global levels; and integrating participatory methodologies at all levels for knowledge production, adaptive management, and social learning for the governance of marine ecosystems.

This chapter expands on each of these points.

Social-ecological systems concept and background Fishing is a human activity. As with many natural resource systems, fisheries are not purely biophysical systems isolated from human influence, nor are they purely social systems that function independently of the ecosystems that provide services and resources that humans need. Although many studies of fisheries have examined some aspect or another of humannature interactions in fisheries, the complexity of coupled social-ecological systems has not been well understood or appreciated (Mahon et al., 2008). This lack of progress is partly due to the disciplinary separation of ecological and social sciences in the study of fisheries. A number of fields have traditions of human-environment integration. In geography, the human ecology school of the 1930s developed the notion that nature is the base on which society rests (Park, 1936). Also starting in the 1930s, the cultural ecology approach of the anthropologist Steward (1955) dealt with adaptive processes by which societies lived in and used their environment. Ingold’s “dwelling perspective” elaborates this integrative concept of humans-in-nature. Seen as the basis for putting humans back into the ecosystem, it involves the “skills, sensitivities, and orientations that have developed through long experience of conducting one’s life in a particular environment” (Ingold, 2000: 25). Over the last few decades, a bewildering array of human-nature models has been developed in a number of disciplines (Glaser, 2006). Natural and social scientists have been rediscovering the unity of people and nature well known to traditional and indigenous societies through such concepts as vanua in Fiji (a named area of land and sea, considered an integrated whole with its human occupants) and aschii/aski of the Cree people in northeast Canada (integrated concept of “land”, consisting of living landscape, humans, and spiritual beings) (Berkes, 2008).

Ommer_c02.indd 11

12/22/2010 3:18:00 PM

12


Nested Social

Nested Governance Filter

Ecosystems

Systems

Fig. 2.1 Social-ecological system consisting of nested social (human) and ecological (biophysical) subsystems, and integrated by two-way feedbacks through institutions or governance. Various versions of this concept have been offered by Berkes et al. (2003), Glaser (2006), Kotchen and Young (2007).

Berkes and Folke (1998) used the term social-ecological systems to emphasize the integrated concept of humans-in-nature, and to stress that the delineation between social and ecological systems is artificial and arbitrary. Social-ecological systems may be defined as integrated complex systems that include social (human) and ecological (biophysical) subsystems in a two-way feedback relationship (Fig. 2.1). The term emphasizes that the two parts (social system and ecological system) are equally important, and they function as a coupled, interdependent, and co-evolutionary system. Human actions affect biophysical systems, biophysical factors affect human well-being, and humans in turn respond to these factors. Several authors have argued that the most appropriate analytical unit for the study of sustainability is the social-ecological system, also called the socio-ecological system (Gallopin, 1991; Gallopin et al., 2001) or coupled human-environment system (Turner et al., 2003). For example, the Millennium Ecological Assessment is not about ecosystem services or about human well-being alone but about the relationships of the two (MA, 2005). The sustainability science approach is neither about the global biophysical system alone nor about social-economic-political systems alone, but uses place-based models that enable the study of the interaction of people and their environment (Kates et al., 2001). The resilience perspective, which has proved to be valuable in understanding the dynamics of social-ecological systems, often focuses on biophysical and social subsystems together because it is the interaction of the two that is particularly informative about non-equilibrium processes and surprises that account for the behavior of the system as a whole (Folke, 2006; Liu et al., 2007). Further exploring the concept, Fig. 2.1 depicts both social subsystems and biophysical subsystems as nested (or hierarchical). Nested ecosystems (e.g., Adriatic Sea – Mediterranean – North Atlantic …) is the obvious choice of scale for the biophysical subsystem. Nested social systems can be institutions, jurisdictions, or a hierarchy of resource management systems. Following Gibson et al. (2000) and Cash et al. (2006), scale is defined as the spatial, temporal, quantitative, or analytical dimensions used to measure a phenomenon, and levels are defined as the units of analysis located at different positions on a scale. Figure 2.1 shows the two-way interaction between the two subsystems of a coupled social-ecological system as going through a governance filter, incorporating institutions, policies, and management measures, all based on ecological knowledge and understanding. Kotchen and Young (2007) suggest that this “governance filter” is what mediates the

Ommer_c02.indd 12

12/22/2010 3:18:00 PM

Restoring Unity

13

interaction between human actions and biophysical processes. Instead of the governance filter, we may insert a number of alternative terms to highlight the different aspects of the relationship that link the social and ecological systems: institutions, ecological knowledge, or environmental values, culture, and worldview. The important point remains that the system shown in Fig. 2.1 is a coupled system with two-way feedback. The full implications of this two-way relationship are still being explored. Conventional resource management has in the past concentrated: on regulating the impacts of the volatility of biophysical systems on human welfare. What is new is the need to regulate the impact of human actions on large-scale biophysical systems. In other words, the vector connecting human systems to biophysical systems in Fig. 2.1 is growing increasingly important (Kotchen and Young, 2007: 150). We might add that the vector connecting biophysical systems to human systems is also increasingly important – but in different ways. Given the increasing recognition of the essential and irreducible nature of ecological uncertainty and variability (Charles, 2001), the vector is less and less about reducing the variability in the flow of resources for human welfare, and more about maintaining the structure/function or the biodiversity and resilience of the biophysical subsystem that provides those resources (Holling and Meffe, 1996; MA, 2005). This new emphasis, in turn, has led to a rethinking of resource management objectives, away from the conventional output-oriented fishery objectives such as MSY and MEY, and toward objectives that seek to maintain the health and integrity of the socialecological system as a whole (Francis et al., 2007; Cochrane and Garcia, 2009). Figure 2.1 highlights the importance of rights, rules, decision-making systems, knowledge systems, research, and communication, all of which are created by humans to mediate the two-way interactions between the two subsystems. This governance system is important to dampen the impact of humans on the global system. But it is also important for providing mechanisms, such as insurance schemes and emergency assistance programs, that help cushion the impact of biophysical factors (e.g., hurricanes, sea-level rise) on human systems (Kotchen and Young, 2007). The social-ecological system at the global level, the “earth system” in the terminology of international global environment change research programs, is not the only level of interest. Consistent with hierarchy theory (Ahl and Allen, 1996), complex systems function at several different levels, and all of these levels are important. The implementation plan of the parties to the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development had 81 references to “at all levels” in just 50 pages (Cash et al., 2006), indicating the international recognition that we can no longer deal with global problems at only one or two levels. The social-ecological system can be specified for any level within a scale, for example, from the local community to the international. The links between social and ecological subsystems are different at different levels of a scale. For example, the people of a fishing community may be primarily interested in obtaining fish, shellfish, and other marine products from their local ecosystem for their livelihood needs, whereas the national government may be primarily interested in stimulating the production of high value export commodities such as aquaculture shrimp. As well, driving forces for change that are operating at the level of the community or region may be quite different from those at the national level.

Ommer_c02.indd 13

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

14


Drivers of change affect social-ecological systems in complex and unpredictable ways, and offer the primary evidence that we are dealing with complex adaptive systems phenomena (Levin, 1999). It is the interaction of the two subsystems that is often responsible for some of the more puzzling kinds of complexity. In many sustainability problems, the investigation of the social subsystem or the ecological subsystem alone gives an incomplete (and sometimes misleading) understanding of the issue. To understand the behavior of the system as a whole requires analysing at all levels, both social and ecological subsystems together. That is, many “socio-ecological systems are non-decomposable systems” (Gallopin, 2006: 294). This non-decomposability is illustrated by simple mathematical models of lake-andmanager systems based on the Northern Highland Lake District of Wisconsin (Carpenter et al., 1999). The analysis of the behavior of these coupled social-ecological systems showed that unwanted collapse could occur even when ecosystem dynamics were perfectly known and managers had perfect knowledge and control of human actions. Such insights could not have been obtained by analysing social and ecological subsystems separately. Additional evidence comes from Liu et al. (2007), who studied the complexity of coupled human and natural systems across six well documented cases of social-ecological systems. The authors found that these systems exhibited complex patterns and processes – non-linear dynamics with thresholds, surprises, reciprocal feedback loops, time lags, legacy effects, and resilience. Many of these patterns and processes were not evident when the cases were analysed by social or natural scientists separately (Liu et al., 2007). All of these examples indicate that integrated social-ecological systems are complex adaptive systems (Berkes et al., 2003). The double-feedback relations between the social and the ecological subsystem, the non-decomposability of the system, and the unpredictable ways in which drivers act, are all indicators of complexity. A complex adaptive system has a number of attributes not observed in simple systems, including scale, uncertainty, nonlinearity, and self-organization, and each of these has implications for the management of marine social-ecological systems. The following section illustrates these ideas further, and expands on some of the complexities.

Complexity, globalization, and social-ecological systems Many of the complex processes and behaviors of social-ecological systems emerge from the dynamic interplay between the two subsystems. One way to illustrate this dynamic interplay is by examining processes of global environmental change and globalization. There is a large and well developed literature on fisheries and global environmental change in such areas as biodiversity loss, habitat loss, pollution, and climate change (Grafton et al., 2008). This literature has been examining both vectors in Fig. 2.1, that is, both the impact of these changes on fisheries, and the ways and means by which the impact of human actions on the biophysical subsystem may be regulated. By contrast, the literature on fisheries and globalization, and the interaction between global environmental change and globalization is poorly developed and often obscure (Leichenko and O’Brien, 2008). However, these interactions provide some of the best examples of the complexity of social-ecological systems in action, and help us develop conceptual tools to deal with complexity. Table 2.1 provides some examples of drivers of change involving globalization.

Ommer_c02.indd 14

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

Restoring Unity

15

Table 2.1 A sample of drivers of change related to globalization. Drivers

Comment

Reference

Globalized markets for marine products

Rapid development and invasiveness of international markets affect fisheries management at all levels Fair trade and change in marketing have potential impact on technology use, species, and areas targeted, and the way fisheries are carried out Unintended capture of non-target species is increasingly coming under scrutiny, affecting activities of fishing fleets, areas, and technologies used, as in tuna-dolphin and turtle by-catch controversies Fishing communities are among the highest-risk groups in countries with high rates of HIV/AIDS, for a number of reasons related to their mobility and other factors of vulnerability International consensus on best practices, codes, and ethics is beginning to shape the way fisheries are carried out worldwide, by drawing attention to wider environmental considerations MDGs, target date 2015, may result in new fisheries policies related to poverty alleviation, sustainability, food security, equity, and livelihoods, for example, by emphasizing decentralization policies

Berkes et al. (2006)

Certification and eco-labeling Environmental monitoring and activism concerning by-catch

Infectious diseases and fishers

Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries

United Nations Millennium Development Goals

Marine Stewardship Council (2010) Project Global (2010)

Allison and Seeley (2004)

FAO (1995)

UNDP (2009)

Internationalization of the shrimp trade, one of the best known examples of globalization of markets for marine products (Deutsch et al., 2007), is seen as a driver of both coastal habitat loss and biodiversity loss in many parts of the world. Its impact on coastal mangroves has been particularly damaging (Primavera, 1997). The loss of mangroves, in turn, has made people more vulnerable to coastal disasters. For example, the 2004 Asian tsunami was a natural disaster, yet the devastation in countries such as Sri Lanka and Thailand was in part due to loss of mangroves and their buffering capacity, associated with the expansion of shrimp aquaculture for global markets (Adger et al., 2005). The motivations for, and impacts of, the globalization of shrimp are not seen only at national and international levels; they are also apparent at local and regional levels. The actual mechanisms may be understood as a mix of national economic policies (the desire to generate foreign exchange), regional (economic development), and local-level decisionmaking. At the local level, factors at work may include the desire of coastal landowners to make quick profits, the ability of local influential people to seize control of government land by clearing mangroves and other coastal vegetation, and the dependence of the local poor on wage employment opportunities (Primavera, 1997; Bhatta and Bhat, 1998). For example, in Kerala, south India, shrimp (“prawn” in local terminology) was transformed from fertilizer for coconut palms to “pink gold”, as international demands and prices rose sharply in the 1970s (Kurien, 1992). South India has a long tradition of coastal brackish water aquaculture, using a rotation of salt-tolerant pokkali rice and a mix of fish and invertebrates. This system disintegrated with the advent of intensive shrimp aquaculture.

Ommer_c02.indd 15

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

16


The conversion of pokkali areas into permanent monoculture shrimp ponds resulted in irreversible change. Once the tide-operated water intakes of the traditional polyculture system fell into disuse, coastal ponds were excavated and the remaining natural vegetation destroyed, the area was not easily restored to its natural state (Bhatta and Bhat, 1998). Yet, the new system was not sustainable. Lack of tidal flushing resulted in the accumulation of salt in the ponds, use of chemicals to keep the system as a monoculture, and shrimp disease imported through seed stock, resulted in the eventual collapse of the system. A recurring pattern of declining production and profits is common in intensive shrimp aquaculture throughout Southeast Asia (Primavera, 1997). Some areas such as the Gulf of Thailand show a boom-and-bust cycle that travels around the coast as intensive aquaculture runs its course, leaving behind a devastated coastal landscape and moving on to another site (Huitric et al., 2002). This boom and bust pattern has been typical of export oriented resource economies of colonial administrations (Ommer, 1990). A similar boom-and-bust pattern results from the activities of “roving bandits”. These are mobile fleets and mobile buyers that move around the globe, exploiting resources in response to global market opportunities. They proceed by mining the resource from one area and then moving on to another. In the case of highly localized stocks such as abalone, the resource may vanish even before the problem is noted. In the case of more widely distributed and relatively abundant species such as sea urchins, serial depletion of local stocks will be masked by spatial shifts in exploitation (Berkes et al., 2006). Global commercial sea urchin harvests began largely for export to Japanese sushi markets, after Japan’s own resources declined around 1960. Waves of exploitation-depletion reached Korea in 1960, Washington State and Oregon (1971), Baja Mexico and California (1972–1973), Chile (1975), Alaska and British Columbia (1980), Pacific Russia (1982), and finally the Northwest Atlantic (1987–1989). The global harvest peaked in about 1990, but declined after that because there were no frontiers left to exploit (Berkes et al., 2006). The sea urchin case illustrates the impact of globalization of markets on the abundance of ecologically significant species, in this case sea urchins, which graze on kelp and other species and have the capacity to alter marine food webs. The depletion in one area only serves to increase the pressure on another area, and the globalization of taste (the internationalization of sushi) results in an additional positive feedback loop by increasing overall demand. There are other cases of rapid, sequential depletion cycles, for example, with the live reef-fish trade for luxury restaurants and the aquarium tropical fish trade. The resulting simplification of food webs and loss of biodiversity may erode the resilience of marine ecosystems and increase their vulnerability to regime shifts (Hughes et al., 2003). On the social side, the push for quick profits can destroy local place-based livelihoods (Coward et al., 2000). Roving bandits pose an enormous challenge for marine resource governance. Rapid development of markets and the resulting high-speed exploitation often overwhelms the ability of local institutions to respond. National level response is too slow, international level even slower (Berkes et al., 2006). Not all globalization examples in Table 2.1 are accompanied by drivers that bring negative change for social-ecological systems. In fact, the use of certification and eco-labeling (Marine Stewardship Council, 2010) is one of the ways in which roving bandits can be slowed down or controlled. The major stumbling block here is the global trend toward unrestricted free trade. That in turn may be counteracted, for example, by local and regional

Ommer_c02.indd 16

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

Restoring Unity

17

environmental activism (e.g., the movement in Australia against roving bandits), and vigilance of scientists and citizens against by-catch of mammals and birds, as in the appropriately named Project Global (2010). Some of the globalization drivers were hardly on the radar screen of fishery managers until recent years. For example, it came as a surprise a few years ago that HIV/AIDS infection rates among fishers in some countries were unexpectedly high. This high vulnerability has been explained in terms of fisher lifestyle and risk-taking, but the causes seem to be a great deal more complex than that. Allison and Seeley (2004) and Westaway et al. (2007) attribute high HIV/AIDS infection rates to a complex of interacting causes that include mobility, time spent away from home, periodic access to cash in an overall context of poverty, availability of commercial sex in ports, as well as the fisher subculture of risky behavior. Other sectors in fisheries, such as fish vendors who tend to be women in some countries, are also vulnerable due to their daily interaction with fishers. The problem is sufficiently prevalent that some fisheries development programs in Africa and Asia have incorporated HIV/AIDS awareness in their planning (Allison and Seeley, 2004). The feedbacks involved in fishers and HIV/AIDS indicate a complex problem of socialecological systems and globalization: it is driven by the dynamics of a “shrinking” world. For example, fishers from Bangladesh may seek employment across the Bay of Bengal in India, boom-and-bust in incomes may follow roving banditry, and the commercialization of livelihood resources creates vulnerability. As in the case of many African agricultural workers, HIV/AIDS infected fisher-folk are often too sick to work, becoming dependent on others and further stressing local food security and the local social-ecological system as a whole. Some international policies with the potential to impact national fisheries policy and practice should also be considered as part of globalization, with drivers affecting marine social-ecological systems. The well-known example here is the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries that is the most comprehensive set of guidelines yet devised to guide marine social-ecological systems toward sustainability. The guidelines address (among others) ecosystem stewardship, dispute resolution, the precautionary principle, international law, and international trade in fish products and rely on the voluntary compliance of nation states (FAO, 1995). Initiated formally by the FAO in 1991, the Code was developed in response to the management crisis in global fisheries. By the late 1980s, it had become clear that new approaches to fisheries management were needed, embracing conservation and environmental considerations, and leading to responsible, sustainable fisheries. The Code and its technical guidelines were partly shaped by the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), and were intended to be consistent with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and other international agreements. A number of other international agreements and conventions can also be listed here, including the Convention on Biological Diversity, with its stipulations concerning endangered and vulnerable species, but also about benefit-sharing rights of indigenous peoples and other rural communities. Not directly involved in fisheries governance but of potential impact are the Millennium Development Goals (UNDP, 2009). The program has eight major goals, including the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger, relevant for livelihoods, food security, and fishing incomes. Targets regarding environmental sustainability include integrating the principles of sustainable development into country policies, and

Ommer_c02.indd 17

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

18


reversing the loss of resources and loss of biodiversity. The strength of Millennium Development Goals comes from the tracking of some 60 measurable indicators, and the guidance they provide for development interventions. Some of these international agreements and conventions result in policies that interact in influencing fisheries governance at various levels, and create both new opportunities and new problems. For example, a key premise in the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries is that marine resources, renewable but finite, need to be managed for their contribution to the nutritional, economic, and social well-being. To achieve this, states and other levels of management need to adopt measures for long-term sustainable use. These measures are meant to meet a number of goals, including the Millennium Development Goal to reduce by half the number of poor and food-insecure people by 2015. Allison and Horemans (2006) show that achieving such international goals has implications for regional, national, and local resource management policies. In the West African Region, governments are committed to poverty-reduction, decentralization, and civil service reform through Poverty Reduction Strategy programs. These have led to the redefinition of the roles of central and local governments, with some of the responsibilities devolved to the local level. The premise here is that decentralization brings government planning closer to primary users, and generates new opportunities for their participation in resource management (Allison and Horemans, 2006). But the experience is that newly devolved power, as a result of decentralization, tends to be captured by the local elite. Thus, making decentralization work as governance reform requires paying attention to factors such as the distribution of power. To make new fisheries governance work, a number of conditions have to be met, such as setting up downward accountability mechanisms (Béné and Neiland, 2006). Policy drivers such as Millennium Development Goals are relevant to marine socialecological systems also, because they interact with other social-ecological systems in agriculture and other livelihood systems. For example, reducing poverty in the overall system has an impact on fishery management as well. High rates of HIV/AIDS impede the ability of fishing communities to escape from poverty and hunger. Such a broader social-ecological approach to fishery management is fundamentally different from treating management merely as stock assessment. Addressing complexity in marine social-ecological systems means paying attention to drivers, and dealing with a number of characteristics of complex adaptive systems ignored by conventional resource management. The examples in this chapter draw particular attention to scale issues, making the point that governance occurs at multiple levels, although not all levels are necessarily important in a given situation. The shrimp aquaculture and roving bandit examples show that various levels have roles to play, and that the role of the local level is particularly important. The example of Poverty Reduction Strategy programs in the West African Region also shows that a major problem in implementing decentralization is related to power relationships at the local level. The idea of reducing bureaucracy to devolve powers and to decentralize decision-making is important for the governance of marine social-ecological systems. The idea derives from the Catholic principle of subsidiarity (O’Brien, 2008). The subsidiarity principle has been incorporated into the Maastricht Treaty that lays out the framework for establishing the European Community: “decisions [should be] taken as closely as possible to the citizen”. It articulates the objective that decisions affecting peoples’ lives should be

Ommer_c02.indd 18

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

Restoring Unity

19

made by the lowest feasible level of social organization (McCay and Jentoft, 1996). But implementing the idea is fraught with complications related to the accountability and responsibility of local decision-makers to the users (Béné and Neiland, 2006). One of the insights from complexity thinking is the multiplicity of scales and levels, and the fact that they are all relevant and important. The choice of scale and level is politically significant, as it may privilege one perspective over another (Reid et al., 2006). But there is no one “correct” perspective in a complex adaptive system. A fishing community may focus on livelihoods, regional managers on user-group conflicts, and the central government on export earnings from shrimp aquaculture. The perspective depends on the interest of the observer and their reading of the history and context of the fishery. A complex social-ecological system cannot be captured using a single perspective. It can be best understood by the use of a multiplicity of perspectives, which is one of the arguments for the use of participatory approaches in the management of social-ecological systems.

Participatory management and governance Participation of users in natural resources and environmental management is based on the premise that people whose lives are affected by a decision should participate in the decision-making process. The participation of various actors in the management of marine social-ecological systems helps establish responsibility and accountability mechanisms (Béné and Neiland, 2006), and legitimizes decisions to make them more acceptable to the users (Jentoft, 2000). It also broadens the range of knowledge available (Johannes, 1998), brings a more diverse set of interests and values into the decision-making process (Jentoft, 2006), and enables participatory research (Wiber et al., 2009) and collaborative learning (Armitage et al., 2007). A great deal of scientific information has been accumulated on marine ecosystems and fisheries. Yet, there often is insufficient knowledge to manage fish stocks, let alone social-ecological systems (Mahon, 1997). Lack of sufficient knowledge is compounded by uncertainties, thresholds, non-linear effects, and surprises that tend to characterize complex adaptive systems. Adaptive management and resilience scholars point out that these uncertainties are inherent in the system; they are not due to lack of sufficient research or data. Ecosystems are intrinsically and fundamentally unpredictable (Charles, 2001; Gunderson and Holling, 2002). What are the options for dealing with imperfect data and inherent uncertainties that challenge the governance of social-ecological systems? Here I focus on three areas, all of which are dependent on participatory approaches: ways to increase the range of available knowledge, use of adaptive management, and social and institutional learning. First, increasing the range of available knowledge is feasible, especially if we are willing to expand the definition of acceptable knowledge. Our education has impressed us that fisheries management requires extensive research, sophisticated models, large amounts of data, and highly trained experts. However, there are practical and cost-effective approaches that can be used alongside non-conventional sources of information. (See Part III in this book on Knowledge.) Johannes (1998) has argued that management can work by supplementing limited scientific data with qualitative indicators and local and traditional knowledge. In the case of small-scale fisheries of the Asia-Pacific, he advocated “data-less” management because

Ommer_c02.indd 19

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

20


he did not foresee sufficient scientific data ever becoming available, given the cost of research and the number of species and stocks that need to be managed over such a large area. What would be the source of the information used in place of conventional scientific data? For Johannes (1998) the most likely source was a combination of baseline data from marine protected areas and fisher knowledge. He knew from his earlier work in Palau that fishers in fact hold much relevant information, such as lunar spawning cycles of reef fish, and in fact they knew more in that regard than scientists did at that time. He also became knowledgeable about reef and lagoon tenure systems, and was surprised to find that almost every basic fisheries conservation measure devised in the western world had been in use in the tropical Pacific centuries earlier (Johannes, 1981). Use of indigenous knowledge for management is not easy; it requires caution. For example, some of these reef and lagoon tenure systems serve the purposes of conflict reduction, rather than purely conservation (Chapman, 1987). As well, there are practical and methodological problems such as accessing and verifying knowledge. Accessing knowledge is complicated by sampling problems: knowledge is not distributed evenly among a group of fishers and finding the “right” informant is difficult. Specialized knowledge by social group and gender creates additional complications. For example, women tend to have special knowledge of lagoon fish and invertebrates in many parts of the Asia-Pacific region. Knowledge is gendered in many indigenous knowledge systems (Berkes, 2008). Despite these complications and limitations, use of fisher knowledge has been receiving much attention as a source of management information (Haggan et al., 2006; Lutz and Neis, 2008). Good management requires mobilizing as wide a range of information as possible and fishers’ direct input into management. The ability to take the steps needed to improve a fishery will be strengthened when stakeholders can agree on the measures used. The key element is consensus. Given the uncertainties inherent in marine social-ecological systems, consensus decision-making, using measures that can be understood by all actors, is a risk-reduction strategy. Pluralism in perspectives is related to pluralism in knowledge. In fishery management disputes, local knowledge may sometimes appear at odds with science. However, in many cases, the differences in knowledge have do to with differences in the level at which information is obtained. Since understanding a social-ecological system requires the input of actors at various levels, fisher knowledge can complement science, not only in terms of adding to the range of information available, but also in terms of scale. This gives a more complete accounting of the various levels of analysis from local to global (Reid et al., 2006). Second, use of the adaptive management approach has been challenging the dominant philosophy of resource management based on positivism. The tradition of positivistic science starts with the assumption that the world is predictable and controllable; this is implicit in the term management. However, contemporary ecology is abandoning the notion of equilibrium and adopting the idea that ecosystems are multi-equilibrium systems in which alternate states may exist over time, and an ecosystem may “flip” from one state to another (Levin, 1999; Folke et al., 2004). According to this thinking, we can never possess more than an approximate knowledge of an ecosystem, and our ability to predict the behavior of multi-equilibrium complex systems, such as marine social-ecological systems, is limited. Once the idea of controlling nature is set aside, then management can proceed with the more humble but realistic idea of learning-by-doing. Adaptive management, the

Ommer_c02.indd 20

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

Restoring Unity

21

contemporary scientific version of age-old trial-and-error learning, starts with the assumption of incomplete information, and relies on repeated feedback learning in which science and management are treated as one, and policies are treated as experiments from which to learn. Such adaptive management, combined with participatory approaches, has been referred to as adaptive co-management, defined by Folke et al. (2002: 20) as “a process by which institutional arrangements and ecological knowledge are tested and revised in a dynamic, on-going, self-organized process of learning-by-doing”. Smallscale fisheries co-management in many parts of the world shows this adaptive character (Wilson et al., 2006). McClanahan et al. (2009) point out that many of the solutions to the problems of small-scale fisheries arise from historical trial-and-error management, and suggest a social-ecological system emphasis in approaching these fisheries. Participation of fishers and other users in adaptive management is important because their perspective and knowledge are important and because such an approach spreads the risk of making the wrong decision. Co-management, or the sharing of power and responsibility between the government and local resource users, is a partnership arrangement (Pinkerton, 1989). It has some common features with other kinds of partnerships and cooperative environmental governance arrangements involving multiple actors. But the hallmark of co-management is to have at least one strong vertical linkage involving the government and a user group, and some formalized arrangement for sharing power and responsibility. Co-management is about shared decision-making, but we can also have co-managed research and monitoring, knowledge co-generation, and collaborative learning involving government managers, scientists, and fishers (Berkes, 2009). Much recent work has focused on ways of combining adaptive management with comanagement. Examining a set of international cases, Armitage et al. (2007) found that time-tested co-management builds on experience and tends to become adaptive comanagement over time. Combining co-management with adaptive management produces a synthesis that is different from either. By recognizing the importance of vertical linkages (co-management) and considering science and management together (adaptive management), the synthesis offered by adaptive co-management brings local knowledge directly into decision-making. As well, it shows an expanded view of the temporal scope, organizational level, and capacity building. Adaptive co-management is more explicitly attuned to the needs of resource users than is adaptive management, and more cognizant of learning and adapting than is co-management (Armitage et al., 2007). Third, participatory approaches are important for the use of social and institutional learning. It is generally accepted that organizations as well as individuals can learn. In many co-management cases, self-organized learning seems to emerge through networks that involve a diversity of actors and cut across two or more levels of organization. These networks constitute “learning communities” or “communities of practice”, emphasizing learning-as-participation and the codification of shared practices (Wenger, 1998). Co-management cases that have a time depth show that effective cooperation evolves through time and relies on learning-as-participation, with each round of problem solving leading to another (Olsson et al., 2004). Participatory approaches seem to be central to learning by groups because they create the mechanism by which individual learning can be shared by other members of the group

Ommer_c02.indd 21

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

22


and reinforced. In the process, social learning may proceed from simple, single-loop learning to learning-to-learn and double-loop learning that can result in fundamental changes in behavior. Important feedbacks seem to be occurring among the use of participatory approaches, social learning, and the enhancement of social capital, which in turn may facilitate further collaboration (Plummer and FitzGibbon, 2007). Successive loops of learning-as-participation combine elements of adaptive management with elements of co-management, and can be depicted as expanding cycles over time (Berkes, 2009). Each cycle starts with observation and problem identification, and the selforganization of a problem-solving network. The identification of problems and opportunities leads to planning for the formulation of solutions; outcomes are monitored, followed by reflection that leads to the next cycle. Each iteration provides new information that can be incorporated into the subsequent round of solutions – the basis of adaptive management. At the same time, each observation-planning-action-outcome cycle is also a learning step, leading to co-management at successively larger scales over time (Pinkerton, 2003). Managing resources in a rapidly changing, globalized world requires continual learning and adapting, aided by collaborative problem solving. These adaptive processes include slow processes such as muddling through, as well as rapid changes that occur in the form of radical innovation and transformation. Interactive governance theory suggests the use of institutional experimentation to stimulate learning and to serve as a prelude to finding the right mix of governance regimes specific to a situation (Kooiman et al., 2005). Learning processes can be structured in such a way that the actors learn from each other and reflect on what they have learned. Learning-by-doing should be interactive because effective learning requires collaboration. The use of participatory approaches and methodologies at all levels is a growing trend in the management of marine social-ecological systems, as well as in other resource and environmental management areas (Berkes, 2009). Collaborative knowledge production, monitoring, and learning lead to collaborative governance in general. But in many parts of the world, participation is at the level of mere consultation. Real collaboration in which fishers are involved in deliberative decision-making (Stern, 2005) is rare. But participation is not merely a democratic nicety; it is a necessity for governance. Dealing with uncertainty and complexity requires building the capacity to learn from crises, respond to change, nurture social and ecological memory, monitor the environment, and manage conflicts (Berkes et al., 2003). Working partnerships between managers and resource users help incorporate all the actors into the management process, leading to risk sharing between the management agency and fishers to deal with uncertainty. Such a process requires collaboration, transparency, and accountability, so that a learning environment can be created and management practice builds on experience.

Conclusions This book and the FAO conference that preceded it started with the premise that social and ecological subsystems are interconnected and should be recognized as integrated socialecological systems. To do so would help reconnect natural science, social science, and humanities perspectives. As Jentoft (2006: 678) puts it, “A fisheries management techne that

Ommer_c02.indd 22

12/22/2010 3:18:01 PM

Restoring Unity

23

draws on both episteme of the natural sciences and phronesis of the social sciences and humanities would require a healthy, pragmatic balancing act, rooted in empirical research and/ or practical experience …” Jentoft goes on to quote Aristotle: “Phronesis is not concerned with universals only; it must also take cognizance of particulars, because it is concerned with conduct, and conduct has its spheres in particular circumstances” (Jentoft, 2006: 678). These are wise words of caution in developing complex adaptive systems approaches and tools to deal with social-ecological systems. The various characteristics of socialecological systems as discussed here and elsewhere leave little doubt that we are dealing with complex adaptive systems phenomena. In doing so, social determinism becomes a potential issue, that is, there is a danger of thinking that the behavior of human systems can be equated with that of natural systems (Ommer et al., 2008). Human actions are responsible for many of the drivers that impact social-ecological systems, both in the area of global environmental change and globalization. However, the outcomes are not mechanistic or predetermined. Human agency, including the role of individuals, leaders, and institutions, is important and influences outcomes in major ways. This is why sustainability science requires contextualized, place-based, social-ecological system cases (Kates et al., 2001; Turner et al., 2003). Universal models, no matter how sophisticated, do not serve well to understand local level dynamics. In recognition of this, the Millennium Ecological Assessment included a volume on local and regional level cases to explore in detail the relationship between ecosystem services and human well-being (Capistrano et al., 2005). It is the interplay between place-based cases and global trends that provides an understanding of the whole (MA, 2005). The tools needed for such an analysis include the use of the concepts of scale and level (Cash et al., 2006) and a vocabulary to deal with the interplay of various institutions at different levels (Young, 2002; Young et al., 2008) and how they can deal with marine ecosystem dynamics across scales (Galaz et al., 2008). Co-management provides an application of this rapidly developing field of institutional interplay in relation to marine ecosystem stewardship (Olsson et al., 2008). The seemingly endless possibilities for combinations of horizontal and vertical linkages help visually describe integrated social-ecological systems and the institutional interactions in their governance (Armitage, 2005; Berkes, 2007). The analysis of possibilities of institutional interplay informs how co-management tools for example, can be used not only for marine turtle co-management at the local and national levels, but also at the international regional level (Campbell et al., 2008). The shift in governance towards large-scale ecosystem-based adaptive co-management of 70 marine habitats of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia, is another example (Olsson et al., 2008). Recognizing the interconnected nature of the social and ecological subsystems, and using ideas of complex adaptive systems and institutional development (Ostrom, 2005) inform the analysis of system behavior. For example, this provides the insight that comanagement is path-dependent, as the theory of complex adaptive systems would predict. That is, the history of interactions among the actors in a particular case strongly conditions the outcome of co-management. A case that starts with particularly acrimonious relations among the actors has little chance of success in building trust and cooperation (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft, 2007). Considerations such as these help build a set of concepts, approaches, and tools to deal with the dynamics of marine social-ecological systems and processes of change.

Ommer_c02.indd 23

12/22/2010 3:18:02 PM

24


The notion of drivers of change is one of the key ideas in this regard. The global project, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, brought the analysis of drivers into common usage (MA, 2005). The analysis of drivers reveals, in such cases as the lake-and-manager systems in Wisconsin (Carpenter et al., 1999), globalization of the shrimp trade (Adger et al., 2005), and the roving bandits of the global sea urchin trade (Berkes et al., 2006), that the investigation of the social subsystem or the ecological subsystem alone would give an incomplete understanding of the behavior of the system as a whole. The social-ecological system has to be the unit of analysis because it is not decomposable (Gallopin, 2006). Whereas the old-school conventional fishery manager could carry out his/her trade by doing little more than stock analysis, the contemporary manager needs to look much farther afield to govern the marine social-ecological system, including such factors as the incidence of HIV/AIDS among fisher-folk. Also part of the transition from old-school conventional fishery management to socialecological system management is the changing role of the manager. He/she is no longer the unquestioned decision-maker using expert-knows-best science to control a predictable system. Instead, the role of the manager is a more humble one as co-manager, facilitator, and co-producer of knowledge, integrating participatory methodologies into all levels. Such management is not control-oriented; rather, it is about governance, learning, and adaptive management. It serves to maintain the productive capacity and resilience of the linked social-ecological system, including the well-being of the fishers and fisher communities.

Acknowledgements Many of these ideas were developed jointly with Carl Folke and members of the international team that produced the volumes, Linking Social and Ecological Systems (1998) and Navigating Social-Ecological Systems (2003). I thank Rosemary Ommer, Ian Perry, and an anonymous referee for helpful comments. My work has been supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and the Canada Research Chairs program (http://www.chairs.gc.ca).

References Adger, W. N., Hughes, T. P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R. and Rockström, J. (2005) Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science 309, 1036–1039. Ahl, V. and Allen, T. F. H. (1996) Hierarchy Theory, a Vision, Vocabulary and Epistemology. Columbia University Press, New York. Allison, E. H. and Horemans, B. (2006) Putting the principles of sustainable livelihoods approach into fisheries development policy and practice. Marine Policy 30, 757–766. Allison, E. H. and Seeley, J. A. (2004) HIV and AIDS among fisherfolk: a threat to “responsible fisheries”? Fish and Fisheries 5, 215–234. Armitage, D. R. (2005) Community-based narwhal management in Nunavut, Canada: change, uncertainty and adaptation. Society and Natural Resources 18, 715–731. Armitage, D. R., Berkes, F. and Doubleday, N. (eds) (2007) Adaptive Co-Management: Collaboration, Learning, and Multi-Level Governance. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver BC.

Ommer_c02.indd 24

12/22/2010 3:18:02 PM

Restoring Unity

25

Béné, C. and Neiland, A. E. (2006) From Participation to Governance. WorldFish Center, Penang, and CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food, Colombo. Berkes, F. (2007) Community-based conservation in a globalized world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 104, 15,188–15,193. Berkes, F. (2008) Sacred Ecology. Second Edition. Routledge, New York and London. Berkes, F. (2009) Evolution of co-management: role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management 90, 1692–1702. Berkes, F. and Folke, C. (eds) (1998) Linking Social and Ecological Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (eds) (2003) Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Berkes, F., Mahon, R., McConney, P., Pollnac, R. C. and Pomeroy, R. S. (2001) Managing SmallScale Fisheries: Alternative Directions and Methods. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa. Berkes, F., Hughes, T. P., Steneck, R. S. et al. (2006) Globalization, roving bandits and marine resources. Science 311, 1557–1558. Bhatta, R. and Bhat, M. (1998) Impacts of aquaculture on the management of estuaries in India. Environmental Conservation 25, 109–121. Campbell, L. M., Silver, J. J., Gray, N. J. et al. (2008) Co-management of sea turtle fisheries: biogeography versus geopolitics. Marine Policy 33, 137–145. Capistrano, D., Samper, K. C., Lee, M. J. and Raudsepp-Hearne, C. (eds) (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Multiscale Assessments, Vol. 4. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and Island Press, Washington DC. Carpenter, S., Brock, W. and Hanson, P. (1999) Ecological and social dynamics in simple models of ecosystem management. Conservation Ecology 3(2), 4. [online] URL: http://www.consecol.org/ vol3/iss2/art4/ Cash, D. W., Adger, W. N., Berkes, F. et al. (2006) Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society 11(2), 8. [online] URL: http://www.ecology andsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art8/ Chapman, M. D. (1987) Traditional political structure and conservation in Oceania. Ambio 16, 201–205. Charles, A. T. (2001) Sustainable Fishery Systems. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford UK. Chuenpagdee, R. and Jentoft, S. (2007) Step zero for fisheries co-management: what precedes implementation. Marine Policy 31, 657–668. Cochrane, K. and Garcia, S. (eds) (2009) A Fishery Manager’s Guidebook, 2nd edn. FAO/Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford UK. Coward, H., Ommer, R. E. and Pitcher, T. J. (eds) (2000) Just Fish: Ethics and Canadian Marine Fisheries. Institute of Social and Economic Research, St John’s, NF. Deutsch, L., Gräslund, S., Folke, C. et al. (2007) Feeding aquaculture growth through Globalization: exploitation of marine ecosystems for fishmeal. Global Environmental Change 17, 238–249. FAO (1995) Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome. Folke, C. (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analysis. Global Environmental Change 16, 253–267. Folke, C., Carpenter, S., Elmqvist, T. et al. (2002) Resilience for sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Rainbow Series 3, International Council for Scientific Unions (ICSU), Paris. Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B. et al. (2004) Regime shifts, resilience and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 35, 557–581.

Ommer_c02.indd 25

12/22/2010 3:18:02 PM

26


Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P. and Norberg, J. (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30, 441–473. Francis, R. C., Hixon, M., Clark, E., Murawski, S. and Ralston, S. (2007) Ten commandments for ecosystem-based fishery scientists. Fisheries 32(5), 217–233. Galaz, V., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., Folke, C. and Svedin, U. (2008) The problem of fit among biophysical systems, environmental regimes and broader governance systems. In: Institutions and Environmental Change (eds O. Young, L. A. King and H. Schroeder), MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 147–186. Gallopin, G. C. (1991) Human dimensions of global change: linking the global and the local processes. International Social Science Journal 130, 707–718. Gallopin, G. C. (2006) Linkages between vulnerability, resilience and adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change 16, 293–303. Gallopin, G. C., Funtowicz, S., O’Connor, M. and Ravetz, J. (2001) Science for the 21st century: from social contract to the scientific core. International Social Science Journal 168, 219–229. Gibson, C., Ostrom, E. and Ahn, T.-K. (2000) The concept of scale and the human dimensions of global change: a survey. Ecological Economics 32, 217–239. Glaser, M. (2006) The social dimension in ecosystem management: strengths and weaknesses of human-nature mind maps. Human Ecology Review 13, 122–142. Grafton, R. Q., Hilborn, R., Ridgeway, L. et al. (2008) Positioning fisheries in a changing world. Marine Policy 32, 630–634. Gunderson, L. H. and Holling, C. S. (eds) (2002) Panarchy. Understanding Transformations in Human and Natural Systems. Island Press, Washington DC. Haggan, N., Neis, B. and Baird, I. G. (eds) (2006) Fishers’ Knowledge in Fisheries Science and Management. UNESCO Publishing, Paris. Hilborn, R. and Walters, C. J. (1992) Quantitative Fisheries Stock Assessment. Chapman & Hall, London. Holling, C. S. and Meffe, G. K. (1996) Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conservation Biology 10, 328–337. Hughes, T. P., Baird, A. H., Bellwood, D. R. et al. (2003) Climate change, human impacts and the resilience of coral reefs. Science 301, 929–933. Huitric, M., Folke, C. and Kautsky, N. (2002) Development and government policies of the shrimp farming industry in Thailand in relation to mangrove ecosystems. Ecological Economics 40, 441–455. Ingold, T. (2000) The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. Routledge, New York. Jentoft, S. (2000) Legitimacy and disappointment in fisheries management – prospects of user participation. Marine Policy 24, 141–148. Jentoft, S. (2006) Beyond fisheries management: the phronetic dimension. Marine Policy 30, 671–680. Johannes, R. E. (1981) Words of the Lagoon: Fishing and Marine Lore in the Palau District of Micronesia. University of California Press, Berkeley CA. Johannes, R. E. (1998) The case for data-less marine resource management: Examples from tropical nearshore fisheries. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13, 243–246. Kates, R. W., Clark, W. C., Corell, R. et al. (2001) Sustainability science. Science 292, 641–642. Kooiman, J., Bavinck, M., Jentoft, S. and Pulin, R. (eds) (2005) Fish for Life: Interactive Governance for Fisheries. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam. Kotchen, M. J. and Young, O. R. (2007) Meeting the challenges of the anthropocene: towards a science of coupled human-biophysical systems. Global Environmental Change 17, 149–151.

Ommer_c02.indd 26

12/22/2010 3:18:02 PM

Restoring Unity

27

Kurien, J. (1992) Ruining the commons and responses of the commoners: coastal overfishing and fishworkers’ actions in South India. In: Grassroots Environmental Action (eds D. Ghai and J. Vivian), Routledge, London, pp. 221–258. Leichenko, R. M. and O’Brien, K. L. (2008) Environmental Change and Globalization. Double Exposures. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York. Levin, S. A. (1999) Fragile Dominion: Complexity and the Commons. Perseus Books, Reading MA. Liu, J., Dietz, T., Carpenter, S. R. et al. (2007) Complexity of human and natural systems. Science 317, 1513–1516. Lutz, J. S. and Neis, B. (eds) (2008) Making and Moving Knowledge. McGill-Queen’s Univerity Press, Montreal. MA (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being. General synthesis. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press, Chicago. http://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Synthesis.aspx (last accessed April 2009) Mahon, R. (1997) Does fisheries science serve the needs of managers of small stocks in developing countries? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, 2207–2213. Mahon, R., McConney, P. and Roy, R. N. (2008) Governing fisheries as complex adaptive systems. Marine Policy 32, 104–112. Marine Stewardship Council (2010) Certified sustainable seafood. Online http://www.msc.org/ (last accessed August 2010). McCay, B. J. and Jentoft, S. (1996) From the bottom up: issues in fisheries management. Society and Natural Resources 9, 237–250. McClanahan, T. R., Castilla, J. C., White A. T. and Defeo, O. (2009) Healing small-scale fisheries by facilitating complex socio-ecological systems. Review of Fish Biology and Fisheries 19, 33–47. O’Brien, K. (2008) Thinking globally and thinking locally: ecology, subsidiarity, and a multiscalar environmentalism. Journal for the Study of Religion, Nature and Culture 2, 218–236. Olsson, P., Folke, C. and Berkes, F. (2004) Adaptive co-management for building resilience in socialecological systems. Environmental Management 34, 75–90. Olsson, P., Folke, C. and Hughes, T. P. (2008) Navigating the transition to ecosystem-based management of the Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, 9489–9494. Ommer, R. E. (ed.) (1990) Merchant Credit and Labour Strategies in Historical Perspective. Acadiensis Press, Fredericton NB. Ommer, R. E., Coward, H. and Parrish, C. C. (2008) Knowledge, uncertainty and wisdom. In: Making and Moving Knowledge (eds J. S. Lutz and B. Neis), McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal, pp. 20–41. Ostrom, E. (2005) Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ. Park, R. E. (1936) Human ecology. American Journal of Sociology 42, 1–14. Pinkerton, E. (ed.) (1989) Co-operative Management of Local Fisheries. University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver BC. Pinkerton, E. (2003) Toward specificity in complexity: understanding co-management from a social science perspective. In: The Fisheries Co-management Experience (eds C. C. Wilson, J. R. Nielson and P. Degnbol), Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 61–77. Plummer, R. and FitzGibbon, J. (2007) Connecting adaptive co-management, social learning, and social capital through theory and practice. In: Adaptive Co-Management (eds D. Armitage, F. Berkes and N. Doubleday), University of British Columbia Press, Vancouver BC, pp. 38–61. Primavera, J. H. (1997) Socio-economic impacts of shrimp culture. Aquaculture Research 28, 815–827.

Ommer_c02.indd 27

12/22/2010 3:18:02 PM

28


Project Global (2010) Global by-catch assessment of long-lived species. http://bycatch.env.duke.edu/ (last accessed August 2010) Reid, W. V., Berkes, F., Wilbanks, T. and Capistrano, D. (eds) (2006) Bridging Scales and Knowledge Systems. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment and Island Press, Washington DC. [online] URL (last accessed April 2009) Stern, P. C. (2005) Deliberative methods for understanding environmental systems. BioScience 55, 976–982. Steward, J. H. (1955) Theory of Culture Change. University of Illinois Press, Urbana IL. Turner, B. L. II, Kasperson, R. E., Matson, P. A. et al. (2003) A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 100, 8074–8079. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2009) Millennium Development Goals. Online http://www.undp.org/mdg/ (last accessed April 2009) Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Westaway, E., Seeley, J. and Allison, E. (2007) Feckless and reckless or forbearing and resourceful? Looking behind the stereotypes of HIV and AIDS in “fishing communities”. African Affairs 106, 663–679. Wiber, M., Charles, A. Kearney, J. and Berkes, F. (2009) Enhancing community empowerment through participatory fisheries research. Marine Policy 33, 172–179. Wilson, D. C., Ahmed, M., Siar, S. V. and Kanagaratnam, U. (2006) Cross-scale linkages and adaptive management: fisheries co-management in Asia. Marine Policy 30, 523–533. Young, O. R. (2002) The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Interplay, and Scale. MIT Press, Cambridge MA. Young, O. R., Berkhout, F., Gallopin, G. C. et al. (2006) The globalization of socio-ecological systems: an agenda for scientific research. Global Environmental Change 16, 304–316. Young, O. R., King, L. A. and Schroeder, H. (eds) (2008) Institutions and Environmental Change. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.

Ommer_c02.indd 28

12/22/2010 3:18:02 PM

Part II

Modeling

Ommer_p02.indd 29

12/22/2010 3:46:55 AM

Chapter 3

Predicting the Impacts and Socio-Economic Consequences of Climate Change on Global Marine Ecosystems and Fisheries The QUEST_Fish Framework Manuel Barange, Icarus Allen, Eddie Allison, Marie-Caroline Badjeck, Julia Blanchard, Benjamin Drakeford, Nicholas K. Dulvy, James Harle, Robert Holmes, Jason Holt, Simon Jennings, Jason Lowe, Gorka Merino, Christian Mullon, Graham Pilling, Lynda Rodwell, Emma Tompkins, and Francisco Werner

Abstract Climate change is accelerating and is already affecting the marine environment. Estimating the effects of climate change on the production of fish resources, and their dependent societies, is complex because of: 1. difficulties of downscaling Global Climate Models (GCM) to scales of biological relevance; 2. uncertainties over future net primary production and its transfer through the food chain; 3. difficulties in separating the multiple stressors affecting fish production; and 4. inadequate methodology to estimate human vulnerabilities to these changes. QUEST_Fish, a research project led from the UK, is addressing some of these challenges through an innovative, multi-disciplinary approach focused on estimating the added impacts that climate change is likely to cause, and the subsequent additional risks and vulnerabilities of these effects for human societies. The project uses coupled shelf seas biophysical ecosystem models forced by GCM forecasts to predict ecosystem functioning in past, World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c03.indd 31

12/22/2010 3:18:19 PM

32


present, and future time-slices. For each slice, and for 20 Large Marine Ecosystems, we estimate plankton production and use this to estimate size-based fish production through models based on macro-ecological theory. Ways of assessing vulnerability of fisheries to future climate change are developed, including the market consequences for fish-based global commodities. The results provide a new framework and new insights into the complex interactions between humans and nature. Keywords: Climate change, marine ecosystems, bio-physical modeling, fish production, macro-ecological theory, vulnerability assessment, economic impacts, marine commodities

Introduction The fourth IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) assessment report concluded that over the period 1961–2003 almost 90% of all the heat in the climate system had been taken up by the ocean (Bindoff et al., 2007). The same report noted that there were only 85 known examples on which to base conclusions about the impacts of climate change on marine and freshwater ecosystems: less than 0.3% of the number of examples available for terrestrial ecosystems (Richardson and Poloczanska, 2008). This reflects the inaccessibility of most marine systems, the relatively limited sustained monitoring of the marine environment, and thus the paucity of long-term observations on which to base assessments. As a result, we currently lack an adequate framework with which to assess the impacts of climate change on global marine ecosystem goods and services. Capture fisheries are one of the largest services provided by marine ecosystems. Over 80t of fresh fish are caught annually (FAO, 2007) in regions subject to very different degrees of exploitation, management, and control (FAO, 2005). Direct consumption of fish and seafood products is on the rise. It currently accounts for ca. 16 kg person−1 year−1 globally. This rate has doubled in developing countries in the last 30 years and, combined with the doubling in the population size of developing countries over the same period, indicates an very large growth in the demand for fish (Delgado et al., 2003). The value of fish production to the developing world goes beyond its direct impact as food. Net fish exports to developed countries surpass the monetary value of many other traditional developingcountry agricultural exports (Delgado et al., 2003; FAO, 2007). Consequently, the future of marine fisheries has significance in terms of global food security but even more significance in terms of the economy and livelihoods of the developing world. At the same time, it is well known that capture fisheries are in a state of crisis. Total catches reached a plateau in the 1990s, and appear to have since declined (Pauly et al., 2003). Continued growth in the production of both low-value (e.g., grass carps) and high-value (e.g., shrimp and salmon) aquaculture products has, until recently, compensated for the lack of growth in capture fisheries, but concerns have been raised about environmental risks associated with the ongoing intensification and spread of fish production, and about competition between traditional fishers – many of whom live in poverty – and large-scale operations. Additional pressures on capture fisheries come from increasing demand for fishmeal for aquaculture production (Deutsch et al., 2007). On top of these, the ecological impacts of climate change, on what is in a severely stressed global production system, are largely unknown.

Ommer_c03.indd 32

12/22/2010 3:18:19 PM

Predicting Impacts and Socio-Economic Consequences

33

Nevertheless, there is enough information to suggest that climate changes will have profound consequences for marine ecosystems and fisheries (Barange and Perry, 2009; Edwards et al., 2002; Hall-Spencer et al., 2008; Harvell et al., 2002; Lehodey et al., 2006; Perry et al., 2005; Stenseth et al., 2005). It is expected that in general terms ocean warming may result in increasing vertical stratification, reduced vertical mixing, and reduced nutrient supply, thereby decreasing overall productivity. Increasing stratification may also alter the balance between pelagic and benthic recycling of material, favoring pelagic pathways at the expense of the benthos (Frank et al., 1990). Fish production predictions, however, will not only depend upon changes in net primary production, but also on its transfer to higher trophic levels, about which there is low predictive confidence (Brander, 2007). Observations and models agree that severely contrasting geographical differences resulting from climate change impacts are likely to be observed (Fréon et al., 2009). For example, net primary production may increase in some high latitudinal regions because of warming and reduced ice cover, but decrease in low latitude regions because of reduced vertical mixing and replenishment of nutrients (Gregg et al., 2003; Sarmiento et al., 2004). Low productivity ocean regions are already expanding in size, a trend that is expected to continue in the future (Polovina et al., 2008). Changes in species composition (Bopp et al., 2005) and seasonality (Hashioka and Yamanaka, 2007; Edwards and Richardson, 2004; Mackas et al., 1998) of plankton may cause mismatches between early life stages of fish and their prey. The warming of the oceans is already affecting the distribution of particular species (Hawkins et al., 2003; Mackas et al., 2007; Sissener and Bjørndal, 2005; Ware and McFarlane, 1995), particularly moving species towards the poles and to greater depths (Dulvy et al., 2008; Perry et al., 2005). In addition, fishing is believed to affect the sensitivity of fish populations to climate change (Anderson et al., 2009; Perry et al., 2010). The above processes involve many unknowns, and depend on the transfer of processes through complex food chains, so predicting climate change impacts and directions for specific species can only be done with low confidence (Brander, 2007). However, predicting net impacts on fish communities (i.e., total biomass or productivity) may be possible because of compensatory dynamics among the members within the various functional groups that make up that community (Jennings and Brander, 2009; Mackas et al., 2001). Jennings et al. (2008), for example, observed that marine ecosystems have remarkably constant and simple relationships between body size, energy acquisition and transfer, suggesting that basic macro-ecological rules can be brought to bear to assess the role of a changing climate, through food web processes, on global fish production (Brown et al., 2004). Unveiling the impacts of climate change on marine ecosystems tells only part of the story. As marine ecosystems respond to the physical changes brought about by climate change, these responses will in turn affect the human communities that use and depend upon the benefits provided by marine ecosystems. Climate change impacts cannot thus be estimated without incorporating an understanding of the vulnerability to ecosystem change of the marine fisheries and the communities, industries, and nations that rely on them. According to the IPCC, vulnerability to climate change depends upon three key elements: the frequency and magnitude of exposure to external shocks (e.g., climate changes), the degree of sensitivity to those impacts (i.e., how they are experienced), and the adaptive

Ommer_c03.indd 33

12/22/2010 3:18:19 PM

34


Global Circulation Models

Physical-Biological Shelf-Sea Models

Potential Fish Production Estimates

Marine Commodity Production and Market Dynamics

Vulnerability Assessments Fig. 3.1 Conceptual diagram of the QUEST_Fish approach to estimate the impacts and consequences of climate change on marine ecosystems and global fish production.

capacity of the group or society experiencing those impacts (i.e., how capable they are of self-recovery). Vulnerability of a system thus involves an external dimension (exposure) and an internal dimension (sensitivity and adaptive capacity) (Füssel and Klein, 2005; Perry et al., 2009; Smit and Wandel, 2006). The continued growth of human populations and fish consumption will place additional demands on heavily exploited ecosystems (Delgado et al., 2003). Predicting the impacts of climate change on global marine fisheries would further require an understanding of the social and economic dynamics of fleets, fishing communities, national and global markets, and their capacity to adapt to change. This calls for a two-pronged approach to develop detailed global-scale “physics-to-fish-to-fishers” models, on the one hand, while using indicators in combination with a risk-assessment or vulnerability framework at national level on the other (McClanahan et al., 2008; Turner et al., 2003; Villa and McLeod, 2002). The QUEST_Fish approach attempts to frame the problem by developing a set of models and tools interfacing processes from the physics of climate to people, across a diversity of scales (temporal and geographical), disciplines, and modeling principles (Fig. 3.1). We start by using Global Circulation Model (GCMs, otherwise referred to as Global Climate Models) outputs to force a series of high-resolution physical-biological regional models throughout the world. Generic principles that describe the relationships between organisms and their environment at large spatial scales are then used to estimate fish production based on the output of such regional models. Finally, potential fish production changes are used to investigate the impacts of such changes on the production/consumption system of the largest marine-based global commodity: fishmeal and fish oil. In addition, an indicatorbased analysis is applied to estimate the relative vulnerabilities of a number of countries to climate change-driven fish production changes. The results provide a framework, applicable to the study of other global resources, to investigate how environmental change will re-shape the interactions between human societies and nature in searching for global sustainability.

Ommer_c03.indd 34

12/22/2010 3:18:19 PM


35

Framing the problem Geographical and temporal framework Assessing climate change impacts at the global scale requires division of the task along geographical scales that respect the integrity of the ecosystems for which physical, biological, ecological, economic, and social principles need to be extracted. The concept of Large Marine Ecosystems (LME) is particularly suited for this purpose. LMEs are regions of ocean space with unique biogeochemical properties, encompassing coastal areas from river basins and estuaries to the seaward boundaries of continental shelves and the outer margins of the major current systems (Longhurst, 1998). They are relatively large regions characterized by distinct bathymetry, hydrography, productivity, and trophic interactions. LMEs are also the appropriate size to address the problem of fit between institutional arrangements and biophysical systems, taking into account jurisdiction and governance scale, as well as ecological processes. Since the early 1990s, the Global Environmental Facility (GEF) and its implementing agencies (World Bank, UNDP, FAO, UNEP) have used the LME as a framework to study, protect, and restore marine ecosystems (Sherman, 2005). It is thus appropriate to conduct assessments along LMEs, recognizing their unique and homogeneous characteristics, and their link to global management. Therefore, while the domain of QUEST_Fish is global, the work will be framed at the level of regional LMEs. Because of resources and computational investment, the implementation of QUEST_Fish will initially be limited to a total of 20 LMEs. These were selected on the basis of fish catch volumes as well as diversity of ecosystem types, so that extension of the conclusions to other areas could be done by proxy (Fig. 3.1, Table 3.1). The LMEs selected contribute over 60% of the world’s fish catch, thus they are likely to reflect the major trends in global production. They also include over 40 nations, an important component for the assessment of vulnerabilities to climate impacts, as described later on. QUEST_Fish thus computes ecosystem and fish production estimates, and socioeconomic consequences of these impacts, for the 20 LMEs listed in Table 3.1. Four fixed

Table 3.1 Primary production, area and fish catch for the 20 LMEs considered in the QUEST_Fish project, contributing >60% of the world fish catches. Data from www.seaaroundus.org LMEs East China Sea/Yellow Sea Humbolt Bay Bengal South China Sea/Sulu Celebes/Indonesian Sea North Sea/Central Biscay Shelf East BS/West BS NW Africa Norwegian Shelf Benguela Iceland Shelf/East Greenland California NE US/Scotian shelf/Newfoundland Labrador

Ommer_c03.indd 35

mgC.m−2.d−1

103.km2

2003 Catch

% catch

1,058 737 568 619 908 609 1,280 498 1,158 509 501 916

1,212 2,544 3,660 3,269 1,449 3,349 1,121 1,116 1,456 634 2,208 1,199

8,193,703 7,882,524 4,005,393 3,400,611 3,270,453 2,660,944 1,963,028 1,767,790 1,415,244 1,320,155 692,277 614,389

13.28 12.77 6.49 5.51 5.30 4.31 3.18 2.86 2.29 2.14 1.12 0.99

12/22/2010 3:18:20 PM

36


temporal scenarios are considered: pre-industrial (1850), present (2005), and future (2050 and 2100), allowing for the quantification of climate impacts relative to past and present situations. For each time slice a total of 10–15 years of data will be extracted, to make sure that we capture both the interannual climate variability as well as the longer-term anthropogenic climate change signals. For the future runs, up to two IPCC emission scenarios (and associated socio-economic storylines) will be considered (SRES, Nakicenovic and Swart, 2000). These scenarios were set up to encapsulate different developments that might influence the emission of greenhouse gases. While it is impossible to predict future emissions, SRES scenarios provide “alternative futures” to analyse the effects of future emissions and to develop mitigation and adaptation measures. The scenarios considered in QUEST_ Fish provide two contrasting world views. The first one is the A1B scenario, characterized by rapid economic growth, a peak in population growth by 2050, a spread of new and efficient technologies, and a balance of energy demands across all sources. Like the rest of the A1 family, this scenario is for a more integrated world, based on economic development and convergence of income (Leggett et al., 1992; Nakicenovic and Swart, 2000). The second scenario has not been agreed upon, but will respond to a low emissions framework, possibly following the B1 SRES model. The central elements of the B1 future are a high level of environmental and social consciousness combined with a globally coherent approach to a more sustainable development. In the B1 storyline, governments, businesses, the media, and the public pay increased attention to the environmental and social aspects of development. Technological change plays an important role, but the storyline does not include any climate policies (Nakicenovic and Swart, 2000). Recent developments, however, suggest that it may be possible to use a modification from the B1 model, associated with aggressive mitigation policies of CO2 emissions to an equivalent atmospheric concentration of 450 ppm (Bouwman et al., 2006). Either model provides a more environmental alternative to the A1B model.

The role of GCMs and RCMs Our understanding of the global climate and of the role of human activities in driving changes in the climate has developed rapidly in recent years, particularly in respect to land use change (Hegerl et al., 2007). The understanding has been greatly enhanced by the use of general circulation models (GCMs) of the atmosphere and ocean. Comparisons between observations and model results have demonstrated that GCMs have the power to simulate many aspects of the real climate. GCMs are constructed using the equations governing the large-scale circulation and thermodynamics of the atmosphere and oceans. In order to make the computational problem manageable they split the world into a series of interconnected atmospheric and oceanic horizontal grid cells, and solve the equations numerically for each cell. Current models typically have a horizontal resolution of 100–300 km2 with 20–40 vertical levels in the ocean and a similar number in the atmosphere. Those smaller-scale processes that can impact on the larger scale (such as formation of clouds) are usually represented by simplified relationships known as parameterizations, derived from observations or limited area models with much higher resolution and complexity. These same ocean-atmosphere GCMs can be forced with estimates of future greenhouse gas emissions to project future climate conditions several decades or even a hundred years into the future. However, they cannot yet directly simulate detailed impacts in relatively

Ommer_c03.indd 36

12/22/2010 3:18:20 PM


37

local shelf seas because they do not resolve small spatial scales (45'

Percentage of operations

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 200 Gross value of catch (in '000s)

no answer

Fig. 14.2 Gross value of catch in Newfoundland and Labrador by fleet category (data from Praxis, 2005). 80

Percentage of operations

70

Seine Vessels

Gillnet Vessels

Salmon Troll

Halibut/Sablefish

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 300

no answer

Gross value of Catch (in 000s) Fig. 14.3 Gross value of catch by Pacific fleet category (data from Praxis, 2005).

Pacific). For example, in Newfoundland and Labrador, the large majority (~80%) of large vessel (over >’45) operators have a gross value catch $200,000 per year, while the majority (~60%) of small vessel (under >’35) operators have a gross value catch of under $50,000 per year. These differences are, in large part, explained by the fact that larger vessels are equipped and licensed to participate in the lucrative snow crab and shrimp fisheries (Murray et al., 2008a).

Ommer_c14.indd 254

12/22/2010 3:24:56 PM

Social-Ecological Restructuring and Implications

255

In New Jersey trends are similar, though more difficult to depict graphically, given the fact that many fish harvesters participate in multiple fisheries. One fish harvester noted that the increasing costs of participation (due to high vessel and, particularly, license costs) have created a situation where fewer and fewer individuals are able to participate:

INTERVIEWEE: Yeah, but what it’s done too, is driven up the price of the boats so high, that where if I wanted to buy a boat, I could never do it. You could just… RESEARCHER: Cause of the permit? INT: The [ ] are worth so much money and you’re making money now, so when there’s no fish and there’s no money, the price of the boats are low, and now they’re just so high, the’re only gonna go to a handful of people on the coast.

De-localization These differences in the distribution of benefits have occurred not only within particular communities, but also among them. Put simply, the control of fishing operations and/or the benefits that accrue to that control have in some cases started to move away from traditional, geographic fishing communities. The Pacific region in Canada has seen a movement of license control away from traditional, rural coastal communities and towards the urban centers at the southwestern end of the Province: The policy approach in the Pacific Region of DFO has contributed to the concentration of ownership and licenses in the Vancouver-Richmond-Victoria area leaving many coastal-rural communities without control of, or access to, adjacent resources (Praxis, 2005: 4). Likewise, Ecotrust Canada (2004: iii) noted that the most resource dependent rural regions are losing their connection to the sea because of the urbanization of the fishery. Local residents of the west Coast of Vancouver Island, for example, only own 2% of all fishing quotas in BC. The number is 3% in the North Island and 9% in the north Coast. By contrast, residents of Vancouver and Victoria own 44% of quotas. Recent decades have also seen the rise of a number of arrangements where license holders lease the right to fish to others. On the west coast of Canada this is happening in, among others, the halibut, sablefish, and groundfish trawl fisheries at sometimes quite exorbitant rates (Ommer et al., 2007; Ecotrust Canada, 2004). At the time of writing, hard figures were not available in Newfoundland and Labrador, though a number of our interviewees suggested that control of licenses has also been “de-localized” in the region through at least two mechanisms. The first is through “slipper skipper” arrangements, where license/quota holders lease all or a portion of their licenses/ quotas for other individuals to harvest. The second occurs through mechanisms such as a trust agreements, where wealthier harvesters and/or processors seek to consolidate control of fishing enterprises through arrangements that sometimes contravene the intent of the fleet separation policy (see also Praxis, 2005).

Ommer_c14.indd 255

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM

256


The situation in New Jersey is more difficult to characterize quantitatively, though again, many of those that we spoke to mentioned that many harvesters and crew are moving away from traditional seaside fishing communities (and taking their licenses with them). In some cases, this has meant an additional form of “de-localization” in the form of non-local crew on vessels from traditional fishing ports. For example, one fish harvester stated the following when asked about how many crew he and others are employing as crew: RESEARCHER: And is that now more or less than there was? You probably never were adding them up back then, but first impression? INTERVIEWEE: It’s probably about the same. Now, I think it’s more…before, the people that worked on the local Cape May boats were local people. My guys now come from Virginia; a couple of them are from Texas. It’s not… RESEARCHER: And you said you had some…but they’re Texas people – the Mexican people you said you have working. INT: Mexican, yeah. Yeah, they’re resident aliens and stuff like that, but now it seems like there’s more people coming from, you know, there’s more, you know, there have been…there was Russian guys, there was people from South America. There’s more, I don’t know, say immigrant people. RES: Is it more like a professional deckhand, or is it just that most of the people don’t [want] the job or what? I mean why are you getting this replacement of… INT: I don’t know; I don’t know. Why don’t young people like to do certain things anymore that their fathers did?

In Canada, there is less direct evidence of the use of non-Canadians, though there has been an increased difficulty in finding crew members, and particularly in finding crew members from within traditional fishing communities (Praxis, 2005; Ommer et al., 2007).

Corporatization In each of the study areas, there has been increasing trends towards the “corporatization” of the fishery, defined here as a movement away from individual owner/operators independently operating individual vessels and towards a situation where multiple vessels and/ or access rights are owned and controlled (directly or indirectly) by more “corporate” entities. These entities are sometimes individuals, and sometimes vertically integrated operations that combine some aspect of processing with harvesting operations. These entities may or may not participate in the actual act of fishing. Directly measuring the degree of “corporatization” is challenging, as available license records do not always contain precise information about the nature of (e.g., corporate or otherwise) listed owners, nor do indirect forms of control (trust agreements, loans, etc.) show up in license records. However, some measures are available. For example, Table 14.1 is based on data from an extensive set of interviews conducted with fish harvesters, and shows the percentage of enterprise heads that had, at any time, entered “…into agreements with fish processor or buyer companies to borrow money in return for certain obligations” (Praxis, 2005: 17 and 18). Clearly, this could involve a wide variety of financial arrangements, and it is unclear how much control the buyer/processor actually obtains over the license/quota. The report does go on to note, however, that:

Ommer_c14.indd 256

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM


257

Table 14.1 Percentage of enterprise heads that have entered into financial agreements with processors/buyer companies. Atlantic Overall NL&L 45’

Pacific 23% 38% 47% 35%

Overall Seine Gillnet Troller Halibut/Sablefish

25% 26% 28% 15% 33%

The great majority of these agreements with processors or buyers involved the obligation to sell fish to the lender. However, 6% of such agreements on the Atlantic coast and 16% on the Pacific coast involved control by the lender over the future sale of the license (Praxis, 2005: 18). The report also states that: If not constrained by clear public policy objectives…market forces will rapidly move the industry towards concentration in ownership and geographical location of fishing licenses (Praxis, 2005: 6). Evidence has also emerged about this trend through talking to career fishermen in New Jersey. For example, the following exchange came from a career fish harvester in New Jersey:

INTERVIEWEE: Well here right now, this is another trend, the processor is owning the boats. For one, he gets a guaranteed profit. You’ve got to come to his dock. And with the cost of acquiring a boat, he’s probably the only one that’s got the money to do it and the financial ability to but these boats. RESEARCHER: So there’s fewer independent owner operators now than there were? INT: Yeah, yeah. I’m gone. And most of these boats that we have here came from independent operators that have been bought up by a bigger operation, and the same thing with Lund’s [a dock/processing facility]. They’re buying boats, Cold Spring [another dock/processing facility] has 3 or 4, so and if you go to New Bedford [Massachusetts] you find the same thing. I have a friend in N. Bedford that owns 21 boats. RESEARCHER: Wow, what do you think about that? INT: I’m not too crazy about the idea, but that’s the way it is. That’s the way it went with the farmers, you know, everything became corporate, and that’s what you have now. RESEARCHER: I forget who said it, but somebody said down here that fishing is feeling more like a business now than it used to. INT: Yeah. At one time it use to be individuals, you know, you work your butt off, you got enough money and a little bit of luck, you bought a boat. And that’s what everybody did. The docks didn’t own any boats. Little by little the docks started getting into the boats, so they had the income from the boats, they had the income from selling the product, so they had more of an opportunity to grow. And how that evolved, they got bigger and the individual boat owners little by little are disappearing as they get older and want to sell out or for whatever reason. It’s changed.

Ommer_c14.indd 257

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM

258


Fishing as a way of life: Now and in the future These changes have clearly involved changes in the flows and distribution of economic benefits associated with fishing related ecosystem services. However, many of the harvesters we have interviewed also described how changes in these structures and processes precipitated a shifting in other, less readily quantified social values that derive from ecosystem services and/or are shaped by social-ecological interactions. These include, but are not limited to, security (in the future), family orientation, egalitarianism, tradition, individualism, and personal enterprise. For example, one interviewee in New Jersey spoke of what some of these trends will mean for fishing as a way of life: INT: I’d say maybe in the past 10 years as the older, independent fishermen retired and would sell their boats, instead of it being bought by another independent person, it’s going to people who have 3, 4, 5, 6 boats because they’re the only ones who can afford it…[ ] I don’t think it’s a good thing, but that’s the way it is. RES: Why isn’t it a good thing? INT: Because…you’re a fisherman because you’re independent, you know? [ ] and I don’t need someone, I mean, it took the incentive of a guy on deck wanting to be a captain, and the guy being a captain wanting to earn his own boat, you know, and it’s more, more moneydriven than a lifestyle, and I just, I mean you probably see that all up and down the coast. It was family-oriented and it changes, like everything else. Your family-oriented grocery store or hardware store is now Home Depot.

Here the individual is pointing to imminent threats to a number of social values that have been associated with traditional fishing communities, including personal enterprise, individuality, and family orientation. Another New Jersey fisherman expressed his frustration with some of the changes that he has seen over time on the water, and the loss of a way of life that he felt to be much simpler (and less regulated). INT: Well you got days at sea, you can’t do this, you can’t do that, so I mean there are just too many to list. I mean it wasn’t how I was brought up, you know, I’m from the old school. The old school says you go out on the ocean, you do the best you can, you get products, you bring it back to the docks, you sell it, and then you go again. Now, you know, they have regulations. You’ve got to sign in, you’ve got this, you’ve got boat tracks. To me it was just too much regulation.

Asking current fish harvesters whether or not they would encourage their children to fish also provided telling insights into eroding senses of tradition as well as, again, family orientation and future security. Of 34 individuals with children in Newfoundland and Labrador, 30 reported that they were not encouraging their children to fish. Likewise, a New Jersey fish harvester expressed some serious reservations about the future of the fishery when asked if he would encourage his children to enter (as well as pointing out some inequities within existing communities):

Ommer_c14.indd 258

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM


259

INT: Probably not, you know, use it maybe for a … I just have no faith in the future, you know. I mean, you know, maybe a good, you know, launching pad to generate some income, but it’s hard to ever believe that, you know, 50 years from now or 30 years from now that there’s really going to be a … I mean there may be a, maybe a little puppet fishery, you know, maybe I’ll be, you know, I’ll be old then but I just don’t know you know. I mean the only ones that are now…I mean the full time scallopers are making a ton of money. You know they’re really doing it up, and that’s about it really. You know there’s some bright spots here and there, and there’s some good fishermen here and there, but the rest of the industry’s pretty … you know you go down to Carolinas and stuff, you know, and it’s pretty shaky really, you know. […] INT: Yeah, and everything, you know, nobody makes a whole lot of money, everybody’s struggling, you know, it’s kind of a mess really, you know. I don’t plan on doing that, you know, I’ll move. If I have to, you know, I’ll hang in as long as I can, but I’m not going to be this starving, you know, moron hahaha, you know, you’re trying to hold on till the last [ ] You know, I just refuse to do that, you know, I’m not going to be belittled.”

Discussion The preceding sections have highlighted how changing social-ecological interactions (“restructuring”) have already re-shaped social structures and processes within these fisheries. On the whole, the fisheries in each of the study areas are moving in directions defined by new ecological realities, and changing governance structures that emphasize economic “rationality”, conservation, and privatization. These trends are occurring across the range of situations examined with (somewhat) different management approaches and different ecological realities (though with important variations in structures and processes). Indeed, these trends are not unique to the study areas and some or all of them can be seen in other areas of the North Atlantic (Hamilton et al., 2003; Hamilton and Haedrich, 1999; Hamilton and Otterstad, 1998). While in a direct sense each of these systems continues to provide socio-cultural and economic benefits, these changes in social-ecological interactions have reshaped social structures and processes in certain ways, dramatically affecting how and where these benefits flow. Moreover, in each of the case studies the relative importance of “fishing” in traditional fishing communities has declined in size, and control of fishing enterprises has been shifting away from traditional fishing communities and towards more urban, “corporate” centers of control. Those remaining in the industry are aging, finding themselves differentiated from their fellow harvesters by reason of access, embedded in a complex and enclosed governance regime, and at the helm of vessels with vastly increased costs, expensive licenses, and tremendous capacity to locate and catch fish. So what does this mean in terms of designing “appropriate” coping strategies in the face of climate change? Several considerations follow from the findings presented above. First, that the types of values affected by restructuring range beyond those that are easily captured by aggregate economic measures of ecosystem services. Some of the values highlighted above – security (in the future), family orientation, egalitarianism, tradition, individualism, and personal enterprise – are not easily captured with economic measures. Yet, as many of

Ommer_c14.indd 259

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM

260


the harvesters we have spoken to alluded to, these values are part of the core identity of fish harvesters, and of the fishing communities they live(d) in – and they are changing rapidly. A focus on total economic valuation and ecosystem services, however, may tend to prioritize those quantifiable values that flow from ecosystems to human communities, and to de-emphasize those values that are shaped by social-ecological interactions. Second, that when we speak of the adaptive capacity of coastal fishing communities, we must realize that these communities are not the same as they were 50 or even 10 years ago. Clearly, fishing communities and fishing actors have changed dramatically over the last several decades. Appropriate for whom and “adaptive capacity” of what therefore become operative questions. Many of the fishing actors of today and the imminent future have started to become more corporate and “dislocated” from traditional fishing communities.8 This suggests that the coping strategies that are designed for these fishing actors may be different from the coping strategies that are designed for those that remain in traditional fishing communities. Moreover, those that do remain are aging and increasingly differentiated from their neighbors in terms of access and income, suggesting that coping strategies designed for the “haves” might be different than those designed for the “have-nots”. Third, climate change will necessarily interact with ongoing processes of interactive restructuring, including ecological change, increasing operation costs and, perhaps most importantly, processes of enclosure. At the most basic level, climate change will likely affect the abundance, distribution, and/or behavior of marine species.9 This implies that existing fishing actors would need flexibility to pursue new species, change their fishing areas, adapt new technologies, and learn to interpret and respond to new ecological realities. However, we have seen that social-ecological restructuring (particularly processes of enclosure) can tend to reduce the flexibility of fishing actors. This suggests that appropriate coping strategies should promote flexibility for fish harvesters, either through licensing mechanisms that allow fish harvester to shift across species (as they have in the past) and/ or to adapt their fishing technologies (gear) or areas. For example, Hunter and Hyatt (personal communication) have documented a diversification of licensing in the salmon fishery of BC, where vessels formerly licensed solely/principally for salmon have begun obtaining licenses in other fisheries, which the authors suggest represents a positive adaptive response that may improve resiliency in the face of regulatory and/or climate change. It also seems important to point out that designing appropriate coping strategies will be complicated by a high level of uncertainty associated with specific local-level ecological impacts associated with global climate change and how those impacts will interact with other ongoing restructuring processes. This demands attention to designing effective learning mechanisms, which involves the capturing of feedback, or signals, from the environment, interpretation of those signals, and adaptation to them – all of which occurs through a complex feedback loop. Murray et al. (2008b) have argued, however, that processes of “creeping” enclosure in New Jersey marine fisheries have reshaped mechanisms of feedback and modified flows of information among fish harvesters, managers, and scientists because of changes in affecting both participation in fisheries, the relationship between harvesters, scientists and managers,10 and the accumulation of knowledge itself (see also Murray et al., 2006). They note that there appear to be both “positive” and “negative” implications of these modifications in information flows and suggest that this should be an avenue for further research.

Ommer_c14.indd 260

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM


261

In a more general sense, it is worth re-examining the notion of “appropriate” when referring to designing appropriate coping strategies, and to the larger governance questions that the word “design” implies. This chapter has drawn attention to changes within social structures and associated value sets in fishing communities, and has further suggested that these changes have been perceived as negative by many of the interview respondents. On the other hand, values are subjective and context dependent and the degree to which “social” values are held necessarily varies from individual to individual and from community to community, as does the degree to which these values are shaped by socialecological interactions in general, or by fishing more specifically. Values are also time dependent, and some of the ongoing processes of global change elaborated above (including climate change) precipitate shifts in the constellation and distribution of values that particular individuals and communities derive from marine and coastal ecosystem services and/or those values that are shaped by interactions with the environment. Values and contexts vary and change, in other words, as they have always done. Deciding which values should be promoted and if/how they should be promoted through the design of coping strategies is itself a value-laden exercise, but if decision-makers wish to promote certain values (and the fishing communities that they help define), we will need to better understand how climate change is likely to interact with ongoing restructuring processes, and design governance regimes that are capable of elaborating appropriate coping strategies that will address value sets that range beyond those easily captured through tools such as total economic valuation.

Conclusion The interactions of traditional fishing communities with the marine environment as part of the act of fishing have shaped social structures and processes within those communities and helped give rise to certain value sets that define and give a shared identity to those communities. Across the range of study sites, several key elements of social-ecological restructuring continue to reshape social structures and processes, and appear to have affected a range of “social values”. To the extent that decision-makers wish to preserve these values within traditional fishing communities, it follows that mechanisms should be developed to identify, characterize, and monitor changes in these value sets. The type of data presented here provide a first step in this effort, but it is important to emphasize that these data do not directly measure these values. Designing longitudinal instruments that monitor these types of value shifts within fishing communities would help to design effective coping strategies that can be adapted to shifting social-ecological realities. Moreover, there are critical and local-level variations in terms of the adaptive strategies of fish harvesters that are based on locally specific and historically contingent socialecological realities (Murray et al., 2008b), and governance regimes and management measures need to be collaboratively developed and tailored to the specifics of these interactions. This is a highly complex task and the local specifics will necessarily vary, but as a starting point these strategies should promote flexibility, provide opportunities for learning, and be responsive to the differing needs within and across communities and fishing actors.

Ommer_c14.indd 261

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM

262


Endnotes 1. In this chapter the idea of “social values” represents a broad category, which can be defined as abstract standards or empirical variables in social life which are believed to be important and/or desirable. 2. The author wishes to thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), which have provided the major funds for CUS through the SSHRC Major Collaborative Research Initiative (MCRI) program. Funding was also provided by the host universities: Memorial University of Newfoundland and the University of Victoria. Rosemary Ommer, Principal Investigator. 3. “Cumulative Effects and New Jersey Fisheries,” Project funded by the New Jersey Sea Grant College Program, New Jersey Marine Sciences Consortium. Thanks also to the 40 fish harvesters that participated in oral history interviews. Bonnie McCay and Kevin St Martin, Principal Investigators. 4. In BC, the geoduck, halibut, sablefish, groundfish trawl, and three shellfish are currently under individual fishing quota programs. In New Jersey, only the surfclam/ocean quahog fishery is under ITQ, while in Atlantic Canada there are no official ITQ fisheries. 5. Moreover, as demonstrated by McDonald et al. (2009) in their case study of fishing communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, processes of enclosure driven by changes in fisheries policy/ management can interact with shifts in other policy areas (e.g., occupational health and safety and employment insurance) to negatively affect some members of coastal communities (including women) disproportionately. 6. http://www.ccpfh-ccpp.org/cgi-bin%5Cfiles%5C050824-Press-Release-and-BackgrounderE-Final.pdf 7. Available at http://www.nafo.int/fisheries/frames/fishery-stats.html 8. Johnsen et al. (accepted) further describe these processes of change in fishing actors as one of “cyborgization” where the fisheries actors of today have become techno-scientific systems. 9. There is evidence that marine ecosystems are already shifting, due to climate influences, both generally (Feely et al., 2008) and with respect to key fisheries stocks. For example, the effects of climate change on BC’s iconic and lucrative salmon stocks have begun to be documented (Beamish et al., 2008; Beamish et al., 2004; McFarlane et al., 2000; Beamish et al., 1999). The Centre de Ressources en Impacts et Adaptation au Climat et á ses Changements (CRIACC) provides an initial reference list partly specific to the Gulf of St Lawrence. 10. A second complication lies in a deep sense of mistrust for regulatory agencies, and a rising sense of persecution and government antagonism that many of our respondents have reported.

References Beamish, R. J., Noakes, D. J., McFarlane, G. A., Klyashtorin, L., Ivanov, V. W. and Kurashov, V. (1999) The regime concept and natural trends in the production of Pacific salmon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 56, 516–526. Beamish, R. J., Benson, A. J., Sweeting, R. M. and Neville, C. M. (2004) Regimes and the history of the major fisheries off Canada’s west coast. Progress in Oceanography 60(2–4), 355–385. Beamish, R. J., Sweeting, R. M., Lange, K. L. and Neville, C. M. (2008) Changes in the population ecology of hatchery and wild salmon in the Strait of Georgia. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 137, 503–520.

Ommer_c14.indd 262

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM


263

Beddington, J. R., Agnew, D. J. and Clark, C. W. (2007) current problems in the management of marine fisheries, Science 316, 1713–1716. Casey, K. E., Dewees, C. M., Turris, B. R. and Wilen, J. E. (1995) The effects of individual vessel quotas in the British Columbia halibut fishery. Marine Resource Economics 10, 211–230. Costello, C., Gaines, S. D. and Lynham, J. (2008). Can catch shares prevent fisheries collapse? Science 321, 1678–1681. de Groot, R. S., Wilson, M. A. and Boumans, R. M. J. (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods, and services. Ecological Economics 41(3), 393. Dolan, A. H., Taylor, S. M., Neis, B. et al. (2005) Restructuring and health in Canadian coastal communities. EcoHealth 2, 1–14. Ecotrust Canada (2004) Catch 22: Conservation, communities and the privatization of B.C. fisheries: an economic, social, and ecological impact study. Accessed 4 December 2008 at http://www. ecotrust.ca/ocean/catch22 Feely, R. A., Sabine, C. L., Hernandez-Ayon, J. M., Ianson, D. and Hales, B. (2008) Evidence for Upwelling of corrosive “acidified” water onto the continental shelf. Science 320(5882), 1490–1492. Gough, J. (2006). Managing Canada’s Fisheries: From Early Days to the Year 2000. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Georgetown, ON. Grafton, Q., Arnason, R., Bjørndal, T. et al. (2006) Incentive based approaches to sustainable fisheries. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63, 699–710. Grafton, R. Q. and Nelson, H. W. (1997) Fishers’ individual salmon harvesting rights: an option for Canada’s Pacific fisheries. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, 474–482. Great Northern Peninsula (GNP) Fisheries Task Force (2006). Final Report. Accessed 4 December 2008 at http://www.nedc.nf.ca/Final%20Report-Jan05.pdf Halpern, B. S., Walbridge, S., Selkoe, K. A. et al. (2008). A global map of human impact on marine ecosystems. Science 319(5865), 948–952. Hamilton, L. C. and Otterstad, O. (1998) Demographic change and fisheries dependence in the northern Atlantic. Human Ecology Review 5(1), 24–30. Hamilton, L. C. and Haedrich, R. L. (1999) Ecological and populations changes in fishing communities of the North Atlantic Arc. Polar Research 18(2), 383–388. Hamilton, L. C., Haedrich, R. L. and Duncan, C. M. (2003) Above and below the water social/ecological transformation in northwest Newfoundland. Population and Environment 25(2), 101–121. Hutchings, J. A. (1996) Spatial and temporal variation in the density of northern cod and a review of hypotheses for the stock’s collapse. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53, 943–962. Kirby, M. J. L. (1982) Navigating troubled waters: a new policy for Atlantic fisheries: report of the task force on Atlantic fisheries. Department of Supply and Services, Ottawa. Mansfield, B. (2004) Neoliberalism in the oceans: “rationalization,” property rights, and the commons question. Geoforum 35(3), 313–326. Marchand, A. R. (2002) Urbanization and Concentration in the Pacific Fishing Fleet and the Sustainability of BC’s Coastal Communities. Unpublished Masters Thesis: Royal Roads University. McCay, B. (1995) Social and ecological implications of ITQs. Ocean and Coastal Management 28(1–3), 3–22 McCay, B. (2004) ITQs and community: an essay on environmental governance. Agriculture and Resource Economics Review 33(2), 162–170.

Ommer_c14.indd 263

12/22/2010 3:24:59 PM

264


McCay, B., Apostle, R. and Creed, C. (1998) ITQs, co-management and community: reflections from Nova Scotia. Fisheries 23(4), 20–23. McDonald, M., Neis, B. and Murray, G. D. (2009) State policy, livelihood protection and gender in coastal communities. International Journal of Canadian Studies/ Revue internationale d’études canadiennes 38, 149–180. McFarlane, G. A., King, J. R. and Beamish, R. J. (2000) Have there been recent changes in climate? Ask the fish. Progress in Oceanography 47(2–4), 147–169. Murray, G. D., Neis, B. and Johnsen, J. P. (2006) Lessons learned from reconstructing interactions between local ecological knowledge, fisheries science and fisheries management in the commercial fisheries of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Human Ecology 34(4), 549–572. Murray, G. D., Neis, B. and Schneider, D. (2008a) The importance of scale and a multi-method approach in reconstructing socio-ecological system change in the Newfoundland Inshore Fishery. Coastal Management 36(1), 1–28. Murray, G. D., McCay, B., St Martin, K., Takahashi, S. and Johnson, T. (2008b) Cumulative effects, creeping enclosure, and the marine commons of New Jersey. Paper given to the 12th Biennial Conference of the International Association for the Study of Commons, Governing shared resources: connecting local experience to global challenges, Cheltenham UK, 14–18 July. Myers R. A. and Worm, B. (2003) Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature 423, 280–283. National Research Council (1999) Sharing the Fish – Towards a National Policy on Individual Fishing Quotas. National Academy Press, Washington DC. Ommer, R. with the Coasts Under Stress Research Project Team (2007) Coasts Under Stress: Restructuring and Social-Ecological Health. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal and Kingston. Palmer, C. T. and Sinclair, P. (1997) When the Fish are Gone: Ecological Disaster and Fishers in Northwest Newfoundland. Fernwood Publishing, Halifax NS. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Dalsgaard, J., Froese, R. and Torres, F. (1998) Fishing down marine food webs. Science 279, 860–863. Philcox, N. (2007) Literature Review and Framework Analysis of Non-Market Goods and Services Provided by British Columbia’s Ocean and Marine Coastal Resources. Report prepared for the Canada/British Columbia Oceans Coordinating Committee. Accessed 4 December 2008 at http:// www.env.gov.bc.ca/omfd/reports/ocean-nonmarket-values.pdf Praxis Research and Consulting Inc. (2005) Setting a New Course: Phase II Human Resources Sector Study for the Fish Harvesting Industry in Canada. Report prepared for the Canadian Council of Professional Fish Harvesters. Accessed 4 December 2008 at http://www.ccpfh-ccpp.org/cgibin%5Cfiles%5CSS-PhII-Final-RPT-E.pdf Sinclair, P. (1987) From Traps to Draggers. ISER Books, St John’s NF. Squires, D., Campbell, H., Cunningham, S. et al. (1998) Individual transferable quotas in multispecies fisheries. Marine Policy 22(2), 135–159.

Ommer_c14.indd 264

12/22/2010 3:25:00 PM

Chapter 15

Economic Valuation of Mangroves in the Niger Delta An Interdisciplinary Approach Godstime K. James, Jimmy O. Adegoke, Ekechukwu Saba, Peter Nwilo, Joseph Akinyede, and Sylvester Osagie

Abstract Today, the concept of an interdisciplinary approach to research has gained tremendous attention, both because it is an antithesis to the conventional divisions of knowledge-based research, and because complex problems in applied research almost always span various disciplines. This study explores one interdisciplinary approach to research, which addresses the problem of equitable mangrove valuation for the sustainable management of the resource in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. By integrating results from satellite remote sensing analysis and socioeconomic surveys, the economic value of mangroves in the Niger Delta, discounted over a 30-year period at 20% discount rate, ranges from $640–2,825ha. The variation in economic value is attributed to the variation in the socioeconomic characteristics of the communities that participated in the study. Keywords: Interdisciplinarity, Niger Delta, mangroves, remote sensing, GIS, economic valuation

Introduction Today, the concept of an interdisciplinary approach to research has gained tremendous attention, because it is an antithesis to the conventional divisions of knowledge-based research. Similarly, according to Klein (1990), researchers turn to the concept of interdisciplinarity to provide explanation and answers to complex questions, address broad-based issues, explore the intersecting relationship between disciplinary and professional interests, address problems that are beyond the scope of a single discipline, and to unify knowledge at different scales of interest. Many practical problems of our time require interdisciplinary solutions: for example, addressing the problems that are inherent in natural resource management requires an interdisciplinary approach. As a result, our approach is collaborative in nature and includes ecologists and spatial scientists (natural sciences), economists and World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c15.indd 265

12/22/2010 3:25:23 PM

266


sociologists (social scientists). It involves the integration of survey-based socioeconomic data and satellite remote sensing derived data to address the problems of environmental resource exploitation (Liverman et al., 1998; Fox et al., 2003; Mennis, 2006). This study explores the value of such a quantitative integrative approach in addressing the problem of equitable mangrove valuation in developing sustainable management of the resource in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. This chapter is divided into eight sections. In the next section “Study area”, a description of the study area (the Niger Delta) is presented, then a succinct review of the integration of remote sensing and socioeconomic data is presented in the section entitled “Integration of remote sensing and socio-economic data”. Economic valuation of mangroves and the method adopted in this study are presented in the sections “Economic valuation of mangrove resources” and “Methodology”, respectively. Then follows a section “Empirical data processing”, which provides an empirical estimate of the economic value of mangroves in the Niger Delta. This is followed by the section “Results and analysis”, in which results and analysis of results are presented. Finally, the concluding remarks address our findings.

Study area This study is focused on the Niger Delta region of Nigeria (Fig. 15.1), located in south central Nigeria. The Niger Delta consists of nine political states: Abia, Bayelsa, Delta, Edo, Imo, Ondo, Rivers, Akwa Ibom, and Cross River. The total population of these states is approximately 20 million and is projected to increase to 39.2 million by 2015 and 45.7 million by 2020 (UNDP, 2006). Settlement is largely nucleated and rural, typically occupying isolated dry sites within the low deltaic swamps. Cities such as Warri and Portharcourt are found in the upland areas, where most of the commercial activities in the region occur. The region is significant for three reasons. First, the region is rich in hydrocarbon deposits. The exploration and exploitation of this mineral resource account for 90% of Nigeria’s foreign exchange receipts. Second, the region has the most diverse culture in Nigeria. The inhabitants of the Niger Delta are, like other Nigerians, highly diverse culturally. The riverine geography of the region promoted the development of isolated settlement of islands surrounded by a maze of inter-woven creeks. These islands converged into small ancient city-states and kingdoms such as Bonny, Brass, Akassa, Kalahari, Okrika, Nembe, Ogoni, Opobo, Bassan, Andoni, Itsekiri, and Urhobo (Petters, 2004). Finally, the Niger Delta has significant biodiversity; for example, the mangrove vegetation in the region is the largest contiguous mangrove zone in Africa and third largest in the world, after Indonesia and Brazil (World Bank, 1995; Nwilo, 2003). The term “mangrove” refers to salt tolerant species of trees or shrubs that grow on sheltered shores and in estuaries located in the tropics and some sub-tropical regions of the world (Saenger, 2002). In the Niger Delta, the mangroves support highly productive marine food chains and provide shelter for large numbers of larvae and juvenile stages of commercially important fishes (Ludo and Snedaker, 1974; Held et al., 2003). They also provide water quality maintenance, local micro-climate stabilization, and shoreline protection. The economic value of mangrove resources in the Niger Delta,

Ommer_c15.indd 266

12/22/2010 3:25:23 PM

Economic Valuation of Mangroves in the Niger Delta

267

N

Map of Nigeria and the Niger Delta States

W

E S

Africa

Legend Niger delta States

5,100 2,550

0

5,100

10,200 Kilometers

Fig. 15.1 The Niger Delta States located in Nigeria.

however, is grossly underestimated by stakeholders in the region, and the lack of equitable valuation of mangrove resources has encouraged the continuous decimation of the coastal delta ecosystem over time. The need to estimate the economic value of the mangrove resources in the region stems from the lack of any empirical study in the public domain that estimates the worth of the mangroves in the Niger Delta, other than that of the 1994 World Bank (Western African Department) sponsored environmental economic assessment study of the region (Linddal, 1995), whose estimate of mangrove productivity was based on value transfer methods and did not involve any direct input from the local communities in the mangrove ecological zone.

Integration of remote sensing and socio-economic data The integration of remote sensing and socioeconomic data has been approached from different perspectives, one of which is the linking of census datasets with satellite imagery. The integration of remote sensing and census data consists primarily of four research approaches (Chen, 2002). The first focuses on the challenges of scale and zoning effects using area-based census data (Wrigley et al., 1997). A second explores methods for effectively representing areal census data spatially, for visualization and subsequent analysis (Langford and Unwin, 1994). A third focuses on the use of census data as ancillary information for satellite image classification (Mesev, 1998), and urban socioeconomic and

Ommer_c15.indd 267

12/22/2010 3:25:23 PM

268


environmental analysis (Lo and Faber, 1997). The fourth examines the correlation between census data at different zonal level and pixel based satellite imagery. Thus, two broad schools of thought that integrate remote sensing and socioeconomic data have emerged. The first deals with the application of remote sensing data to socioeconomic analysis (Liverman et al., 1998). Interest in this has increased as recognition of the usefulness of remote sensing for identifying the landscape effects of socioeconomic processes has grown over time (Fox et al., 2003). The second consists of an application of socioeconomic data to remote sensing data (Mertens and Lambin, 2000). This has focused to a great extent on integrating census data and survey-based socioeconomic data to remotely sensed land-use or land-use change data, particularly for modeling the anthropogenic drivers of environmental change (Pfaff, 1999; Walsh et al., 1999; Geoghegan et al., 2001; Mennis, 2006). In our study, we apply an integrated approach to the economic valuation of environmental resources such as the mangrove ecosystem (see also Kreuter et al., 2001; Zhao et al., 2004; Tianhong et al., 2010). In particular, the study by Zhao et al. (2004) coupled remote sensing and socioeconomic data to estimate changes in the economic value of ecosystem services at the local level. They applied three LANDSAT TM and ETM datasets to estimate changes in the size of five land-cover/land-use categories, and used previously published value coefficients to estimate changes in the value of ecosystem services delivered by each land category in Chongming Island, China. Finally, they ranked the contribution of various ecosystem functions to the overall value of the ecosystem services.

Economic valuation of mangrove resources Mangroves support human welfare in terms of the goods and services they provide (i.e., direct use values), and the ecological functions which indirectly support economic activity (i.e., indirect use values) (Baan, 1997; Barbier, 1994, 2007; Barbier et al., 1997; Carson, 1998; Hamilton et al., 1989). The direct use benefits derived from mangrove ecosystems in the Niger Delta include the extraction of firewood, charcoal, wood for building, salt, fish traps, and fish stack (a local material used to store and preserve fish). Similarly, the communities derive indirect use benefits from the mangroves, such as the fact that the mangrove ecosystem provides breeding grounds for both onshore and offshore fisheries (Barbier, 2007). This ecological service supports the vibrant offshore fishery on the Atlantic coast of the Niger Delta (NDES, 1997). That is why, in this study, the economic valuation of mangroves in the Niger Delta is based on net income benefit derived from the following mangrove resources: firewood, charcoal, demersal and nondemersal fish species. These items were selected because past studies have shown that communities within the ecosystem derive income from the sale of the mangrove resources (World Bank, 1995; NDES, 1997; Lindall, 1995). In addition, focus group sessions and household surveys conducted in the mangrove communities as part of this study also confirm that the communities derive income from mangrove resources. Hence, the economic value of one hectare of mangrove vegetation in the Niger Delta was estimated using Equation 15.1, which is made up of the net income from the sale of mangrove resources aggregated across the sampled households in a community, the total number of household sampled, the number of households that

Ommer_c15.indd 268

12/22/2010 3:25:23 PM


269

derive income from the extraction of mangrove resources in the community, and the mangrove area that supported the income. v

w

åå (G

ij

EVk =

j =1 i =1

vk

- Cij ) ´

Nk Ak

(15.1)

where: i = ith Mangrove resource; j = jth Household; w = Total number of mangrove resources sold by household (j); v = Total number of households surveyed in a community; G = Annual Gross income from mangrove resources ($); C = 10% Cost of extraction ($); Ak = Mangrove area that supports income from mangroves in community (k)(ha); Nk = Number of households that extract resources from mangroves in community (k).

Methodology Sourcing for the data requirements in Equation 15.1 requires an interdisciplinary approach that provides methods for delineating the mangrove areas that support the income from the mangroves, as well as estimates of the net income from mangroves. Remote sensing was used in this study to delineate the spatial extent of mangroves in the Niger Delta. Similarly, social research methods (focus groups and household surveys) were conducted to provide data for the net income derived from the sale of mangrove resources.

Remote sensing analysis Remote sensing is one of the commonly used approaches for mapping the spatial coverage of mangrove vegetation (Brackel, 1984; Borel, 1985; Congalton, 1991; Aschbacher et al., 1995; Gao, 1998, 1999; Mumby et al., 1999; Green et al., 2000; Coppin et al., 2004), and it was adopted in this study to produce mangrove thematic maps covering the Niger Delta region. We did this for three reasons. First, the large spatial coverage of the mangrove vegetation in the Niger Delta requires a large coverage data gathering method. It would have been economically challenging to use aerial photographs or other high resolution optical remote sensing systems. Second, the swamp terrain of the mangrove ecosystem in the Niger Delta limits accessibility and the application of ground survey methods. Third, optical satellite images for the Niger Delta are readily available dating back to the early 1970s and can be acquired for free or purchased at minimal cost. The remote sensing approach adopted in this study is documented in James et al. (2007) and involves three stages. First, Landsat images captured in 2003 and covering the Niger Delta were acquired and geometrically rectified. Second, an unsupervised image classification process was used to discriminate mangrove vegetation category from other land-use/

Ommer_c15.indd 269

12/22/2010 3:25:23 PM

270


land-cover categories. Third, the accuracy of the mangrove thematic map was tested by cross-referencing pixels from the thematic map with test sample data obtained during field visits to the Niger Delta (Congalton, 1991; Jensen, 2005). The reliability of the derived mangrove thematic maps was above 90%. The resulting thematic maps were used to estimate the mangrove area (Ak ) in Equation 15.1.

Focus group analysis The focus group sessions were conducted in 2007 with the following objectives: to identify the various mangroves resources that provide income for the communities within the mangrove ecological zone of the Niger Delta; to pretest the survey instrument that was to be used to source for the income data; and lastly, to identify the mangrove areas that support the income from mangroves. A major methodology in this study is the participatory approach to primary data collection that requires input from local knowledge (Habermas, 1984; Dryzek, 1987, 1990; Fishkin, 1991). To do this, we conducted focus group sessions in Buguma, Kuruama, and Burutu, communities in the Niger Delta. These communities were selected because they are the major communities found within the mangrove ecological zone in the region. Moreover, they derive their livelihood from daily interaction with the mangrove ecosystem. Participants in the focus group sessions were drawn from stakeholders in each community, including community elders, women, fishermen, and youths. Each session was conducted in an informal manner and all participants had equal chance of participation. Consequently, no speaker was hindered by external compulsion or pressure. Finally, participants were encouraged to express their own attitudes, needs, and preferences for the mangrove ecosystem goods and services. Each session was conducted in English and a local interpreter was hired to translate all the discussions into the local dialect for the benefit of the participants. Each focus group session was divided into two segments. During the first segment, participants were asked to provide a list of mangrove resources that generated income for community members. Some of the major mangrove resources extracted for subsistence income and their local names are presented in Table 15.1. During the second segment of the focus group sessions, participants were involved with the delineation of the mangrove area that supports the community’s income from mangroves. To identify the spatial extent of these mangrove areas, participants were shown a mangrove thematic map of their community derived from our remote sensing analysis. The names of neighboring villages were also included on the map, thus facilitating the ability of the participants to relate to the geographic location covered by the map. The participants were then requested to identify the distance traveled by members of their community to extract mangrove resources. This was achieved by calling the names of neighboring villages to find out if members of the community travel as far as such villages to extract mangrove resources. When some villages were called, participants all agreed that members of their community do not travel that far to extract mangrove resources. At the end of the exercise, the distance traveled by members of the community was delineated on the analog map and shown to the participants. Corrections were made until all the participants agreed that the area delineated was a fair representation of the extent that members of their community traveled to extract mangrove resources.

Ommer_c15.indd 270

12/22/2010 3:25:25 PM


271

Table 15.1 A list of mangrove resources and their local names. Mangrove Resources

Local Name for Mangrove Resources (Burutu)

Local Name for Mangrove Resources (Buguma)

Local Name for Mangrove Resources (Kuruama)

Firewood Charcoal Local Salt Fish Crabs Periwinkle Oyster Bush meat Wood Construction Fish Traps Bait Fish Fish Stack Potash

Fini Ayingbo Fun Nji Ikoli Isam Ngbe Pirinama Angalasi Ikata Kenge/Paipai Kassa Fungroma

Fene Angalameni Fur Ndi Ago Samon Ibe Bonama Ten Ita Fen Akasa Ikaoun

Fini Anyimigbolo Fu Nji Ikoli Esem Ngbe Piri-Nama Warinamasi Fughuma Koninye Akasa –

Household survey Results from the first segment of the focus group sessions were used to develop a survey instrument. The survey instrument was pretested during the focus group sessions before it was administered to households in Kuruama, Burutu, and Buguma communities. The household survey was conducted in 2008. The sample size was calculated at the 90% confidence interval and 95% confidence level for all the communities visited. Given the preceding sample parameters, the following minimum sample sizes were determined 87, 85, and 55 households in Buguma, Burutu, and Kuruama communities, respectively. However, the actual households interviewed were 136, 155, and 60, in Buguma, Burutu, and Kuruama communities, respectively. The difference between the estimated sample size and the actual number of households sampled was to account for non response errors. The household survey focused on the elicitation of income derived from the sale of fishery and non-fishery Mangrove products (listed in Table 15.1) in each of the households that participated in the survey.

Empirical data processing Estimation of net income from the sale of mangrove resources The approach adopted for estimating net income, which was then used in the empirical estimates of direct use value and indirect use value of mangrove, was as follows. Net income from the extraction of mangrove resources was taken to be gross income from such extraction less the cost of extraction. The weekly gross income from the extraction of mangrove resources for each household was estimated from the responses to the survey questions. Estimating the cost of extracting mangrove resources in the studied communities was a challenge, because the resource extraction is at the level of subsistence, the goal being use in household consumption and subsistence income. Therefore, household members constitute the major labor force during the extraction process (Focus Group, 2008), and the handpaddled dugout canoe is the primary mode of transport to the resource extraction location.

Ommer_c15.indd 271

12/22/2010 3:25:25 PM


272

Previous studies have suggested that the cost of resource extraction within a mangrovedependent peasant economy, such as the Niger Delta, ranges between zero and 10% of the gross income (Naylor and Drew, 1998; Ronnback and Primavera, 2000). Consequently, 10% of household gross income was adopted as the cost of extraction. Hence, the net income from the extraction of mangrove resources was estimated by calculating the difference between the gross income and 10% of the gross income at the household level. Subsequently, the household net income was aggregated for each community. The aggregated net income (Equation 15.2) is one of the numerator terms in Equation (15.1). The next variable estimated in Equation (15.1) was the mangrove area that supported the net income from the sale of extracted mangrove resources. v

w

Aggregated Net Income = åå (Gij - Cij )

(15.2)

j =1 i =1

where: i = ith Mangrove resource; j = jth Household; w = Total number of mangrove resources sold by household (j); v = Total number of households surveyed in a community; G = Annual Gross income from mangrove resources ($); C = 10% Cost of extraction ($).

Estimation of the mangrove area that supported mangrove income (Ak ) The analog mangrove thematic map on which the mangrove boundary layer had been delineated (based on inputs from the focus group sessions in each surveyed community) was scanned, added to a project layer created in an ESRI Arc Map environment, and georeferenced. The extent of the mangrove area visited by members of each community was digitized into a separate map layer as a shapefile. The thematic map produced from the remote sensing analysis in this study was added to the project folder in the ESRI Arc Map environment. The mangrove land-cover category was exported from the thematic map. Since the exported land-cover data was in raster format, it was converted to vector format using the raster-to-vector conversion routine in the spatial analyst extension of Arc GIS 9.2. The vectorized mangrove layer was also added to the map project layer in ESRI Arc Map environment. An intersect overlay operation was performed using the vectorized mangrove layer and the delineated boundary layer that was derived from the focus group session. The objective of the intersect overlay operation was to ensure that only the mangrove area in the focus group mangrove delineated boundary was included in the final intersect layer. Since the final intersect layer was a combination of fragmented polygons from the raster-tovector operation, the fragmented polygons were dissolved using the dissolve routine in ESRI Geoprocessing Arc Tool box. The value of the mangrove area from the dissolve operation was calculated by importing the dissolved polygon shapefile into a geodatabase. Given that the procedures described in the previous paragraph were to be repeated for each of the three communities visited in this study, a Geoprocessing model (called GEOND) was developed using the Geoprocessing tool in ESRI Arc Tool box. GEOND is made up of

Ommer_c15.indd 272

12/22/2010 3:25:25 PM


Buguma Fishing

Intersect

Raster to Polygon

Mangrove Layer

Output Feature class

Output polygon features

273

Dissolve

Output Feature class (2)

Fig. 15.2 Geoprocessing model for extracting mangrove areas.

three segments. The first segment converts raster data layer to a vector data layer (i.e., raster-to-vector operation). The raster-to-vector operation accepts the raster image of the mangrove coverage as input and produces the vectorized model of the image. The second segment of GEOND involves the intersection of the mangrove vectorized shapefile and the digitized mangrove area shapefile derived from the focus group sessions. The result of the intersection operation is fed into the dissolve module (i.e., the third segment of GEOND). The model diagram for GEOND is presented in Fig. 15.2.

Annual household net income at the community level The average annual net income from mangrove resources in each community was estimated by dividing the total annual net income by the total number of households that generated the income (vk) (Equation 15.1). The goal was to estimate the total annual income generated by all the households that derive income from the mangroves in each of the three communities sampled. To achieve this goal, the percentage of respondents in each community that derive income from mangrove vegetation was estimated from the results of the household surveys. In Buguma, Kuruama, and Burutu communities, 84%, 70%, and 82% of respondents sampled in that order, extract mangrove resources. Since the estimated number of households in Buguma, Kuruama, and Burutu were 900, 128, and 700, respectively, the number of households that extract mangrove resources in these communities (i.e., Nk in Equation 15.1) were 754, 90, and 575, in Buguma, Kuruama, and Burutu communities, in that order. To estimate the total annual household income (AI ) for a community (e.g., Buguma), the number of households that extract mangrove resources in the community Nk was multiplied by the average annual household income from mangrove resources in the community (Equation 15.3). v

w

åå (G

ij

AI =

j =1 i =1

vk

- Cij ) ´ Nk

(15.3)

where: i = ith Mangrove product; j = jth Household; w = Total number of mangrove resources sold by household ( j);

Ommer_c15.indd 273

12/22/2010 3:25:27 PM

274


v = Total number of households surveyed in a community; G = Annual Gross income from mangrove resources ($); C = 10% Cost of extraction ($); Nk = Number of households that extract resources from mangroves in community (k).

Results and analysis Socio-economic characteristics of household survey respondents The majority of household respondents who participated in the survey were male household heads. They accounted for about 60% of respondents, while female household heads constituted about 40%. The results from the focus group sessions conducted in the three communities indicated that women are also actively involved with the extraction of mangrove resources. Consequently, they can provide reliable information on the productivity of the mangroves. Most of the household heads sampled were within the age bracket of 41 years and above; they constituted 59% of the respondents. On average, the respondents had lived in their community for about 29 years; about 37% had completed their secondary education, while 33% had primary level education. This is not surprising because the majority of those with higher educational background are more likely to migrate to the cities for better opportunities. The majority of those sampled (~67%) reported the extraction of mangrove resources as their full-time occupation. The extraction of these resources is at the subsistence level. About nine out of every ten household respondents extract fishery resources within the adjoining community rivers and creeks. Similarly, 95% of respondents use hand-paddled dugout wooden canoes as their primary means of transportation to the locations where they collect mangrove resources. Furthermore, 62% of those sampled use fishing hooks, while about eight out of every ten respondents use fishing nets for the extraction of fish. The reported average monthly income of respondents was approximately N18,694 ($130).

Area of mangrove that support income stream (Ak ) Results from the implementation of the GEOND geoprocessing model developed in this study indicated that the area of mangrove that supported income streams from mangroves varies among the three communities considered in this study. While the estimated mangrove area was 20,215 hectares in Burutu community (Fig. 15.3), the area was 8,490 hectares in Buguma community (Fig. 15.4). The least area of 2,222 hectares was estimated for Kuruama community (Fig. 15.5).

Results from the economic valuation The results from the economic valuation of mangrove resources in the three sampled communities based on Equation 1 are presented in Table 15.2. The highest economic value ($483.40/ha/yr) was obtained in Burutu, followed by Buguma ($280.68/ha/yr), and the lowest value was obtained in Kuruama ($109.44/ha/yr). Similarly, the result of the

Ommer_c15.indd 274

12/22/2010 3:25:28 PM


275

N W

E S

Forcados River Estuary

Legend 0 1,500 3,000

6,000

9,000

Meters 12,000

Mangrove Area Burutu

Fig. 15.3 Mangrove area that supports the fishery in Burutu community.

net income stream, discounted over a 30-year period at 20% discount rate, is presented in Table 15.2. The 30-year period was adopted because it takes about 30 years for a degraded mangrove ecosystem to recover after a disturbance, giving favorable ecological conditions (Adegbenhin and Nwaigbo, 1990; Focus Group, 2008). Also, the 20% discount rate was adopted because the current lending rate (first quarter of 2008) in Nigeria is approximately 20%. The economic value of mangroves derived from Equation 15.1 represents annual net income from mangrove resources aggregated over households and the mangrove areas that supported the income in a community. As a result, the economic values represent an upper bound of marginal estimates of incremental use, and a lower bound for average estimates of total use under the usual assumptions of diminishing returns to scale and diminishing marginal utility (i.e., the productivity of a unit area depends on the remaining mangrove area) (Costanza et al., 1989; Naylor and Drew, 1998). The variations of the economic value of mangroves across the sampled communities reflect the variation in the socioeconomic characteristics of the communities within the zone. Kuruama community is a classical example of a small community with a low level of economic activities. They do not sell non-fishery mangrove products. By contrast, Burutu and Buguma communities represent large communities in the mangrove ecological zone that enjoy, to some extent, the influence of trade in mangrove resources. For example, mangrove products from Buguma are bought by

Ommer_c15.indd 275

12/22/2010 3:25:29 PM

276


N W

E S

Legend 0

700 1,400

2,800

4,200

Meters 5,600

Mangrove Area Buguma

Fig. 15.4 Mangrove area that supports the fishery in Buguma community.

traders from Portharcourt (Portharcourt is the largest city in the Niger Delta). Similarly, there is a weekly market in Burutu that attracts people from the various neighboring villages; traders from Warri visit the community during market days to buy mangrove products (Warri is the second largest city in the Niger Delta). However, these markets are largely imperfect because of the high degree of distortion in the prices paid for mangrove resources. For example, while a kilogram of mullet fish costs N500 ($4) in Burutu community, the same amount of mullet sells for N1,200 ($10) in Warri and N1,500 ($13) in Portharcourt. One of the far reaching implications of the economic valuation results in this study is that the estimated economic value for mangroves exceeds the compensation paid to Niger Delta communities for damaged/degraded mangroves. Compensation rates for damaged environmental resources resulting from the activities of the oil and gas industry operating in Nigeria is enshrined in the Nigerian oil and mineral laws of 1961 as well as the Land Use decree of 1978, and these provide for the payment of compensation whenever there is environmental degradation resulting from the activities of the oil industries. The communities in the Niger Delta are currently compensated with $24/ha for degraded or destroyed mangroves (UNDP, 2006). Comparing the current compensation rate with the economic valuation results in this study, there is a clear indication that the compensation rate is abysmally low. At a potential income stream of $2,825/ha from mangroves (Table 15.2), the paid

Ommer_c15.indd 276

12/22/2010 3:25:29 PM


277

N W

E S

0

350 700

1,400

2,100

Meters 2,800

Legend Mangrove Area Kuruama

Fig. 15.5 Mangrove area that supports the fishery in Kuruama community.

Table 15.2 Net Annual Income Stream from the Mangrove Ecosystem Services in Kuruama, Buguma and Burutu Communities. Community Kuruama Buguma Burutu

2008 ($/ha/yr)

20% Discount ($/ha)

109.44 280.68 483.40

639.51 1640.15 2824.75

compensation is less than 1% of what should be paid. On the other hand, if the least income stream derived in this study ($640/ha) (Table 15.2) is compared with the compensation rate, then the paid compensation is just about 4% of what should be paid.

Conclusions This study has demonstrated the role of interdisciplinarity in addressing natural resource valuation for sustainable management options. In particular, data sources from socioeconomic as well as satellite remote sensing datasets were integrated within an interdisciplinary framework to estimate the economic value of the mangroves in the Niger Delta region

Ommer_c15.indd 277

12/22/2010 3:25:29 PM

278


of Nigeria. Results reveal that the potential income from one hectare of mangroves over a 30-years period, discounted at 20% discount rate, ranged between $640 and $2,825. The variation in the economic value of mangroves is largely influenced by the socioeconomic background of the communities that participated in the study.

References Adegbehin, J. O. and Nwaigbo, L. C. (1990) Mangrove resources in Nigeria: use and management perspectives. Nature and Resources 26, 13–21. Aschbacher, J., Ofren, R., Delsol, J. P., Suselo, T. B., Vibiusresth, S. and Charrupat, T. (1995) An integrated comparative approach to mangrove vegetation mapping using advanced remote sensing and GIS technologies: preliminary results. Hydrobiologia 295, 285–294. Baan, C. (1997) The Economic Valuation of Mangroves: A Manual for Researchers. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa, Canada. Barbier, E. B. (1994) Valuing environmental functions: tropical wetlands. Land Economics 70, 155–173. Barbier, E. B. (2007) Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs. Economic Policy 22, 177–229. Barbier, E. B., Acreman, M. and Knowler, D. (1997) Economic Valuation of Wetlands: A Guide for Policy Makers and Planners. Ramsar Convention Bureau, Department of Environmental Economics and Management, University of York, Cambridge UK. Borel, D. (1985) Monitoring of mangroves areas through high resolution remote sensing techniques: the SPOT simulation campaign over Bangladesh. Bakawan 4, 6–8. Brackel, W. H. (1984) Seasonal dynamics of the suspended sediment plumes from Tano and Sabaki Rivers, Kenya: analysis of coastal imagery. Remote Sensing of the Environment 18, 165–173. Carson, R. T. (1998) Valuation of tropical rainforests: philosophical and practical issues in the use of contingent valuation. Ecological Economics 24, 15–29. Chen, K. (2002) An approach to linking remotely sensed data and areal census data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 23(1), 37–48. Congalton, R. G. (1991) A review of assessing the accuracy of classification of remotely sensed data. Remote Sensing of Environment 37, 35–46. Coppin, P., Jonckheere, I., Nackaerts, K. and Muys, B. (2004) Digital change detection methods in ecosystem monitoring – a review. International Journal of Remote Sensing 25, 1565–1596. Costanza, R., Farber, S. C. and Maxwell, J. (1989) valuation and management of wetland ecosystems. Ecological Economics 1, 335–361. Dryzek, J. S. (1987) Rational Ecology: Environment and Political Economy. Basil Blackwell Inc., New York. Dryzek, J. S. (1990) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Science. Cambridge University Press, New York. Fishkin, J. S. (1991) Democracy and Deliberation. Yale University Press, New Haven CT. Focus Group (2008) Proceedings of the focus group sessions conducted in the Niger Delta by Godstime James. (Unpublished). Fox, J., Rindfuss, R. R., Walsh, S. J. and Mishra, V. (2003) People and the Environment: Approaches for Linking Household and Community Surveys to Remote Sensing and GIS. Kluewer Academic Publishers, Boston MA. Gao, J. (1998) A hybrid method towards accurate mapping of Mangroves in a marginal habitat from SPOT multispectral data. International Journal of Remote Sensing 19, 1887–1899. Gao, J. (1999) A comparative study on spatial and spectral resolutions of satellite data in mapping mangrove forests. International Journal of Remote Sensing 20, 2823–2833.

Ommer_c15.indd 278

12/22/2010 3:25:30 PM


279

Geoghegan, J., Villar, S. C., Kelpeis, P., Mendoza, P. M., Ogneva-Himmelberger, Y., Chowdhury, R., Turner, I. B. L. and Vance, C. (2001). Modeling tropical deforestation in the southern Yucatan Peninsular region: comparing survey and satellite data. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 85(1–3), 25–46. Green, E., Mumby, P., Edward, A. and Clarke, C. (2000) Remote sensing handbook for tropical coastal management. In: Coastal Management Source Book (ed. A. Edward), 3rd edn, UNESCO, Paris. Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action. Beacon Press, Boston MA. Hamilton, L., Dixon, J. and Owen Miller, G. (1989) Mangroves forests: an undervalued resource of the land and sea. In: Ocean Yearbook 8 (eds E. M. Borgese, N. Ginsburg and J. R. Morgan), University of Chicago Press, Chicago IL. Held, A., Ticehurst, C., Lymburner, L. and Williams, N. (2003) High resolution mapping of tropical mangrove ecosystems using hyperspectral and radar remote sensing. International Journal of Remote Sensing 24, 2739–2759. James, G. K., Adegoke, J. O., Saba, E., Nwilo, P. C. and Akinyede, J. (2007) Satellite based assessment of Mangrove ecosystem change in the Niger Delta. Journal of Marine Geodesy 30, 249–267. Jensen, J. (2005) Introductory Digital Image Processing: A Remote Sensing Perspective, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River NJ. Klein, J. T. (1990) Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice. Wayne State University Press, Detroit MI. Kreuter, P. U., Heather, G. H., Marty, D. M. and Ronald, E. L. (2001). Change in ecosystem service values in the San Antonio area, Texas. Ecological Economics 39(3), 333–346. Langford, M. and Unwin, D. J. (1994) Generating and mapping population density surfaces within a geographical information system. The Cartographic Journal 31, 21–26. Linddal, M. (1995) Environmental Economic Study of the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Carl Bro International, Glostrup, Denmark. Liverman, D., Moran, E. F., Rindfuss, R. R. and Stern, P.C. (eds) (1998) People and Pixels: Linking Remote Sensing and Social Science. National Academic Press, Washington DC. Lindall, M. (1995) Environmental Economic Study of the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Submitted to the World Bank. Carl Bro International. Glostrup, Denmark. Lo, C. P. and Faber, B. J. (1997) Integration of Landsat Thematic Mapper and census data for quality of life assessment. Remote Sensing of Environment 62, 143–157. Ludo, A. and Snedaker, S. (1974) The ecology of Mangroves. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 5, 39–64. Mennis, J. (2006) Socioeconomic-vegetation relationships in urban, residential land: the case of Denver, Colorado. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 72(8), 911–921. Mertens, B. and Lambin, E. F. (2000) Land-cover change trajectories in southern Cameroon. Annals of the Association of the American Geographers 90, 3. Mesev, V. (1998) The use of census data in urban image classification. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 64, 431–438. Mumby, P. J., Green, E. P., Edwards, A. J. and Clark, C. D. (1999) The cost effectiveness of Remote Sensing for Tropical Coastal Resources Assessment and Management. Journal of Environmental Management 55, 157–166. Niger Delta Environmental Survey (NDES) (1997) The Niger Delta Environmental Survey (phase 1), Environmental and Socio-economic Characteristics. Environmental Resources Mangers Ltd, Lagos-Nigeria. Naylor, R. and Drew, M. (1998) Valuing mangrove resources in Kosrae, Micronesia. Environmental and Development Economics 3, 471–490.

Ommer_c15.indd 279

12/22/2010 3:25:30 PM

280


Nwilo, P. (2003) Spatial data infrastructure: an imperative in the management of the resources of the Niger Delta. Genova-Italy: Proceedings of the 5th International symposium on GIS and computer cartography for coastal zone management, 16–18 October 2003. Internet on-line. Available from http://www.gisig.it/coastgis/papers/nwilo.htm (last accessed 18 December, 2005). Petters, S. (2004) Conservation and development of the Niger Delta. Internet on-line. Available from http://onlinenigeria.com/links?LinksReadPrint.asp?blurb=497 (last accessed 25 June 2004). Pfaff, A. S. P. (1996) What drives deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon: evidence from satellite and socioeconomic data. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 1772. World Bank, Washington DC. Ronnback, P. and Primavera, J. H. (2000) Use of environmental functions to communicate the roles of a mangrove ecosystem under different management systems – a critique. Ecological Economics 35, 135–141. Saenger, P. (2002) Mangrove Ecology, Silviculture and Conservation. Klumer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. Tianhong, L., Wen kai, L. and Zhenghan, Q. (2010) Variations in ecosystem service value in response to land use changes in Shenzhen. Ecological Economics 69(7), 1427–1435. UNDP (2006) Niger Delta human development report. United Nations Development Programme, Garki, Abuja-Nigeria. Walsh, S. J., Evans, T. P., Welsh, W. F., Entwisle, B. and Rindfuss, R. R. (1999) Scale-dependent relationships between population and environment in northeastern Thailand. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 65(1), 97–105. Wrigley, N., Holt, T., Steel, D. and Tranmer, M. (1997) Analysing, modelling, and resolving the ecological fallacy. In: Spatial Analysis: Modelling in a GIS Environment (eds P. Longley and M. Batty), Geoinformation International, London. World Bank (1995) Defining an Environmental Management Strategy for the Niger Delta. Report prepared by Jasdip Smigh, David Moffat and Olof Linden. Industry and Energy operations division, West African Department, World Bank, Washington DC. Zhao, B., Kreuter, U., Li, B., Ma, Z., Chen, J. and Nakagoshi, N. (2004) An ecosystem service value assessment of land-use change on Chongming Island, China. Land Use Policy 21(2), 131–142.

Ommer_c15.indd 280

12/22/2010 3:25:30 PM

Chapter 16

US Marine Ecosystem Habitat Values Ussif Rashid Sumaila, Jackie Alder, G. Ishimura, William. W. L. Cheung, L. Dropkin, S. Hopkins, S. Sullivan, and A. Kitchingman

Abstract Sumaila et al. (submitted) estimated annual total use values from US marine ecosystems at $2.2 and $7.1 billion under the current and a more effective management scenario. The corresponding total non-use values were estimated at $5.2 and $8.5 billion. Hence, the sum of annual use and non-use values was estimated at $7.4 and $15.7 billion for the current and improved management scenario. In this chapter, we assign these estimated values to four marine habitats in the United States, i.e., estuaries, seamounts, coral reefs, and the remaining habitats. We find that estuaries contribute the largest value per km2, followed by seamounts, coral reefs, and then the remaining habitats. The importance of the three habitats in terms of their value per km2 cannot be overemphasized, with the cumulative percentage of the total value derived from these three habitat types exceeding 90% of the total value. Keywords: Gulf of Alaska, east Bering Sea, US section of the California Current, US section of the Gulf of Mexico, US East

Introduction The goal of this chapter is to assign the values from US marine habitats that were estimated in Sumaila et al. (submitted) to four habitat types within marine ecosystems found in the United States. We give particular attention to ocean bottom habitat, for example, estuaries,1 seamounts, and coral reefs. We obtain a measure of ‘worth’ that would be useful to regulators, the scientific community, civil society, and other interested


Ommer_c16.indd 281

12/22/2010 3:25:55 PM

282


parties in making decisions on how these habitats are used. Although estuaries, seamounts, coral reefs, and other fragile habitats were first documented hundreds of years ago, the value of these areas has only become apparent in the last few decades. With the development of deep-sea exploration technology, scientists have finally been able to study cold water corals, seamounts, and other bottom communities in their natural environment and capture both their astonishing diversity and beauty (Freiwald, et al., 2004), and also the damage inflicted on them by fishing gear (Koslow; et al., 2001; Roberts, 2002; Pauly et al., 2002). Juvenile fish seeking protection from predators tend to aggregate in areas of high underwater relief, including estuaries, mangroves, coral reefs, canyons, boulder and cobble bottoms, seamounts, and on cold water corals. Coral reefs, sponges, and sea squirts provide structure to the seabed in areas of high relief and offer complex habitat for numerous fish and shellfish species (Freiwald et al., 2004; Rogers, 2004). Commercially valuable fish are found associated with these types of habitat (Freiwald et al., 2004; Koslow et al., 2001). For this reason, the same areas are attractive to fishing trawls. Seamounts, canyons, and associated deep-water corals are used as breeding or nursery areas by many fish and are such important components of the deep-sea ecosystem that their destruction would cause long-term changes in associated animal communities (Hall, 1998; Morgan et al., 2005). It is essential that we understand the full value of these complex marine habitats before they are irrevocably damaged by destructive activities such as bottom trawling, mining, and seismic exploration.

Geographical scope of study The study covers all US marine ecosystems and significant habitats within the waters of the contagious US and Alaska. This includes all or part of the following large marine ecosystems (LMEs; Sherman et al., 1993): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

the east Bearing Sea; the Gulf of Alaska; the California Current; the Gulf of Mexico; the US part of the southeast Continental Shelf; and the US part of the northeast Continental Shelf (Plate 10 in the color plate section).

We regrouped these large LMEs into four “EEZ regions”, namely, Alaska (the parts of the Gulf of Alaska and the east Bering Sea that are within the US EEZ), US West (the part of the California Current that is within the US EEZ), Gulf of Mexico (the part of the Gulf of Mexico that is within the US EEZ), and US East (the parts of the northeast and southeast US Continental Shelves that are within the US EEZ), and based our analysis on these so-called EEZ regions of the US. For each of these EEZ regions, we assigned direct use values made up of use (commercial, recreational, and indirect) and non-use values (existence, option, and bequest values).

Ommer_c16.indd 282

12/22/2010 3:25:55 PM

US Marine Ecosystem Habitat Values

283

Assigning use and non-use values to habitat types Direct use: Habitat associated commercial values To assign direct use values to habitat types, we split the landings and net catch values reported in Sumaila et al. (submitted) by: 1. 2. 3. 4.

coral reefs;2 estuaries; seamounts; and “other”, i.e., the remaining habitats for which no separate data were available.

The distribution of each habitat was mapped onto a 30' × 30' grid and the distribution of each commercial taxon from the US EEZ regions was mapped onto the same grid (http:// www.seaaroundus.org/distribution/map/DistMethod.htm (Watson et al., 2004).3 We assumed that the spatial distribution of landings of each taxon followed its predicted relative distribution. Total catch and catch values were then estimated from distribution overlaps with each habitat scaled by their relative area: k

Ch, E , y = å Ck , E , y × k

Vh¢¢, E , y = åVk , E , y ×

H h,k , E Tk , E

(16.1)

H h,k , E Tk , E

(16.2)

where C denotes habitat associated catch in tonnes per km2, H is habitat area (km2), T is total area, V˝ denotes habitat catch value ($ per km2), h is habitat, k is species, E is EEZ region, and y is year. In the case of seamounts, we estimated the average basal area to be approximately 100 km2 based on the average diameter and height of recorded seamounts (e.g., http:// earthref.org/index.html) and the number of seamounts. The number of seamounts in each EEZ region (Table 16.1) was counted by using two algorithms developed by Kitchingman and Lai (2004). First, counts based on the depth differences between adjacent horizontal cells of a digital global map distributed by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Table 16.1 Area of habitats (km2) in US EEZ regions. Area of habitats (km2)

EEZ regions

Alaska US west coast US east coast Gulf of Mexico 1 2

Ommer_c16.indd 283

Coral1

Estuary

Seamount2

Others

Total

– – 404 624

6,322 5,045 24,730 23,543

10,200 (102) 5,300 (53) 400 (4) 0 (0)

3,416,497 906,754 1,024,234 805,229

3,433,019 917,099 1,049,768 829,396

Refers to tropical coral reef only. Assuming average basal area of seamount to be approximately 100 Km2 (e.g. http://earthref.org/index.html). Values in parentheses are the predicted number of seamount in U.S. EEZ (Kitchingman and Lai, 2004).

12/22/2010 3:25:55 PM


284

Administration (NOAA) were mapped. These distributions were then adjusted with a dataset of known seamount locations supplied by NOAA and Seamounts Online (http:// seamounts.sdsc.edu). Areas of habitat were estimated using locations of seamounts and overlapped grids. Finally, we assume that the quantity of fish that overlap with these grids is fish that can be associated with seamount (Rogers, 1994).4 Using the information derived above, we estimated catch and catch value per unit habitat (per km2) using the equations below: C H h, E , y = h, E , y Ch, E

(16.3)

V ¢¢ Vh, E , y = h, E , y H h, E

(16.4)

~ ~ where H is the catch per unit habitat area and V stands for value per unit habitat area.

Direct use: Habitat associated recreational values We combined the information reported by NMFS on species caught by recreational fishers, the data on direct expenditures, and the species classification presented at NMFS Recreational Fisheries website: http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/recreational/queries/index.html to assign recreational values to coral reefs, seamounts, estuaries, and “other”. Descriptions of species’ habitat association were obtained from FishBase (http://www.fishbase.org) and used to assign the species caught to different habitats. The proportion of fish caught in the different habitats was then applied to help pro-rate the total direct recreational expenditures to the different habitat types. Based on the net recreational values calculated earlier, we estimated the economic value of recreational fishing generated from the three habitats (coral, estuary, and others), not four because, as it turned out, recreational fishers do not target seamount associated species. Assuming that net recreational values relate positively to the quantity of anglers’ catch and the maximum body size of fish targeted, we divided net recreational values in each US EEZ zone by the number of fish caught weighted by their log-transformed maximum length (normalized to a range of 1–5). The value for each fish taxon was then equally divided by their associated habitats, from which total recreational value to each habitat i (Vi) was estimated: s=n

Vi =

v × å Ys × ws × H i ,s s i =3 s = n

åå Y × w s

i

s

(16.5)

× H i ,s

s

and æ L ' s - min( L ') ö w s = 1+ 4 ×ç ÷ è max( L ') - min( L ') ø

(16.6)

where v is the net recreational value for each US EEZ regions, Ys is the quantity (number of fish) of anglers’ catch on taxa s, w is the weighting factor based on normalized

Ommer_c16.indd 284

12/22/2010 3:25:58 PM


285

log-transformed maximum length (L´), and H is the taxon’s relative association to each habitat i. Recreational fishing value per unit area of a given habitat was also estimated.

Non-use and indirect value: Habitat values based on iconic species To compute non-use and indirect values, Sumaila et al. (submitted) employed the contingent valuation method (CVM), which is an indirect approach to estimating willingness to pay (WTP). The authors applied a logit regression model to estimate the mean WTP for indirect, option, and existence values. Using these estimates, a logit regression model was further employed to assign the estimated values to the four marine habitats based on the iconic species they support. Seven iconic species – shrimp (Panaeus spp.), salmon (Salmo spp.), lobster, Pollack (Theragra chalcogramma), rockfish (Sebastes spp.), grouper (Epinephelus spp.), and scallop (Placopecten spp.) were identified for US marine ecosystems (Sumaila et al., submitted).

The results

100 200 300 400 500 600

Estuaries

0

Total Value (US Million Dollar)

0.5

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Year

Year

Seamount

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Others

0

0.4 0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Coral



0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0


Figure 16.1 presents the habitat associated catch values for seamounts, coral reefs, estuaries, and “other”. We see that the values derived from each of these habitats have peaked, and are trending downwards.

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Year

Year

Fig. 16.1 Habitat associated real landed values (note that the figures are not equally scaled).

Ommer_c16.indd 285

12/22/2010 3:26:04 PM

286


Table 16.2 Current and potential habitat associated net commercial values ($ km−2). Habitats

Net values in EEZ regions ($ km−2)

Management scenario

Coral Estuary Seamount Others

Alaska

US west

US east

Gulf of Mexico

US total

– – 602 4,232 510 3,587 27 188

– – 132 927 1,265 8,898 12 87

26 179 591 4,157 166 1,168 108 758

35 140 387 2,725 – – 63 443

61 319 1,712 12,041 1,941 13,653 209.8 1,476

Current Potential Current Potential Current Potential Current Potential

Table 16.3 Current and potential habitat associated net recreational values ($ km−2). Habitats Coral Estuary Others

Management scenario

US west

US east

Gulf of Mexico

US total

Current Potential Current Potential Current Potential

– – 6 43 0.4 3

146 1,124 13 103 0.3 2

115 888 8 62 0.3 2

261 2,012 27 208 1.0 7

Direct use: Habitat associated commercial values We report in Table 16.2 the habitat associated net commercial values for seamounts, coral reefs, estuaries, and “other” under current and potential management scenarios using the above methods. We see from the table that estuaries and seamount areas provide an order of magnitude of net commercial values per area compared to the coral and “other” habitats.

Direct use: Habitat associated recreational values We report in Table 16.3 below the habitat associated net recreational values for coral reefs, estuaries, and “other” for the current and potential management scenarios. The crucial role of coral and estuarine habitats in providing net recreational values cannot be overemphasized. Note that no values are assigned to seamounts because, according to the reported data, recreational fishers do not target seamount associated fish species. Coral values ranged between $115 and $1124 per km2, while estuary values ranged between $6 and $103 per km2. For the remaining habitats (other), the value was from $0.3 to $3 per km2. These numbers demonstrate the importance of coral and estuarine habitats in providing recreational values.

Non-use and indirect value: Habitat values based on iconic species The estimated value (million $) for each species – habitat combination, total habitat value, total habitat area in the continental USA and Alaska, and value on km2 are given in Table 16.4. We see from the table that for all four non-use and indirect use values, estuaries are over-

Ommer_c16.indd 286

12/22/2010 3:26:05 PM


287

Table 16.4 Current and potential habitat associated indirect and non-use values ($ km−2). Values

Management scenario

Indirect use Non-Use Option Existence Bequest

Corals

Estuaries

Seamounts

Other

Current Potential

332 611

1,558 2,871

140 258

170 313

Current Potential Current Potential Current Potential

602 1,111 278 278 440 484

2,829 5,221 1,308 1,308 2,069 2,274

254 469 117 117 186 205

309 570 143 143 224 246

Table 16.5 Current and potential habitat associated use (commercial, recreational and indirect) and non-use (option, existence and bequest) values ($ km−2). Values

Management scenario

Corals

Estuaries

Seamounts

Other

Current Potential Current Potential

654 2,942 1,320 1,873

3,297 15,120 6,206 8,803

2,081 13,911 557 791

381 1,796 676 959

Use Non-use

whelmingly valued more than corals and estuaries. While coral reefs are valued more than seamounts, the differences are not as large as those between corals and estuaries. Finally, we provide a summary of our estimates of total annual habitat associated use (commercial, recreational, and indirect) and non-use (option, existence, and bequest) values from US marine ecosystems in Table 16.5.

Concluding remarks According to Sumaila et al. (submitted), the estimated annual total use values from US marine ecosystems at $2.2–7.1 billion under current and a more effective management scenario. The corresponding total non-use values for US continental waters and Alaska were estimated at between $5.2 and $8.5 billion. Therefore, the sum of annual use and nonuse values was estimated at $7.4 and $15.7 billion. From the results of this study, we see that estuaries contribute the largest value per km2, followed by seamounts, coral reefs, and then the remaining habitats. The importance of the three habitats in terms of their value per km2 cannot be overemphasized, with seamounts, estuaries, and coral reefs contributing significantly more per km2 than the rest of the habitats. These values are important in deciding appropriate uses for marine areas and in evaluating the trade-offs that will be made in reconciling the competing uses for these marine habitats and their ecosystem services. For example, working out the trade-offs between developing coral reefs for tourism or destroying the same coral reefs for expansion

Ommer_c16.indd 287

12/22/2010 3:26:05 PM

288


of an airport runway. Similarly, the maintenance of an estuary for fish nursery services vs. developing it for aquaculture with its associated risks of diseases and invasive species can be evaluated. The direct, indirect, and non-use values of these habitats estimated in this study will enable policy-makers to compare the value of proposed development with other ecologically and socially important values.

Acknowledgements We thank our colleagues at the Sea Around Us project and Fisheries Economics Research Unit, Fisheries Centre for commenting on earlier drafts of the article. We also appreciate helpful comments from reviewers of the article. Finally, we thank OCEANA for their financial support.

Endnotes 1. Estuaries are defined as partially enclosed bodies of water where freshwater from rivers and streams flow into oceans. 2. Since cold water corals do not represent a large spatial area in US waters and data on cold water coral were not available by the time of this analysis, “coral reef ” denotes tropical coral species only in this report. 3. Analyses in this chapter are based on the predicted distribution of commercial taxa that were available during the time of this study. However, the research on the prediction of distribution of commercial taxa is ongoing by the SAUP. Hence, the predicted distributions could be revised upon new data and improved models. 4. Details of this procedure can be found in Kitchingman and Lai (2004).

References Freiwald, A., Fosså, J. H., Grehan, A. et al. (2004) Cold-water Coral Reefs. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge UK. Hall, S. J. (1998) The Effects of Fisheries on Ecosystem Communities. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK. Kitchingman, A. and Lai, K. (2004) Inferences of potential seamount locations from mid-resolution bathymetric data. In: Seamounts: Biodiversity and Fisheries (eds T. Morato and D. Pauly), Fisheries Centre Research Report, Vol. 12(5), Fisheries Center, the University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC, 78 pp. Koslow, J. A., Gowlett-Holmes, K., Lowry, J. K. et al. (2001) Seamount benthic macrofauna off southern Tasmania: community structure and impacts of trawling. Marine Ecology Progress Series 213, 111–125. Morgan, L. E., Etnoyer, P., Scholz, A. J. et al. (2005) Conservation and management implications of deep-sea coral distributions and fishing effort in the northeast Pacific Ocean. In: Deep-water Corals and Coral Ecosystems (eds A. Freiwald and J. M. Roberts), Springer, Heidelberg, Germany. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénette, S. et al. (2002) Towards sustainability in world fisheries, Nature 418, 689–695.

Ommer_c16.indd 288

12/22/2010 3:26:05 PM


289

Roberts, C. M. (2002). Deep impact: the rising toll of fishing in the deep sea. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17(5), 242–245. Rogers, A. D. (2004) The Biology, Ecology and Vulnerability of Deep-water Coral Reefs. IUCN-The World Conservation Union. Gland, Switzerland, 13 p. Sherman, K., Alexander, L. M. and Gold, B. M. (1993) Large Marine Ecosystems: Stress, Mitigation and Sustainability. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington DC, 352 p. Sumaila, U. R., Alder, J., Ishimura, G. et al. (submitted). Values from Marine Ecosystems of the United States. Watson, R., Kitchingman, A., Gelchu A. et al. (2004) Mapping global fisheries: sharpening our focus. Fish and Fisheries 5, 168–177.

Ommer_c16.indd 289

12/22/2010 3:26:05 PM

Part V

Governance

Ommer_p05.indd 291

12/22/2010 4:23:07 AM

Chapter 17

Historical Transitions in Access to and Management of Alaska’s Commercial Fisheries, 1880–1980 Emilie Springer

Abstract Using illustrative sketches of important features of Alaskan social-ecological history, this chapter explores transitions in social and institutional priorities with respect to the interdependence of society and ecology, within the broad industry of North Pacific commercial fisheries over the century from approximately 1880–1980. It examines key elements of international history, stakeholder communication patterns, transformational technology innovations, US federal fisheries regulatory structure, and various institutional agencies and social groups involved in social and ecological decision-making within the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea Aleutian Islands. Keywords: Alaska, commercial fisheries, fisheries management, transitions The spotlight of the present sometimes leaves the purposes of the past in the dark when those purposes do not belong there. (Jay Hammond, Former Governor of Alaska, addressing the Issue of United States-Japanese Fisheries Negotiations, 20 August 1976)

Introduction This chapter explores transitions in social, ecological, and institutional priorities within the broad industry of North Pacific commercial fisheries and the manner in which the principal commercial development patterns of the fishing industry interacted with the marine systems over the century covering approximately 1880–1980. That century demonstrated significant continual and dynamic change in both the social and environmental dimensions of remote community development and the commodification of marine species. The chapter also examines how changes in commercial foci occurred in the context of social-ecological interfaces, and investigates the various social groups that were involved in the pursuit and development of World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c17.indd 293

12/22/2010 3:26:20 PM

294


the fisheries: individuals employed on the fishing grounds; those involved in policy formation in congressional and other managerial settings; and those who are now permanently settled in coastal communities that have a strong linkage to the availability of marine resources.

Early days: Gold and salmon; 1867–1919 Alaska was purchased from Russia on 30 March 1867, as a contribution to a major defense system and territorial expansion for the United States. The population at the time was made up of 500 Russians, 1,500 Creole (Russian/Native mixed heritage), 300 Americana, and 24,000 “Alaska Natives” (US Army, 1965). US military forces were based mainly at Sitka, “The Russian Factory” in Cook Inlet, Kodiak, and Unalaska. By this time, the role of salmon as a commercial possibility was in a nascent phase but had begun to emerge. In Washington, Oregon, and California, catch was confined to and dependent upon large, primary river sources such as the Fraser, the Columbia, the Klamath, and the Sacramento. By contrast, there were “approximately 2,000 salmon streams (of varying sizes) in Alaska” (Crutchfield and Pontecorvo, 1969). Opportunities abounded and were dispersed across a very extensive coastline. The abundance of the resource functioned as a significant economic attraction to prospective settlers in the otherwise remote state. The 1891 statistics on cannery output for major northwest areas demonstrate Alaska’s huge processor output in comparison with the other river systems: River Columbia River ................................................. Other Oregon Rivers ......................................... Puget Sound ...................................................... Fraser River ....................................................... British Columbia and elsewhere… Alaska Total ..................................................... TOTAL

Number of Cases 390,000 20,000 20,000 225,000 235,000 800,000 1,680,000 (McDonald, 1892)

By 1888 there were 17 canneries operating in Alaska (Table 17.1) with an output of 412,115 cases and this peaked in 1889 at 37 canneries with an output of 714,196 cases. Then, over the next few years, the industry slowed as “the market became glutted and a consolidation of interests followed” (ibid.). A packing association was formed in 1891 for the explicit purpose of disposing of 363,000 cases of unsold salmon. It then ceased to exist, but its early success eventually led to the formation and incorporation of the Alaska Packer’s Association, which became the largest canning operator in Alaska.

1899 Report by Jefferson Moser, United States Navy Commander of the steam ship Albatross In 1899, the steam ship Albatross, commanded by US Navy captain Jefferson Moser, sailed into the Gulf of Alaska to research its salmon fisheries. The captain reported that the vessel sailed from Mary Island (southeast Alaska) to Sitka, then to streams and cannery sites on

Ommer_c17.indd 294

12/22/2010 3:26:20 PM

Historical Transitions in Alaska’s Commercial Fisheries

295

Table 17.1 Canneries Operating in Alaskai in the peak years of 1888 and 1889. Year

Name of Cannery and Location

1888

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

1889

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

i

Alaska Salmon Packing and Fur Company. Loring. Cape Lees Packing Company. Burroughs Bay. Northern Packing Company. Kenai. Kodiak Packing Company. Karluk. Aleutian Islands Fishing and Mining Company. Karluk. Arctic Packing Company. Larsen Bay. Nushagak Packing Company. Nushagak River, Bering Sea. MISSING INFORMATION FOR 10 Companies. Boston Fishing and Trading Company. Yes Bay. Baranoff Packing Company. Redoubt Bay. Astoria and Alaska Packing Company. Freshwater Bay. Bartlett Bay Packing Company. Bartlett Bay. Chilkat Canning Company. Chilkat Village. Peninsula Trading and Fishing Company. Little Kayak Island. Pacific Packing Company. Eyak. Pacific Steam Whaling Company. Eyak. Hume Packing Company. Karluk. Alaska Improvement Company. Karluk. Arctic Packing Company. Alitak Bay. Kodiak Packing Company. Alitak Bay. Royal Packing Company. Afognak. Russian-American Packing Company. Afognak. Chignik Bay Packing Company. Chignik. Shumagin Packing Company. Chignik. Western Alaska Company. Alaska Peninsula. Thin Point Packing Company.

For each year, assume the prior year canneries are still operational.

Kodiak Island (“Kadiak” in his text). The Albatross continued to Dutch Harbor in the Bering Sea and Chignik in Western Alaska and returned to survey the western side of Kodiak, Cook Inlet, Prince William Sound, Yakutat, and then returned to San Diego Bay, California. Moser noted that there were “large areas where not a single person can be found except during the fishing season”, and he emphasized the primary importance of sockeye in the region, commenting that other species were “packed incidentally, or to fill up quota when other kinds are scarce”. This, he explained, was why his vessel did not visit non-red salmon streams. By noting in his log that “the laws and regulations pertaining to Alaska salmon fisheries are very generally disregarded and they do little to prevent the illegal capture of fish,” Moser’s report provides early documented evidence of overfishing, in Alaska. Of the Karluk River, for example, he observed that: this river will soon cease to show such a state of productiveness, if it has not already done so, and we must conclude that the most formidable obstruction at present to the ascent of salmon in the Karluk for the purpose of reproduction is overfishing. By 1912, congressional statements by Governor Walter E. Clark expressed further concern about overfishing, and advised that a restrictive measure of the Bureau of Fisheries should be passed (Clark in the US Senate, 1912).

Ommer_c17.indd 295

12/22/2010 3:26:20 PM

296


Stream barricades were another biological problem faced by returning Alaska salmon as they inhibited the passage of fish and the natural spawning process by failing to give the fish access to critical upstream reproductive locations. By 1899, there were “strict laws that forbid complete obstruction of streams…penalties include $1,000 fine, three months imprisonment, and an additional fine for every day that the obstruction remains in place” (Moser, 1899). The subsequent use of salmon traps built at the mouths of streams was also considered a very effective and useful method for catching salmon, since they did allow some salmon to pass into the spawning zone. In the 1912 congressional report, Governor Clark provides this general description of a fish trap: A fish trap is established by a series of piling at some little distance from the shore with a barrier reaching to the shore. The position of the fish trap with reference to the width of the stream is fixed by law and regulation at the present time. The web [in the trap], if well cared for, will last about three years. Clark suggested the fish trap as an essential “factory” item for a fish-packing plant. “You might compare it in importance to the sawmill”, he claimed (US Senate, 1912).

1920–1939: The records of Hubbell and Waller One very prominent company, Hubbell and Waller, based out of Seattle, was responsible for the design and installation of many of the fish traps used in Alaska. This company was founded in 1920 as “The Hubbell & Waller Engineering Corporation”. It was a co-partnership between Charles S. Hubbell and Harold H. Waller and operated in southeastern Alaska and along the Aleutian chain: surveying homestead and mineral claims, trade and manufacturing sites, and salmon cannery sites as well as designing, surveying, and in some instances constructing pulp and saw mills, wharves, cargo handling facilities, hydroelectric power facilities, and private and municipal subdivisions, streets, roads, and water and sewer systems. [They] acted as consultants and agents for salmon canneries, oil companies, land developers, mining companies, pulp and lumber companies, and other commercial interests in conducting script transactions for their clients which secured titles to land in Alaska. (NWDA, 2008) Hubbell and Waller archival records, located at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, are an important source of information on the Alaska historical fishery: their clients included some of the largest canning and packing companies in the Pacific Northwest. Along with receipts and general correspondence regarding business records, the files include a series of “Client Files”, over 122 boxes containing Hubbell and Waller’s corporate and individual correspondence with administrators, legal advisors, and federal agencies such as the Chief of Engineers, US War Department, and the Secretary of the Interior. There are also, “contracts, land plans and charts, financial statements and receipts, court documents, photographs, survey field notes, legal land records such as homestead, and tideland applications as well as land and mineral patents” (NWDA, 2008). The archives contain Hubbell and

Ommer_c17.indd 296

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM


297

Waller’s administrative files: descriptions of cannery locations and trap listings, by the latitude and longitude of the actual trap, as well as the name and address of the trap owner. Their clientele was diverse: some individuals are listed as possessing a single trap, while others show numerous traps. The Seattle-based New England Fish Company, for example, has 16 listings, Columbia River Packer’s Association has 5 listings, and PE Harris and Company has 29 listings. Few files showed clear Alaska ownership, but there are individual owners from the Kenai, Starisky, and Tyonek areas. These records also indicate the time of arrival for parts and service, checks, and money. Correspondence was from varied locations: Juneau, Cordova, Ketchikan, and Wrangell. Other correspondence occurred by general hand-written mail. In short, these records are a major source for the history of Alaskan commercial fishery operations during this era. They also provide rich social-ecological details of that fishery. For example, the original correspondence between Mr Bartlett Long – hired by Hubbell and Waller to maintain salmon traps in the Prince William Sound region of Alaska – and his supervisors gives a fine sense of firm client relations at the beginning of the 1930s, as well as telling details of the interdependence of the social and ecological components of the commercial fisheries of the time. The story begins with a letter from Hubbell and Waller, confirming the employment of Mr Bartlett Long and two follow-up telegrams. May 22, 1929. Dear Sir: It is understood that you will be available leaving Seattle on June 1st, on the steamer Yukon, to work for us in the summer in Alaska. Reservation has been made on this boat for your passage. It is also understood that you are to furnish your own transit; and your salary, for both transit and services to be $150 per month and expenses. If there is any hitch in this matter, please advise us at once…Very truly yours, Hubbell and Waller. Telegram: May 24, 1929 Expect to arrive Seattle about noon Tuesday unless you wish me before. Wish to bring army trunk bed roll and pack sack. If this is too much luggage for your boat please advise. BG Long. The company not only wished Long to survey client operations on the coast, but also to assess any other operations in the area. This letter, signed HHW to BG Long, briefly describes the tasks to be completed in the locality of Cordova, and also recommends discreetly surveying of other nearby traps, even though they belong to a different owner: July 6, 1929. Dear Sir: You will proceed to Cordova and report to Mr. Bert Williams of the New England Fish Co. whose cannery is situated on the dock where the steamer arrives. The NFC have about 8 or 9 traps in Prince William Sound. Your contract furnishes quarters and meals while work is conducted – this is preferable because [you] can get around having considerable hotel and restaurant bills while at Cordova and Latouche. When you are finished with their work, you will proceed to Drier Bay or the Franklin Packing Co. at Latouche, and report to Mr J. N. Gilbert…

Ommer_c17.indd 297

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM

298


Our contracts with the cannery men contemplate that they will furnish you with quarters and meals while you are doing their work and will furnish what transportation for what men and gear is needed…Of course, this does not include your board if you should be done with one job and waiting for a boat to go to the next one.… We have gone over the matter of surveying adjacent traps, particularly the Booth Company and it is understood that you will do everything possible to re-survey the locations that are convenient to where you are working. As you recall we discussed this matter verbally and you are acquainted with the reasons for doing this. It is a good policy to tie in all other trap locations that are convenient to reach when you are making surveys…I recommend that you do everything possible to do this without taking up too much extra time of the boat from which you are working… You will also please not discuss these matters with cannery-men or others, and all information you get in regard to these trap locations, distances, etc. is absolutely confidential and only the cannery-men for whom we are working are entitled to it. HHW A second letter (composed on the same date) from HHW suggests the pressing need for attending to other nearby traps: July 6, 1929. Dear Sir: – In regards to additional work which may come up in the Prince William Sound district, you are authorized to survey any additional traps for other companies and if they should ask you what our charge will be on them, you can quote them $60 each plus field expenses. You can explain to them what the $60 covers, to wit: the survey in the field by our engineer, the complete compilation of maps, and the continued service. We do not solicit surveys from private individuals whose credit is unreliable, but any company or individual citizens who may have trap locations and who are well recommended by the canneries you can take them on and advise that we will bill them from Seattle when the work is finished. Very truly yours, HHW. Long’s reply graphically expresses dislike of being in a very remote location for an occupational task that is progressing poor. More importantly, it provides a colorful picture of fish operations, including competition, on the coast: July 17, 1929 Dear “Boss”: I’ve completed all of NEF’s traps but one. And, I’ve plotted all the notes and found only one “Douglas Islander.” He’s not so much ‘cause five minutes will fix him up and I have to go right by the trap anyway. Lucky! The weather has been dreadful and constant fog has rendered visibility the old sh—s and I’ve not be able to get the change shots over lights that I’d like to have – but I think we can make out. Williams has been doing the “painting” and has put the worst of the cement patches too near the tide mark – and used ordinary white paint (against my advice) – and hasn’t

Ommer_c17.indd 298

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM


299

let me run the shores out as far as I wis – let alone work Booths! I fooled him on one anyway – where he had one on either side of Booth and I insisted on tying his two together. He carefully “skipped” Booth’s tail hold – however! Can you beat it? Maybe Gilbert won’t go with me and I can slip in a few more miles of traverse. I’ve drummed up the Pioneer business and hope to get the others. I’m quoting $60.00 and expenses and telling ‘em we’ll do everything but “brail” (what a witty word!) the traps for ‘em for that figure. But I’ve some keen competition ‘cause RR and Forestry guys do it for $50.00 (the damned skunks!!) and beat us [UNKNOWN] guys out of a living! (To Hell with de’ lumber barrows – les’ all sing de’ International!) I’ll get all I can anyway. Trig stations are scarce as virgins in a brothel up here. I’ve not found a single one yet—and Montague Island is “dotted” all over the charts.… So, I didn’t feel so badly when one o’ my traps landed two miles off shore (underlined 4 times)! I’m told that Hubbell had the same experience with some of Booth’s, on Montague too. I need some more “X-Sec” paper (Nick’s not Roosian – he’s SCOTCH!) and some note books and some more GIN! If I do Pioneer’s work and Gilbert wants the Wakefield traps surveyed AND I get Premier’s and Copper River’s – I may as well buy a house here in Cordova and ship my other [UNKNOWN] up! You’d better send the swag here – pick it up or get one of the tender’s to bring it over to Drier Bay. This is a pretty delicate little “school-girl” game at best – and it’s in a rough country – what? And, I’d like some large targets if you have any. These are pretty small for a lowpower telescope. However, I’ll make out. I’ll wire when I’ve completed NEF’s traps (which should be day after tomorrow). … Cheerio “Long”. PS: Yeah!! I’m sober – wot the Hell? The urgency to secure trap sites emphasizes the fact that pressure to secure appropriate ecological niches for salmon capture was building. Moreover, by the 1820s, there was growing commercial interest in appropriate sites for the expanding net and capture fishery technology: prime capture space was already at a premium, and this provides us with a good qualitative baseline for assessing later social-ecological pressure on stocks and people.

The mid-century era of fisheries: 1940–1969 Data on the Alaskan fisheries are scarce for this period, although significant local and international events were in progress: World War II took place, Alaska statehood was negotiated, local (human) Alaskan population increase was dramatic, and the desire for commercial fisheries led to the establishment of Alaska’s Limited Entry system of fisheries management. Offshore, basic monitoring of international behavior was gradually giving way to more national involvement and a clearer delimitation of national jurisdiction in order to protect “national” fish stocks. Institutional establishment of rights of access, along with increasing protection of coastal regions and realization of the need for

Ommer_c17.indd 299

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM

300


food security, all combine to suggest that fishing effort was threatening stocks, and that awareness of the existence of limits to marine resources was growing. This is not surprising, since several other nations were involved in Bering Sea fisheries from (approximately) 1960–1980. According to Miles et al. (1982), these included Canada, Japan, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Korea, Russia, and the United States. Catch statistics for these nations show major effort. The list below shows total quantity of catch by nation:

1954–1970 Total Catch Statistics ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Japan, 8 million tons. Russia, 2 million tons. South Korea, 0.8 million tons. China (from the East China Sea) cannot be estimated. North Korea estimate, 0.7 million. Canadian catch, slightly over 0.1 million. United States, less than 0.7 million.1 Mexican catch, less than 0.2 million. (Kasahara and Burke, 1972).

A 1964 report by Haskell focuses on the rapid expansion of Soviet and Japanese fishing efforts in the North Pacific Ocean in the period following World War II. It is a monitorial report and states that in the period of the survey (the year 1963), the United States Coast Guard Coast Guard air service “patrolled 100,000 miles and made sighting reports of: 250 Japanese, 5,019 Russian, 53 Canadian vessels” (Haskell, 1964). Vessel based sightings were a result of cruise statistics of: 11,977 hours and 63,834 miles. In this period, the Coast Guard encountered 314 Japanese, 565 Russian, and 51 Canadian vessels. Another vessel, US Fish and Wildlife Service’s John R. Manning, also made patrols of the Alaska coastline, but these patrols were limited primarily to the Gulf of Alaska and the opinion of the patrol vessel, even in this official documentation, was very negative as to the state of the boat: [t]he inept and inadequate Bureau of Commercial Fisheries vessel, John R. Manning, is severely lacking as an enforcement vessel and should be replaced. Her very presence among the most modern fishing fleets of the world is damaging to US prestige” (ibid). The vessel’s inferiority seemed to inhibit more thorough patrols. Although the joint monitoring effort was considerable, there was little indication in the publications that there was a noted risk of marine ecological damage and possible human consequences. But, the reports do clearly describe how the fisheries were being conducted and the methodology of the gear (including crew tasks and processes). Here is an example of the details within such a report: A typical fishmeal operation consists of anchoring the factory ship in a favorable location where its trawlers fish over an area of 5 to 10 miles in radius. When the cod end of

Ommer_c17.indd 300

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM


301

the otter trawl is full of fish, it is taken aboard or left hanging in the rigging over the port bulwark and the trawler proceeds to the factoryship…the catch is dumped in wooden bins on the deck of the factoryship and men wade through the fish sorting out edible species for human consumption. The remainder of the catch is then pushed and washed onto two conveyor belts and moved below decks to the processing plant (Haskell, 1964). According to reported conversations that occurred at sea, it was clear that the factory ship operators were under the impression that many of the ships were not large enough to deal with the typically adverse weather and sea conditions of the Bering Sea. For this reason, not for reasons of stock size, the fishing companies were interested in the idea of diverting the smaller (1,500-ton trawlers) to the Atlantic and replacing them with larger (3,500-ton trawlers) that could serve as centralized hub vessels. There was a marked absence of concern regarding comparative quantities of catch levels; at this time: discussions were not intense, nor was anxiety apparent, unlike the language that was to gradually emerge in the mid-1970s and grow further into later periods. Nonetheless, jurisdiction and management were regarded as important issues. Thus, in 1958 and 1960, the United Nations International Law of the Sea Conferences took place, their goal being the development of international agreements on fishing rights (Marchak et al., 1987).

Species shift, changing technology, improved access, and awareness of off-shore waters: 1970–1980s During the 1970s and 1980s, the majority of commercial interests in Alaska moved away from prosecuting the salmon fisheries and into groundfish fisheries and other offshore and deep-sea opportunities and the highly productive Bering Sea became a focal point of interest. Various federal and international communications tell of conflicts and tensions around those new grounds. The period was characterized by advances in fisheries technology, military monitoring, and the passage of major marine legislation, culminating in the federal Magnuson Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act. The Kasahara and Burke Report of 1972 shows clearly increasing social pressure around the fisheries in this final period of the study. It concludes that: … the United States government will continue to be under pressure from industry, as well as from the general public, for further jurisdiction as a means not only to eliminate the immediate problem of effects of foreign fishing on local fisheries but also fully to control the exploitation of any resource that might be considered potentially important to the United States (Kasahara and Burke, 1972). The Report did not, however, explain how the government was “under pressure from industry.” The Report also drew attention to the contrast between the fishing needs of the United States and those of Japan. It stated that “the United States has always been one of the greatest consumers of fish products and total consumption continues on a steady increase”

Ommer_c17.indd 301

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM

302


Table 17.2 Percentage of World Fish Harvests Taken by North Pacific Nations (1960–1977). Data from Miles et al. (1982). Nation

1960

1965

1970

1975

1976

1977

Canada DPRK Japan China ROK Russia US

2.3 – 15.5 14.5 1.1 7.6 7.0

2.4 – 12.9 – 1.2 9.5 5.1

2.0 1.4 13.2 8.8 1.1 10.3 4.1

1.4 2.1 14.8 9.7 3.0 14.4 4.1

1.5 2.1 14.8 9.7 3.0 14.0 4.1

1.7 2.2 14.6 9.4 3.3 12.7 4.2

(ibid.), skirting around US food preferences that might include fish but were unlikely to be fish-based, in contrast to some Asian nations that therefore had significant interests in the Alaskan offshore waters. The United States, with its large land mass and significant grain production, was in sharp contrast to Japan, territorially small but with ease of access to the ocean. The traditional food system of Japan was, of course, therefore more marine protein-based and fisheries expansion was inevitably a priority. The contrast between Japan, China, and the US (Table 17.2) shows clearly in the statistics compiled by Miles et al. (1982).2 The increasing efforts of Japan and the Soviet Union/Russia were of tremendous significance to Alaska and require more detailed investigation, although it was actually the “last straw” of Korean salmon effort that brought the US to take Alaskan fisheries management seriously.

Three Alaskan competitors: Japan, Russia/Soviet Union, and Korea The Japanese traditionally fished their coastal waters with nets dragged over the sea bottom, and “offshore trawling” was not practiced until the [1990, estimated] introduction from European of trawling vessels3 large enough to fish with a farther distance range from Japan. World War II, however, halted North Pacific expansion of the Japanese trawl fishery, and nearly all off-shore Japanese trawlers were destroyed by US military efforts between 1941 and 1945. Post-war, Japan converted cargo vessels to floating canning and freezing factory ships, thus advancing their international fishery efforts. The 1960 trawl ships were often referred to as “fish meal” ships and were not specifically organized to harvest a particular species. The majority of the catch (pollack) went directly into meal. Perch, Pacific cod, and sablefish (also referred to as black cod) were “generally frozen, dressed whole or as fillets and [were] intended for human consumption … these more desirable fishes[were] hand selected out of a deck load” (ibid.), a process that must have been intense and messy. Japanese trawlers also harvested shrimp, king crab, and participated in whaling. The whaling industry had expanded rapidly in the 1930s but, like several of the other fisheries, it temporarily ceased operations during, and for a time after, World War II. By 1963, whaling

Ommer_c17.indd 302

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM


303

was in full force again and occurred in both the Gulf and Bering Sea areas, along the Aleutians (especially in the western areas), near Unimak pass, near Prince William Sound, and along southeast Alaska outside waters. This fishery is now closed as a result of various federal legislative acts, such as the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), but the stocks show evidence of permanent ecological damage, and have never returned to their pre-harvest abundance. Most early Russian fisheries were conducted primarily from small sail or rowing craft and, prior to the 1917 Russian Revolution, Russian fisheries were relatively undeveloped. The bulk of the catch came from the Caspian Sea and other inland waters. At that time, British vessels made 70% of the catch in the Barents Sea and 85% of salmon caught in the Russian Far East was made by Japanese vessels. In 1920, the total Russian national catch was only 260,000 tons. However, war equipment advancements and improvements in mechanization provided opportunities for fleet expansion since, as Haskell’s records show, the ability to maximize time on the fishing grounds was very important given the distance that had to be traveled to reach them. Kodiak, for example, is 2,500 miles from Vladivostok and 1,200 miles from Petropavlovsk, and the Alaskan fleet was “equipped with the most modern fish-finding instruments. More accurate radar and radio navigational devices … installed to enable ships to fish their positions more precisely in the worst possibly weather” (Haskell, 1964). Russian involvement in major off-shore fisheries was not secured until about 1959: the 1960 catch was 3,500,000 metric tons, double the 1950 catch, and the major Gulf of Alaska efforts started slightly later in 1962. The expansion came from the fact that: the Russian consumer is demanding greater variety, better quality, more and more fish. The growing demand is mirrored in the five-fold increase in canned fish production. The industry has been forced to go further and further afield in its efforts to satisfy a market of over 200,000,000 people and have vowed to intensify activities in the northern Pacific Ocean and Bering Sea (Haskell, 1964). Whaling was also an important marine industry for the Russian fleet. “Blubber was used for food for cattle, pigs, and chickens. Whale products are also used for high-grade margarine and lard, vitamin A, insulin, cholestrin, other medical preparations”. Blubber meat and subcutaneous cellular tissue was used in tanning and chemical industry, perfumery and agriculture. “The same amount of food and oils derived from one season from one whaling flotilla is equivalent of that obtained from 2.5 million sheep” (ibid.). The significance of protein had implications that were both social (food preferences and standards) and ecological (species depletion). Fishing pressure continued to build in the north Pacific and, on 19 February 1970, Elmer Rasmuson (a member of the International North Pacific Fisheries Commission) was urged to pay attention to what was happening, because: actions could lead to termination of north pacific fisheries treaty with Canada and Japan and complete destruction of all United States and Canada salmon resources and destruction of US and Canadian salmon fishing and processing industries urge your help in having our government take all possible actions at the highest levels to prevent destruction of US salmon by Korea and other foreign countries (Rasmuson Papers, 1970).4

Ommer_c17.indd 303

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM

304


A memorandum sent by Charles Meachum suggested that “this is one of the gravest situations facing the salmon industry of Alaska since its inception … we must take immediate action to avert disaster” (Rasmuson Papers, 1970). At last awareness of the vulnerability of marine ecosystem to over-exploitation was growing. On 26 March 1970, a notice filed jointly from the US Department of Interior and US Fish and Wildlife Service again urged attention: [t]he South Korean fishing industry is preparing to send a large mother-ship fleet to the Northeastern Pacific this year. This fleet, composed of a 9,400 ton mother-ship and about 30 catcher-vessels will be equipped to catch and process salmon. Although the SK government gave us assurances last year that its vessels would not be licensed to fish for salmon, they caught about 300,000 in waters near Alaska. We have received similar assurances this year about licensing, but the Korean government has not provided satisfactory assurances that it will prevent the recurrence of the same kind of incident this year (Rasmuson Papers, 1970). The UAF Rasmussen Papers holds a newspaper article published in The Daily Astorian (date unknown), which opened with this comment: “economic pressure was proposed Wednesday if diplomacy fails to prevent South Korean fishermen from catching salmon off of the Alaska coast…” Senator Magnuson stated that, “If we can’t [approach this] diplomatically, we’ll have to try some other way” (Rasmuson Papers, 1970), which summed up the situation and showed that serious legislation to control international fisheries was urgently needed

Organization of the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) In 1976, the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (now MSFCMA) passed and became effective in 1977, in order to organize a governing process for the US exclusive economic zone (EEZ) up to 200 nautical miles from federal land and territory. The act divided US waters into eight regional areas and established management Councils to create and maintain fishery management plans (FMPs) and FMP amendments. It was driven by fear of declining stocks, but also showed awareness of the social and economic dimensions of the industry, both nationally and locally. As the United States moved towards establishing its 200-mile exclusive economic zone, there was correspondence from Japanese stakeholders in the Bering Sea region to American political representatives, expressing diverse concerns, and pleas for opportunities to continue fishing. A 1976 letter from Yoshiro Okazaki suggests distress over rapid changes in regional regulatory structure: you have independently decided to bring [the] 200 mile fishery resources conservation law into effect, which will exert a serious influence on ship owners and fishermen. We sincerely appeal to you to consider matters and enable us to operate our fishery as before” (Rasmuson Papers,5 1976).

Ommer_c17.indd 304

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM


305

To this day, NOAA, the overarching US federal oceans body, systematically arranges the Management Council process. The first Council conference occurred on 16 September 1976 and involved participation by all national councils. The conference was intended to organize and advise the federally standardized process. Council members were encouraged to ask questions, such as “Can Councils impose constraints on foreign vessels within our fishery zone relative to pollution?” A considerable bureaucracy was established and the basis for present-day meeting structure was initiated. The issues of the early years were surprisingly similar to the social and cultural ones addressed through Council meetings and actions today. The agenda for the first NPFMC shows how the groundwork was laid down. It contains consideration of the formation, function, and selection of the membership of the Scientific and Statistical Committee, and the Advisory Panel, and included discussion of management plans, priorities, and first assignments. Total allowable catch was debated, as was the possibility of making recommendations to the Secretary on “surplus stocks, if any, available for harvest.” The era of present-day fisheries management had arrived. All that remained to complete the picture was the creation of aquaculture – this is still a developing feature and highly restricted by Alaska state legislation, particularly in the commodity of salmon due in part to both the social concerns and the environmental impacts.

Discussion and conclusions Analyses of the human dimensions of Alaskan fisheries are often very basic and use simple statistical evidence as: social and community census information; stock assessments; fleet size; quota allocation quantities; standard catch patterns; and income indicators. Topics that are more qualitative or cultural are often overlooked. Such complex and important matters as the venue of decision-making related to participation in the fisheries, the hierarchy and power status of institutional interests in comparison with industrial or occupational interests, a consideration of the occupational workforce (employees and management) beliefs and customs, assessments of Alaska residential6 participation, involvement and subsistence fisheries use patterns, are usually beyond the purview of quantitative work. However, as this chapter shows, these cultural components are vital to any understanding of fisheries development and management, despite the fact that they may raise questions of ethical practice, and of aesthetics, that can be difficult to research and articulate using standard analytical quantitative methodologies alone. The evidence presented in this chapter shows a development path for Alaska fisheries involvement in an era of major population growth with organization and management structures from the very local to the international. Fisheries in Alaska first grew with the start of the lucrative canned salmon industry.7 In the late 1800s, salmon were caught in close proximity to land, with drift nets, set nets, or salmon traps, and distance traveled from the catch location to the cannery was generally very short, to minimize the need for ice or refrigeration. In the early days, fisheries were largely conducted under the direction of cannery owners, but later transitioned to independent vessel ownership and state authorized regulations for access to the fish. With incremental developments in marine vessel capabilities and navigational technology, and a shift in market opportunities as new fisheries were recognized by United States federal regulators, North Pacific fisheries interests

Ommer_c17.indd 305

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM

306


gradually shifted to a greater focus on off-shore species. This shift in turn generated a new transitional phase of rapid development, in which issues such as environmental sustainability, while acknowledged, were not widely addressed. This was a period of relatively underregulated and minimally monitored fisheries, in which a gradual increase in research effort (which improved understanding of the physical and biological details of fisheries locations and productivity) eventually led to the formulation of national (i.e., the United States federal government’s Magnuson Stevens Fisheries Conservation and Management Act) and international (i.e., United Nation’s International Law of the Sea) policies that strive to bring into balance the human dimensions of fisheries and the ecological features of the marine environment. Over time, networks of stakeholders shifted, and the methods and standards of interaction between these various industry stakeholders changed: for example, early federal documents generally describe Alaska and the various human dimensions of the commercial fishing occupation casually, while the later documents leading up to major federal policy transitions have a more defined sense of formal authority. Similarly, communication between vessels at sea and from vessels to land changed noticeably, as did employee status, which experienced transitions in formality. This can be clearly seen in the archived correspondence between Hubbell and Waller, where many of the letters are extremely informal. War and major international conflicts were also of more significant influence than might be immediately obvious. In wartime there was less time available to spend on the advancement of fisheries efforts, which received little political interest, given that community attention and labor were often more focused on military efforts than commercial fisheries. Moreover, the relationship between war, technology, and navigational supplies was crucial, generating valuable improvements in navigational opportunities, vessel size and capacity; in some cases, war ships were transformed into fishing or monitoring vessels. The international capability for over-exploitation also expanded as a result, hastening negative changes in marine social-ecological well-being. Coastal Alaska is often referred to as being fishery-dependent, though many Alaskan communities and their historic connections to commercial fisheries actually result in high vulnerability to this dependency over time. Alaska settler fishing community maturity is quite brief compared to that of very long-standing “fishing communities” in more established locations such as the Canadian east coast, Japan, and even other regions in the United States (although the indigenous subsistence fishing communities have deep roots in ecology and culture that were not examined here). The historic interpretation of settler Alaska as a remote, fairly inaccessible coast that gradually became dominated by outside interests remains in some cases true today. For example, non-Alaska residents still undertake a large portion of Bering Sea fisheries. Similarly, Alaska’s state commercial fishing industry has always had and still has substantial involvement by non-residents. Fishing “community”, in the case of Alaska, often seems to indicate an occupational rather than physical community. This suggests that social-ecological embeddedness can occur, even in a situation where commercial fisheries are only seasonally place-based and, on an international scale, have been carried out over a relatively brief time-period. The research discussed here demonstrates that the topic of commercial fisheries and social-ecological sustainability in the North Pacific cannot be adequately analysed purely

Ommer_c17.indd 306

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM


307

from the perspective of the present day: the role of values and motivations at different times in history must also be considered. Many of the most significant contemporary issues do have a history in older issues – topics re-emerge, memories prompt new action, new events transpire, alliances form and disband, and new scientific findings are made – but the context alters. And so we can ask, in reference to Jay Hammond’s insightful comment that opened this chapter: Where do the purposes of the past belong in our understanding of the present? How can research be faithful to the past and present at the same time? Hammond suggests that the purposes of a different time need both to be preserved and re-evaluated, even though they are a mix of opinions, preferences, and circumstances that are the result of changing conditions. In the fishing industry, with its large numbers of stakeholders, the legacies of individuals are nonetheless very important. Such were the results of the activities of Captain Jefferson Moser, early Alaskan Governor Clark, the business of Mr Bartlett Long and the Hubbell and Waller Company, Elmer Rasmuson and Jay Hammond. They and others have, in their own ways, each cast light on the manner in which fish and fishermen are interconnected, on the way in which human communities are embedded in the environments which, quite literally and also culturally, nourish them. The qualitative evidence of stakeholders – essential human dimensions in the social-ecological system of fisheries – is important data in any time period. When linked over the long term, such evidence can provide us with a vital chain of developments in attitude, culture, economy, ecology, and society, not only locally, but also nationally and globally.

Endnotes 1. This quantity includes tuna catch in eastern tropical Pacific and spans the geographic region from northern Alaska to southern California. 2. The information in this chart is calculated from data in FAO’s Yearbook of Fisheries Statistics, Vols. 39, 40 and 42. 3. European trawl vessels were traditionally designed, constructed and utilized in Scandinavian regions. 4. This telegram is in the Rasmuson Papers, Series V, Box 45. 5. This letter is in the Rasmuson Papers, Record Group II, Series 2, File 9. 6. “Alaska resident” in this instance refers both to the indigenous population of Alaska, particularly relevant to the assessment of participation in early salmon operations as well as later Alaska resident interest in comparison to non-state residents. 7. Pacific cod fisheries pursued by sail powered schooner vessels based out of Seattle and San Francisco occurred prior to the salmon momentum by approximately a decade. However, the field of participants was fairly small and the industry had a lower profile and less of a boom effect than salmon.

References Primary Sources UAF Alaska Polar Regions Collections: Hubbell & Waller Records:

Ommer_c17.indd 307

12/22/2010 3:26:21 PM

308


Series I. Administrative Files. Box Numbers: 2, 45. Series II. Client Files. Box Numbers: 7–14, 24, 38, 47, 57–59, 60–62. Series VI. “Photographs.” Series VII. “Engineering Drawings.” Archives, Alaska and Polar Regions Collections, Rasmuson Library, University of Alaska Fairbanks. Rasmussen Collection: Series 1. Civic Activities and Associations. Box Numbers: 45 (Folders 1, 5), 46, 47, 50 (Folders 4, 9), 52 (Folder 2). Archives, Alaska and Polar Regions Collections, Rasmuson Library, University of Alaska Fairbanks. Secondary Sources Barber, W. (1987) the fisheries management structure and process under the MFCMA: a North Pacific perspective. Fisheries 12(6), 10–17. Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (eds) (1998) Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Burke, P. (2002) Western Historical Thinking in a Global Perspective – Theses. Western Historical Thinking: An Intercultural Debate. Berghan Books, London. City of Seward (1965) Fisheries Potential in the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea. Originally written by: Staff, Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base in Seattle WA, September 1965. Colt, St (1999) Salmon Fish Traps in Alaska. ISER Publication. http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/publications/fishrep/fishtrap.pdf (last accessed 1 January 2008). Crutchfield, J. and Pontecorvo, G. (1969) The Pacific Salmon Fisheries: A Study of Irrational Conservation. The John Hopkins Press, Baltimore MD. Exploratory Fishing and Gear Research Base (1965) Fisheries Potential in the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea. 30 September 1965. Reproduced by the City of Seward (20 April 1966). Fogelson, R. (1989) The ethnohistory of events and non-events. Ethnohistory 36(2), Spring 1989. Hammond, J. (1976) United States-Japanese Fisheries Negotiations. Address to Congress, Washington DC, 20 August. Hanna, S. (1997) The New Frontier of American Fisheries Governance. Ecological Economics 20, 221–223. Haskell, W. (1964) Foreign Fishing Activities Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries, Region V. Office of Resource Management. Kasahara, H. and Burke, W. (1972) International Fishery Management in the North Pacific: Present and Future. University of Washington, Vancouver BC; Seattle WA. Marchak, P. et al. (eds) (1987) Uncommon Property: The Fishing and Fish-Processing Industries in British Columbia. Methuen Press, New York. McDonald, M. (1892) (Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries) Report on the salmon fisheries of Alaska. Senate Miscellaneous Document No. 192. 52nd Congress, 1st session. Miles, E. et al. (1982) The Management of Marine Regions: The North Pacific. UCLA Press, Los Angeles CA. Moser, J. (1899) Salmon and Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. Report of the Operations of the United States Fish Commission Steamer Albatross for the Year Ending 30 June 1898. Government Printing Office, Washington DC:

Ommer_c17.indd 308

12/22/2010 3:26:22 PM


309

New York Times (2008) President Taft appoints Walter Clark as governor of Alaska. 19 May 1909. New York Times Article Archives. http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/nytarchive.html (last accessed 18 Apri 2008). Northwest Digital Archives (2008) Guide to the Hubbell and Waller Records 1908–1976. http:// nwda-db.wsulibs.wsu.edu/nwda-search/fstyle.aspx?doc=AkUV5_205.xml&t=a&k1=fisheries& k2=&k3=&t1=0&t2=0&t3=0&o1=0&o2=0&s=0&i=18 (last accessed 23 April 2008). United States Army, Alaska Headquarters (1965) Building Alaska with the US Army, 1867–1965. Pamphlet No. 360–5. October. United States Department of the Interior (1931) General Information Regarding the Territory of Alaska. Washington DC, June. United States Department of Commerce. Bureau of Fisheries (1914) Report of Alaska Investigations in 1914. Washington DC, 31 December. United States Fish and Wildlife Service (1976) Digest of Federal Resource Laws of Interest. Fishery and Conservation Management Act of 1976. http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/fishcon.html (last accessed 6 May 2008). United States House of Representatives (1902) Committee on the Territories. Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. Report No. 2062. 57th Congress, 1st session. May. United States Senate (1904) Subcommittee of the Committee on Territories. Hearings. 58th Congress, 2nd session, 12 January. United States Senate (1912) Subcommittee of the Committee on Fisheries. Hearings on Senate Bill 5856. 62nd Congress, 2nd session, April. United States Senate (1956) Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Hearings on Senate Resolution 13. 84th Congress, 2nd session. October and November. United States Treasury Department (1893) Letter from the Secretary of the treasury in response to Senate resolution of 19 January 1893, transmitting a report on the salmon fisheries of Alaska. 23 January 1893. Wolfe, R. et al. (1984) Theoretical considerations. In: Subsistence Based Economies in Coastal Communities of Southwest Alaska. Division of Subsistence, Alaska Department of Fish and Game and Minerals Management Services. Anchorage, Alaska.

Ommer_c17.indd 309

12/22/2010 3:26:22 PM

Chapter 18

Can Fishers’ Virtuous Behavior Improve Large Marine Ecosystem Health? Valentina Giannini

Abstract Fish landings have been diminishing over the last decades in the Bahía de Amatique, Guatemala, following a worldwide trend in natural food production. There are several drivers for this, acting at different scales and involving different issues. Some of the most obvious causes of natural resources production decline and ecosystem damage are a direct result of human activity: overfishing and pollution. There are also other, less obvious, social, environmental, and economic drivers. Many are linked in cause-effect relationships and, taken together, they have consequences for the livelihoods of coastal populations. In this chapter, I examine how these cause-effect relations work, and how they can be altered to ameliorate the livelihoods of artisanal fishers and their communities. Following discussion of the general issue, I analyse a case study: the “Red de Pescadores Artesanales del Caribe Guatemalteco y Lago de Izabal” (Red, Network of the artisanal fishers of the Guatemalan Caribbean and of Lake Izabal) based in Livingston, Guatemala. The Red is based on the recognition by fishers of common needs and the determination to find solutions to common problems. I examine the projects and goals of the Red in relation to the changes that have taken place since its foundation, and then propose further research needs to tackle some of the bigger scale issues, such as watershed contamination. Keywords: Artisanal fishers, overfishing, community management, adaptive management, ecosystem-based management, best practices, intermediaries, Red de Pescadores Artesanales del Caribe Guatemalteco y Lago de Izabal, Bahía de Amatique, Guatemala

Introduction Ecosystems have always changed in response to various global forces, either biophysical or anthropogenic or both (Holling, 1973; Gunderson, 2000). Today, world population is growing, particularly along coasts, and increased anthropogenic pressure is bringing World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c18.indd 310

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

Can Fishers’ Virtuous Behavior Improve Large Marine Ecosystem Health?

311

degradation and destruction of coastal habitats and declining near-shore water quality, which translate into losses of ecosystem services (Olsen and Christie, 2000). In the 21st century, the long-term goal of conservation and exploitation should be built into the coastal management plans and should take into account both natural dynamism and anthropogenic impacts (Bengtsson et al., 2003). In other words, ecosystems should be managed for resilience rather than thought of as static reserves, otherwise the result may be a few protected areas in a matrix of degraded ecosystems (Bengtsson et al., 2003). Holling (1973) defined resilience as: the persistence of relationships within a system and [it] is a measure of the ability of these systems to absorb changes of state variables, driving variables, and parameters and still persist. In this definition resilience is the property of the system and persistence or probability of extinction is the result. Resilience in an ecosystem can be enhanced by preserving biodiversity to facilitate recovery after major disturbances (Bengtsson et al., 2003). One way towards this is the reduction of fishing effort, according to the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (Pauly et al., 2002), which would also reduce the mortality of by-catch species, and thus be a step towards the preservation of biodiversity and the fostering of ecosystem-based fisheries management (Hall and Mainprize, 2004). Most of the planet’s fisheries management, however, is done through considerations based only on one species at a time. The models used to determine fishing effort, such as maximum sustainable yield (MSY) and total allowable catch (TAC), take into account only the management of one species, and do not take into account the damage predation inflicts on the habitat or other species, (Zabel et al., 2003). Several recent studies, however, suggest that fisheries management should be ecosystem-based (Pauly et al., 2003; Pikitch et al., 2004). This approach was examined and approved at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in 2002 in Johannesburg (Pauly et al., 2005). In accordance with this, interest in Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) has grown since the Rio Convention on Environment and Development of 1992 (Olsen and Christie, 2000). It has become clear, then, that fisheries research should focus on the ecosystem as a whole, considering entire food webs and not single species (Christensen and Pauly, 2004) since, given the clear interaction between land and sea, these need to be managed as a whole system in a governance structure capable of addressing multiple uses in a coherent way (Cicin-Sain and Belfiore, 2006). It follows that decisions under such a governance structure have to be taken at the appropriate scale, encompassing whole ecosystems and facilitating the participation of all relevant actors. Place-based management has to be integrated with wider regional strategic initiatives, for the good of both (Olsen and Christie, 2000), and any fisheries management plan has to be tailored to the specific needs and priorities of a given region (Olsen and Christie, 2000). The practice of ICM, then, has to be a learning process that will result in management adaptations (Olsen and Christie, 2000). Since ecosystem states vary, management will be a learning process, incorporating uncertainties, and proceeding through a trial and error methodology, adapting management to different states (Gunderson, 2000; Olsen and Christie, 2000). Variability of natural

Ommer_c18.indd 311

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

312


processes, and changes in anthropogenic drivers, both mean that management plans have to be continuously monitored, evaluated, and adapted to the changing conditions. Adaptive management will be the result of interactions among all stakeholders, including local communities (Bengtsson et al., 2003; Agrawal, 2000), not least because local populations can provide the long-term monitoring capabilities needed in an adaptive management scheme: they must be considered as managers, and not only as users (Agrawal, 2000; Berkes et al., 2000). The advantages offered by such adaptive management, in comparison with conventional management, include learning from experience and feedback, recognition of alternatives and trade-offs, and the possibility of achieving long-term goals (Agrawal, 2000; Berkes et al., 2000). Conservation of marine resources cannot be achieved if local communities are not involved: this is a matter both of social and environmental justice and of pragmatism (Chapin, 2004). Since fisheries are an open access resource, state regulation has come to be regarded as necessary to avoid possible overfishing. However, community-based management regulatory regimes can be used (Berkes et al., 1989): there is now evidence that Hardin’s (1968) paradigm of the “tragedy of the commons” is not always true, and case studies show that when a community is able to restrict access and to limit extraction, then the resource can be managed in an ecologically sustainable way (Berkes et al., 1989; McCay, 1981). Indeed, it is now increasingly recognized that all stakeholders should be involved in the decision-making process, each stakeholder bringing her/his own knowledge to the table (Kaplan and McCay, 2004; Colmenares and Escobar, 2002), and thus merging top-down and bottom-up approaches, and national and international agencies (Cicin-Sain and Belfiore, 2006; Olsen and Christie, 2000). The resultant continuous interchange among local fishers, and social and natural scientists may well lead to permanent collaboration, at least in those fisheries where traditional and local knowledge exists, and, where it can be made to have the same relevance as scientific knowledge (Drew, 2005; Kaplan and McCay, 2004). Local fishers provide site-specific information established over long-term observations, for example (Drew, 2005) and those data can be shared with social and natural scientists, who will all develop trust in each other’s actions as a result (Kaplan and McCay, 2004). Of course, marine resource management cannot be successful if carried out only by one local fishing community: the scale is too small, and since many fishes are mobile, management must include all potential stakeholders, or else what is protected by one group can be depleted by another (McCay, 1981). Ultimately, because the changes that are taking place are not only local but, indeed, are now global, management plans for each community are going to have to be linked to the broader context as part of a regional network. Overfishing has been exacerbated by the global adoption of a neoliberal economic agenda, which has fostered the global expansion of trade, including that based on fish extraction. That in turn is also driving conflict among interest groups (Thorpe and Aguilar Ibarra, 2000). There are some interesting examples, however, of resistance to the neoliberal model, as in the way that coffee can be produced and marketed. If the functioning of coffee cooperatives and certified Fair Trade (FT) are examined, there are some useful lessons to be learned. Coffee is the second most traded good worldwide after petroleum (James, 2000). Tracing the global commodity chain, however, it is clear that the farmers do not benefit from

Ommer_c18.indd 312

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM


313

the high price set for coffee in the New York Stock Exchange (Mace, 1998). Most coffee farmers around the world are forced to sell at a price set by intermediaries below the market price (Levi and Linton, 2003; Mace, 1998). That is, the power of intermediaries has negative effects on local small-scale economies, while farmers who are Fair Trade certified will get a higher price for their produce, based on a guaranteed minimum that is linked to the New York Stock Exchange (Rice, 2001; Levi and Linton, 2003). Fair Trade coffee is only a partial success story, however (Levi and Linton, 2003). In the world market, only 0.001% of the coffee is sold as FT certified, and only 1.7% of the coffee produced is FT certified (Rice, 2001). This defines one problem: coffee farmers obtain FT certification for their produce, but are able to sell only about half of it as FT certified, because the demand for FT coffee is less than the supply, leaving some FT farmers subject to the intermediaries’ power (Hudson and Hudson, 2004; Levi and Linton, 2003). However, the application of the FT model to marketing fish is subject to specific constraints, which are not addressed by certification schemes. Fish is either sold fresh, with a time limitation, or frozen, with the need for equipment and infrastructure. Both options leave fishers vulnerable to the power of the intermediary. With fresh fish, fishers are forced to sell as soon as they land the catch, which does not leave them much time to bargain for a better price; if frozen, it is often only intermediaries who possess equipment and infrastructure, and who have enough money to lend. Moreover, the only available certification for fish is given by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), which does not address issues of Fair Trade. MSC ecolabel principles are, however, based on sustainable management practices of the fishing activity, as described in FAO’s “Code of conduct for responsible fisheries” (www.msc.org 2009; www.fao.org 2009). Sadly, although fishers pay for MSC certification, they are not always able to derive benefits from it: for some of the certified fisheries there is still no market (A.S., Comunidad y Biodiversidad, personal communication, 2006). Although Fair Trade certification might eventually become a long-term solution to weakening intermediary power, another mechanism, forming cooperatives, seems to be more effective in the short term and on the local scale. In Mexico, for example, the Vigía Chico Cooperative, established in 1968 by 49 members, is not only able to manage its fishery successfully, but is also able to select its buyer each year according to the best offer made. This offer is made in a meeting before the opening of the season, but the system allows for the possibility of changing a buyer during the season if another buyer offers a better price (Solares-Leal and Alvarez-Gil, 2003). Another example – the case of the Ibiraquera Lagoon in Brazil – illustrates how the shrimp local trade is influenced by ecological processes, socio-economic relations, and regional markets (Seixas and Troutt, 2003). When a local market for shrimp trade in the region developed along with tourism and its related infrastructure (Seixas and Troutt, 2003), fishers were able to choose whether to sell to intermediaries or directly to local stores and restaurants, weakening the pre-existing exclusive relation of patronage between intermediaries and fishers (Seixas and Troutt, 2003). In short, the success of the economic activity of rural primary producers such as fishers, or coffee farmers, seems to rely on their ability to avoid intermediaries. This happens when a local market can be accessed directly by producers, as in the case of the Ibiraquera Lagoon in Brazil (Seixas and Troutt, 2003), but when the local market is not large enough, a cooperative may be the only way for fishers to gain stronger bargaining power.

Ommer_c18.indd 313

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

314


Guatemala: A case study How does cooperation between fishers get established so that local communities benefit and are not tied inevitably to the power of intermediaries? A Guatemalan fisheries network called the Red (see below) makes a useful case study. In Guatemala, the Mesoamerican Reef Fund focuses on the Mesoamerican Reef Ecoregion (MAR), an area extending almost 1,000 km from the northern tip of Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula to the Bay Islands/Cayo Cochinos complex off the northern coast of Honduras. The coastal and marine portion of the ecoregion ranges from about 40 km off the northern coast of the Mexican state of Quintana Roo to about 240 km from the Gulf of Honduras, and 50 km off the north coast of Honduras at the mouth of the Aguán River. The MAR also includes the Caribbean watersheds of those four countries, clearly establishing a ridge-to-reef approach to conservation in the ecoregion (www.marfund.org 2009). In 2006, while carrying out fieldwork there, I developed a methodology for community management of their marine resources, reported to them as “Diagnostic of community marine reserve models and methodologies for application in the Mesoamerican Reef Region” (www.marfund.org 2009). Conservationists, researchers, and fishers in Guatemala participated in the research by sharing information and experiences in unstructured interviews. The people I contacted were identified as key informants through peer recommendations. Field observations carried out in the Bahía de Amatique were recorded in photographs and in notebooks, and the knowledge I acquired there laid the groundwork for understanding the story of the fisheries decline in the Bahía de Amatique. All cause-effect relationships that led to over-exploitation and degradation of natural resources, were identified by people who described the local social-ecological system. Reports of workshops and studies carried out by local conservation organizations, as well as by international organizations, were also gathered and analysed to provide an assessment of the state of the environment, to collect evidence of impacts of human actions in the Bahía de Amatique, and to understand the socio-economic condition of the local fishing communities. All findings were then incorporated in a regional and global framework of reference. A land-use map was drawn to understand the spatial scale of the impacts described in the reports found, using data accessed from the web (www.ccad.ws 2009).

Vicious chains: Exploitation and degradation In the Bahía de Amatique, three things placed ecosystems at risk of serious damage: 1. frequent accidents that occur during transportation of hydrocarbons and other dangerous substances; 2. illegal fishing and overfishing; and 3. pollution from agriculture, pesticides and fertilizers, and from lack of sewage treatment (FUNDAECO, 2001).

Ommer_c18.indd 314

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM


315

According to Burke and Sugg (2006), these problems are relevant for the whole Mesoamerican Reef ecosystem. Overfishing, sedimentation from land erosion, nutrient pollution from agriculture run off, bleaching, and disease are also common to the large marine ecosystem. There is anecdotal evidence that fisheries have declined in the Bahía de Amatique (Heyman and Graham, 2000; personal communications, 2006). Overfishing has several origins; commercial fishing is one of them, but we know that artisanal fishers can also be responsible (Pauly et al., 2005). Some of the fishing techniques used in the Bahía de Amatique area, such as trawling, can also be part of the problem. Local fishers are aware of this and want to be part of the solution. They have, in fact, already been proactive in problem solving, as testified by an agreement made in 1996 and discussed below. Fishers would like to be part of the decision-making process for the implementation of the Regulation for the General Law of Fisheries and Aquaculture (below): the closures are not effectively helping to increase fish stocks because they occur in the wrong seasons. In this region too trade is one of the drivers of the depletion of fisheries resources. Catches from the small-scale fleet supply the internal market, being transported to the distribution centers by intermediaries, who buy them from the fishers (www.fao.org 2009). All the fish caught in the Bahía de Amatique are sold through four or five intermediaries who act as a cartel and are thus able to set the price to their advantage. Estimates suggest that the final prices paid by consumers are 50–150% higher than the price paid to the fisher by the intermediary (www.fao.org 2009).Some fishers in the past have tried to sell their landings directly in the market in Guatemala City, but they were forced to abandon this practice because it was not economically feasible due to the small catches and the high transportation costs. The fact that fishers have no access to information about prices paid by consumers also hinders their ability to demand a fair price. These traded goods must be fresh, and this further constrains the bargaining capabilities of fishers: fish must be sold immediately to the available buyer. By obtaining a small price per unit of catch, fishers are forced to increase their fishing effort to sustain their livelihoods. This means using fishing techniques that cause habitat damage (e.g., trawling) and that do not allow for fish to grow to reproductive age (e.g., by using nets with small mesh sizes). The waters of the Bahía de Amatique are also visibly contaminated: the two harbors of the Bahía, Puerto Barrios and Santo Tomas de Castilla, house a hydrocarbon terminal and ship terminals (FUNDAECO, 2001). Moreover, the Rio Dulce-Polochic river system has its estuary in the Bay and the Rio Motagua has its estuary further east. Sea currents in the area are predominantly westward along the coast of Honduras, and southward along the coast of Belize (Thattai and Kjerfve, 2003) and so the waters of the Rio Motagua may reach Punta de Manabique and possibly circulate into the Bay. This is problematic: roughly 3.7 million people – or one-third of the total population – live in these two watersheds, which include a portion of Guatemala City, which has no sewage treatment system (www.infoiarna.org.gt/ guateagua/index.htm 2009). Land-use data and maps of these two watersheds, Rio DulcePolochic and Rio Motagua (which together constitute almost one-third of Guatemala), indicate that almost 44% of the land (>15,000 km2) is dedicated to agriculture, both in the valley plains and on the hillsides (www.ccad.ws 2009; web.pml.ac.uk 2009). Such intensive agriculture is the origin of nutrient and pesticide contamination in the marine environment: the hill slopes show signs of erosion (Burke and Sugg, 2006).

Ommer_c18.indd 315

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

316


Virtous chains and the Red: A partial solution to conflict and overfishing Today, there are three main fishing techniques employed in the Bahía de Amatique (Guatemala), used by four different ethnic groups. The first group, the Garifuna, are anglers: they fish with hook and line (pesca con anzuelo). They have been living in this region the longest, since 1802, and have very good knowledge of the location of patches of coral where their fishing activity is located; they employ wooden boats with small or no engine. Each day, they first fish for bait (carnada) with a cast net (atarraya), and then they use that bait to operate their subsistence fishery (J. A. Garifuna fisher, interview, summer 2006). The second group is the Ladino, who fish for shrimp with trawlers. The net is about one meter high at the center, and about 15 meters wide; the doors are about one meter high by a little over 2 meters wide, and mesh size is almost 4 centimeters. The net is hauled in by hand; no winches are used. Boats are smaller than 12 meters (35 feet), and engines are less than 200 hp. The third group, the Q’eqchi’ and the forth, the Hindu population, fish with gillnets (trasmallo) of both the set and encircling kind, casting them from small motorboats (lanchas). This is the major fishing technique in the area, and the fishers are aware that they overfish, mainly to sell their catch (Heyman and Graham, 2000). Conflicts have arisen among these groups due to the different fishing techniques used. For example, when gillnet fishers spot Garifuna fishers, they know that indicates a good fishing ground. With what is called “tiro de avión”, they circle the Garifuna with a gillnet, catching all the fish in an area much more quickly than a Garifuna with a hook and line. Worse still, gillnets set during the day will be destroyed at night by the trawlers. Fortunately, in 1996, with the help of the Alianza Trinacional de ONGs para la Conservación del Golfo de Honduras (TRIGOH; Tri-national Alliance of NGOs for the Conservation of the Gulf of Honduras), the four fisher groups were able to establish what is called the Pacto de Caballeros (Gentlemen’s Agreement) in which some of them came together to solve their common problems of interference that caused damage for all. As a result, the Bay has been divided into three sections, easily identifiable by any fisher. One section is permanently closed to fishing; one is open for shrimp trawlers (red de arrastre), and the third is open for gillnetting (trasmallos). Every Sunday these uses rotate. Anglers (pesca con anzuelo) are allowed to fish everywhere, and interfering with them is not permitted. Drawing on the experience of the Pacto de Caballeros, with the help of foreign cooperation, on the 2 February 2004, the Red de Pescadores Artesanales del Caribe Guatemalteco y Lago de Izabal (Red; Network of Artisanal Fishers of the Guatemalan Caribbean and of Lake Izabal) was founded. The five-year process that led to the foundation of the Red was facilitated by the Comitato Internazionale per lo Sviluppo dei Popoli (CISP; International Committee for the Development of Peoples), who organized workshops and collected socio-economic as well as ecological data and analysed it (M.T., CISP, interview, summer 2006). CISP is an Italian based NGO that works with local stakeholders in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, Asia, and Eastern Europe to design plans in development cooperation, for poverty alleviation, and for social justice (www.sviluppodeipopoli.org 2009). The foundation of the Red was based on the recognition by fishers of common needs and the determination to find solutions to common problems, thus to coordinate the efforts

Ommer_c18.indd 316

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM


317

of fishers (A. M., Red, interview, summer 2006). The goals of the RED are conservation and exploitation of marine resources, and the creation of links to facilitate communication among fishing organizations (A. M., Red, interview, summer 2006). There are 17 member organizations, and five more organizations may join (H. H., FUNDAECO, interview, summer 2006). Its first action was to create the Centro de Servicio para la Pesca Artesanal en el Golfo de Honduras (CESPAGOH; Service Center for Artisanal Fishery in the Gulf of Honduras). This was the result of a series of workshops, organized and facilitated by CISP and by the Fundación para el Ecodesarrollo y la Conservación (FUNDAECO; Foundation for Eco-development and Conservation). FUNDAECO is a Guatemalan NGO, whose mission is to restore and conserve environments while improving people’s livelihoods (www. fundaeco.org.gt 2009). To achieve this objective, FUNDAECO promotes the empowerment of local communities. Fishers expressed the desire to sell their catch directly, avoiding intermediaries. The foundation of the CESPAGOH was driven by the desire to increase the price per unit of fish caught by avoiding intermediaries and by locally processing the catch, thus reducing the fishing effort and diminishing pressure on the marine environment. At time of writing (June 2008), the Red is waiting for the CESPAGOH to start its operations: the construction phase finished in the spring of 2006, but electricity supply and some machinery are still missing.

Discussion Local fishers are not the only cause of the depletion of natural marine resources; other causes are related to events in the entire sea and coastal area and its related watersheds (land-use practices), and to global change. The problem of what drives the depletion of marine resources is thus multi-causal and multi-scale, without clearly defined boundaries, and therefore the solution is best addressed on an ecosystem scale. This broader approach implies not only setting aside portions of the coastal waters as protected or managed areas, but also regulating all waters and all lands as a unit, recognizing the link between watershed, coast, and shelf regions including reefs. Recognizing that land and sea are linked ecosystems is referred to as Integrated Coastal Management (ICM). Although needed, this ICM approach unfortunately falls outside of the competences of the Red. Larger issues, such as watershed and sea water contamination, thus, remain unsolved. However, the Red has accomplished a lot in terms of fisheries management. Even before its foundation, some of the fishers who later founded the Red, united to define an agreement, i.e., the Pacto de Caballeros. The agreement has been successful; the demonstration of this is its incorporation into the New Fisheries Law approved in Guatemala in 2002. The Fisheries Law also recognizes the exclusive right of local fishers to access the waters of the Bahía de Amatique, prohibiting commercial fishing vessels to enter the bay. As a response to commercial over-exploitation of the resource, the New Fisheries Law approved in Guatemala in 2002 and its Regulation approved in 2005 permits only artisanal fishers to fish in the Bay (Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganaderia y Alimentacion; Ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura, Decreto No. 80-2002; Reglamento de la Ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura, Acuerdo Gubernativo No. 223-2005). The Law describes in detail the techniques that are

Ommer_c18.indd 317

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

318


allowed and incorporates the Pacto de Caballeros, but the implementation and enforcement of the Law are judged unsatisfactory by fishers and conservationists. The Red’s foundation fostered good fishing practices that follow sustainability principles, such as those defined in the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (www. fao.org 2009). This certainly sets an example to be followed by other fishers, which could adopt this alternative management model based on the cooperation of all fishers that refer to one fishing ground. The Red still feels it can accomplish much more. It is the understanding of fishers that to be able to maintain – or improve – their livelihoods, the fisheries must not be depleted. Consequently, fishers realize their practices need to be managed by implementing regulations, such as closures. However, fishers feel the management plans in place need to be improved, and want to participate in the decision-making process for the definition of new, more effective, management plans. Their knowledge, such as where breeding grounds are, or when reproduction occurs, is needed to best define fishing closures or other management plans. This brings more considerations. Fishers that founded the Red now understand they need to reach out and involve all the fishers of the area. Only in this way the implementation of their efforts for fish conservation and extraction can effectively be pursued; otherwise the benefit of good fishing practices of some might be outweighed by bad practices of others. Also, the inclusion of other fishers would foster cooperation, thus diminishing the power of intermediaries, increasing the possibility of market control. Last but not least, the creation of the CESPAGOH, i.e., a center that creates economic alternatives and possibly reduces intermediaries’ power, is also an example that could be followed. As we have learned from examples elsewhere, when fishing organizations were able to control the market, and have a fair price for their landings, livelihood of fishing communities improved, and fishing effort decreased. A diversified economy also generally leads to livelihood improvement.

Conclusions A social-ecological approach can contribute significantly to conserve the marine biodiversity of this region, because local populations must play an important role in the definition and implementation of protected areas (Agrawal and Ostrom, 2006). Governance and ecosystem processes have to be investigated as linked systems in a multidisciplinary approach, at the appropriate scale (Agrawal and Ostrom, 2006). The case study chosen, the Red de Pescadores Artesanales del Caribe Guatemalteco y Lago de Izabal (Red), illustrates some of the possible drivers, what here I have defined as vicious chains that cause fisheries depletion and marine ecosystem degradation. Local issues, such as overfishing, contamination, and the role of intermediaries have to be analysed and monitored at the appropriate scale, i.e., at the large ecosystem scale, using a ridge-to-reef approach, which integrates changing global and local conditions. The Red’s work also provides insights into, and identifies possibilities for, decisionmaking and problem solving, i.e., the several virtuous behaviors of the Red described in the discussion section. Ecosystem-based fisheries management, integrated coastal management, and avoiding intermediaries, seem to be plausible virtuous behaviors to improve the well-being of fishing communities. The Red is moving in the right direction. Having

Ommer_c18.indd 318

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM


319

founded the CESPAGOH is the first step towards emancipation from intermediaries. However, many more actions must be put into place to improve the situation and address local and global change. Large-scale management (Integrated Coastal Management and Ecosystem-Based Management), and involving other sectors of the economy of Guatemala, will have to be addressed. The question is where the fishers of the Red will find the human and financial resources to assist them in this struggle.

Acknowledgements This work is drawn from my Master’s Thesis (Master of Environmental Management) at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies (F&ES). I would like to specifically acknowledge the help of my advisor at F&ES, Carol Carpenter; during our conversations, I was able to focus my ideas and gain new perspective on issues. In the Master Lab at F&ES, Carol Carpenter, Amity Doolittle, Michael Dove, and fellow students shared with me helpful and encouraging thoughts. Last but not least, thank you to all who made my summer internship research possible, and to the many people in Guatemala who gave of their time and knowledge to allow me to understand their fishery, its problems, and potential solutions.

References Agrawal, A. (2000) Adaptive management in transboundary protected areas: the Bialowieza National Park and Biosphere Reserve as a case study. Environmental Conservation 27(4), 326–333. Agrawal, A. and Ostrom, E. (2006) Political science and conservation biology: a dialog of the deaf. Conservation Biology 20(3), 681–682. Bengtsson, J., Angelstam, P., Elmqvist, T. et al. (2003) Reserves, resilience and dynamic landscapes. Royal Swedish Academy of Science 32, 389–396. Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (2000) Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecological Applications 10(5), 1251–1262. Berkes, F., Feeny, D., McCay, B. J. et al. (1989) The benefits of the commons. Nature 340, 91–93. Burke, L. and Sugg, Z. (2006) Hydrologic modeling of watershed discharging adjacent to the Mesoamerican Reef. World Resources Institute, Washington DC, 55 pp. Chapin, M. (2004) A challenge to conservationists. World Watch 17(6), 17–31. Christensen, V. and Pauly, D. (2004) Placing fisheries in their ecosystem context, an introduction. Ecological Modelling 172, 103–107. Cicin-Sain, B. and Belfiore, S. (2006) Linking Marine Protected Areas to integrated and coastal management: a review of theory and practice. Ocean and Coastal Management 48, 847–868. Colmenares, N. A. and Escobar, J. J. (2002) Ocean and coastal issues and policy responses in the Caribbean. Ocean and Coastal Management 45(11–12), 905–924. Drew, J. A. (2005) Use of traditional ecological knowledge in marine conservation. Conservation Biology 19(4), 1286–1293. FUNDAECO (2001) Lineamientos técnicos para el aprovechamiento sostenido de los recursos pesqueros en la Bahía de Amatique. Fundación para el Ecodesarrollo y la Conservación (FUNDAECO), Guatemala, Guatemala, 48 pp.

Ommer_c18.indd 319

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

320


Gunderson, L. H. (2000) Ecological resilience: in theory and application. Annual Review of Ecology 31, 425–439. Hall, S. J. and Mainprize, B. (2004) Towards ecosystem-based fisheries management. Fish and Fisheries 5, 1–20. Hardin, G. (1968) The tragedy of the Commons. Science 162, 1243–1248. Heyman, W. and Graham, R. (2000) La Voz de los Pescadores de la Costa Atlántica de Guatemala. Fundación para el Ecodesarrollo y la Conservación, Guatemala, Guatemala; Toledo Institute for Development and Environment, Punta Gorda, Belize. 44 pp. Holling, C. S. (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 4, 1–23. Hudson, M. and Hudson, I. (2004) Justice, sustainability, and the fair trade movement: a case study of coffee production in Chiapas. Social Justice 31(3), 130–146. James, D. (2000) Justice and java: coffee in a fair trade market. NACLA Report on the Americas 34(2), 11–14. Kaplan, I. M. and McCay, B. J. (2004) Cooperative research, co-management and the social dimension of fisheries science and management. Marine Policy 28, 257–258. Levi, M. and Linton, A. (2003) Fair trade: a cup at a time? Politics and Society 32(3), 407–432. Mace, B. (1998) Global commodity chains, alternative trade and small-scale coffee production in Oaxaca, Mexico. Masters Thesis, Miami University, Oxford, OH. McCay, B. J. (1981) Development issues in fisheries as agrarian systems. Culture and Agriculture 11, 1–8. Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganaderia y Alimentacion, Guatemala. Ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura, Decreto No. 80-2002. Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganaderia y Alimentacion, Guatemala. Reglamento de la Ley General de Pesca y Acuicultura, Acuerdo Gubernativo No. 223-2005. Olsen, S. and Christie, P. (2000) What are we learning from tropical coastal management experiences? Coastal Management 28(1), 5–18. Pauly, D., Christensen, V., Guénnette, S. et al. (2002). Towards sustainability in world fisheries. Nature 418, 689–695. Pauly, D., Alder, J., Bennett, E. et al. (2003) The future for fisheries. Science 302, 1359–1361. Pauly, D., Watson, R. and Alder, J. (2005) Global trends in world fisheries: impacts on marine ecosystems and food security. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 360, 5–12. Pikitch, E. K., Santora, C., Babcock, E. A. et al. (2004) Ecosystem-based fishery management. Science 305, 346–347. Rice, R. A. (2001) Noble goals and challenging terrain: organic and fair trade coffee movements in the global marketplace. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics 14, 39–66. Seixas, C. and Troutt, E. (2003) Evolution of a local Brazilian shrimp market. Ecological Economics 46(3), 399–417. Solares-Leal, I. and Alvarez-Gil, O. (2003) Socioeconomic assessment of Punta Allen: a tool for the management of a coastal community. Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve, Mexico. Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas, Cancún, Quintana Roo, Mexico.102 pp. Thattai, D. V. and Kjerfve, B. (2003) Numerical modeling of tidal and wind-driven circulation in the Meso-American barrier reef lagoon, Western Caribbean. Oceans 5, 2930–2937. Thorpe, A. and Aguilar Ibarra, A. (2000) The new economic model and marine fisheries development in Latin America. World Development 28(9), 1689–1702. Zabel, R. W., Harvey, C. J., Katz, S. L. et al. (2003) Ecologically sustainable yield. American Scientist 91, 150–157.

Ommer_c18.indd 320

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM


321

Useful Websites (last accessed 2009) http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/fwg/focus4/symposium/posters/S1-P3.pdf http://www.ccad.ws/mapas/mapoteca.htm http://www.cobi.org.mx/ http://www.sviluppodeipopoli.org/English/Home/Frameset.html http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/v9878e/v9878e00.htm http://www.fao.org/docrep/field/003/AC587S/AC587S03.htm http://www.fao.org/fi/fcp/es/GTM/profile.htm http://www.fundaeco.org.gt/ http://www.infoiarna.org.gt/guateagua/index.htm http://www.marfund.org/diagnosticofcommunitymarinereservemodels.pdf http://www.marfund.org/themesoamericanreef.html http://www.msc.org/about-us/credibility/how-we-meet-best-practice/?s

Ommer_c18.indd 321

12/22/2010 3:26:39 PM

Chapter 19

Ecosystem-based Management in the Asia-Pacific Region Mitsutaku Makino and Hiroyuki Matsuda

Abstract In this chapter, we derive several indicators of the fisheries sectors on a country-by-country basis, and clarify the social and ecological conditions in the Asia-Pacific area. These are summarized as financial, industrial profile, marine resource diversity, food security, social security, and human resource conditions. Then, with a case from an UNESCO World Natural Heritage site in Japan, we propose a socially and ecologically compatible ecosystem-based management framework in the Asia-Pacific area. Under this framework, the local fishers are the core of the management. The most important policy measure is the human capacity building and legal protection of each fishery. Keywords: Ecosystem-based management, fisheries co-management, Asia-Pacific area, social conditions, ecological conditions, Shiretoko World Natural Heritage, Japan

Introduction Ecosystems provide a variety of services (World Research Institute, 2005), including fish, for humans. Since fisheries harvests are only a small portion of all ecosystem services from marine environments (Costanza et al., 1997), fisheries operations should not jeopardize the wide range of goods and services from marine ecosystems that provide food, revenues, and recreation (US National Research Council, 1998). This thinking is central to what is called ecosystem-based fisheries management, or an ecosystem approach to fisheries.1 A closely related but broader concept is ecosystem-based management. Its focus is not limited to a single sector, i.e., the fisheries sector, but encompasses holistic, regionally integrated, and multiple use management of the oceans (UNEP GPA, 2006). In this chapter, we discuss resilient ecosystem-based management for the countries in the Asia-Pacific area.2 We pay particular attention to 11 countries in the Asia-Pacific, World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c19.indd 322

12/22/2010 3:27:04 PM

Ecosystem-based Management in the Asia-Pacific Region

323

i.e., Cambodia, China, Chinese Taipei, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. These countries are ranked within the top 40 fisheries production countries, in terms of production volume (tonnes) for 2002 to 2006, based on the FAO FISHSTAT. The top 40 countries globally cover 90%, and the above 11 countries in the Asia-Pacific area cover 42%, of global fish production. The situation and performance of fisheries and the characteristics of the surrounding ecosystem are closely linked (Worm et al., 2006). In the next section “Global comparison of fisheries sectors”, we derive several indicators representing the social and ecological conditions of fisheries on a country-by-country basis, and clarify the features of the fisheries sectors in the Asia-Pacific area. Then, based on these results, we propose an approach for building resilient ecosystem-based management in the Asia-Pacific areas, with a case study from an UNESCO World Natural Heritage site in Japan.

Global comparison of fisheries sectors Figure 19.1 shows the global comparison of per capita GDP (in Purchasing Power Parity) on a country-by-country basis. It covers OECD countries3 and the top 40 fisheries production countries. The vertical axis shows the latitude of the capital of each country. The NorthSouth divide is clearly observable. With the exception of Japan and Korea, all the fisheries countries in Asia-Pacific area are positioned in the left side of the figure (100 tonnes per fisher). On the other hand, all the fisheries countries in the Asia-Pacific area are much below the average. This means that fisheries operations in the Asia-Pacific area are conducted at a small scale. Figure 19.2 shows the diversity of fish taxa caught (as the diversity index H’) calculated for OECD countries over the period 2002–2006, and arranged by latitude of their capital city. To calculate H’, the Shannon Function (MacArthur and MacArthur, 1961) for diversity was applied to the FAO FISHSTAT data. Because the details of fisheries statistics reported to FAO largely depend on the domestic statistics system in each country, only the OECD countries are compared. This figure shows that in mid-low latitudes, in which

Ommer_c19.indd 323

12/22/2010 3:27:05 PM


324

70 Iceland Finland Swe Denmark Germany Ireland UK Netherlands France

60 Russia Latitude (degrees North or South)

Poland 50

Norway

Canada China 40

Turky Paki Argentina Morocco Chile Egypt India S.Africa Bangla Namib Vietnam Mexico Myanmar Brazil Philippine Senegal Thai Cambodia Peru Venezuela Nigeria Indonesia Ghana Malaysia

30

20

10

Italy NZ Portugal Spain Greece Korea Japan AU

USA

0 0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

US$/capita (PPP) Fig. 19.1 Global distribution of per capita GDP, arranged by latitude of the capital city (Source: The World Bank 2008).

fisheries countries in the Asia-Pacific area are located, a wider range of species is utilized than at higher latitudes. This can be understood as reflecting the high biodiversity as well as varieties of seafood culture in these lower latitude areas. Related to this, Fig. 19.3 shows the percentage of seafood as a source of animal protein in the top 40 fisheries countries. It shows that countries in the Asia-Pacific area have a larger reliance on seafood than other sources of animal protein, reflecting the importance of seafood to their food security. Figure 19.4 shows the percentage of fishers in the total population, demonstrating the importance of the fisheries sector as a source of employment. For many countries in the Asia-Pacific area and Northern Europe, the fisheries sector is more important as a source of jobs than in other countries. It is worth pointing out that in many developing countries, it is often the poorest social class that work in the fisheries sector, which serves as a kind of social security net for landless people. Finally, Fig. 19.5 shows the average number of marine fishers per kilometer of coastline. The appropriate balance between the number of fishers and the biological productivity of an area is an important theme for further research, because excess numbers of fishers could easily lead to overfishing. However, the people living along the coast are the most direct stakeholders and recipients of the marine ecosystem services (UNEP CBD, 2000), and we

Ommer_c19.indd 324

12/22/2010 3:27:05 PM


325

Table 19.1 Fisheries production, number of fishers, and average production per fisher in the top 40 fisheries countries (Source: FAO, 1999, FAO FISHSTAT). Shaded cells represent those countries in the Asia-Pacific region. Country or area name China Peru USA Indonesia Chile Japan India Russia Thailand Norway Philippines Vietnam Iceland Republic of Korea Myanmar Mexico Malaysia Bangladesh Canada Denmark Chinese Taipei Argentina Morocco Spain South Africa Brazil United Kingdom France Faroe Islands Namibia New Zealand Turkey Nigeria Netherlands Venezuela Pakistan Senegal Egypt Cambodia Ghana Average

Fisheries production by volume (tonnes)*

Total number of fishers**

Per-fisher production (tonnes/fisher)***

17,190,201 8,178,363 4,959,275 4,639,326 4,593,475 4,440,150 3,680,819 3,241,117 2,824,466 2,649,158 2,197,587 1,885,598 1,789,424 1,666,571 1,590,768 1,362,649 1,285,864 1,240,546 1,120,344 1,069,481 1,028,689 986,820 934,065 878,002 798,481 748,663 654,503 653,596 586,950 579,760 540,382 516,896 499,395 499,299 489,487 485,791 423,009 394,985 388,571 384,018

1,286,799 65,290 290,000 4,649,153 75,367 278,200 5,958,744 n.a. 438,934 22,916 990,872 3,030,000 6,300 180,649 580,962 258,850 100,666 1,320,480 84,775 4,792 297,523 12,320 96,708 75,434 10,500 290,000 19,044 26,113 2,761 2,700 2,227 33,614 481,264 3,711 39,621 416,405 51,197 61,977 73,425 230,749

0.1 120.7 20.5 1.0 84.5 26.6 0.8 n.a. 8.0 149.3 2.8 0.5 353.8 18.1 1.4 6.1 12.4 1.0 13.1 359.7 n.a. 104.8 8.2 18.8 52.3 2.2 51.8 35.6 127.4 99.4 325.9 19.4 0.9 148.2 12.7 1.5 9.9 7.4 1.6 2.1

2,101,914

560,283

58.2

* The average production volume (tonnes) for 2002 to 2006 from FAO FISHSTAT. ** Based on the total employment recorded by FAO (1999). *** The production data are from FAO FISHSTAT for the year when the employment data were collected by FAO (1999).

Ommer_c19.indd 325

12/22/2010 3:27:05 PM

70 Iceland Finland

60

Norway

Swe Denmark

Ireland Germany UK Netherlands

Latitude (degrees North or South)

Poland 50

France Canada

40

Italy NZ Portugal Spain USA Greece Japan AU Korea

Turkey

30

20

Mexico

10

0 2

3

4

5

6

7

H'

Fig. 19.2 Diversity of fish taxa caught, with diversity calculated using the Shannon function H′, for OECD countries arranged by latitude of their capital city (Source: FAO FISHSTAT). 70 Iceland Norway


60 Denmark Russia UK Netherland

50

France Canada

40

30

Spein China

NZ Turkey USA Argentina Chile Pakistan

Morocco

India S.Africa Mexico

Bangladesh Vietnam Philippines

Brazil Venez

10

Japan

Egypt

Namibia 20

Korea

Peru Nigeria

Myanmar Seneg Thailand

Cambo

Indonessia

Ghana

Malaysia 0 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Fig. 19.3 Percentage of seafood as a source of animal protein in the top 40 fisheries countries, arranged by latitude of their capital city (Source: FAO Food Balance Sheet)4.

Ommer_c19.indd 326

12/22/2010 3:27:05 PM


327

70 Iceland

60

Norway

Faroe Islands

Denmark


50

Netherland UK France Canada

NZ Spain China Turkey USA Korea Japan Argentina Pakistan Morocco Chile Egypt 30 India

40

S.Africa Namibia

20

10

Chinese Taipei Bangladesh Vietnam

Mexico Brazil Myanmar Senegal Philippine Thai Peru Cambodia Venezuela Nigeria Indonesia Ghana Malaysia

0 0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00 %

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

Fig. 19.4 Percentage of fishers in the total population in the top 40 fisheries countries, arranged by latitude of their capital city (Source: FAO 1999, CIA 1997).

presume that they could therefore play the most important role in coastal co-management. From this perspective, Fig. 19.5 suggests that in the Asia-Pacific areas, local people can potentially play an important role in local ecosystem management, i.e., those areas are rich in potential human resources. The summary of the fisheries sectors in the Asia-Pacific area is in Table 19.2. When we create ecosystem-based management in the Asia-Pacific area, all these conditions should be clearly taken into account. In addition, other social aspects, which cannot be quantified, must be considered. For example, anthropological studies point out that in many parts of the world, especially in tropical areas, a redistribution of wealth through social interdependence and a traditional credit system is the norm (Ruddle, 2008). That may bind fishers to their communities and occupation, as embodying a sense of cultural identity. For example, crew sizes may be determined more by social imperatives, or obligations to share economic benefits, than by economically rational choices. It is important to consider these societal norm conditions in order to facilitate effective co-management of local natural resources (Ostrom, 1990, Armitage et al., 2007).

Ommer_c19.indd 327

12/22/2010 3:27:06 PM


328

70 Iceland Faroe Islands Norway Denmark

60

UKNetherland France


50

Canada NZ Spain USA Japan Argentina Morocco Chile Egypt

40

30

Pakistan

S.Africa

Chinese Taipei

Bangladesh

Namibia 20

Mexico

10

Philippine Thai Peru Venezuela

Myanmar Senegal

Indonesia

Ghana

Malaysia 0 0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Number of marine fishers/Km Fig. 19.5 Average number of marine fishers per km of coastline in the top 40 fisheries countries, arranged by latitude of their capital city (Source: FAO, 1999; CIA, 1997). Brazil, Cambodia, China, India, Korea, Nigeria, Russia, and Vietnam are not indicated in this figure because appropriate data for marine fishers are not available.

Table 19.2 Summary of the social and ecological conditions of the fisheries sectors in the Asia-Pacific area. Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4 Condition 5 Condition 6

Expensive policy measures are impossible (financial condition). Fisheries operations are small-scale (industrial profile condition). Diversity in resource use is high, reflecting the high biodiversity of the surrounding sea (marine resource condition). People largely rely on seafood as a source of animal protein (food security condition). Fisheries sector is important as a source of employment (social security condition). Rich in the potential human resource in the coastal area (human resource conditions).

How, then, can we build socially and ecologically resilient systems based on the social and ecological conditions listed in Table 19.2? How we can build an ecosystem-based management framework, which fits well to the Asia-Pacific area? In the section “Ecosystembased management at the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage, Japan”, a case from Japan is discussed as an example.

Ommer_c19.indd 328

12/22/2010 3:27:06 PM


329

Ecosystem-based management at the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage, Japan Shiretoko Peninsula is located in the northeast of Hokkaido Island, Japan. A distinguishing characteristic of this area is the interrelationship between its marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Many anadromous salmonids swim up the rivers in the peninsula to spawn. They serve as an important source of food for upstream terrestrial species such as the brown bear, Steller’s sea eagle, and whitetailed eagle (Plate 11 in the color plate section). The peninsula is also internationally important as a stopover point for migratory birds (Ministry of Environment of the Government of Japan, Hokkaido Prefectural Government, 2007). At the same time, Shiretoko is also famous in Japan for fisheries production, and the fisheries and tourism sectors are the most important industries here. In 2006, 851 fishers were engaged in the fishing industry, yielding 73,641 tonnes for a cash value of 22,966 million yen (Hokkaido Prefectural Government, 2007). To maintain sustainable fisheries, local fishers who possess fishing rights and licenses have implemented a wide range of autonomous measures under a fisheries co-management framework.4 For example, they autonomously enlarged the mesh size of walleye pollack gillnets from 91–95 mm in the 1990s, in accordance with research results provided by the local research station. Gillnet fishers divided the fishing ground into 34 areas, based on their local knowledge and experience, and declared 7 of them protected in order to conserve resources. These protected areas include a portion of the scientifically identified spawning ground of walleye pollack. The protected areas are re-examined every year on the basis of the previous year’s performance and scientific advice from the local research station. After nomination of the peninsula and its surrounding marine areas for UNESCO World Natural Heritage Listing in 2004, six other areas were also designated as protected, and the fishers implemented various autonomous measures for other species in the Shiretoko ecosystem. In addition, the fisheries cooperative associations fund their own monitoring programs and research vessel. Although these co-management measures are not well defined or described in documents, they regulate the impact of fishing on stock very strictly. Since 2004, various additional measures have been implemented to conserve the outstanding ecosystems of this area. The approach taken was one that did not displace local fishers from the area, but placed their activities at the core of the management scheme to sustain ecosystem structure and function, while other sectors were integrated into the existing co-management framework. That is, fisheries co-management was expanded to ecosystem-based co-management to achieve ecosystem conservation. We call this the “Shiretoko Approach”. One of the most important new measures implemented in the Shiretoko area is a system for coordination among the wide range of sectors involved (Fig. 19.6). The Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Site Regional Liaison Committee is composed of officers from related ministries and departments, such as the Fisheries Agency, Coast Guard, Ministry of Environment, Forestry Agency, Ministry of Education, etc. Fisheries cooperative associations, the tourism sector, the Scientific Council (described later), and NGOs, also participate. The committee serves as the core arena for policy coordination among administrative

Ommer_c19.indd 329

12/22/2010 3:27:06 PM

330


Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Site Regional Liaison Committee (since 2003) Role: exchange information, and coordinate interests/policies amongst administrative sectors. Participants: Central/local government, Fisheries Cooperative Associations, Sightseeing Guide Associations, and NGOs.

Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Site Scientific Council (since 2004)

coordination and cooperation

Role: Provide scientific advice on management, research, and monitoring activities

Role: Build use rules for tourists to reduce negative impacts on environment

Participants : Scientists, Central/local government, Fisheries Cooperative Associations, and NGOs.

Marine WG

River Construction WG

Shiretoko National Park Committee for the Review of Proper Use (since 2004)

Participants: Scientists, Central/local government, NGOs. Yezo Deer WG

Fig. 19.6 Coordinating system in the Shiretoko World Natural Heritage site.

bodies. The Shiretoko World Natural Heritage Site Scientific Council is the scientific advisory body for the formulation of the management plan and for research and monitoring activities. The council has three working groups (WGs): for marine ecosystem management (Marine WG), for improvement of river constructions (River Construction WG), and for Yezo deer (Cervus nippon yezoensis) management (Yezo Deer WG). The Shiretoko National Park Committee for the Review of Proper Use has conducted research and discussions on proper-use rules for tourism, which is another important sector in this peninsula. These organizations and their interrelationships have helped to ensure participation, to exchange information and opinions, and to build consensus between the wide-ranging interests of multiple users of the ecosystem services, supporting the legitimacy of the management plans and rules. The official management plan for the marine area of the World Heritage site, called the Multiple Use Integrated Marine Management Plan, was drawn up by the Marine WG in December 2007. Its objective is “to achieve both conservation of the marine ecosystem and stable fisheries through the sustainable use of marine living resources in the marine area of the heritage site” (Ministry of Environment of the Government of Japan, Hokkaido Prefectural Government, 2007). It defines management measures to conserve the marine ecosystem, strategies to maintain major species, along with monitoring methods, and policies for marine recreational activities. The fisheries sector has participated from the beginning of the drafting process. To monitor the Shiretoko marine ecosystem, the Marine Working Group drew up a food web (Plate 11 in the color plate section), identified indicator

Ommer_c19.indd 330

12/22/2010 3:27:06 PM


331

species, and specified monitoring activities. Because the local fishers have caught a wide range of species in responsible ways (>50 species), the catch data has been compiled by local fishers and it includes many of the indicator species and other major marine species in the food web. This information is an important foundation for monitoring changes in the functions and structure of the Shiretoko marine ecosystem. Under the Shiretoko Approach, the local fishers are recognized as an integral part of the ecosystem, as indicated in Plate 11 in the color plate section, and their data are officially utilized to monitor the ecosystem cost-effectively. However, catch data are not enough for monitoring the entire marine ecosystem, because fishers are targeting only commercial species. Therefore, the Marine Management Plan specifies monitoring of non-commercial species, as well as basic environmental indices such as weather, water quality, sea ice, and plankton. Also, it is worth noting that the Shiretoko Approach can save considerable costs for ecosystem-based management. In 2006, the public expenditure from both the local and central governments, excluding fisheries management measures, was about 470 million yen, corresponding to about 2% of the fisheries production value in the area. For the full details of the ecosystembased co-management in the Shiretoko area, see Makino et al. (2009).

Discussion Copes and Charles (2004) categorized Japanese co-management as a kind of “communitybased co-management”, which recognizes that fishers are the primary participants in management, and that involvement and support of the broader community is essential. The system is open to consideration of a wide range of human needs in the community, and therefore lends itself to the implementation of a balanced mix of biological, social, and economic objectives. The Japanese institutional background naturally leads to a different ecosystem-based management framework from, for example, that of Iceland or New Zealand, where market-based individual transferable quotas are the central policy tool. The Shiretoko Approach is an example of extension from community-based co-management to an ecosystem-based management approach. Furthermore, based on the social and ecological conditions summarized in Table 19.2, we discuss the compatibility of the Shiretoko Approach to the Asia-Pacific area. First, under the Shiretoko Approach, due respect is paid to the local fishers’ knowledge and to their autonomous activities, and local fishers are not excluded from the heritage area. Rather, they are the core of the ecosystem-based co-management. Therefore, local norms and livelihoods are not destroyed (Condition 5), and fisheries products are continuously supplied to the market (Condition 4). The importance of this requirement cannot be overemphasized, especially for the remote fishing communities on islands or peninsulas in the Asia-Pacific area. Matsuda et al. (2008) pointed out that, based on their mathematical model of fisheries’ impacts on an ecosystem, profit maximizing fisheries are likely to utilize only one or two highly-valued species from the food web. This means, from the ecosystem-based management point of view, that we can gain information about very limited aspects of the ecosystem through the fisheries sector. Government has to monitor the rest of the ecosystem, and these costs are beyond the budget of many countries in the Asia-Pacific area. In the

Ommer_c19.indd 331

12/22/2010 3:27:07 PM

332


Shiretoko area, however, local fishers are utilizing a wide range of species from the ecosystem; they conserve species by various autonomous measures, and compile the catch data by themselves. Their data cover most of keystone species of the ecosystem, and government saves the cost of ecosystem monitoring. In other words, the Shiretoko case shows that diversity in fisheries can save costs in ecosystem monitoring (Conditions 1 and 3). Participation of local stakeholders in all the decision-making processes (Fig. 19.6) also helps to increase the legitimacy and applicability of management measures, and saves enforcement costs (Hilborn, 2007).

Conclusion Because the Asia-Pacific area is potentially rich in human resources, the most important policy measure when applying the Shiretoko Approach is human capacity building in order to achieve community-based co-management (Condition 6). Legal protection of each fishery, such as the fishing rights and license system in Japan, is indispensable as it permits coordination of fisheries on equal terms. Without such legal guarantees, the co-existence of small-scale, artisanal fisheries and large-scale, efficient fisheries is difficult (Condition 2). The analyses outlined in this chapter are still in their very early stages, and much can be done to improve them. The indicators discussed in the section “Global comparison of fisheries sectors” are just a snapshot, but trends in indicators could be calculated from the time series data, and would give more insight into macro changes in societies, as well as in ecosystem services. Also, large countries cannot be represented by a single latitude and value, so division by eco-region is the next fruitful analytical step.

Acknowledgement This work was supported in part by the Global COE Program (grant to Hiroyuki Matsuda).

Endnotes 1. For more details in the terminologies, see Garcia et al. (2003). 2. In this chapter, the Asia-Pacific area refers to the East Asia and the Southeast Asia. 3. The term “OECD countries” refers to the member countries of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development whose fisheries production volume (tonnes) for 2002–2006 were ranked within top 100 countries in the world. Therefore, OECD member countries with relatively small fisheries production, such as Belgium (ranked 111), Hungary (146), the Czech Republic (157), Slovakia (184), Switzerland (186), Austria (203), and Luxembourg (232) are excluded from the figure. 4. For the institutional features of fisheries co-management in Japan, see Makino and Matsuda (2005). Other case studies of Japanese fisheries co-management can be found in Townsend et al. (2008).

Ommer_c19.indd 332

12/22/2010 3:27:07 PM


333

References Armitage, D., Berkes, F. and Doubleday, N. (2007) Adaptive Co-Management, UBC Press, Vancouver BC. CIA (1997) The 1997 World Fact Book. Copes, P. and Charles, A. (2004) Socioeconomics of individual transferable quotas and communitybased fishery management. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 33, 171–181. Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R. et al. (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253–260. FAO (1999) Number of Fishers 1970–1997. FAO Fisheries Circular 929. FAO, Rome. Garcia, S. M., Zerbi, A., Aliaume, C. et al. (2003) The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries. Issues, Terminology, Principles, Institutional Foundations, Implementation and Outlook. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 443. FAO, Rome. Hilborn, R. (2007) Defining success in fisheries and conflicts in objectives. Marine Policy 31, 153–158. Hokkaido Prefectural Government (2007) Hokkaido Fisheries white paper. Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Makino, M. and Matsuda, H. (2005) Co-management in Japanese Coastal Fishery: its institutional features and transaction Cost. Marine Policy 29, 441–450. Makino, M., Matsuda, H. and Sakurai, Y. (2009) Expanding fisheries co-management to ecosystembased management. Marine Policy 33, 207–214. Matsuda, H., Makino, M. and Kotani, K. (2008) Optimal Fishing Policies that Maximize Sustainable Ecosystem Services. In: Fisheries for Global Welfare and Environment, 5th World Fisheries Congress 2008, (eds K. Tsukamoto, T. Kawamura, T. Takeuchi, et al.), TERRAPUB, Tokyo, pp. 359–369. MacArthur, R. and MacArthur, J. W. (1961) On bird species diversity. Ecology, 42, 594–598. Ministry of Environment of the Government of Japan, Hokkaido Prefectural Government. (2007) The Multiple Use Integrated Marine Management Plan. Ruddle, K. (2008) Misconceptions, outright prejudice, SAMUDRA Report 48, 4–9. Townsend, R., Shotton, R. and Uchida, H. (2008) Case Studies in Fisheries Self-governance. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 604. FAO, Rome. UNEP CBD (2000) Decisions adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its 5th Meeting, UNEP/CBD/COP/5/23. UNEP GPA (2006) Ecosystem-Based Management: Markers for Assessing Progress. UNEP/GPA Coordination Office, Hagure. US National Research Council (1998) Sustaining marine fisheries. A report of the Committee on Ecosystem Management for Sustainable Fisheries. Ocean Studies Board, Commission on Geosciences, Environment and Resources, National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington DC. World Bank (2008) World Development Indicator 2007. World Bank, Washington DC. Worm, B., Barbier, E. B., Beaumont, N. et al. (2006) Impacts of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystem Services. Science 314, 787–790.

Ommer_c19.indd 333

12/22/2010 3:27:07 PM

Chapter 20

A Network Approach to Understanding Coastal Management and Governance of Small-scale Fisheries in the Eastern Caribbean Kemraj Parsram and Patrick McConney

Abstract In the eastern Caribbean, many people depend on the good governance of fisheries and other marine resources for their livelihoods and for development to be sustainable. The governance of small-scale fisheries in the eastern Caribbean often lacks the interactions among stakeholders needed to sustain fisheries management. There is an urgent need to understand networks in the governance of these fisheries without claiming that they are necessarily good or bad. Small, low status government fisheries units often have tenuous links to public sector policy and resource users. Other stakeholders, such as in tourism, may be more connected to policy, marginalizing small-scale fisheries even in the context of integrated coastal management. Network analysis has been applied to both social systems and ecological systems, but much less to social-ecological systems. We use cases of coastal and fisheries networks in the Caribbean to investigate and seek to understand the governance of social-ecological systems in the eastern Caribbean and their capacity to adapt. Keywords: Caribbean, coastal, governance, small scale fisheries, social network analysis

Introduction Images of the insular Caribbean, promoted mainly by tourism marketing, typically depict palm trees on white sandy beaches that stretch for miles along coasts washed by clear, turquoise waters and fringed by pristine coral reefs teeming with marine life. These idyllic images typically omit the local inhabitants pursuing the livelihoods and developments that link coastal and marine ecosystems to the equally important social, cultural, and economic systems of the Caribbean. This link is strong. The Caribbean Sea Ecosystem Assessment World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c20.indd 334

12/22/2010 3:27:23 PM

A Network Approach to Coastal Management in the Eastern Caribbean

335

(CARSEA), a sub-global component of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) asserts that: The peoples of the Caribbean are defined by the Sea whose shores they inhabit. In the rich diversity of cultures and nations making up the region, the one uniting factor is the marine ecosystem on which each ultimately depends” (Agard et al., 2007: xiv). The touristic images mask the underlying difficulties and escalating challenges of governing and managing coastal and marine resources, in the contexts of globalization and global change, among increasing and competing users and uses. Depletion of some fisheries resources, worsening coastal habitat degradation, increasing threats from climate variability and change, food security risks and concerns over fossil fuel costs, all contribute, among other factors, to the challenges faced by the small island developing states (SIDS) of the eastern Caribbean. These places and their people, characterized by coastal communities and enterprises (mainly fishing and tourism) that are heavily dependent on coastal and marine ecosystems, are particularly vulnerable to both natural and anthropogenic threats to life and livelihoods. Decisions on resource governance and management need to be cross-scale (e.g., jurisdictional and institutional) and multi-level (e.g., sub-regional, national, and local). Understanding how such societal decisions are now made and how they can be improved in the future for superior outcomes is crucial to coping with global change in marine social-ecological systems. With our perspective on the governance of fisheries and coastal management, grounded in thinking about them as complex adaptive systems (CAS) and social-ecological systems (SES), we examine aspects of a network approach to understanding coastal management and governance of small-scale fisheries in the eastern Caribbean. We briefly describe the resources and governance arrangements before illustrating the network approach with three examples. The cases are of: 1. international governance in the tuna fishery; 2. sub-regional management via fisheries science information exchange; and 3. mobilization of fisher folk organizations for participation in regional fisheries governance.

Coastal and fisheries resources The eastern Caribbean sub-region is geographically and politically diverse, with SIDS stretching in an island chain from the northern Leeward Islands to Trinidad and Tobago just north of South America (Fig. 20.1). This chapter focuses upon the majority, which are English-speaking member states of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), but interspersed among them are the dependencies and territories of metropolitan countries (USA, UK, France, and The Netherlands). The islands vary in terms of geology, physical size, political status, governance structures, economic situation, history, and culture among many features. There also similarities among some features. The latter include critical coastal and

Ommer_c20.indd 335

12/22/2010 3:27:24 PM

Costa Rica

Nicaragua

Colombia

60°W

US

Venezuela

I

30°N

10°N

Trinidad & Tobago

I in irg Anguilla V h Antigua and Barbuda itis Br St. Martin/St. Marten St. Kitts & Nevis 20°N Montserrat Guadeloupe Dominica Martinique St. Lucia Barbados St. Vincent & Grenadines Grenada

in rg Vi

Turks and Caicos I

ATLANTIC OCEAN

Haiti Dominican Puerto Rico Republic

Bahamas

Jamaica

Panama

Cayman I.

Honduras

Cuba

Fig. 20.1 Hypothetical Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) in the Wider Caribbean.

PACIFIC OCEAN

Belize

Mexico

USA

GULF OF MEXICO

70°W

Gu ya na

80°W

Su rin am e

90°W

Fr e Gu nch ian a

100°W

Bra zil

Ommer_c20.indd 336

12/22/2010 3:27:24 PM


337

marine ecosystems such as island shelves and slopes, coral reefs, sea-grass beds, mangroves, coastal lagoons, and beaches. These ecosystems and the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) around the islands form a mosaic of adjacent marine spaces that support a variety of goods and services, particularly fisheries and tourism related activities. The islands of the eastern Caribbean face similar environmental and socio-economic challenges. They are all highly dependent socially and economically on the marine environment and associated living resources. Many aspects of sustainable development in the insular Caribbean are intricately linked to living marine resources (Heileman, 2007). These resource bases support small-scale fisheries that contribute to local economies, more or less significantly depending on location, as sources of food supply, employment, and foreign exchange income earnings (Berkes et al., 2001; Mahon and McConney, 2004a). This dependence places intense pressures on living marine resources. The health of coastal ecosystems and fisheries resources has declined due to over-exploitation, habitat degradation, and pollution (UNEP, 2005), leaving a wide range of problems that are among the major challenges confronting the eastern Caribbean. Sustainable use and effective management of coastal and marine living resources are of major importance to these places, not only at local and island scales but at transboundary sub-regional and international scales due both to ecological processes (e.g., migration, larval dispersal) and global governance (e.g., political unions, international conservation instruments). The fisheries of the eastern Caribbean are dynamic and evolving small-scale socialecological systems, employing labor intensive harvesting, processing, and distribution technologies to exploit a few large stocks and several smaller stocks with a diverse array of species over several management units (Berkes et al., 2001; Fanning et al., 2007b). Most of the fishery resources are transboundary and shared. Species and species groups targeted include tunas and tuna-like species, dolphinfish, flyingfish, snappers, hinds, grunts, sea urchins, lobsters, conch, and many others. These fisheries vary in status of resources and exploitation trends, vessel and gear used, and the approaches to governance used for their development and management (Fanning et al., 2007b). In general shelf, reef, and near shore fish, which includes lobster and conch, are said to be either fully exploited or overexploited. The status of coastal large pelagic stocks is generally unknown, although there is evidence that some mackerel stocks are over-exploited. There is better information on the status of the oceanic stocks from the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) assessments. Yellowfin, albacore, and big eye tuna are estimated to be fully exploited. The status of the skipjack tuna and sailfish is unknown, while swordfish, blue marlin, and white marlin are over-exploited. However, some regionally distributed stocks may be adequate to allow expansion of pelagic fisheries (Mahon et al., 2003; Mahon and McConney, 2004a).

Governance issues In the eastern Caribbean, many people depend on the good governance of the small-scale fisheries and coastal resources described above for their livelihoods. They would wish for development to be equitable and sustainable, especially in coastal communities. However,

Ommer_c20.indd 337

12/22/2010 3:27:25 PM

338


ICCAT WECAFC ACS

OLDEPESCA

CARIFORUM CARICOM and CRFM

OSPESCA

OECS

Fig. 20.2 Overlapping fisheries governance organizations in the Caribbean (WECAFC = FAO West Central Atlantic Fishery Commission, ACS = Association of Caribbean States, CARICOM = Caribbean Community and Common Market, CRFM = Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism, OECS = Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, OLDEPESCA = Latin American Organization for Fishery Development, OSPESCA = Organización del Sector Pesquero y Acuícola del Istmo Centroamericano, ICCAT = International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas). CARIFORUM is a forum consisting of 16 Caribbean states which facilitates economic discussions with the European Union.

the governance of these complex fisheries and coastal resources has been challenging the diverse national and regional institutional arrangements that typically have limited capacities for fishery management due in part to small and fairly independent fisheries authorities (Mahon et al., 2005; Fanning et al., 2007a,b). Although these fisheries authorities operate much on their own, they are inevitably linked to the several regional and international level intergovernmental organizations with interest in fisheries that currently overlap each other creating issues of scale, capacity, power, politics, equity, law, and jurisdiction (Fig. 20.2) (Chakalall et al., 1998; Mahon and McConney, 2004b). Key organizations in the English-speaking eastern Caribbean include: the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and its Environment and Sustainable Development Unit (ESDU); the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and its Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (CRFM); and the Western Central Atlantic Fishery Commission (WECAFC) of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The approaches by national governments and these organizations to coastal and marine resource governance have generally been poorly coordinated or integrated. This is one of the reasons driving a currently ongoing project aimed at enhancing the transboundary governance and sustainable management of the shared living marine resources of the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) (Parsons, 2007).

Ommer_c20.indd 338

12/22/2010 3:27:25 PM


339

At the national and local levels there are issues related to weak institutions, poor leadership, inadequate information, and limited capacity that contribute to low levels of governance and non-governmental stakeholder engagement in dialog and action related to fisheries and coastal management in the eastern Caribbean (McConney and Parsram, 2007). Government authorities and/or statutory corporations, which typically have responsibility for fisheries, tourism, trade, transportation, foreign affairs, public health, environment, marine parks, and protected areas are seldom coordinated on marine policy matters. Management tools have either not been tried or have failed, and consequently most of the fisheries are lightly managed or unmanaged and are open access (Mahon, 1997, Chakalall et al., 1998; Grant, 2006; Mahon et al., 2008). Small states have tried unsuccessfully to mimic the organizational structures and management approaches of large countries, and indeed this is not appropriate (Mahon and McConney, 2004b). The diverse mix of regional and international organizations that often compete for the attention and time of the small staffs in the national fisheries departments at times unnecessarily duplicate efforts and serve to disrupt, rather than enhance, governance arrangements (Parsons, 2007). At the local level, and in a few countries at the national level, there are small fisher folk organizations (FFOs) operating with inadequate capacity and leadership in most cases. The majority of resource users and postharvest workers are not formally organized and often lack critical linkages with other stakeholders, across levels and scales in the governance regimes. These issues suggest that coastal and marine resource governance remains difficult and sometimes ineffective in the eastern Caribbean. Sustainable management of these systems and resources require a coordinated multi-sectoral approach taking, account of the needs and potential impacts of complementary and competing industries including agriculture, fishing, manufacturing, recreation, shipping, and tourism (Fanning et al., 2007b). It has been argued that transboundary and shared fisheries require strong regional integration of governance regimes, associated management approaches, and linkages across spatial and jurisdictional scales and at all levels (Mahon and McConney, 2004a; Fanning et al., 2007a; Chakalall et al., 2007). There is a need for stronger inter-organizational linkages in fisheries management, for example, as a means for enhancing and scaling-up the adaptive capacities of the small fisheries authorities from the national to regional levels, and fisher folk stakeholder groups from local to regional levels. However, these linkages seem to be lacking or poorly developed in the eastern Caribbean, and instead current governance and management arrangements appear to remain fragmented (Chakalall et al., 2007; Parsons, 2007, McConney et al., 2007). This situation calls for innovative approaches and perhaps a shift in the model of governance from attempts at command-and-control by the state authorities to ones that are more enabling, approached from complex adaptive systems (CAS) and social-ecological systems (SES) perspectives. Enabling policies with these perspectives encourage conflict management, collaboration, participation, subsidiarity, self-organization, collective action, adaptive co-management, and similar arrangements (McConney, 1997; Chakalall et al., 1998; Berkes et al., 2001; Mahon and McConney, 2004a; Kooiman et al., 2005; Bavinck et al., 2005). Self-organization, learning, and adaptive capacity, combined with polycentric networks of institutions with adequate cross-scale and cross-level linkages, are believed to confer resilience on governance systems (Berkes, 2006; McConney et al., 2007). These concepts are considered next.

Ommer_c20.indd 339

12/22/2010 3:27:26 PM

340


Network governance thinking Conventional approaches to fisheries governance and management typically assume that fisheries are more deterministic and predictable than they really are, and that they can thus be controlled through management action (Berkes et al., 2003; Charles, 2001; Mahon et al., 2005). For fisheries managers, other stakeholders and policy decision-makers to see the governance of fisheries as occurring through social-ecological system networks will require significant changes in the ways people think about fisheries, their connectivity, feedback loops, and generally the concepts that they use (Berkes and Folke, 1998). Berkes and Folke (1998) coined the term “social-ecological system” (SES) to emphasise the integration of humans-in-nature, proposing that social and ecological systems are inevitably linked or better described as interconnected, and that the delineation between the two systems is artificial and arbitrary. Models and conceptual frameworks of such coupled systems have been constructed to also integrate economic, cultural, political, and institutional dimensions of social-ecological interactions in ways that acknowledge and address complexity (Walker et al., 2006; Berkes et al., 2003). For example, Janssen and Ostrom (2006) explain SES as systems with both biophysical and social components, in which individuals self-consciously invest time and effort in developing forms of physical and institutional infrastructure that are embedded in layers of networks of relationships among smaller and larger clusters of actors, which affect the way the systems function over various time-scales in coping with diverse external disturbances and internal problems. Complex systems theory suggests that the structure and nature of connections between the elements of a system govern the dynamics and functions of that system. In social networks these connections describe who relates to whom in what way, and these linkages institutionalize the formal and informal operational rules that guide and govern people’s behavior (Straton and Gerritsen, 2005). Network theory has been used to describe and analyse emergent features of connected actors (Scott, 2000). A social network is a set of nodes (individual or organizational actors) related or linked to each other through specified relationships (ties). The relationships can involve the exchange of material or non-material resources, such as goods, money, information, services, social or emotional support, trust, or influence. Networks can be mapped and drawn to visually describe the many different features and types of interaction among actors. How a network is structured partly determines its function and performance (Straton and Gerritsen, 2005; Carlsson and Sandström, 2006). For example, the relative positions of nodes and the numbers of ties or frequencies of exchanges (strength of ties) can reveal who are the key and potentially powerful players in a network. Such actors may have significant influence over decisions and outcomes, or may be critical for facilitating or blocking the communication of information to others. Network analysis can also suggest the level of social capital possessed by a group or community. Networks are real and observable structures that can be measured using quantitative techniques in social network analysis (Wasserman and Faust 1994; Scott, 2000; Hanneman and Riddle, 2005). Networks of actors and stakeholders are gaining attention in studies of natural resource management. Janssen et al. (2006), Bodin (2006), Bodin et al. (2006), Carlsson and

Ommer_c20.indd 340

12/22/2010 3:27:26 PM


341

Sandström (2006), and Crona (2006) suggest that network theory has the potential to aid understanding of the interactions between institutional arrangements, individual decisions, and environmental and social outcomes in identifying strategies for improving collective management and governance of common pool resources such as fisheries. However, no comprehensive application of network analysis of fisheries and coastal resource governance in the eastern Caribbean has yet been undertaken. Here we seek to illustrate the potential practical application of how the network approach helps with understanding coastal and marine resource governance in the eastern Caribbean. These brief cases concern tuna management, fisheries science networks, and aspects of fisher folk organization.

Tuna fishery management Mahon and McConney (2004a) reviewed fisheries for large pelagics in the CARICOM region. Several countries in the eastern Caribbean have small-scale tuna fleets. These range from artisanal longline, 6-meter undecked and outboard-powered boats making trips of only a few hours in Grenada, to the 15-meter inboard-powered longliners of Barbados that make trips of up to 2 weeks. In all cases the main target species landed is yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares) destined for export to the USA. Other tunas and billfishes are bycatch sold locally along with the non-exportable grades of yellowfin. As described earlier, all of the large tunas are under the international management jurisdiction of ICCAT, to which only a few of the countries are contracting parties. Unlike the large tunas of interest to international industrial fleets and world trade, there are eastern Caribbean small-scale fisheries for several smaller tunas and tuna-like species that are less commercially important globally, and in which ICCAT takes little interest either for assessment or management at this time. The management of the tuna fisheries of the eastern Caribbean must be considered at different levels comprising diverse actors linked across jurisdictional, institutional, and geo-spatial scales in the formulation and delivery of policy, implementation of management measures, and use of resources. Figure 20.3, adapted from McConney et al. (2007), presents a very much simplified view of governance illustrated by the key linkages in tuna fishery management that impact the eastern Caribbean. The presence and directions of the arrows indicate major pathways for information and instruction flow. Arrow size is a rough indicator of the strength of the relationship. The network perspectives presented here were derived from literature related to CARICOM views on policy, planning, and management (Singh-Renton et al., 2003; Mahon and McConney, 2004a). The stylized diagram, arranged in four levels on a jurisdictional scale, shows ICCAT uppermost and communicating to the regional level CRFM Secretariat along with national level contracting parties, Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados. The link to Trinidad and Tobago is stronger because that country requested and received assistance from ICCAT in data management, whereas Barbados only receives communication from ICCAT but has so far not really engaged the organization in any way. Countries are members of the CRFM, OECS, and WECAFC, but on tuna matters the interaction is mainly with the CRFM Secretariat, which compiles data, interprets ICCAT decisions, and has attended ICCAT meetings.

Ommer_c20.indd 341

12/22/2010 3:27:26 PM


Food and Agriculture Organisation

International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas

INTERNATIONAL

342

Complex institutional linkages at policy level

WECAFC Secretariat

OECS Secretariat

REGIONAL

CRFM Secretariat

CRFM

St. Vincent and the Grenadines Barbados

Grenada

Trinidad and Tobago

WECAFC

Countries with adjacent EEZs share more linkages

Guyana USA Venezuela

Fewer connections among countries at the local level

LOCAL

St. Lucia

NATIONAL WITH ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERSHIP

OECS

Fig. 20.3 Tuna fishery management linkages.

The local level communities have no direct interaction with either ICCAT or any of the regional bodies. They interact among themselves primarily by fishers encountering each other at sea, and to a lesser extent by various interactions in fish trade. On some matters there may be more lateral interaction among fishers of different countries than between the fishers and fisheries authorities in the same country, and the latter interaction tends to be top-down (such as when fisheries authorities simply disseminate information). The diagram suggests primarily top-down power and policy linkages within a heterogeneous, hierarchical, but sparse network. National through to local level stakeholders are policy-takers,

Ommer_c20.indd 342

12/22/2010 3:27:26 PM


343

rather than makers or influencers. However, at the local level there is some dense and strong networking among fishers (e.g., longline fishers exchange information at sea; tournament anglers form a community of interest). Berkes’ (2006) analysis of tuna management in the eastern Caribbean within the context of cross-scale governance argued for bottom-up integration in fisheries management and suggested that ecological management units and maritime jurisdictions at the international, regional, national, and community levels were mis-matched and poorly linked. He pointed out scale mis-matches of power and knowledge that were seldom considered in conventional management. Local fishery knowledge has no way of making an impression in ICCAT assessments, since ICCAT is heavily focused on the complicated numerical models of “big” science. However, ICCAT wields power through its allocation criteria and management measures that affect the livelihoods of tuna fishers at the community level (Grant and Berkes, 2007). McConney et al. (2007) followed-up on this argument, noting that both bottom-up and top-down linkages between the three pairs of adjacent levels were weak. According to Mahon and McConney (2004a), although fisheries for large pelagics are economically important to most of the countries, they do not necessarily receive much attention from policy-makers such as fisheries ministers and their advisers. Information on international or regional fisheries management may not always penetrate beyond the national level fisheries authorities to reach fishing communities, fisher organizations, and individual fishers, due to the limited extension and outreach capacities of small fisheries authorities (McConney et al., 2007). There are few linkages between the industry and fisheries authority that assist in empowering the latter successfully to pursue policy decisions and to build national management capacity to participate internationally in ICCAT. Fisher folk organizations and harvest stakeholders at the local level are poorly organized to act collectively and influence policy processes (McConney et al., 2007). When the capital investment in tuna fishing enterprises increases, the individual wealth, power, and socio-economic status of vessel owners is such that there may be little interest in collective action since individual interests can be met through personal networks alone. The network perspective suggests that since the above conditions constrain, rather than build, the development of adaptive capacity and self-organization at the local level, resource users may not be adequately prepared for the shock of ICCAT management measures under the current arrangements if no enabling policy is implemented. Furthermore, additional national and regional vertical and horizontal linkages among organizations involved in governance may need to be established and sustained if the countries of the eastern Caribbean are to have their voice heard in ICCAT among the industrialized nations.

Fisheries science networks The CRFM member states’ national fisheries authorities contain fisheries data managers and scientists who have met with selected fisheries consultants and international fish stock assessment experts annually in the CRFM Scientific Meetings. For two weeks in the year they form a transient network, or community of practice, of pooled capacity for data sharing and some level of collaborative stock and fishery assessment, with the aim of tendering scientific advice to underpin fisheries policy and management decisions. The structure is

Ommer_c20.indd 343

12/22/2010 3:27:27 PM

344


to have regional working groups of scientists working in clusters based on the species or species groups to be managed. The record of these meetings suggests that the quantity and quality of data collected and shared for assessment, and the assessment processes themselves may often be insufficient for working groups to make concrete policy and management recommendations (Parsram, 2008). This inadequacy of fisheries science data and information may be due, in part, to poor communication, collaboration, and informationsharing among organizations involved in fisheries science in the remainder of the year during which preparation for the assessments should be taking place. Reduced intersessional communication may constrain the opportunities to improve governance through scientific advice offered to fisheries managers and policy-makers. The structural and functional characteristics of the fisheries science information exchange networks of national fisheries authorities in the eastern Caribbean are believed to have direct influence on the potential for successful communication and collaboration (Crona and Bodin, 2006). To examine this possibility, a preliminary social network analysis of the fisheries science network containing the four national fisheries authorities of Grenada, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, and Barbados, was conducted with emphasis upon information exchange. The analysis involved mapping the network of organizations (nodes) that participate in fisheries science; determining the relationships (ties and links) among these; and determining where fisheries science information is generated (source) and communicated to be used (sink) (Fig. 20.4). The resulting network (Fig. 20.4) shows nodes and their level in the governance hierarchy represented by shapes. Circles are organizations at the international level; squares are organizations at the regional level; triangles are organizations at the national level; and diamonds are organizations at the local level. The information that flows within these networks includes fisheries data, general fisheries information, scientific/analytic advice, funding for science, training in science, and assistance in science through consultants. The size of the arrows connecting nodes is proportional to the number of ties between any two nodes. In these networks most ties (thicker arrows) converge on the national fisheries authorities and the regional and international organizations, particularly the Caribbean Regional Fisheries Mechanism (CRFM), the Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission of the FAO (WECAFC), International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), University of the West Indies (UWI), and the Convention for International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). The least numbers of ties connected the national and local level organizations. There were no direct ties between any of the national fisheries authorities. However, key regional and International level organizations act as “boundary spanners”, connecting the otherwise unconnected national fisheries authorities. The results of the social network analysis suggest that the networks of the national fisheries authorities are not realizing their potential for fisheries science information exchange (i.e., the national fisheries authorities are not adequately connected across all levels). Their existing communication and information exchange linkages seemed to be directed upward, mainly towards organizations at the international and regional levels and not so much downward to the local level or laterally within the national level. The fisheries authorities are communicating less with each other and their local stakeholders than with the regional organizations.

Ommer_c20.indd 344

12/22/2010 3:27:27 PM


345

GRDDIVEASSOC

CARRIACOU_EC

OCEANSPIRITS GRENCODA SGU

SLUMINPLANSTATS

NMSF UNIWALES

TNC GRDFOREST

SLUSWASTE

SLUGAMEFISH_ASSOC

NOAA WIDECAST

SLUNATASSOC_FISHCOOP

GRDENVD

GRDFISH GRDPPLAN

IWC

SLUMARPOLICE SLUFISH

ART CANARI

SLUNATDEVCORP OECS CRFM SMMA

UWI

FAO_WECAFC SLUNATTRUST

ICCAT

CITES

BARFISH

SVGFISH SVGFISHCOOP

Barnufo

SVGMINTOUR

KTOWNFISHCORP

CALLIQFISHCENTER CZMU

BEQFISHCTR

CANFISHCTR SVGMINEDU

SVGSTATS

Fig. 20.4 Network map of fisheries science information exchange in the eastern Caribbean. Nodes are represented by shapes: circles = international organizations; squares = regional organizations; triangles = national organizations; diamonds = local organizations. Ties include fisheries science information, advice, funding, training, and assistance. Thickness of connecting arrows is the number of types of ties between any two nodes: thin line = 1, medium line = 2–3, and thick line = >3.

The national fisheries authorities and regional and international organizations (CRFM, WECAFC, ICCAT, UWI, OECS, and TNC) seem to be in positions to control the information flow in the network. They are likely to coordinate some of the flows within these network exchanges around their specific shared mandates (e.g., CRFM and ICCAT on tuna management as discussed in the section “Tuna fisheries management”). These exchanges have the potential to improve the communication and coordination at the lower levels if there are mechanisms that enable stakeholder participation. National fisheries authorities, and the regional and international fisheries organizations, that dominate the science communication and information exchange, could benefit from improving linkages with the other components such as national and local fisheries organizations. There was little or no information exchange between the national fisheries authorities and fishers, fisher’s organizations and other national level organizations, but strong communication and information linkages with organizations at the national and local levels could be crucial. For example, local and national fisher folk organizations should ideally be sources of raw fisheries-dependent data and may serve to validate fisheries independent data. Local harvesters should be receiving fisheries management and scientific information from the fisheries authorities via outreach initiatives. They also should be receiving

Ommer_c20.indd 345

12/22/2010 3:27:27 PM

346


information on opportunities for funding, training, and assistance in doing collaborative science from regional and international organizations through the national fisheries authorities, and sometimes directly from regional fisheries management organizations such as the CRFM.

Regional fisher folk organization The CRFM was designed to be a network of stakeholders (Haughton et al., 2004), although the term was used rather loosely. The intention was for nodes (countries or organizations) within the Mechanism to take the lead on various issues by using regional teams, making the CRFM polycentric and perhaps more adaptable while building indigenous capacity. Instead, activity has primarily been fairly centrally coordinated or implemented by the CRFM Secretariat. The CRFM is not (yet) operationalizing the network concept used in its design. Yet, despite the CRFM having set aside its own network thrust, it has taken the lead in supporting the establishment of a regional fisher folk organization (RFO) comprising a network of national fisher folk organizations (NFOs), each with its set of local level or primary groups (PFOs). In CARICOM countries, PFOs tend to be place-based, being associated with particular fish landing sites, markets, or harbors rather than being associated with the target marine resources or fishing gears and methods as common in North America and Europe. The project is expected to produce a transboundary, hierarchically networked RFO comprising three tiers, with the lower two being within the boundaries of member states on geographic and jurisdictional scales. The RFO network is intended to make inputs into enabling policy through engagement with the components of the CRFM, being primarily the Caribbean Fisheries Forum and the Ministerial Council (Fig. 20.5). The use of network perspectives goes further in that a collaborative planning group of researchers, fisher folk leaders, and personnel from the CRFM Secretariat are investigating options for the design of the RFO to optimize characteristics such as adaptive capacity and self-organization, in order to cope and achieve the resilience required for the RFO to be sustainable under changing global conditions. One of the favored

CARIBB

Nevis Montserrat

Barbuda Antigua

NISM

St. Kitts

S

HA EC

EA N

AL FISHER ION IE

M

G RE

Guadeloupe Dominica Martinique St. Lucia

St. Vincent Grenada

Barbados The Grenadines*

Fig. 20.5 Fisherfolk organization inputs into enabling fisheries policy.

Ommer_c20.indd 346

12/22/2010 3:27:27 PM


347

THE BAHAMAS

The Wider Caribbean

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

CUBA

THE UNITED STATES AND BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS ANGUILLA PUERTO RICO

BELIZE

JAMAICA

HAITI

ANTIGUA

DOMINICA

ST. LUCIA

BARBADOS

GRENADA TRINIDAD

GUYANA

Fig. 20.6 Regional fisherfolk organization model as decentralized linked clusters.

network configurations is that of multi-clusters that form around areas in which there are social-ecological similarities in resource use and human institutions. Figure 20.6 illustrates one such hypothetical option. Although it is inevitable that the RFO structure will result in a network of sorts, given the physical distribution of the participants around the Caribbean, it is an unconventional and progressive step for interested parties to collaborate in explicitly devising a network structure in order to derive the most benefit from CAS thinking in relation to fisheries governance.

Conclusion The network perspective is a very useful and complementary approach to understanding coastal and marine resource governance. We have briefly highlighted three cases in the eastern Caribbean of how network perspective can be applied to thinking about, analysing, and designing governance. Network perspectives provided useful observations on the nature of governance. Key structural characteristics and pathways through which information for policy and science flows were determined, identifying actors in critical positions of power and authority. Knowing these characteristics in systems of governance can help managers find problematic areas and implement appropriate solutions to improve performance, stimulate learning and innovation, build resilience and adaptive capacity, strengthen networks for better policies, and promote interactive good governance (Kooiman et al., 2005).

Ommer_c20.indd 347

12/22/2010 3:27:27 PM

348


The examination presented here was mainly conceptual. Network theory can be usefully applied to understanding governance and institutional arrangements in terms of network structure and particular roles in governance. More formal, quantitative analysis is required in exploring these and other cases of coastal and marine resource governance. This will provide better understanding how network structures, and the existence or absence of organizations and people playing particular roles within social networks, can impact on governance to achieve sustainability in the eastern Caribbean.

References Agard, J., Cropper, A., Garcia, K. (eds) (2007) Caribbean Sea Ecosystem Assessment (CARSEA). A sub-global component of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). In: Caribbean Marine Studies, Special Edition. Bavinck, M., Chuenpagdee, R., Diallo, M. et al. (2005) Interactive Governance for Fisheries: A Guide to Better Practice. Centre for Maritime Research (MARE). Eburon Academic Publishers, Amsterdam, 72 pp. Berkes, F. (2006) From community-based resource management to complex systems: the scale issue and marine commons. Ecology and Society 11(1), 45. (Online) URL: http://www.ecologyand society.org/ vol11/iss1/art45 Berkes, F. and Folke, C. (eds) (1998) Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 459 pp. Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (eds) (2003) Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Berkes, F., Mahon, R., McConney, P. et al. (2001) Managing Small-Scale Fisheries: Alternative Directions and Methods. International Development Research Centre, Canada, 320 pp. Bodin, Ö. (2006) A network perspective on ecosystems, societies, and natural resource management. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, Sweden. Bodin, Ö., Crona, B. and Ernstson, H. (2006) Social networks in natural resource management: What is there to learn from a structural perspective? Ecology and Society 11(2), r2. (online) URL: http:// www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/resp2/ Carlsson, L. and Sandström, A. (2006) Network governance of the commons. Paper presented at The Eleventh Biennial Global Conference of The International Association for the Study of Common Property (IASCP) Survival of the Commons: Mounting Challenges & New Realities, 19–23 June, Bali, Indonesia. Chakalall, B., Mahon, R. and McConney, P. (1998) Current issues in fisheries governance in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Marine Policy 22, 29–44. Chakalall, B., Mahon, R., McConney, P. et al. (2007) Governance of fisheries and other living marine resources in the wider Caribbean. Fisheries Research 87, 92–99. Charles, A. T. (2001) Sustainable Fishery Systems. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK, 384 pp. Crona, B. (2006) Of mangroves and middlemen: a study of social and ecological linkages in a coastal community. Doctoral Thesis in Marine Ecotoxicology. Department of Systems Ecology. Stockholm University. Sweden. Crona, B. and Bodin, Ö. (2006) What you know is who you know? Communication patterns among resource users as a prerequisite for co-management. Ecology and Society 11, (online) URL: http:// www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art7 Fanning L., Mahon, R., McConney P. et al. (2007a) A large marine ecosystem governance framework. Marine Policy 31, 434–443.

Ommer_c20.indd 348

12/22/2010 3:27:28 PM


349

Fanning, L., Mahon, R., McConney P. et al. (2007b) Living Marine Resource Governance for the Wider Caribbean with Particular Emphasis on Non-Extractable Resources and LME Level Monitoring and Reporting. A Discussion Paper for the CLME Synthesis Workshop, CLME Project, CERMES UWI. Grant, S. (2006) Managing small-scale fisheries in the Caribbean: the surface longline fishery in Gouyave, Grenada. Ph.D. Thesis. Natural Resources Institute, University of Manitoba. Grant, S. and Berkes, F. (2007) Fisher knowledge as expert system: a case from the longline fishery of Grenada, the Eastern Caribbean. Fisheries Research 84, 162–170. Hanneman, R. A. and Riddle, M. (2005) Introduction to Social Network Methods. University of California, Riverside CA. (online) URL: http://faculty.ucr.edu/∼hanneman/ Haughton, M., Mahon, R., McConney P. et al. (2004) Establishment of the Caribbean Regional fisheries mechanism. Marine Policy 28, 351–359. Heileman, S. (2007). Thematic report for the insular Caribbean sub-region. A discussion paper for the CLME synthesis workshop, CLME project, CERMES UWI. Janssen, M. A. and Ostrom E. (2006) Governing social-ecological systems. In: Handbook of Computational Economics II: Agent-Based Computational Economics (eds L. Tesfatsion and K. L. Judd), Elsevier, North Holland, pp.1465–1509. Janssen, M. A., Bodin, Ö., Anderies, J. M. et al. (2006) A network perspective on the resilience of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11(1), 15. (online) URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art15/ Kooiman, J. Bavinck, M., Jentoft, S. et al. (eds.) (2005) Fish for Life: Interactive Governance for Fisheries. MARE Publication Series No. 3, University of Amsterdam Press, Amsterdam. Mahon, R. (1997) Does fisheries science serve the needs of managers of small stocks in developing countries? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, 2207–2213. Mahon, R. and McConney, P. (eds) (2004a) Management of large pelagic fisheries in CARICOM countries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 464. FAO, Rome, 149 pp. Mahon, R. and McConney, P. (2004b) Managing the managers: improving the structure and operation of fisheries departments in SIDS. Ocean and Coastal Management 47, 529–535. Mahon, R., Bavinck, M. and Roy, R. (2005) Governance in action. In: Fish for Life: Interactive Governance for Fisheries (eds J. Kooiman et al.), MARE Publication Series No. 3, University of Amsterdam Press, Amsterdam. Mahon, R., McConney, P. and Roy, R. (2008) Governing fisheries as complex adaptive systems. Marine Policy 32(1), 104–112. Mahon, R., Chakalall, B., Cochrane, K. et al. (2003) Preparation for expansion of domestic fisheries for large pelagic species by CARICOM countries. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 56, 213–226. McConney, P. (1997) Social strategies for coping with uncertainty in the Barbados small-scale pelagic fishery. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 49, 99–113. McConney, P. and Parsram, K. (2007) Fisheries governance in the eastern Caribbean: network and institutional perspectives on policy. Fourth International Conference, MARE, Amsterdam. McConney, P., Oxenford, H. A., Haughton, M. (2007) Management in the Gulf and Caribbean: mosaic or melting pot? Gulf and Caribbean Research 19, 103–112. Parsons, S. (2007) Governance of Transboundary Fisheries Resources in the Wider Caribbean. A discussion paper for the CLME synthesis workshop. CLME project. CERMES UWI. Parsram, K. (2008) A preliminary analysis of fisheries science networks in the eastern Caribbean. Proceedings of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute 60, 88–96. Scott, J. (2000) Social Network Analysis: A Handbook, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, California. Singh-Renton, S., Mahon, R. and McConney, P. (2003) Small Caribbean (CARICOM) states get involved in management of shared large pelagic species. Marine Policy 27(1), 39–46.

Ommer_c20.indd 349

12/22/2010 3:27:28 PM

350


Straton, A. and Gerritsen R. (2005) Using network theory to analyse adaptive resource governance and distribution. In: ANZSEE Conference: Ecological Economics in Action, 11–13 December, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand., Society for Ecological Economics Palmerston North, New Zealand, pp. 40–56. United Nations Environmental Programme (2005) Caribbean Environmental Outlook. Special edition for the Mauritius International Meeting for the 10-year Review of the Barbados Programme of Action for Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States. UNEP, Nairobi. Walker, B., Gunderson, H., L. H., Kinzig, A. P. et al. (2006) A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 11(1), 13. [online] URL:http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art13/ Wasserman, S. and Faust, F. (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.

Ommer_c20.indd 350

12/22/2010 3:27:28 PM

Chapter 21

Uncertainty Demands an Adaptive Management Approach to the Use of Marine Protected Areas as Management Tools Michel J. Kaiser

Abstract Networks of marine protected areas are important conservation and resource management tools that are under development in Europe and elsewhere. The ability of MPAs to deliver stated objectives and targets is likely to be challenged under a scenario of a rapidly changing climate. Such changes will be greatest in shallow coastal areas where multiple physical stressors impinge on marine habitats and species. Links between fish abundance and prey biomass mediated by physical stress highlight the sensitivity of coastal carrying capacity to changes in the physical environment. Adaptive management approaches are required to accommodate changes in the capacity of coastal systems to deliver desired objectives. Keywords: Marine protected areas, physical stressors, adaptive management, “plaice box”, performance metrics

Introduction Marine protected areas can be used as management tools to achieve either conservation of specific species and habitats, or they may be used as tools to underpin the resilience of local fisheries eventually leading to spill-over effects, but more importantly providing insurance against environmental shocks (Gell and Roberts, 2003). Since 1964, more than 4,000 MPAs ranging in size from less than 1 Ha to 345,000 km2 have been declared around the world (UNEP, 2007). When extractive activities have been removed, wholesale or selectively, numerous studies have reported higher densities and larger sizes of fish and invertebrates within MPAs compared with adjacent areas where these activities continue (Bell, 1983; Buxton and Smale, 1989; Murawski et al., 2000; Halpern et al., 2004; Blyth-Skyrme World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c21.indd 351

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM

352


et al., 2006; Claudet et al., 2006; Guidetti, 2007). Quantitative syntheses of these studies, generally confirm these observations but highlight variation in the performance of individual reserves that is likely linked to local environmental and enforcement factors (Mosquera et al., 2000; Côté et al., 2001; Halpern, 2003; Micheli et al., 2004; Claudet et al., 2008). Most agree that the contribution of MPAs as tools to meet management and policy objectives will be enhanced if they contribute to a coherent network implemented at the appropriate scale. The scientific arguments for developing networks of MPAs are well understood, but the science that would underpin the design process is both demanding and incomplete (Soto, 2001; Sala et al., 2002, 2005). Such knowledge gaps are inevitable and managers and policy-makers need to develop strategies that can accommodate such uncertainties and accordingly incorporate mechanisms that impart adaptability to the MPA design process. In this chapter, I briefly highlight some important considerations for quantification of the performance of MPAs, and the issue of future changes in the marine environment that will impact upon the ability of networks of MPAs to deliver their intended objectives. This chapter is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all these issues, but to draw the attention of policy-makers to them. Finally, I suggest strategies that need to be incorporated into the legislative and design process that will promote adaptability.

Quantifying the performance of MPAs In general, MPAs are considered to be a management tool that can contribute to achieving either conservation, or sustainable (or both concomitantly) fisheries objectives. Attainment of the latter may rely upon achieving the former if it can be shown that the maintenance of biodiversity underpins the resilience of exploited systems (Worm et al., 2006). MPAs potentially enable the attainment of these objectives through the removal of anthropogenic activities that impinge upon the environment, habitat, or species of interest. A selection of such activities would include certain types of bottom fishing, aggregate extraction, land reclamation, etc. (Hall, 1994). The use of MPAs as a management intervention can only remove anthropogenic activities that might have an effect upon the “metric” of interest, and may thus contribute to the overall resilience of a system subject to large-scale background environmental change. In this chapter the word “metric” hereafter refers to the quantity of the response variable, for example, the quality of the environment, the amount of a certain habitat, or the abundance or biomass of a particular species. The effectiveness of an MPA as an intervention is related to the degree that an anthropogenic activity was the limiting factor for the metric of interest (Hiddink and Kaiser, 2005). For example, if trawling kills 50% of the benthic biota on a given area of seabed, while natural predation and density dependent effects account for only 20% of mortality, the removal of trawling is likely to have a positive outcome because its effect was large relative to other causes of mortality. Clearly if trawling accounted for only 20% of mortality while natural mortality accounted for a further 50% of mortality, the effect of the removal of trawling would be less pronounced or undetectable using inappropriate sampling designs and methodology (Table 21.1). Interpreting correctly the response of the metric (e.g., fish abundance, benthic biomass) to the MPA intervention becomes increasingly difficult as the importance of an

Ommer_c21.indd 352

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM

Uncertainty Demands an Adaptive Management Approach

353

Table 21.1 Consideration of objectives, desired outcomes and appropriate limiting factors that need to be measured to assess the success or failure of MPAs as a management intervention. The examples given are illustrative only. Desired outcome

Performance metric

Intervention

Other limiting factors

Causative agent

Increase abundance of species A

Abundance of species A

Remove fishing activity

Abundance of competitors

Community shift due to prior fishing history

Abundance of predators

Outcome of conservation objectives beyond boundaries of MPA, e.g., increasing seal abundance Changing environmental conditions altering carrying capacity Additional anthropogenic (pollution) or environmental factor altering key habitat characteristics

Biomass of prey Habitat quality

anthropogenic activity in limiting the metric declines relative to other limiting factors. Measuring the effectiveness of the intervention is further complicated if limiting factors act synergistically. If we accept the importance of understanding the factors that are key in limiting the response of the chosen metric, it follows that we need to invest effort in identifying the mechanistic relationship between response metrics (e.g., fish abundance) and potential limiting factors (e.g., prey abundance). In other words, when attempting to quantify the effectiveness of MPAs as a management intervention, it is not sufficient to quantify the change over time in a single response metric (e.g., fish abundance) in isolation from other limiting factors (Fig. 21.1). In situations where multiple variables have been measured, it is possible to differentiate the effects of the removal of trawling from the effects of variation in environmental variables (e.g., food supply, temperature, and salinity). However, examination of the literature relating to the outcome of implementing MPAs reveals that often few metrics have been measured, for example, fish biomass/abundance, and that time-series of data are scarce in relation to these studies. Time-series of data provide the necessary statistical power to differentiate the impacts of environmental variables from pressures such as trawling activity; hence it is clear that a policy commitment to monitoring the performance of MPAs is a necessary prerequisite to the quantification of potential outcomes.

The “plaice-box” as a case study A recently published case study highlights the necessity of understanding the additional limiting factors that influence response metrics of interest (Hiddink et al., 2008). The North Sea “plaice box” is an MPA designed to protect juvenile and under-sized plaice from the high levels of mortality associated with discarding: that is, the metric of interest is “the proportion of catch discarded as undersized plaice”. The key feature of the plaice box is that it extends over a large area of the sea (along the coastline of The Netherlands, Germany,

Ommer_c21.indd 353

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM


354

(c) Response variable

Response variable

(a)

Time (years)

Time (years)

Response variable

(b)

Time (years) Fig. 21.1 Different scenarios of the response variable that quantifies the outcome of the implementation of a Marine Protected Area (MPA). The dashed line shows the response within the MPA after removal of the limiting anthropogenic activity, the solid line shows the response of the same variable measured in comparator sites in which the anthropogenic activity remains. (a) In this scenario the removal the anthropogenic activity was the main limiting factor and other factors have little influence on the outcome. (b) Here the removal of the anthropogenic activity is beneficial; however, there has been a concomitant change (negative) in another limiting factor (e.g., prey abundance) that contributes to a continued decline in the response variable. Nevertheless this remains a positive outcome of the MPA as a management intervention. (c) This scenario illustrates the situation created by the North Sea plaice box, in which fishing actively stimulated the production of particular types of prey organisms that were the preferred food for plaice (flatfish). Consequently the proportion of the plaice catch that was retained declined (i.e., the proportion discarded increased) (from data in Hiddink et al., 2008).

and Denmark), from which large beam trawlers (that part of the fleet that has maximum impact on the fishery) are excluded. Beam trawling causes direct physical disturbance of the seabed, and this leads to the mortality of some components of the benthos, while creating space for colonization by smaller-bodied opportunistic species such as polychaete worms and small bivalve mollusks (Kaiser et al., 2006). Smaller vessels are allowed to continue fishing within the plaice box, while large beam trawlers tend to fish most heavily along the edge of the plaice box, presumably because they assume that greater numbers and larger fish will spill over at the edge of the MPA (Rijnsdorp and Leeuwen, 1996). In practice, however, fishermen began to report increasing catches of undersized plaice inside the box, leading to discards of more than 90% of the plaice catch. Using an extensively validated body-size-based model (Hiddink et al., 2006), Hiddink et al. (2008) were able to model the response of the benthic community to the removal of the direct disturbance caused by large beam trawlers within the plaice box, and the effect of the displaced activity along the edge of the plaice box. They found that the overall production of the benthos within the plaice box had increased between 1.5 and 2

Ommer_c21.indd 354

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM


355

times compared with that outside At the same time, however, the production of smaller soft-bodied fauna (the preferred food of plaice (Hinz et al., 2006) was twice as high outside the plaice box. As plaice abundance is positively correlated with prey biomass, Hiddink et al. (2008) concluded that plaice aggregate most in the areas outside the plaice box where the production of their preferred prey is higher. This explains the rather counter-intuitive observed response illustrated in Fig. 21.1c, and demonstrates the importance of understanding more fully the ecology of the species of interest. Reflecting on the plaice-box as a management intervention is instructive, as it illustrates a number of pitfalls that may occur when attempting to evaluate the performance of MPAs. As a tool to achieve the objective of reducing the proportion of the plaice catch discarded as undersized individuals, it is clear that the plaice box was not effective. However, there were other positive outcomes: the production of larger-bodied benthic fauna increased within the plaice box and, while these are not the preferred prey of plaice, they may perform important ecosystem functions (bioturbation, habitat creation) and provide prey for other commercially important fish species such as gadoids, elasmobranchs, and triglids. Thus, in terms of the response of large body-sized benthos, the response is similar to Fig. 21.1a, which is perhaps more intuitive.

Climate effects on MPA performance metrics The plaice-box case study also provides some insights into likely future changes in response metrics in relation to the changing global climate regime. Current predictions of future climate change scenarios predict that in the northeastern Atlantic the frequency and intensity of storm events will increase, while elevated sea-level will lead to changes in tidal current strength. In addition, precipitation will increase in intensity in northern Europe, with a greater likelihood of flood scenarios. These predictions have several implications. First, wave height will increase and consequently wave erosion at the seabed will increase concomitantly. Second, freshwater run-off patterns will change, which could affect the quality of water discharged into coastal areas (e.g., through increased nutrient loading from agricultural run-off) as well as the sediment loading. Furthermore, increasing the volume of riverine discharge into coastal waters would impact directly upon the associated Regions of Freshwater Influence (ROFI) that generate alongshore coastal currents driven by the density gradient between the surface freshwater discharge and coastal full salinity water (Parry et al., 2007). The majority of the world’s MPAs are located in shallow continental and coastal waters and adjoin the coastline (Gell and Roberts, 2003). Inshore coastal waters are among the most productive and consequently support commercially important fisheries (Paerl, 1997). Due to their shallow nature, marine ecosystems in coastal regions are subject to disturbance from wave and current induced stress and are directly affected by discharges from adjacent coastal catchment areas. Changes in physical processes will have considerable implications for coastal benthic communities and the species that depend upon them. Specifically, tidal currents generate water movement that transports sources of food to benthic communities, but as current strength increases, the effects of scour and reduced feeding efficiency begin to have negative effects on the benthos (Emerson, 1989). Wave erosion at the seabed is a

Ommer_c21.indd 355

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM

356


determinant of mortality in benthic invertebrates, with increasing wave stress associated with higher levels of mortality in the benthos (Rees et al., 1977; Emerson, 1989; Hiddink et al., 2006). Wave stress is highest in the shallowest areas and progressively decreases into deeper water, thus wave stress is a key determinant of benthic mortality in the shallowest waters. Changes in the quality of estuarine discharge linked to increased precipitation levels may stimulate production in coastal waters through the additional input of nutrients derived from catchments. Above a certain threshold, the associated increased sediment load will elevate mortality associated with smothering of fauna and interference with feeding structures (Rhoads, 1974). Empirical studies have demonstrated that interactions between physical processes in the coastal zone are key drivers that determine patterns of benthic production and biomass close the coast (Rhoads, 1974; Kaiser et al., 2006; Hiddink et al., 2008). In the shallowest waters adjacent to the coastline, wave stress is the key limiting factor and determinant of mortality of the benthos. As depth increases the effects of wave erosion are ameliorated such that biomass increases. Tidal currents in this region also ensure an adequate supply of food to the benthos. Moving further offshore into deeper water (>15 m), the effects of wave induced mortality declines rapidly, but the supply of food diminishes as tidal current strength weakens and hence benthic biomass declines once more. Given the predicted responses of physical drivers under a changing climate scenario, the likely outcome is net decrease of overall biomass supported in coastal waters and an offshore shift in the occurrence of the biomass peak that is determined by these physical processes. Given the observed link between benthivorous fish species abundance and prey biomass (benthic biomass), the carrying capacity of coastal seabed habitats for fish will decline with increasing levels of physical forcing (Hiddink et al., 2008). This has important implications for consideration with respect to the metrics that are set to determine the performance of MPAs or other spatial management measures. Setting absolute figures against which to judge performance (e.g., MPA X will maintain a biomass of 400 tonnes of fish species Y) run a considerable risk of leading to the potentially inaccurate conclusion that the MPA intervention has failed. Performance metrics should be relative measures that are compared with valid comparator sites (e.g., MPA X will maintain a biomass Y% higher than comparator site Z with fishing activity level N). Nevertheless, in some circumstances there may be valid ecological reasons (e.g., critical spawning stock biomass) for setting absolute values for conservation purposes. It therefore follows that if carrying capacity declines, a network of MPAs designed under present environmental conditions may not deliver the desired outcome at some point in the future.

Dealing with future uncertainty There are several approaches that can be used to accommodate future uncertainties regarding the ability of MPAs to deliver their stated targets. In the case of species of commercial importance, a decline in the ability of MPAs to support the desired level of fish could be compensated by reductions in existing fishing effort. Alternatively the spatial extent of the MPAs could be increased to the required level to deliver the desired outcome. However the latter is unpalatable for policy-makers either because of difficulties associated with

Ommer_c21.indd 356

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM


357

renegotiating boundaries, or because of the perception that this can been seen as a potential loop-hole that some might use to reduce the integrity and extent of a network of MPAs. Such difficulties emphasize the necessity of ensuring that legislative frameworks exist such that it is clear from the outset that assessment and revision is part of and evidencebased process. If we are serious about convincing stakeholders about the value and contribution that networks of MPAs can make towards sustainable use of natural resources, we must be prepared to refine spatial restrictions that were initially informed by incomplete scientific knowledge, or that were designed under a set of environmental conditions that no longer apply.

References Bell, J. D. (1983) Effects of depth and marine reserve fishing restrictions on the structure of a rocky reef fish assemblage in the northwestern Mediterranean. Journal of Applied Ecology 20, 357–369. Blyth-Skyrme, R. E., Kaiser, M. J., Hiddink, J. G., Edwards-Jones, G. and Hart, P. J. B. (2006) Conservation benefits of a marine protected area vary with fish life-history parameters. Conservation Biology 20, 811–820. Buxton, C. D. and Smale, M. J. (1989) Abundance and distribution of three temperate marine reef fish in exploited and unexploited areas off the southern cape coast. Journal of Applied Ecology 26, 441–451. Claudet, J. et al. (2006) Assessing the effect of MPA on a reef fish assemblage in a NW Mediterranean reserve: identifying community based indicators. Biological Conservation 130, 349–369. Claudet, J., Osenberg, C. W., Benedetti-Cecchi, L. et al. (2008). Marine reserves: size and age do matter. Ecology Letters doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01166.x Côté, I. M., Mosqueira, I. and Reynolds, J. D. (2001) Effects of marine reserve characteristics on the protection of fish populations: a meta-analysis. Journal of Fish Biology 59, (Supplement A), 178–189. Emerson, C. (1989) Wind stress limitation of benthic secondary production in shallow, soft-sediment communities. Marine Ecology Progress Series 53, 65–77. Gell, F. R. and Roberts, C. M. (2003) Benefits beyond boundaries: the fishery effects of marine reserves. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18, 448–455. Guidetti, P. (2007) Potential of marine reserves to cause community wide change changes beyond their boundaries. Conservation Biology 21, 540–545. Hall, S. J. (1994) Physical disturbance and marine benthic communities: life in unconsolidated sediments. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 32, 179–239. Halpern, B. S. (2003) The impact of marine reserves: do reserves work and does reserve size matter? Ecological Application 13(1), 117–137. Halpern, B. S., Gaines, S. D. and Warner, R. R. (2004) Confounding effects of the export of production and the displacement of fishing effort from marine reserves. Ecological Application 14, 1248–1256. Hiddink, J. G. and Kaiser, M. J. (2005) Implications of Liebig’s law of the minimum for the use of ecological indicators based on abundance. Ecography 28, 264–271. Hiddink, J. G., Hutton, T., Jennings, S. and Kaiser, M. J. (2006) Predicting the effects of area closures and fishing effort restriction on the production, biomass, and species richness of benthic invertebrate communities. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63, 822–830. Hiddink, J. G., Rijnsdorp, A. D. and Piet, G. J. (2008) Can bottom trawl disturbance increase food production for a commercial fish species? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 65, 723–732.

Ommer_c21.indd 357

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM

358


Hinz, H., Bergmann, M., Shucksmith, R., Kaiser, M. J. and Rogers, S. I. (2006) Habitat association of plaice, sole and lemon sole in the English Channel. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63, 912–927. Kaiser, M. J., Clarke, K. R., Hinz, H., Austen, M. V. C., Somerfield, P. J. and Karakassis, I. (2006) Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series 311, 1–14. Micheli, F., Halpern, B. S., Botsford, L. W. and Warner, R. R. (2004) Trajectories and correlates of community change in no-take reserves. Ecological Applications 14, 1709–1723. Mosquera, I., Côté, I.M., Jennings, S. and Reynolds, J.D. (2000). Conservation benefits of marine reserves for fish populations. Animal Conservation 3, 321–332. Murawski S. A., Brown, R., Lai, H. L., Rago, P. J. and Hendrickson, L. (2000) Large-scale closed areas as a fishery management tool in temperate marine systems: the Georges Bank experience. Bulletin of Marine Science 66, 775–798. Paerl, H. W. (1997) Coastal eutrophication and harmful algal blooms: Importance of atmospheric deposition and groundwater as ‘new’ nitrogen and other nutrient sources. Limnology and Oceanography 42, 1154–1165. Parry, M. L., Canziani, O. F., Palutikof, J. P., Van der Linden, P. J. and Hansen, C. E. (eds) (2007) Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 976 pp. Rees, E. I. S., Nicholaidou, A. and Laskaridou, P. (1977) The effects of storms on the dynamics of shallow water benthic associations. In: Biology of Benthic Organisms (eds B. F. Keegan, P. O. Ceidigh and P. J. S. Boaden), Pergamon, Oxford UK, pp. 465–474. Rhoads, D. (1974) Organism-sediment relations on the muddy sea floor. Oceanography and Marine Biology Annual Review 12, 263–300. Rijnsdorp, A. D. and Leeuwen, P. I. (1996) Changes in growth of North Sea plaice since 1950 in relation to density, eutrophication, beam-trawl effort, and temperature. ICES Journal of Marine Science 53, 1199–1213. Sala, E., Aburto-Oropeza, O., Paredes, G., Parra, I., Barrera, J. C. and Dayton, P. K. (2002) A general model for designing networks of marine reserves. Science 298, 1991–1993. Sala, P. F., Cowen, R. K., Danilowicz, B. S. et al. (2005). Critical science gaps impede use of no-take fishery reserves. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20, 74–80. Soto, C. (2001) The potential impacts of global climate change on marine protected areas. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 11, 181–195. UNEP World Database on Protected Areas (WWW document) URL http://www.unep-wcmc.org/ wdpa/index.htm (last accessed 30 November 2007). Worm, B., Barbier, E. B., Beaumont, N., Duffy, et al. (2006) Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science 314, 787–790.

Ommer_c21.indd 358

12/22/2010 3:27:46 PM

Chapter 22

Building Resilience to Climatic and Global Change in High-Latitude Fishing Communities Three Case Studies from Iceland and Alaska1 James R. McGoodwin

Abstract The 2007 IPCC reports conclude with virtual certainty that a global warming trend is underway. This chapter first discusses the sorts of impacts that are forecast for marine ecosystems and the world’s fisheries, and then discusses impacts that are forecast for fisheries in highlatitude regions, where the impacts of global change are forecast to be especially severe. Three case studies from high-latitude fishing communities – one from Iceland, two from Alaska – are presented in this chapter. Each explores how fishing people have responded in recent decades to climatic and marine-environmental phenomena of the sort that may be altered by global warming and change. These phenomena include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

ordinary climatic variability; severe coastal storms and extreme weather events; changes in marine-ecosystem compositions; sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion; and the urgent necessity for developing fisheries-management systems that can enhance coastal fishing communities’ abilities to cope with the foregoing phenomena.

Knowing how these three communities have responded to the foregoing phenomena provides insights concerning their relative degree of resilience to the sort of changes that global warming and change may prompt in high-latitude regions. A number of broad recommendations are offered at the end of the chapter concerning how to build the resilience of high-latitude fishing communities to global warming and change. Several recommendations are offered, including the necessity of increased World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c22.indd 359

12/22/2010 3:28:06 PM

360


planning and coordination to build resilience to severe coastal storms and extreme weather events, sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion, and changes in marine-ecosystem composition. Recommendations for fisheries-management regimes are also provided. Keywords: Climate change, fisheries, Arctic, Sub-Arctic, Alaska, Iceland

Introduction The IPCC reports released in 2001 and 2007 conclude with virtual certainty that a global warming trend is underway, driven by anthropogenic emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases (IPCC, 2001 reports include those by Houghton et al., 2001; McCarthy et al., 2001 and Metz et al., 2001; IPCC, 2007 reports include those by Bernstein et al., 2007; Metz et al., 2007; Parry et al., 2007 and Solomon et al., 2007). A global increase in temperature, as well as sea level rise prompted by ocean water expansion and melting ice in high latitudes, is anticipated. And even if greenhouse gas emissions are stabilized, the warming trend is forecast to continue for centuries to come, with the extent of its future increase depending mainly on the relative intensity of human fossil fuel use in the future. There will be more frequent heat waves and heavy rainfalls, glaciers will continue to disappear, and there will be an overall increase in droughts, extreme high tides, tropical cyclones, and significant changes in the Earth’s living ecosystems. Various forecasts of the consequences of this change for the Earth’s natural ecosystems and global humanity have emerged, ranging from the relatively benign to the truly catastrophic. Some describe gradual, incremental changes that humanity will have a high likelihood of adapting to. Others foresee catastrophic and even “doomsday” changes that would be disastrous for much of the world’s human population. And yet, while most scientists agree that a long-term global warming trend is already underway, there is little agreement among them regarding its specific impacts and ultimate consequences for humanity. Similarly, forecasts of the impacts in fishing communities in coastal regions are also currently characterized by high degrees of uncertainty. Thus, until a global monitoring system is put in place, many scientists think that forecasting global warming’s impacts on coastal fishing communities will have to rely on case studies that link past climate and marine-ecosystem changes with changes in fisheries. This chapter first discusses the sorts of impacts that are forecast for marine ecosystems and the world’s fisheries. Next, it discusses impacts that are forecast for fisheries in highlatitude regions where the impacts of global change are forecast to be especially severe. Three case studies from high-latitude coastal fishing communities are presented: one from Iceland, the other two from Alaska. The central concern in each of these case studies is to discover how fishing people in these regions have responded to past climatic and marine-ecosystem variability, on the assumption that this may provide important clues concerning their resilience to longer-term climatic and marine-ecosystem change. Specifically, the study focuses on how these fishing communities have been affected by four climatic, marine-ecological, and hydrological phenomena of the kind that the IPCC 2007 reports suggest will significantly change throughout the rest of this century, as well as a fifth variable concerning the capacity of their fisheries-management systems to cope with this. The five key variables are:

Ommer_c22.indd 360

12/22/2010 3:28:06 PM

Building Resilience to Climatic and Global Change

361

1. Ordinary climatic events (e.g., precipitation, snowfall, atmospheric temperature, prevailing winds, and, where relevant, river conditions), which the IPCC 2007 reports project with “very high confidence”, will undergo significant pattern changes in coastal regions. 2. Severe coastal storms and extreme weather events, which the IPCC 2007 reports project with “very high confidence”, will increase in frequency and intensity. 3. Changes in marine-ecosystem composition, including changes in fish-stock availability, composition, and size, which the IPCC 2007 reports project with “high confidence”, will undergo significant changes. 4. Sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion, which the IPCC 2007 reports project with “high confidence” and “very high confidence,” respectively, will see significant increases in the near future. 5. The capacity of the fisheries management system to cope with the foregoing climatic and marine-ecosystem phenomena. How well these coastal communities have, or have not, been able to adapt to these stressors in the past suggests their degree of resiliency to them in the future. Based on the findings, recommendations are presented for increasing these communities’ resilience to the sorts of climatic and marine-ecosystem changes that are forecast to take place in their regions through to the year 2100. Social-ecological resilience is described in Folke et al. (2002), Holling (1973), and Walker et al. (2004). Folke et al. state: resilience for social-ecological systems is often … related to three different characteristics: (a) the magnitude of shock that the system can absorb and remain within a given state; (b) the degree to which the system is capable of self-organization, and (c) the degree to which the system can build capacity for learning and adaptation. Similarly, Holling says, “resilience determines the persistence of relationships within a system and is a measure of the ability of these systems to absorb a change of state … and still persist,” while Walker et al. see resilience as “the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and re-organize while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity and feedback.” To the foregoing, I have also applied thinking appearing in Rubinoff and Courtney (2008), regarding the resilience of coastal communities to severe coastal storms and other extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and saltwater intrusion. Moreover, my conception of resilience also allows for the possibility that certain stressors may so overwhelm a coastal community that it precludes its future existence.

Impacts that are forecast for marine ecosystems and the world’s coastal fishing communities A variety of future climate change projections have been proposed with respect to global warming’s impact on the world’s fisheries and fishing communities, ranging from the mildly beneficial to the truly catastrophic. At the most benign end of the spectrum, a few

Ommer_c22.indd 361

12/22/2010 3:28:06 PM

362


scientists have suggested that a general global warming of ocean waters may actually increase global ocean productivity, especially in high-latitude regions. Still, they concede, this may not occur, at least not in the immediate future, if the rate of global change is too great, and in any event such a change would still entail significant changes in species distributions, ecosystem biodiversities, and ecosystem biomass. Most scientists, however, offer projections describing more disruptive changes in ocean productivity, marine-species distribution, and ecosystem biodiversity. Some suggest there will be outright extinctions at the margins of various species’ current distributional ranges, and many think the impact of ocean warming on various marine species will be most pronounced at the northern and southern margins of their customary ranges. Even slight changes in ocean temperatures may prompt significant shifts in the distribution of various fish species – for example, from one nation’s EEZ to that of a nearby nation, while changes in stock distributions within a nation’s EEZ may be disruptive to various components of the fish chain, including producers, processors, marketers, ancillary fisheries enterprises, and ultimate consumers. And such disruptions may be especially disruptive in developing countries, whose coastal inhabitants often have few other economic alternatives available to them. Although global warming will prompt a general increase in ocean water temperature worldwide, some regions may actually become cooler. Thus new climatic and ocean-current patterns will prompt the development of temperature regimes in many regions that are currently unprecedented and difficult to foresee. And whether these changes will be sufficiently gradual to allow species and ecosystems to adapt to them also remains to be seen. Moreover, global climate change may prompt fisheries in some regions to display unanticipated, anomalous, and even counter-intuitive effects. For regional changes in the abundance of various fish species, there will be “winners” and “losers”, but not necessarily in a zero-sum sense. This is because the pace of change will remain an important determinant of how various marine species fare as a result of warming. Warming may therefore prompt rapid collapses of species in marine ecosystems that are unable to adapt to environmental changes as quickly as they are taking place. Some catastrophic projections have also been proposed including extreme changes in climate regimes and ocean currents, extraordinary sea-level rise, and acidification of the ocean. Regarding the first of these catastrophic possibilities, some scientists propose that the Gulf Stream may be significantly slowed, or even shut down, by an influx of cold fresh water from melting Arctic ice. Should this happen, they think a new ice age might ensue in Europe in less than 10 years. It has also been suggested that widespread melting of ice in Arctic and Antarctic regions could prompt as much as a 20-foot rise in sea level during the coming century, displacing roughly 50–70% of the world’s human population, which now lives in coastal zones. Indeed, even modest rises in sea level may be catastrophic for people living in many developing countries. The World Bank, for example, has recently estimated that even a 1 m rise in sea level would turn at least 56 million people in the developing world into environmental refugees (World Bank, 2007). Acidification of the ocean, depending on its degree, could also be catastrophic for ocean ecosystems. Acidification of ocean water is caused by increased CO2 in the atmosphere, which increases the amount of carbonic acid that is dissolved in ocean waters. And while temperature changes will vary considerably in different regions of the ocean, increased acidification and CO2 in ocean water will likely be spread more evenly and pervasively throughout the oceans worldwide. Especially at risk from acidification will be corals and

Ommer_c22.indd 362

12/22/2010 3:28:06 PM


363

mollusks, the “marine calcifiers”, whose skeletons and shells are constructed from calcium carbonate. Significant acidification may therefore lead to a widespread decimation of tropical reefs around the world, as well as the decimation of the many fish and other marine species that live around them. At the same time ocean acidification may reduce the general health and productivity of marine species found in temperate and high-latitude regions (Conover, 2007; Feely, 2007). A realization of even the more conservative projections of increasing frequency and intensity of storms, sea-level rise, and saltwater intrusion will place great strains on coastal communities. Rising sea levels accompanied by increasingly persistent coastal flooding in some regions, and permanent inundations in others, as well as increased saltwater intrusion that threatens supplies of domestic drinking-water and water used in agriculture, may prompt not only radical marine ecological change but may also require costly relocation of shore-side facilities, other supporting infrastructure, and domestic dwellings. The global warming trend may also prompt unprecedented, extraordinary, and lasting changes in some fisheries, which may be much more difficult, and in some cases impossible, for fishing communities to adapt to. Fish species never seen before may suddenly become abundant in some locations, while other species that have been long relied upon there may disappear. In some regions climatic and ocean-ecosystem changes may be the sole reason for fish disappearance, but these changes may also be exacerbated by the combined effects of ocean-ecosystem change and excess fishing effort. In sum, as global warming proceeds, the management regimes that fishing communities work within will likely be confronted with higher degrees of uncertainty than they have faced in the past. This will heighten tensions between fishing people and fisheries managers, and likewise heighten fishing peoples’ uncertainties regarding what investments they should make in the fisheries. Working in dynamic combination, climate change and fishing effort will prompt sometimes unprecedented ocean-ecosystem changes in ways that are currently difficult to forecast. Indeed, these two stressors influence ocean ecosystems in rather different ways: climatic and environmental change are usually more extensive, while fishing activity is more often selective and intensive, targeting larger individual fish or larger fish species. Fisheries scientists may be increasingly less able to provide credible assessment advice for preventing major fishery collapses as the climatic and marine-environmental conditions move farther from their historic baselines. Heretofore estimates of the abundance of fish species have been derived mainly from records of fish landings. But landings are often as much influenced by politico-economic factors, fishing methods, and fishing effort, as they are by climatic and ecosystem conditions. Thus, fisheries managers who are poorly informed about changing ocean-ecological conditions, and who continue to rely on data on landings, may unwittingly accelerate stock collapses or other unintended situations. Nonetheless, for the world’s fishing communities, from the smallest-scale subsistenceoriented ones to the largest-scale industrialized ones, being able to adapt to future climatic and marine-ecological variability and change will be essential for sustaining their societies, economies, and general well-being. It will also be essential for sustaining those world food supplies that are derived from the sea. The impacts of global warming are expected to be especially severe in high-latitude regions. As the planet warms, melting sea ice will infuse greater quantities of fresh water into ocean ecosystems. And more problematic, because sea ice reflects much of the sun’s

Ommer_c22.indd 363

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM

364


heat back into space, as it melts ocean waters will absorb more of the sun’s heat, accelerating the warming phenomenon and correspondingly accelerating the rate of sea-level rise. As a result, the pace and intensity of ocean-ecosystem change in high-latitude regions will be especially pronounced. The 2004 ACIA report, for example, concluded that the Arctic climate is changing almost twice as fast as the rate of climatic change at lower latitudes (ACIA, 2004), while the 2001 and 2007 IPCC reports demonstrate that the greatest temperature increases over the last 35 years occurred in Arctic and sub-Arctic regions. In parts of these regions the warming has been extreme, as much as 3.9–5.6°C (~7–10°F). Projecting this trend two to three decades into the future, such warming may prompt rapid disruption, alteration, or even collapse of marine-ecological systems as they are unable to adapt as fast as the rate at which change is taking place.

Case studies from three high-latitude fishing communities The IPCC 2007 working group on fisheries (Parry et al., 2007) acknowledged that its forecasts regarding global warming’s impacts on fisheries had been mainly informed by case studies that had focused on how ocean-environmental changes may have influenced fish stocks in the recent past. Indeed, scientists currently have to rely to a great degree on case studies to help them understand how fishing communities and fisheries-management organizations should respond to the challenges posed by global warming. In recent years a number of case studies have emerged suggesting the linkages between fishing effort, climatic and environmental changes, and fishery collapses, including the collapse of the long-abundant herring stocks around Iceland in the 1960s. Initially thought to have resulted from overfishing, recent advances in the environmental sciences now support conclusions that the collapse was actually the result of excessive fishing combined with changed environmental conditions (Arnason, 1995; Belkin et al., 1998; Dickson et al., 1988; Durrenberger and Pálsson, 1989; Hamilton et al., 2004). In 2001 through 2004, I explored how three different high-latitude fishing communities (one in Iceland and two in Alaska) had responded to climatic and marine-environmental variability in the recent past. In the first phase of the research, I mainly looked for how fishing activities and fishing production had been influenced by climatic and other environmental variability in recent decades. This phase also entailed studies of meteorological data and various archival sources. Excellent data tracking climatic and marine-environmental variability over several past decades, and excellent data tracking fishing activities and production over the same decades, were also available. But data on longer-term climatic and marine-environmental change were virtually non-existent, as is the situation in most of the world’s fisheries. Initially, I sought to understand how fishing communities in these regions had responded to climatic and marine-environmental variability in the past, since that could provide clues as to how they might respond to future climatic and marine-environmental change. From that, fisheries-management policies could be derived to give these communities a better chance of making sustainable adaptations to change, which would help to generally inform fisheries policies for high-latitude regions. Eventually, I undertook broader considerations of the communities themselves, and their potential resilience to phenomena that are forecast to be prompted by climatic and global change.

Ommer_c22.indd 364

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM


365

Case Study 1: Heimaey, Iceland Heimaey, Iceland lies at 63° North latitude, approximately 315 km South of the Arctic Circle. Situated on a small island off Iceland’s South Central coast, it is a fully modern, industrialized fishing community, its high-relief coastline providing a well-protected harbor with naturally hardened shore-side facilities. Although it has only 4,600 inhabitants, it is Iceland’s largest fishing port in terms of landings and value of landed catch, and it has extensive industrialized fish-processing facilities. A very high percentage of the town’s year-round population works in the fisheries, although some of the fishers who work on large-scale vessels are based here only seasonally. Nonetheless, most of the people who work in the fisheries live in Heimaey. The community targets a great diversity of fish species year-round, and has small-, intermediate-, and large-size fishing vessels that work within Iceland’s 200-mile EEZ and are managed by a stock-assessment and ITQ system that is operated by the Icelandic government. Virtually all of the fish produced by the community is turned over to a local market for export abroad, and this local market is highly interconnected with global fish markets. I found as follows:

Responses to ordinary climatic events As with the other two case study communities, ordinary climatic events and variations in their annual impacts have had virtually no impact on fishing activities, fishing production, and everyday life over several past decades. Regression analyses comparing climatic variability with data on fishing activity and production over the past two decades showed no significant relationships. This suggests that this fishing community is well-able to cope with ordinary climatic and environmental variability.

Responses to severe coastal storms and extreme weather events Because of the nature of the coastline, over the past several decades severe storms and extreme weather events have had little impact on either the community’s terrestrial infrastructure, or its large-vessel enterprises that are able to fish in practically any conditions. On the other hand, there are high risks for small-vessel enterprises, causing frequent curtailments of fishing activities and fishing production, as well significantly higher losses of life at sea, especially during the stormy winter months. Indeed, in recent years the community’s large-scale operators have enjoyed a sizeable competitive advantage over their smaller-scale counterparts by virtue of their being able to spend more time fishing, especially during Iceland’s severe winter months. Because the larger vessels can catch far more fish per crew member employed than can the smaller vessels, this also has given them a significant competitive advantage. Hence, while most large-scale enterprises have prospered in recent years, small-vessel enterprises have been progressively marginalized, and unemployment levels among small-boat crew members has increased. This trend is also evident in the increasing concentration of ITQ licenses among largescale enterprises seen in recent years, and their corresponding decrease among smallscale enterprises (see also Pálsson, 1991 and 1998, and similar findings regarding Iceland, as well as Newfoundland and Norway, appearing in Hamilton and Butler, 2001,

Ommer_c22.indd 365

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM

366


and Hamilton et al., 2006). An increased incidence of ocean storms prompted by climatic change in the future would likely marginalize Heimaey’s small-boat operators even more.

Responses to changes in marine-ecosystem composition, including changes in fish-stock availability, composition, and size Although the ITQ management regime has so far prevented over-harvesting, most fish stocks are being harvested to near their theoretical limits. The nature of this regime imposes harvest levels that would be difficult to reduce under ITQs, should changes in climatic and ocean-ecosystem conditions require it, and leaves fishers vulnerable to severe economic risks should, changing ocean-ecosystem conditions require a rapid revision of the customary quotas. Even though ordinary fish-stock variability has, for the most part, remained within historic baselines in recent years, there have been a few occasions when the management system was unable to effectively manage some extreme variations in certain stocks. Although local fishers and fishery managers have often claimed that these extreme variations were “unforeseen”, in fact there were precedents for some of them in the past two decades. Furthermore, virtually all fishers stress that the current ITQ regime affords them little flexibility in being able to respond to natural variations in fish-stock availability. In essence, those having quota rights for certain stocks cannot easily switch to fishing other stocks when the stock they “own” is unavailable, not even when no other fishers have rights to those alternative stocks. The local fishing community’s economic security is also threatened by its high degree of integration in global fish markets, including markets that are greatly influenced by climatic variability in distant other parts of the world. Notably, when the El Niño drastically curtails Peruvian fish-meal production, those Icelandic reduction fishers who have quota rights for “reduction species”, along with reduction processors, will have a very profitable year. On the other hand, high production seasons in the Peruvian fishery can render the Icelanders’ quotas for reduction species virtually worthless – no matter how abundant they may be. Thus, the local fishing community in Iceland is economically vulnerable to the effects of distant climatic events over which it exerts no control, and which are also often difficult to anticipate. In this semi-isolated island community, which is highly dependent on its fishing industry, a lack of alternative economic opportunities also places its inhabitants at great economic risk should ocean-ecosystem changes bring about declines in essential fish stocks. There is a growing economy based on summer tourism, but this is seasonal, and in any event would not provide very many employment alternatives for Heimaey’s inhabitants should the fisheries experience significant reversals.

Responses to sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion Because of its location on a high-relief rocky coastline, with its harbor and shore-side facilities well protected from prevailing seas and most of its domestic dwellings on higher ground, Heimaey’s fishing community is not currently threatened by sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion. Of course, that would not be the case in many other Icelandic fishing communities, which are situated along low-lying coastal plains.

Ommer_c22.indd 366

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM


367

Responses regarding the capacity of the fisheries-management system to cope with the foregoing climatic and marine-ecosystem phenomena The current management system has been effective in sustaining the most important stocks at high levels. However, its policy of managing for maximum sustainable yields leaves little margin for error in the annual stock assessments, and would be ill advised for managing in the face of unprecedented marine ecosystem change. Moreover, the current ITQ management system has not been sufficiently flexible to permit fishers to take advantage of unforeseen surges in various fish species for which they do not have quotas. Moreover, the management system has been unable to mitigate the economic downside of the boom/bust cycle in the reduction fishery, stemming from its high degree of articulation with international fish markets.

Case Study 2: Dillingham, Southwest Alaska Dillingham, Southwest Alaska lies at 59° North latitude, approximately 840 km south of the Arctic Circle. A modern industrialized, small-vessel fishing community, it is located on the shore of Nushagak Bay, an offshoot of Bristol Bay in Southwest Alaska. It is situated on a low-relief coastline and lacks hardened features that might protect it (both domestic dwelling sites, and important shore facilities) from storm surges and coastal flooding. Although it has only 2,400 year-round inhabitants and can be reached only by air or water, Dillingham is Southwest Alaska’s regional hub and site of one of Alaska’s oldest fish-processing plants. Here also is the headquarters for the region’s native association, as well as a hospital that serves its dispersed indigenous population. The fishery is highly seasonal and from early spring through the end of summer targets migratory salmon that have left the sea and entered coastal bays. A majority of the fishers who work aboard fishing vessels, as well as the workers in the local processing plant, are migratory and only based here during the spring/summer salmon-fishing season. Drift gillnets are the main gear used to catch salmon, and the fishery is managed by a limited-entry licensing system that also mandates maximum vessel length (32 feet) and fishers’ observance of open/closed fishing days. Open/ closed days are determined on the basis of ongoing stock assessments and the escapement that is deemed necessary to sustain the stocks. This management system is operated by the State of Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG). The largest single employer in the community is Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc., whose facility was one of the first fish processing and packing plants to be established in this region, and which employs a large number of workers during the spring/summer salmon fishing season. Virtually all of the wild salmon that is commercially produced in the region is turned over to this firm and exported for sale into various domestic and international markets. I found:

Responses to ordinary climatic events As in Heimaey, and in the Yup’ik community described in Case Study 3, ordinary climatic events and variations in their annual impacts had virtually no impact on fishing activities and fishing production in Dillingham over the past two decades. Regression analyses comparing climatic variability with data on fishing activity and production over the past two decades found no significant relationships.

Ommer_c22.indd 367

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM

368


Responses to severe coastal storms and extreme weather events Because Dillingham is located on the shore of a very low-relief coastline, an increase in the frequency and intensity of coastal storms would likely force the relocation of many of its shore-side facilities, other businesses, and domestic dwellings. Since the town is located only slightly above mean sea level, several coastal storms in recent decades have already caused serious flooding in the town and surrounding region. Moreover, because in recent years the principal fisheries-management response for combating a steady decline in salmon stocks has been to increase the number of closed days to permit salmon escapement, this has increasingly compelled fishers to fish on open days that coincide with dangerous weather conditions, and several recent fatalities have been attributed to this increased pressure on local fishers. Thus, local fishers find themselves in a triple bind: their relative safety at sea is diminished by management provisions that limit vessel length to 32 feet. Because they fish from these relatively small vessels, severe coastal storms often compel them to curtail fishing activities; and the management system also compels them to take advantage of open days, even when threatening storms are forecast. Inasmuch as global warming portends an increase in the frequency and intensity of coastal storms in this region, unless changes are made in the management system, this problem can only get worse.

Responses to changes in marine-ecosystem composition, including changes in fish-stock availability, composition, and size Despite diligent stock-assessment efforts, limited entry and transferable licenses, limitations on vessel length, and open/closed fishing days, salmon stocks and salmon production have declined over the past two decades. Fishers are faced with declining yields and economic marginalization, with many going out of business. The causes of the salmon decline are poorly understood, although it is likely a combined result of local fishing effort and changes in ocean-ecological conditions taking place over the salmon’s vast migratory range. Indigenous fishers who harvest salmon for subsistence purposes also impact the stocks, although fisheries officials feel their impact is so small that it is not an important factor in the decline. At the same time, due in part to the steady increase of inexpensive farm-raised salmon in global fish markets, prices for the wild catch have been declining and so, although salmon production in 2003 tied a longstanding old historical record for the number of salmon landed at the local processing plant, it was still a “bad” year for the fishers because of poor prices. These problems have created hard times for the region’s commercial salmon fishers: many have gone out of business in recent years, and many are currently attempting to sell their fishing vessels and gear, as well as their limited-entry licenses, which not many years ago were expensively obtained at auction but are now worth much less. Moreover, few other economic alternatives are locally available, and especially among the seasonal migratory fishers and fish-plant workers there seems little interest in developing them.

Responses to sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion At the time of the field work, sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion had not been observed, and there seemed to be little local concern regarding these phenomena – even though they are forecast to increase significantly. Indeed, because of its location, even slight increases

Ommer_c22.indd 368

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM


369

in sea level and saltwater intrusion will have disastrous consequences for both its terrestrial human infrastructure and surrounding natural ecosystems. In that event, profound ecological change would occur in this region’s key salmon habitats – in the coastal bays, in the numerous freshwater rivers and creeks that empty into the bays, and in the briny marshes that fringe the expansive low-lying coastal plain, diminishing salmon production and habitats. Shore-side fishing facilities, supporting infrastructure, and domestic dwellings, are also vulnerable to saltwater intrusion that may be prompted by sea-level rise and increased frequency and intensity of storms. While many of the fishers dwell here only seasonally, they still greatly depend on various local businesses, notably the local fish processing and packing plant, as well as on the infrastructural offerings of Dillingham – including its electrical power, fresh drinking water, and harbor facilities. Thus, even slight sea-level rise would force relocation of the community.

Responses regarding the capacity of the fisheries-management system to cope with the foregoing climatic and marine-ecosystem phenomena Despite diligent stock-assessment efforts, limited entry and transferable licenses, limitations on vessel length, and open/closed fishing days to permit salmon escapement, the current management system has been unable to stem the drastic decline in salmon stocks seen over the past two decades. At present there seem no alternative under-utilized and commercially valuable species that fishers might target. That said, the local management system, which is unable to monitor and control marine-ecological changes and fishing effort over the salmon’s vast migratory ocean range, cannot be held solely to blame for the salmon stocks’ recent decline.

Case Study 3: The Yup’ik community, Southwest Alaska The coastal region of Southwest Alaska is home to the indigenous Yup’ik people, who are a part of the Inuit culture that is spread from Northeastern Siberia, eastward across Northern Alaska and Canada to Greenland. Four inland Yup’ik villages were selected for this study, all of which are situated on the coastal plain generally north or northeast of the regional hub, Dillingham, at approximately 59° North latitude, or approximately 668 km south of the Arctic Circle. Three of these villages are situated along the banks of the Nushagak River, are rather isolated, and reached mainly by small airplanes. A fourth village is situated in a different drainage, is only slightly north of Dillingham, and can be reached by road from that town. There are several dozen small and permanently settled Yup’ik villages in this region, which are dispersed and widely separated from one another across the broad, low-lying coastal plain. Most of these villages are situated inland along rivers and streams, although a few can be found along the shores of Nushagak Bay (an offshoot of Bristol Bay). There are also a few seasonally-occupied settlement sites along the bay shore. Yet despite their dispersion and seeming isolation from one another, virtually all of the Yup’ik villages in this region regularly interact with one another, especially during the long winter when travel across the marshy coastal plain becomes feasible by snow machine. The four villages that were studied were selected on the basis of their high reliance on harvesting salmon ascending the region’s rivers and streams for subsistence purposes,

Ommer_c22.indd 369

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM

370


their reputations as being among the more traditional villages in the region, and – at least regarding three of the four villages – their relatively high degrees of isolation. At the time of the field work, the smallest of the villages studied had 107 inhabitants, the largest had 355. And for purposes of this study these villages were regarded as a single community because they share a common cultural heritage, have virtually identical subsistence economies, are highly interrelated through kinship ties, and regularly interact with one another – especially during the winter. Although ethnographers might appraise these communities as “rich” in terms of their common cultural heritage and subsistence economies, by modern standards their level of development and standard of living is quite low. Nevertheless, their cultural heritage does feature a web of social-ecological adaptations that have sustained them for millennia. Indeed, this web of social-ecological adaptations has been extensively explored by many ethnographers and others who have studied the Yup’ik (with excellent accounts including Barker, 1993; Fienup-Riordan, 2000; Jolles, 2002; Joseph, 1997; Kawagley, 1995; Van Stone, 1984a,b). Their subsistence economy is based on longstanding cultural-ecological adaptations; salmon are the mainstay and the main dietary staple throughout the year. Salmon production, which is solely for subsistence, takes place mainly in the spring and summer months, and produces migratory salmon that are ascending the region’s freshwater rivers and creeks. Gillnets are the main gear used for harvesting the salmon, and the main methods of preservation are sun drying and smoking. Each spring and summer enough salmon are harvested to meet the villagers’ annual needs. Other wild foods are also obtained in various seasons, including moose, caribou, marine mammals, various fish species, waterfowl, other small animals, and plants. All are locally consumed and commercial sale of locally-caught salmon is strictly prohibited. The subsistence fishery is managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game – Division of Subsistence (ADFG-DS). Because the ADFG-DS does not regard the Yup’ik’s subsistence fishery as a significant threat to the sustainability of the salmon stocks, it places few restrictions on subsistence fishing activities and production. Hence, the subsistence fishery is open access and participants are merely required to obtain cost-free permits and report their catches to the ADFG-DS to help inform stock assessments. I found:

Responses to ordinary climatic events As in the modern communities of Heimaey and Dillingham, ordinary climatic events and their variable incidence had virtually no impact on fishing activities over several past decades in the Yup’ik community. In essence, these people fish as they always have, regardless of variations in climatic and environmental conditions and declining salmon stocks. I had assumed that climatic variations would influence subsistence fishers more than more modernized ones, who have far more sophisticated technologies at their disposal, but regression analyses comparing subsistence fishing production in the four Yup’ik villages with cardinal climatic variables (such as precipitation, temperature, and snowfall over a nearly 20-year period for which there are excellent meteorological data) revealed that subsistence fishing activities were only weakly influenced by variations in these variables, with the linear regressions yielding r2 values generally less than 0.2. This suggests that these high-latitude

Ommer_c22.indd 370

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM


371

fishing communities, which still depend on traditional subsistence approaches using rudimentary technologies, are highly resilient and well adapted to ordinary climatic events and variability2.

Responses to severe coastal storms and extreme weather events An increase in the frequency and intensity of coastal storms would likely have only a slight impact on this community, since all of the villages that were studied are inland. The most severe storms occur in the winter months when very little subsistence fishing takes place, and most subsistence fishing activities take place well inland, at some distance from the more dangerous bays. There might be a heightened risk among the few persons who fish and hunt seals and whales in the bays, although even in those settings loss of life has been rare – which again seems to underscore the rich heritage of social-ecological adaptations these people’s ancestors developed to sustain them in this region’s harsh environmental conditions.

Responses to changes in marine-ecosystem composition, including changes in fish-stock availability, composition, and size Salmon stocks and salmon production for subsistence purposes have been steadily declining in recent years (Plate 12 in the color plate section). Yet despite this recent steady decline there seems little concern in the community. Some maintain that if they did not choose to engage in seasonal migratory wage-labor work, or increasingly purchase food items in local stores, their subsistence salmon production would be greater than it has been in recent years. Others insist that more fish than they need to satisfy their annual subsistence needs still ascend the rivers and streams. Indeed, one commonly hears people say, “there has always been enough salmon to meet our subsistence needs.” This is probably true, at least for now, inasmuch as their collective demand for the salmon resource continues to be small relative to its availability – a situation having few parallels in most commercial fisheries nowadays. Thus, for now, these native people have excellent food security, although otherwise their overall standard of living in modern-contemporary terms is low. This situation may change drastically, however, and quickly, should salmon stock levels fall below what they need to supply their key dietary staple. But because that has never happened before it is difficult to foresee how they would respond. On the one hand, even then they might still have many other abundant wild food resources available to them – still enjoying a form of economic pluralism, at least in a dietary sense. But on the other hand, these things too might change, and drastically, should climatic and environmental change decimate these other wild food resources as well. Add to this that few other economic alternatives are locally available, and the ability of this community to sustain itself should it lose its most important subsistence resource, may ultimately turn out to be quite low. In this regard, a few community members have recently begun to express an increased interest in developing and diversifying the local economy, which they acknowledge will be a daunting undertaking, given their relative isolation, the harsh environmental conditions, the lack of other resources, and the lack of local know-how for bringing about economic diversification and development.

Ommer_c22.indd 371

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM

372


Responses to sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion At present sea-level rise and saltwater intrusion have not been experienced, and as a result there seems little concern among community members, even though they are forecast to become increasingly significant in the future. Indeed, because they are on a low-lying coastal plain, catastrophic social-ecological and economic disruption would result from sea-level rise sufficient to inundate the coastal plain, and from the intrusion of salt water into freshwater ecosystems and domestic drinking supplies. In those events, the villagers would have no choice but to relocate to less familiar, and most likely less naturally provident, areas lying further inland, where their ability to rely on salmon as their subsistence mainstay would be uncertain.

Responses regarding the capacity of the fisheries-management system to cope with the foregoing climatic and marine-ecosystem phenomena So far the fisheries-management system has been adequate to ensure that this community’s subsistence-fishing needs are met. However, salmon production levels are now near the minimum that community members regard as necessary to meet their subsistence needs, and if the stocks continue to decline, will no longer be adequate.

Conclusion: recommendations for increasing the resilience of the three high-latitude coastal fishing communities Recommendations for Heimaey, Iceland The ITQ system should build in a margin of safety by backing away from its current practice of fishing various species to near their theoretical sustainable limits. At the same time the government should sponsor more extensive monitoring of ocean conditions in Icelandic waters to try to anticipate emerging trends that seem to be prompted by global warming and ocean-ecosystem change. The ITQ system should also be made more flexible to permit quota owners to switch among species that are more or less abundant in various seasons. Clearly, large-vessel enterprises will be the most resilient to the sorts of changes that global warming may prompt, by virtue of their ability to range over larger areas in practically all weather conditions, as well as their ability to mobilize capital to retrofit gear and take advantage of changing opportunities. Small-vessel operators, therefore, should be afforded extra fishing opportunities to offset the limitations placed on them by unfavorable weather conditions. Sustaining the small-vessel fishery is also desirable for sustaining local levels of employment, without which the local community will be more vulnerable to climatic and global change. A more diversified local economy should also be developed to provide alternative income opportunities for local fishers who experience reversals in the fisheries. Finally, although the fishing community’s integration in a global marketing system somewhat reduces its vulnerability to local and regional market swings, global markets have occasionally shown themselves to be unstable, and new means should be explored for reducing

Ommer_c22.indd 372

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM


373

the economic risk of operators who target species whose market prices are significantly influenced by climatic and financial events taking place in other parts of the world.

Recommendations for Dillingham, Southwest Alaska More research is needed to determine the causes of the salmon-stock declines in recent years. Moreover, international cooperation will be required to put in place the extensive and expensive monitoring systems that will be needed over vast trans-boundary ocean regions. The Alaska state government should also subsidize license buy-out schemes to reduce the number of limited-entry licenses. At the same time, it should redouble its efforts to promote the superiority of wild-caught salmon over farmed salmon, to justify the higher prices that the wild fish must bring in export markets. Finally, the current system of prescribing open and closed days for fishing should continue to be predicated on what is needed to conserve the salmon stocks. But these approaches should also be augmented with new regulations that prevent fishers from going out on open days, which coincide with forecasts of dangerous weather and sea conditions.

Recommendations for the Yup’ik community, Southwest Alaska At current stock levels, the subsistence fishery focusing on salmon is adequately managed and meets local subsistence needs, providing excellent food security. However, the management regime should begin to incorporate contingency plans regarding changes in stock availability, composition, and size. The native subsistence-fishing community in southwest Alaska manifests high resiliency and capacities for adapting to the region’s ordinary climatic and ecosystem variability. This resiliency is a result of considerable long-term cumulative experience from living in this climatically harsh region. However, the local economy does not provide an adequate standard of living in modern-contemporary terms, and in recent years, as these people have become more aware of the world beyond their region, this has been a source of increasing dissatisfaction and strain. Thus, greater efforts should be made to develop a more modern and diversified economy. This low-lying region is highly vulnerable to catastrophic disruption caused by sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and increased frequency and intensity of coastal storms. This underscores an urgent need for contingency planning for relocation to areas where the best chances for assuring food security and economic growth can be sustained.

General recommendations The following general recommendations for building resilience to climatic and global change in high-latitude fishing communities also emerge from this research:

Regarding ordinary climatic variability For the most part, it seems little needs to be done to build fishing communities’ capacities to adapt and respond to ordinary climatic variability.

Ommer_c22.indd 373

12/22/2010 3:28:07 PM

374


Regarding severe coastal storms and extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and saltwater intrusion Although coastal storms and extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and saltwater intrusion are different phenomena, they suggest similar responses for mitigating their impacts on vulnerable coastal communities. Hence there is an urgent need to: ●

●

●

●

●

●

identify coastal communities at high risk to severe coastal storms and other extreme weather events, sea-level rise, saltwater intrusion, and increased inundation; increase efforts to raise awareness in such communities that are situated along low-relief, low-lying coastal plains, concerning the potential risks to them; develop contingency planning exploring various strategies for relocating coastal communities, especially those that are situated in low-lying areas, including identification of sustainable sites for relocation; develop more coordinated regional, macro-regional, and global planning and assistance for such communities; legally institute coastal setbacks to build in a margin of safety from seasonal, long-term, and occasionally extreme fluctuations in coastlines (Hettiarachchi and Samarawickrama, 2005); and, only where absolutely necessary, and where there would be a high benefit/cost ratio for doing so, harden coastlines to protect vulnerable communities, their domestic living sites, and shore-side facilities. This should only be done in extreme situations; because of the typically high costs, diminution of aesthetic values, and often only partial effectiveness of such measures.

Regarding changes in marine ecosystem compositions Improving fisheries-management systems will be an integral part of building high-latitude coastal fishing communities’ resilience to marine-ecosystem variability and change. Because marine-ecosystem variability and change can profoundly affect fish stock availability, composition, and size, causing severe to catastrophic social and economic strains in high-latitude fishing communities, this sort of variability and change has often arrived unexpectedly, exacerbating its impact in fishing communities. There is therefore an urgent need to: ●

●

●

develop a global observation system that provides continuous time series of environmental data, tracking climate change and its consequences in marine ecosystems. do this by emphasizing the development of more accurate methods for forecasting marine-ecological trends in specific regions, including trends in fish-stock availability, composition, and size. This will be very expensive, requiring global international cooperation. However, the technology for doing it currently exists, and at present there seems no other way to reliably monitor and anticipate the consequences of global warming and change in marine ecosystems. continuously track the following: atmospheric CO2 and temperature; ocean wind and current patterns; ocean water temperature; change trends in climatic variables, including

Ommer_c22.indd 374

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM


●

●

375

frequency and intensity of storms; change trends in sea levels from historic norms; ocean salinity and pH; dissolved CO2 and oxygen in ocean waters; chlorophyll, mineral, and nutrient loads in ocean waters; and ocean ecosystem species compositions, distributions, and biomasses. engage the following persons and organizations for promoting and supporting the foregoing developments: interested members of the UN General Assembly; interested facilitators of the United Nations Agreement on Highly Migratory and Straddling Fish Stocks (UNFSA), which urges that States cooperate to ensure conservation and optimum utilization of fisheries resources, both within and beyond the exclusive economic zone (United Nations, 1995); various persons and components of the FAO (FAO, 1999); the Consortium for Ocean Leadership; US NOAA Research, and others. develop a cooperative international effort that will be comparable to, if not exceed, previous global-scale monitoring projects – the International Geophysical Year (1957–1958), for example.

Regarding building the capacity of fisheries-management systems to more effectively deal with global warming and change ●

●

●

●

Incorporate more flexible and adaptive approaches to management, which enhance the ability of both fishers and managers to adapt to changing marine-ecological conditions. Otherwise, the more specialized the solutions that management systems develop for meeting various problems, the less flexibility they will have for responding to unprecedented problems that may arise in the future. In essence, future management policies must build in specific means for coping with change, regardless of the direction it takes (McGoodwin, 1990: 182).3 Emphasize management strategies that especially enhance the safety of fishing crews working in smaller-size vessels. Strive to reduce the smaller-scale fishing sector’s competitive disadvantage relative to the larger-scale sector. Of course, some economists may object to this recommendation because of its potential for reducing a fisheries’ overall economic efficiency and productivity. Indeed, it does imply a value judgment on my part concerning the desirability of sustaining employment levels in fishing communities – that is, instituting economies where human concerns are foremost. Develop international agreements that aim to enhance price stability among fish producers and processors who produce internationally-marketed species whose availability is highly variable due to marine-ecological conditions arising in various parts of the world.

Regarding future fisheries research ●

Ommer_c22.indd 375

Continue and expand the effort to discover the interactive dynamics of fisheries, marineecosystems, and global warming and change, while similarly continuing to support the development of theoretical fisheries models that integrate the effects of fishing effort and climatic and global change. Start by focusing on situations where good data exists concerning the interactive dynamics of these variables, and continue to support studies

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM

376

●

●

●


of documented instances of stock increases or declines that cannot be attributed to fishing effort alone. Similarly, promote further research regarding marine ecosystem dynamics prior to fishing effort. Promising research currently underway includes studies based on historical climate change (e.g., the Medieval Optimum from ~AD 800–1100, and the Little Ice Age from ~1550–1850), studies focusing on paleo-climate information (e.g., the Altithermal ~4,000–8,000 years ago), and sediment studies tracking variability in marine life prior to fishing activity. Continue to rely on case studies of fisheries that are impacted by marine-ecosystem variability and change and other phenomena that may be prompted by global warming and change. Given the inadequacy of current mainstream science to forecast the future impacts of global warming in various fisheries, a situation which is likely to continue until a coordinated worldwide monitoring system is in place, generalizations will still have to be drawn from case studies. For now, therefore, continue to build the store of case studies concerning how fishing people and fishing managers have responded to climatic and marine-ecosystem variability and change. These studies will provide important clues concerning how fishing people may attempt to adapt to climatic and global change in the future, and help to inform the development of more sustainable fisheries policies. Promote research that explores ways to reduce the carbon footprint of the fisheries themselves, facilitating, for example, a return to a greater reliance on sail propulsion in certain fisheries.

Regarding regional fisheries management organizations ●

●

●

●

●

Inasmuch as regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) are the primary means for managing global fish stocks, expand the scope of these organizations’ charters to monitor and address the consequences of climatic and global change in the world’s fisheries, and to develop innovative management measures for dealing with them. In this regard, new organizations may need to be formed. RFMO’s should become more involved in reducing the vulnerability of fishing people and other coastal dwellers to the physical and economic risks posed by increasing inundations, storms, and other climatic events. Prescribe for the UNFSA relating to the conservation and management of straddling and highly migratory fish stocks enhanced State-level cooperation and global trans-boundary cooperation, providing a framework that may be capable of elaboration and extension, which would help RFMOs to incorporate considerations of ocean-ecosystem change that is driven by climate change (United Nations, 1995). Where applicable, RFMO’s should devote more attention to how climatic, marine-ecosystem, and global changes impact the small-scale fishing sector. Small-scale fishers constitute a decisive majority of the world’s fishing people, and compared with large-scale fishers are generally less mobile geographically and more vulnerable to ecosystem changes. RFMO’s should also explore means for integrating various components of the fishing industry itself into monitoring climate-change impacts, making these more active and integral participants in fisheries-management reform and implementation. And because

Ommer_c22.indd 376

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM


●

377

the fishing industry is the main economic beneficiary of fisheries resources, it should share in the costs of these efforts. RFMO’s should incorporate scientifically informed information regarding ocean-ecosystem trends that are driven by climate change into their efforts to assist developing countries. In this realm they can play an important role in coordinating policies and programs at regional and sub-regional levels that are aimed at sustaining vital fishery resources.

Finally, because there are limits to the resilience and adaptive capacities of human socialecological systems, we must grant that some coastal communities may be so overwhelmed by climatic and global change that they may not be able to sustain themselves and will disappear. Yet, while some of the problems posed by climatic and global change currently seem to be virtually insurmountable, we must never underestimate humanity’s ability to come up with innovative solutions when faced with extraordinary challenges – and to persist nevertheless.

Acknowledgements Support for the research in Iceland was provided by a National Science Foundation grant, “Seascapes and landscapes: linkages between marine and terrestrial environments and human populations in the North Atlantic [Iceland Sector]: a contribution to the HARC Initiative,” Astrid E. J. Ogilvie, Principal Investigator. Support for the research in Alaska was provided by the Council for Research and Creative Work, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, for the project, “Yup’ik Eskimo fishers’ adaptations to climatic variability, climate change, and other changing environmental conditions,” James R. McGoodwin, Principal Investigator. I also thank the following people and institutions for their generous help and support: in Iceland: Jónas Gunnar Allansson, Gísli Pálsson, Hjalmar Vilhjalmsson, and the Marine Research Institute; at the University of Colorado, Boulder, CO: Astrid E. J. Ogilvie, and the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research; among the Yup’ik in Southwest Alaska: Andrew Petla and Wassillie Andrews; in Dillingham, Southwest Alaska: the Bristol Bay Native Association, George and Noi Guthridge, and Peter Pan Seafoods, Inc.; and in the Alaska Department of Fish and Game - Division of Subsistence: Molly Chythlook, James A. Fall, Terry Haynes, and Ted Krieg.

Endnotes 1. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Symposium on Coping with Global Change in Marine Social-Ecological Systems, held at FAO Headquarters, Rome, Italy, 8–11 July 2008, with support from GLOBEC and other organizations. Some of its results also appeared in McGoodwin (2007). 2. In the formal analyses that looked for influences on human subsistence fishing activities and behavior, only climatic variables that could be sensed or experienced directly by subsistence fishers in the 4 villages were taken into account (e.g., precipitation, snowfall, atmospheric temperature, prevailing winds, river conditions – and in a few instances severe coastal storms and other

Ommer_c22.indd 377

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM

378


extreme weather events). Marine-environment variables such as sea temperature, salinity, sea level, saltwater intrusion, and shoreline erosion were not incorporated in these analyses because all four of the villages that were studied are situated inland, where presumably their inhabitants would not be able to sense these phenomena. Of course, these and other marine-environmental phenomena undoubtedly play a crucial role in determining the size and timing of the salmon runs that the villagers intercept, and no doubt these variables combined with the commercial fishing harvest have played a decisive role in bringing about the steady decline in salmon stocks that has been observed in this region over the past two decades. 3. I strongly feel that holding to these principles will be fundamental to humanity’s ability to cope with climatic and global change, and remain in debt to anthropologist Elman R. Service, who elucidated them in his book, Primitive social organization: an evolutionary perspective (Service, 1971: 34).

References ACIA (2004) Impacts of a warming Arctic – Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. (The ACIA report stems from the Fourth Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting, Reykjavik, Iceland, November 2004). Arnason R. (1995) Icelandic fisheries and fisheries management: adaptation to a limited resource base. In: The North Atlantic Fisheries: Successes, Failures and Challenges (eds R. Arnason and L. Felt), Institute of Island Studies, Charlotte, Prince Edward Island, pp. 237–266. Barker, J. H. (1993) Always getting ready. Upterrlainarluta: Yup’ik Eskimo subsistence in Southwest Alaska. University of Washington Press, Seattle WA. Belkin, I. M., Levitus, S., Antonov, J. and Malmberg, S. A. (1998) Great salinity anomalies in the North Atlantic. Progress in Oceanography 41, 1–68. Bernstein, L. et al. (2007) Climate change 2007: synthesis report, summary for policy-makers. An Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf Conover, D. O. (2007) Written testimony titled Effects of Climate Change on Fisheries, submitted to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard, for the hearing, Effects of Climate Change and Ocean Acidification on Living Marine Resources, 10 May. Dickson, R. R., Meincke, J., Malmberg, S. A. and Lee, A. J. (1988) The “Great Salinity Anomaly” in the northern North Atlantic 1968–1982. Progress in Oceanography 20, 103–151. Durrenberger, E. P. and Pálsson, G. (1989) The Anthropology of Iceland. University of Iowa Press, Iowa City IA. FAO (1999) International Plan of Action for the Management of Fishing Capacity. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Feely, R. A. (2007) Written testimony at the Hearing on Effects of Climate Change and Ocean Acidification on Living Marine Resources, before the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries and Coast Guard, United States Senate, 10 May, http://www.legislative.noaa.gov/Testimony/feely051007.pdf Fienup-Riordan A. (2000) Hunting Tradition in a Changing World: Yup’ik Lives in Alaska Today. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick NJ. Folke, C., Colding, J. and Berkes, F. (eds) (2002) Synthesis: building resilience and adaptive capacity in social-ecological systems. In: Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience of Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.

Ommer_c22.indd 378

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM


379

Hamilton, L. C. and Butler, M. J. (2001) Outport adaptations: social indicators through Newfoundland’s cod crisis. Human Ecology Review 8(2), 1–11. Hamilton, L. C., Jónsson, S., Ögmundardóttir, H. and Belkin, I. M. (2004) Sea changes ashore: the ocean and Iceland’s herring capital. Arctic 57(4), 325–335. Hamilton, L. D., Otterstad, O. and Ömundardóttir, H. (2006) Rise and fall of the herring towns: Impacts of climate and human teleconnections. In: Climate Change and the Economics of the World’s Fisheries (eds R. Hannesson, M. Barange and S. F. Herrick, Jr), Edward Elgar, Northampton MA, pp. 100–125. Hettiarachchi, S. S. L. and Samarawickrama, S. P. (2005) Planning and implementing coastal management in Sri Lanka. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Maritime Engineering 158, Issue MAI, pp. 25–32, March. See www.thomastelford.com/journals/DocumentLibrary/maen.158.1.25.pdf Holling, C. S. (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecological Systems 4, 1–23. Houghton, J. T., Ding, Y., Griggs, D. J., Noguer, M., van der Linden, P. J. and Xiaosu, D. (eds) (2001) IPCC Third Assessment Report: Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Jolles, C. Z. (2002) Faith, Food and Family in a Yupik Whaling Community. University of Washington Press, Seattle WA. Joseph, D. S. (1997) Fishcamp. Maverick Publications, Bend OR. Kawagley, A. O. (1995) A Yupiaq Worldview: A Pathway to Ecology and Spirit. Waveland Press, Prospect Heights IL. McCarthy, J. J., Canziani, O. F., Leary, N. A., Dokken, D. J. and White, K. S. (eds) (2001) Climate Change 2001: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. McGoodwin, J. R. (1990) Crisis in the World’s Fisheries: People, Problems, and Policies. Stanford University Press, Stanford CA. McGoodwin, J. R. (2007) Effects of climatic variability on three fishing economies in high-latitude regions: implications for fisheries policies. Marine Policy 31, 40–55. Metz, B., Davidson, O., Swart, R. and Pan, J. (eds) (2001) Climate Change 2001: Mitigation. Contribution of Working Group III to the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. Metz, B. et al. (2007) Working Group III Report: Climate Change 2007: Mitigation. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg3/ar4-wg3-frontmatter.pdf Pálsson, G. (1991) Coastal Economies, Cultural Accounts: Human Ecology and Icelandic Discourse. University of Manchester Press, Manchester UK. Pálsson G. (1998) The virtual aquarium: commodity fiction and cod fishing. Ecological Economics 24, 275–288. Parry, M. et al. (2007) Working Group II Report: Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/ wg2/ar4-wg2-intro.pdf. Rubinoff, P. B. and Courtney, C. A. (2008) How resilient is your coastal community? A guide for evaluating coastal community resilience to tsunamis and other coastal hazards. In: Basins and Coasts News, Integrated Management for Coastal and Freshwater Systems (ed. J. Tobey), USAID, 2(1), January, 24–28. Service, E. R. (1971) Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary Perspective, 2nd edn. Random House, New York.

Ommer_c22.indd 379

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM

380


Solomon, S. et al. (2007) Working Group I Report: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report. http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4wg1-frontmatter.pdf United Nations (1995) United Nations Fish Stock Agreement (The United Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks). Van Stone, J. W. (1984a) Southwest Alaska Eskimo: Introduction. In: Handbook of North American Indians (eds D. Dumas and W. C. Sturtevant), Vol. 5: Arctic, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC, pp. 205–208. Van Stone, J. W. (1984b) Mainland Southwest Alaska Eskimo. In: Handbook of North American Indians (eds D. Dumas and W. C. Sturtevant), Vol. 5: Arctic. Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC, pp. 224–242. Walker, B., Folke, C., S. Carpenter, S. et al. (2004) Regime shifts, resilience, and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 35, 557–582. World Bank (2007) Climate Changes and Impact on Coastal Countries. Risk of Sea-Level Rise: High Stakes for Developing Countries. Research at the World Bank, February, http://econ.worldbank. org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/EXTRESEARCH/0,,contentMDK:21215328~pagePK:6 4165401~piPK:64165026~theSitePK:469382,00.html

Ommer_c22.indd 380

12/22/2010 3:28:08 PM

Chapter 23

Coping with Environmental Change Systemic Responses and the Roles of Property and Community in Three Fisheries Bonnie J. McCay, Wendy Weisman, and Carolyn Creed

Abstract We compare how fisheries in three marine systems – from Atlantic Canada, Pacific Mexico, and the eastern United States – respond to significant environmental changes, whether deviation-amplifying or deviation-mitigating. We ask what triggers changes that can avert fisheries collapse and how this is affected by intersections of governance and environment. We conclude by affirming the importance of both exclusive, secure property rights, and community-oriented decision-making power in tipping the balance towards more adaptive ways of responding to environmental change. Keywords: Atlantic Canada, Pacific Mexico, eastern United States, environmental change, ITQs, property rights, community, Newfoundland northern cod fishery, moratorium, surfclam fisheries, stewardship, deviation mitigation, deviation amplification, enclosure

Introduction In this chapter we compare how fishers and communities in three marine social-ecological systems – in Atlantic Canada, the Pacific coast of Mexico, and the eastern United States – have coped with significant environmental changes. In addition to providing material for analysing how and why people do and do not respond in time to protect a fishery or rescue it from imminent collapse, the comparison allows us to consider the roles played by distinct kinds of management of common resources: privatized rights in the form of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs), communal rights, and top-down centralized management. Incentives and desire on the part of resource users to sustain the fishery in the long term are present in all three cases; we turn to specific social, historical, and natural features of each case to explain their different outcomes to date. We conclude by affirming the importance of both exclusive, secure property rights and community-oriented decision-making power in tipping the balance towards more adaptive ways of responding to environmental change. World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c23.indd 381

12/22/2010 3:28:22 PM

382


The study of fisheries makes clear many of the patterns and outcomes of using and managing resources held in common (“common pool resources” or “the commons”). Indeed, although the challenge of managing the commons has been labelled “the fisherman’s problem” (McEvoy, 1986), the scope and scale of environmental challenges now facing aquatic as well as terrestrial common pool resources suggests that it is everyone’s problem. Property rights (more specifically access rights to common resources) strongly influence capacities for and outcomes of natural resource use and management. Property rights can be thought of along a continuum from lesser to greater exclusivity of access to places and resources and the benefits derived from them; they range from public and/or free rights at one end to individually exclusive, “sole owner” rights at the other. Economists have persuasively shown the losses of “rent” or productive potential that come about with totally free access rights in fisheries, the “tragedies of the unmanaged commons” (Hardin, 1968, 1994) that often ensue, and the economic benefits that attend more exclusive, privatized rights (Gordon, 1954; Scott, 1955). Limiting of access to fisheries and other commons can be referred to as “enclosure” – another way of talking about degrees of exclusivity of access, whether in terms of bounded spaces, time (seasonality of access or limited term concessions), or users (some people, institutions, or classes of organizations are granted access) or a combination. Our three cases for comparison include one that has become a classic “tragedy of the commons,” the Canadian northern cod fishery, and two others characterized by more exclusive property rights, which appear to have helped people manage their relationships to the commons and its climate-induced perturbations: surfclams in the US and lobster and abalone in Mexico. The two latter cases are especially interesting for comparison because they represent arrangements from two opposite ends of the spectrum of ways of enclosing a commons: individual (private) ownership of access to resources in the US case, and collective rights to access (though not “open” access) in the Mexican one. The surfclam fishery – the first US fishery to be managed with ITQs – comes close to the economists’ ideal; we will consider whether and how ITQs affect human capacity to respond adaptively to the effects of climate change on surfclams. By contrast, small-scale benthic fisheries of Mexico’s Baja California peninsula in an area known as the Pacifico Norte represent a clear-cut instance of “communal” property rights (McCay and Acheson, 1987), with exclusive property rights held by community-based cooperatives rather than individuals. We ask in turn how exclusive but collective rights have influenced their capacity to respond adaptively to environmental changes linked to ENSO or El Niño events. This chapter is written in the spirit and framework of systems thinking, as it evolved through the cybernetics era of the mid-20th century and was elaborated by Bateson (1963, 1972), Slobodkin (1968), Slobodkin and Rapoport (1974), and McCay (2002). System frameworks have come to inform a great deal of thinking and research in recent years, as evidenced by the focus on complex adaptive systems and resilience (Berkes et al., 2003; Davidson-Hunt and Berkes, 2003). From this perspective, responses to the effects of climate change can occur at many levels and scales. Some responses can make matters worse or merely fail to help restore system health or its ability to rally from insults. In systems language, ineffectual or backfiring responses that worsen the problem are called “deviationamplifying” responses, and though it may sound counter-intuitive in ordinary speech, are called examples of “positive feedback” to the system. We discuss the Newfoundland cod

Ommer_c23.indd 382

12/22/2010 3:28:22 PM

Coping with Environmental Change

383

case in those terms. Other responses can mitigate the negative effects of change, helping to protect or even restore system health, and are referred to here as “deviation-mitigating” or “negative feedback” responses. The Baja California fishery we describe is an example. As significant effects of climate change are just beginning to be felt in the Mid-Atlantic surfclam fishery and the resource users and other observers do not yet have the luxury of hindsight, we engage in reasoned conjecture about future outcomes for this economically important American fishery. All three cases form part of larger marine ecosystems, with complex dynamics and different environmental and fishing challenges for the people that work them. Fogo Island, Newfoundland, is within the Newfoundland-Labrador Shelf Large Marine Ecosystem (LME), with sharply seasonal productivity arising from the confluence of the cold waters of the Labrador Current and the warm ones of the Gulf Stream, since it is seasonally constricted by coastal ice. The fisheries of the Pacific coast of Baja California Sur are in the southern part of the California Current LME, and have always been strongly influenced by El Niño and La Niña changes in ocean conditions and weather. Surfclam fisheries of the Mid-Atlantic region are part of the Northeast Continental US LME, and are experiencing direct effects of sea temperature warming. The three cases offer a contrast between smallscale, local, and artisanal (the Mexican case) to large-scale, offshore, and industrial (the US surfclam case), with the Newfoundland case in between, but each is dependent on producing commodities for distant, globalized markets and is fully embedded in government-run and science-based fisheries management regimes. Other points of similarity and difference are made within our descriptions of the three cases, and in our conclusion we focus on the factor of property rights or “enclosure of the commons” as manifested in each of the cases.

Case Study 1: Fogo Island, Newfoundland, Canada Fogo Island, on the northeast coast of Newfoundland, Canada, is the locale of nine small remote villages where fishing and fish processing are the primary sources of work. A local cooperative processes and markets the products, although fishers can and in later years often did market through off-island private firms. Weather and sea ice reduce the fishing season to four to six months of the year. Until recent decades, the fishery was primarily small-scale, involving locally built small (15–35′) and mostly open boats, using fish traps, gill-nets, and hook and line gear for cod and other species; in the 1970s and 1980s, larger vessels called longliners enabled more diversified and mobile fishing but cod remained important and the small-scale fishery continued side-by-side with the longliner fishery (McCay, 1976, 1978). Today the small-scale fishery has diminished greatly, a consequence of the “tragedy of the northern cod” that shows deviation-amplification at work. Fogo Island is part of a much larger social-ecological marine system that can be defined by the very large spatial scale of fish migration and current structures and by the top-down federal institutional structure of Canada (the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, DFO, a federal ministry with regional offices for science and management). Despite the centralized management scheme, Fogo Island has some local autonomy through its communitybased fish processing and marketing cooperative. Moreover, the fishers participate in fisheries management in various consultative capacities through their producers’ cooperative and through committees of a province-wide union and advisory meetings with DFO

Ommer_c23.indd 383

12/22/2010 3:28:22 PM

384


officials. As elsewhere in Newfoundland and Labrador, there is some small-scale locallygenerated data for fisheries management through a program called “sentinel fisheries.” However, that occurred after the fisheries collapse of 1992, and most data, stock assessments, and management rules come from the science and policy branches of DFO. Management decisions have been made on a large scale. These features of the case have important implications for the possibilities for responding and adapting appropriately to environmental changes, and help explain the responses seen during the critical period before and during the cod fishery collapse, described below. The story of Fogo Island’s fishery is that of the entire east and northeast coast of Newfoundland. It experienced the process, now known throughout the world, of the collapse, or “tragedy” of the northern cod (Harris, 1998; Rose, 2007; May, 2009). In June 1992, the fishery for the stock of northern cod found off the east and northeast coasts of Newfoundland and southern Labrador was closed due to evidence of a nearly total collapse of the fish stock. Closures or severe cutbacks of other groundfish fisheries soon followed. The build-up to the 1992 moratorium on cod fishing involved deviation-amplification. For one reason or another (see Case Study 3) the allowable catch levels during the 1980s were always greater than the actual catch, and the dominant response to declining catches was to intensify efforts (Finlayson, 1994; Finlayson and McCay, 1998), which, in the circumstances, led to worsening overfishing, or deviation-amplification. For example, in the inshore fisheries, which were the mainstay of the small fishery-dependent communities of Fogo Island and other coastal areas, fishers’ response to catching smaller sizes of fish and smaller catches overall was to adopt smaller mesh nets and more efficient fish traps; the cooperative, like other cod processors, refined its filleting machines for small fish. Many participants in the coastal fishery knew that the stocks were declining, but they appeared unable to do much about it. In such a centralized system, management was a government responsibility anyway. The situation was made worse by government decisions to rely more on the offshore trawler fishery in the effort to industrialize and modernize the fisheries, making them more year-round. As George Rose recently observed (Rose, 2007), in the early 1980s, the critical time for this tragedy to unfold, the federal and provincial governments reacted to evidence that the inshore fishery could not catch its 120,000 tonnes quota by giving more of the overall quota to the offshore fishery, thinking the fish stock was growing despite trouble in the inshore fishery. This was unfortunate because the less efficient inshore fishery tended to catch fewer fish when abundances were declining, making it inherently precautionary, whereas the offshore fishery was only too efficient and capable of keeping its catches high in the context of decline. The decision to give more to the offshore “lessened the inherent precaution of the inshore fishery and increased the potential for overfishing when quotas were set too high, as indeed they would be” (Rose, 2007). The direness of the situation was masked by landings data coming from the offshore fishing strategies that compensated for declining catches by opening up new fishing grounds. It was also masked by a retrospective bias in stock assessments, whereby data on the later years of a fish cohort tended to show that the size of the cohort in earlier years had been overestimated (Finlayson, 1994; Finlayson and McCay, 1998). The signs and signals of trouble were hard to translate into terms usable in scientific population dynamics models, and the provincial court struck down an effort led by some inshore fishermen, academics,

Ommer_c23.indd 384

12/22/2010 3:28:22 PM


385

and lawyers to force a review of the situation (Steele et al., 1992; Martin, 1992, 1995). The problem was belatedly recognized by a government unwilling to make hard choices when confronted by scientific evidence of stock decline, when those choices involved thousands of fishers and fish plant workers. There seem to have been large and grave disconnects between experience-based observations, scientific knowledge, and policy, one effect of which was that the observations and efforts of many of the fishers, experiencing stock decline, as well as of some scientists, seeing problems in the data, were readily ignored. Even after the 1992 moratorium, science reports were allegedly edited and tailored to fit political efforts to continue providing jobs and revenue to fishery dependent communities at the cost of the natural resource that had sustained these communities (Hutchings et al., 1997a,b). The moratorium of 1992 was supposed to last only a couple of years, allowing the fish a chance to recover, but recovery has barely occurred almost 20 years later. Water temperature changes linked to the North Atlantic Oscillation, seal predation, a possible ecological regime shift, and continued fishing – offshore in international waters and inshore by-catches, both legal and illegal, and smallscale inshore commercial and subsistence fishing – have kept northern cod stocks at a very low level (Shelton et al., 2006). The fishery management measure of a virtually complete closure of the fishery was unable to arrest the decline in cod stocks that had been precipitated by the “deviation-amplification” processes of the 1980s. Given the sad outcome of the northern cod story, we feel compelled to look for more hopeful signs and positive responses to environmental change. What if any are the signs of significant restructuring and shifts toward more sustainable, “deviation-mitigating,” system dynamics in this case, as might be predicted from such a dramatic collapse (Gunderson and Holling, 2002)? Finlayson and McCay (1998) found little evidence of institutional change within the parameters of fisheries management in Newfoundland, despite the creation of a broader and more representative consultative system (Charles, 2001). Instead, the dominant response to change has been industrial diversification, taking advantage of both strong markets and strong, even increasing, populations of crustaceans (Schrank, 2005); queen crab and northern shrimp, which may have increased in response to decline of top predators such as cod. The fisheries management system has seemed more precautionary in the management of crab and shrimp, but this may have as much to do with lack of the data and scientific understanding needed for sophisticated stock assessments as with any “lesson learned” from northern cod. Diversification has been the key to survival of Newfoundland’s fisheries economy and fishery-dependent coastal communities in the wake of the collapse of northern cod. However, there is nothing inherently more sustainable about diversification per se; outcomes are still unfolding and will depend in part upon the nature of marine resources and unpredictable global markets. Indeed, “diversification” includes a “fishing down the food web” response (Pauly et al., 1988), to the point that sea cucumber has been processed on Fogo Island and even jellyfish has undergone pilot studies. The fishery has also continued a focus on other groundfish, particularly “turbot” or Greenland halibut, which amounts to another kind of “fishing down,” not down the food web but into far deeper (and more distant) waters, with very questionable management controls (Healey and Mahé, 2005). From a broad systems perspective (and from economic ledgers) we might interpret the situation as not tragic at all, but rather involving a viable restructuring, a positive regime

Ommer_c23.indd 385

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

386


shift. Crab and shrimp turned out to be more valuable than cod and generate many jobs as well. Diversification has enabled the islanders to survive the demise of the cod fisheries, but there are social costs. For the most part, crab and shrimp fishing takes place offshore and thus requires large and expensive boats, up to 65 feet in length, and long fishing expeditions. Striking economic differences are evident within the local fishing communities between the families heavily involved in the large-scale crab and shrimp fisheries and those which are not. Such stratification, with its effects on vulnerable sectors of the population (e.g., older and poorly educated men and women and fish plant workers) and on the viability of local communities, is among the social costs of diversification in response to change in the fisheries system. The high investments required for crab and shrimp combined with intense competition among buyers for the product (especially crab) have threatened local institutions such as the Fogo Island cooperative and, indirectly, local communities. Many of Fogo Island’s vessel owners stopped delivering their catches to the local cooperative because of agreements made with other buyers in order to secure financing for the costly vessels required for successful crab and shrimp fishing. This reduces jobs available in the cooperatives’ fish plants, which are the principal source of income for island households, and it created the backdrop for a dramatic conflict over gender, equity, and human rights, which has torn the island’s communities further apart (Penton, 2001; McCay, 2003). A coda to the Fogo Island case, and the others we discuss, concerns critical moments or forms of intervention from the outside. Although the island’s population declined from almost 5,000 in 1992 to less than 3,000 in 2009, Fogo Island’s fishers and communities have shown considerable resilience. This is in part due to the constructive engagement of outsiders, working with local leaders, in helping provide resources for coping and adaptation. Such work on Fogo Island began in the 1960s, with a major rural development effort organized around community films and the creation of the cooperative (Healey and Mahé, 2005), and it has recurred from 2006 to the present with the efforts of a private foundation begun by a former resident of the island to revive aspects of traditional culture in ways that foster community survival (McCay, 2003).

Case Study 2: Pacifico Norte, Baja California Sur, Mexico In sharp contrast to Fogo Island and its experience of the “tragedy” of the northern cod, the fishery of Mexico’s Pacifico Norte region, on the west coast of the peninsula of Baja California, has been internationally recognized as a fisherman-led, community-based effort to prevent major stock decline (in the spiny or red rock lobster fishery) and help restore diminished stocks with government partners (in the abalone fishery). The unusual social and institutional organization of resource users in this case appears to shape the more corrective responses and adaptations to environmental change we observe. The fisheries of the Pacific coast of Baja California Sur are in the southern part of the California Current Large Marine Ecosystem, which is marked by strong upwelling and complex rocky shore habitats, and these fisheries are strongly influenced by ENSO (El Niño-Southern Oscillation), or El Niño and La Niña changes in ocean conditions and weather. This has notable effects on the two main fisheries of lobster and abalone. The fishers are engaged mainly in lobster pot fishing and diving for abalone and whelk from small

Ommer_c23.indd 386

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM


387

open boats 15–30 feet in length; they also engage in finfishing with gill-nets. They, like many of the fishers of Fogo Island, Newfoundland, belong to cooperatives. The ten fishing cooperatives of this region manage the harvesting and processing operations and are engaged in some marketing through their federation. They are more extensively involved in the fisheries than is Fogo Island’s cooperative. The cooperatives, not the fishers, own the vessels and most other factors of production and marketing. Even more striking and important to the outcome is the fact that the cooperatives hold exclusive concessions to vast areas of inshore fishing grounds for abalone, lobster, and turban snail, the major export fisheries. The basic feature of institutional structure, through which response and adaptation at various scales are implemented, is a co-management relationship between government fisheries agencies and this group of ten local cooperatives (Ponce-Diáz et al., 2009), which allows for both local-level and coordinated responses to signs of trouble in the fisheries and environment. The cooperatives of the Pacifico Norte region are organized into a federation which coordinates many marketing and other services, such as resource monitoring and analysis of scientific information and providing advice to government agencies and the cooperatives. The cooperatives’ prosecution of the fisheries is regulated in significant ways, from internal regulations made through general assemblies of all members, to co-management (“co-responsibilidad” or co-responsibility) with government agencies, within the framework of a law governing cooperatives that originates from the same socialist principles that created the ejido system of collective land tenure in Mexico. In 1992, the Pacific Norte cooperatives were granted 20-year, renewable fishery concessions for abalone and lobster. The concessions, which gave the cooperatives and their members exclusive rights of access to those stocks within well-defined territorial boundaries, provide a major incentive for localized resource management, especially for lobster, whose life history better fits the 20-year time span than does that of the longer-lived abalone (Costello and Kaffine, 2008). Concessions come with rules created by the government fisheries agency, but in practice many of them are negotiated with the cooperatives and federation experts; the cooperatives hold significant leverage for political reasons and because the enforcement of these rules depends greatly on the cooperatives. Certain rules governing the concessions derive from top-down mandates, such as closed seasons and quota limits for abalone, which are based on a biomass model used by the fisheries research agency (Muciño-Diaz and Sierra-Rodriguez, 2002). Other rules come about through negotiation with the government, such as when cooperatives argue to shift the date of the open season to be more in line with observed reproductive patterns of lobster. And still others are locally derived, such as choosing to make the size limit for abalone even more stringent than the one recommended by government in order to rebuild abalone populations faster. They have averted the complete fishery failures we see in cases like northern cod, Although decline in abalone populations since the 1960s has been dramatic, the fishery continues, under strict but collaborative management, and appears to be holding its own (Ponce-Diáz et al., 1998), unlike the case for other abalone fisheries in North America, which are commercially and in some cases biologically extinct. The lobster fishery has seen increases in both effort and catches and was awarded certification as a sustainable fishery by the Marine Stewardship Council. In other words, the fisheries of the Pacifico Norte cooperatives appear to be cases of “deviation-mitigation,” or corrective and/or precautionary responses to environmental change.

Ommer_c23.indd 387

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

388


The stewardship involved took a long time to develop, however, and was itself the outcome of response to environmental change. In 1982/83 (before the concessions were implemented and before the current orientation towards stewardship within the cooperatives), a major El Niño brought warmer waters through the disruption of local upwelling. This resulted in decline of the kelp that sustains abalone. Combined with already declining catches in prior years, a drastic decline of abalone began. The government fishery agency threatened the cooperatives with complete closure of the lucrative abalone fishery if they did not agree to severe austerity measures. Added to the fact that the government had long sought to gain more control over these lucrative, locally-run export fisheries, the rise of global awareness of El Niño helps explain the response by government. In 1982/83, fears circulated about the actual and predicted catastrophic effects of the most severe El Niño in memory; it made global headlines and was experienced in some developing countries as a sort of Armageddon (Broad et al., 2002). The negotiated outcome of the government ultimatum was that cooperatives took on greater responsibility for sustainable and cooperative management of the fishery in exchange for being allowed to continue fishing but at a lower and more tightly regulated level. In effect, this formed the beginnings of co-management that continues to evolve in these fisheries (Weisman, 2007). El Niños occurred again in the 1990s, and cooperatives had to adjust once again to lean and uncertain times. In each case, when quotas for lucrative, abalone fisheries were severely reduced by government, cooperatives, family members, and anyone living in the communities felt the impact. To help tide families over, the cooperatives took on additional debt and gave credit to members to help them get through the worst times. Community cohesiveness and the degree to which the survival of the cooperatives is connected with the survival of its members made such critical institutional responses possible (Weisman et al., 2007), as did the lucrativeness of the fisheries. Another response by some cooperatives during and after the El Niño events described was diversification to other fisheries, such as finfish, whelk, and more recently sea cucumber and sea urchin, which are sold to Asian markets (Weisman et al., 2007). Diversification to other fisheries was initially thought of as a short-term solution to the problem of economic crisis when abalone became scarce. But, in fact, the cooperatives have come to depend on them, and the finfish fisheries now fill a social niche in many cooperatives, functioning to keep more people gainfully employed than would be otherwise possible, and provide such work at times of year when more lucrative lobster or abalone is out of season and economically leaner times set in. Longer-term effects of those diversifications, as in the case of Fogo Island, are still playing out, but thus far they have not required new sources of capital and new business arrangements. Nor have they yet created differences in social position and income within the communities that may threaten the system itself. However, greater effort in fishing for finfish may have implications for the ecological system, depending on the ecological impacts of the gill net fisheries that appear to have more substantial effects on coral and other structures than the traps used for lobster (Shester, 2008). Regarding the question of identifying what triggers change that can avert fishery crash, in this case the threat of fishery closure in 1982/83 was one of several critical moments in which cooperatives had to reassess what they were doing and consider alternatives. Government intervention was the clear initial impetus for the shifts towards more careful fishing practices and other rules and scientific monitoring, which cooperatives put into

Ommer_c23.indd 388

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM


389

effect themselves over the following years, with various ups and downs in the process of trying to implement them as well as ongoing debate with government about how much conservation was enough. The willingness of the cooperatives to undertake the costs of carrying out these and other responsibilities aimed at sustainable fisheries can be traced to the incentives provided by the concessions (Costello and Kaffine, 2008), but their ability to do so is very impressive and unusual given the limited intervention of government in many aspects of the cooperatives’ internal operations. The cooperatives have shown strong capacity for both reducing the threat of illegal fishing in the cooperatives’ zones and enforcing the internal rules and standards for work within the cooperatives. The Pacifico Norte cooperatives’ distinction as the only small-scale fishery worldwide to receive certification for a sustainable fishery (for lobster) is another example of their success in responding and adapting to change – not only changes in the environment but also in markets, political climates, and global trends being set by environmental conservation NGOs (Weisman, 2006). In 1999, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) together with a local NGO, Community and Biodiversity (CoBi), initiated a program to use certification as a method of helping small-scale, community-based fisheries receive recognition for and improve their management of local fisheries. The objective was to use certification, or “green marketing,” to help them get financial benefits in exchange for their commitments to practices believed to ensure greater sustainability of fisheries (WWF, 2008). In April 2004, certification for sustainable lobster fishing was granted to nine of the Pacifico Norte cooperatives by the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC), a non-profit certifying body, and although wholesale prices did not go up markedly, other benefits of eco-certification, including enhanced political capital affecting interactions with government, led the cooperatives to seek and gain renewal (McCay and Weisman, 2007). In sum, many factors contribute to the capacity of the Pacific Norte fishing cooperatives to carry out “deviation-mitigating” actions, which translate into what we would call positive actions for the system, including protection against over-fishing in the case of lobster, and efforts at both protection and restoration in the case of abalone. This comes from and informs the local history of experience with environmental changes, due to both El Niño and overharvesting as well as larger changes in laws and fisheries governance. It is also affected by an immensely productive natural environment that has helped buffer those changes and offered alternative fishery resources that required no major changes in investment or organization (in contrast with the Newfoundland case). The cooperatives also had capacity to respond to such challenges because of their strong structure and the degree to which they are embedded in the local communities, which had been poorly served by state and federal governments and depended on the cooperatives for survival. They had the incentives to respond because of the very high value of the fisheries, as well as a high level of dependence on the resources (which Fogo Island also displays) combined with some measure of autonomy to make and act on important fishery decisions (which Fogo Islanders did not have). Paradoxically, isolation, which accounts in part for the lack of full government service, has also helped the cooperatives avoid overharvesting and fisheries decline. The self-sufficiency of the Pacifico Norte fishing settlements, supported by the cooperatives, has created an ethic of proud autonomy. That in turn has contributed to extraordinary efforts by the

Ommer_c23.indd 389

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

390


cooperatives to enforce concession boundaries against outsiders and to maintain discipline within their organizations. Furthermore, the timing of the earlier El Niño events as well as the 1992 concessions was critical, in that fisheries in this region were still in relatively good shape, enabling the cooperatives to make significant investments in monitoring and enforcement when other cooperatives in the region appeared unable to do so, their abalone and lobster fisheries apparently in worse shape by this time. The Pacifico Norte case represents a fishing economy built upon a place-based sense of community – through the cooperatives – that has incorporated what Princen calls “the logic of sufficiency” (Princen, 2005), whereby people embrace, or at least accept, the need to limit what they take, produce, or consume for a more sustainable – and sufficient – way of using nature’s endowments. The system of locally managed fisheries operating within the framework of an otherwise highly centralized federal government regulatory structure also helps explain the timing and quality of responses by the cooperatives to environmental changes. Another factor may be that the high value of the major species involved and the fact that they remained at some level of profitability even at the time of crisis, gives the cooperatives the financial buffer they needed to be able to respond to signs of trouble and change, a condition that may be atypical for small-scale fisheries and for remote coastal communities. However, this system has its vulnerabilities. The concession system marginalizes some people in the communities who are not members of the cooperatives. Membership is limited, especially where the cooperatives have developed policies to stabilize membership; family members are given preference for membership; and women in particular have few work opportunities. The system seems to depend quite heavily on the tight-knit nature of the communities and their isolation, both of which can end very quickly, as is beginning to happen with relaxation of Mexico’s rules against foreign ownership of coastal properties and wakening interest in developing these coasts for tourism as well as salt production. Moreover, a decisive moment looms: the concessions are up for renewal in 2012. Prior to 1992, fishing cooperatives had exclusive rights in another sense, similar to those of landbased ejidos, but as of 1992, neo-liberal policies have opened access to the fisheries to market competition. Private businesses as well as cooperatives may be eligible for concessions. The cooperatives are therefore very aware that concession renewal is not guaranteed, adding considerable insecurity to their property rights, but also creating a motive to strive to maintain a reputation as good stewards and exemplars of “co-responsibility” (Costello and Kaffine, 2008). As in the case of Fogo Island, Newfoundland, outsiders and the “globalization” they represent have been critical to the Pacifico Norte fisheries, helping to provide resources for coping and adaptation. This is clear in the intervention of NGOs to help the cooperatives gain eco-certification for their lobster fisheries. In addition, for many years, scientists from academic and government research institutions have worked with the cooperatives, especially on abalone biology, and they have played important roles from time to time in politics and fisheries management decisions. Regional and international NGOs and wealthy US-based foundations also have been involved. In addition, the decisions of the separate cooperatives and the federation of cooperatives are strongly influenced by standards and norms of international fisheries science through the training of technicians and scientists and the use of particular stock assessment models. Finally, the cooperatives were able to attract scientists, including social scientists, from both the United States and Mexico to

Ommer_c23.indd 390

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM


391

carry out a large interdisciplinary research project, which is helping efforts towards providing annual reports on and eventual renewal of eco-certification (Shester, 2008) and, it is hoped, concession renewal.

Case Study 3: US Surfclam Fishery Surfclam fisheries of the Mid-Atlantic region are part of the Northeast Continental US LME, an expansive, sloping continental shelf marine system strongly influenced by the Gulf Stream and coastal estuaries and rivers. After at least two decades of stability in terms of management and harvests, surfclam populations are now experiencing serious die-offs, which are being attributed to global warming effects. The US surfclam fishery represents a case of distinct signs of the effects of global warming on marine resources, and one in which the human and institutional components of the system appear on the brink of significant change. Response to the effects of climate change is still in its early stages. It is also different from the two other cases in that access and use rights have been privatized at the level of individuals, and they are fully marketable, unlike the case of concession rights, which are held by the collective organization and are not transferable through market mechanisms. The US surfclam harvesters rely on large vessels, 60–150 feet in length, equipped with hydraulic dredges to harvest surfclams (Spisula solidissima) from the sandy bottom of the continental shelf. The canned and frozen clam products that result from this industry are not high-valued luxury foods as are Mexican lobster and abalone, but the scale of the clam harvests is very large and a great deal of money is at stake in the management of the fishery. Although long situated in certain ports, there are no local communities that are dependent on this fishery; the fishing ports of the region are located within fully gentrified and/or industrialized coastal communities. Harvesters, owners, and processors are spread out over a large area and intersect with numerous place-based communities, no one of which is dependent on this fishery or even fishing in general. But there is a kind of community that arises out of the industry itself, a small, very competitive, but tightly networked one with considerable vertical integration between harvesters and processors. It also arises from long-term involvement in the fishery management system for the region (McCay and Creed, 1990, Creed and McCay, 1996); and from the myriad of relationships engendered by trading within the ITQ system. Unlike the Fogo Island fishers and the Pacifico Norte fishers of Mexico, the surfclam fishers have not formed cooperatives that buy their product and run processing facilities. The surfclam fishery of the northeast region of the United States is much more industrialized and much less connected with local communities than are the other two cases. It is similar to the lobster fishery of the Pacifico Norte case in having been relatively sustainable over a long period of time, in terms of overall landings and harvestable biomass (MAFMC, 2008). This is due partly to the intensive government-directed program of management; this fishery was one of the very first in the United States to be managed after the 200-mile limit was enacted in 1976, and it was the first to have both quota controls and limited access, by the late 1970s. From that point to the present it has been managed through quota limits, plus various effort limitations, and the management rules and landings have been relatively stable in recent decades (MAFMC, undated).

Ommer_c23.indd 391

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

392


Whereas the biological dimension of this fishery had been fairly stable until about 1999, its property rights system had gone through dramatic changes. The open access condition changed in 1978, when access was restricted by a moratorium or ban on new vessels and catches were limited by quotas, time limits, and other means. In the late 1990s, the surfclam fishery became the first in US federal waters (outside 3 miles) to be managed with individual transferable quotas (ITQs). Already an industrialized fishery dominated by a few vertically integrated firms, the small owner-operator fleets disappeared very quickly as the harvesting sector consolidated to gain the efficiencies promised by ITQs (McCay and Brandt, 2001). The surfclam resource had increased from lows in the early 1980s to record highs in the late 1990s, and catches were mainly constrained by market limitations. Though it may seem bizarre to outsiders imbued with the notion that fishermen are inherently “risk-prone” rather than “risk-averse” and want the highest allowable catch they can get (Ludwig et al., 1993), almost every year, until about 2000, the surfclam industry asked the regional fishery management council to keep the overall total allowable catches (TACs) considerably below what would be allowed if the biological models were used as strictly to guide quota setting. Given that the clams are long-lived and that the fishery is an ITQ system, keeping the quota low can be seen as a good business decision. Hence, the fishery’s sustainability may also be related to the strong presence of the industry in the management arena, which in the United States is highly participatory, making it open to an industry such as this that is fairly small and able to organize itself to affect management decisions. Consequently, at times the industry has been able to translate the concern about limited markets for product of many of its members into management council decisions to impose lower quotas than what is biologically recommended. Beginning in about 2000, the surfclam fishery began to experience declining catches, as expressed in landings per unit effort and, in particular, what is interpreted as a recent and dramatic die-off of clams in the southern part of their known range, correlated with a rise in sea surface temperatures (Weinberg et al., 2002, Weinberg, 2005). Being so market-oriented, with little evidence left of fishing community allegiance, the industry can and has begun to respond by moving boats closer to the more northern clam beds, and even by shifting where the clams are sent for processing, as predicted in spatial choice economic models (Hicks et al., 2004). But there are other uncertainties beyond the community impacts that such a response to change will create: the market situation and a problem with the distribution of the clams. Surfclams and ocean quahog products – frozen and canned – have global but limited markets, with strong competition. Price is inelastic even as catch efficiencies decline and the costs of fuel, insurance, and other inputs increase. This is forcing out even more of the smaller companies, creating a situation that has prompted calls for addressing a question that was left open when ITQs were legislated in 1990: what is an “excessive share” of the quota? Among the vulnerable in this situation are also those small-holders who opted to remain in the fishery as “sealords,” leasing out their ITQs, but finding it difficult to find lessees or even buyers. The most vulnerable are workers in clam processing plants, the forgotten participants (many of whom are either immigrants from Central America and Southeast Asia or rural African-Americans). As surfclams in the southern part of their range die off and the boats move north, these workers are left behind. A large processing plant in the State of Virginia cut back workers in recent years and finally moved to New England in the spring of 2008, removing one of the last sources of jobs in its rural area.

Ommer_c23.indd 392

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM


393

The problem of clam distribution is that whereas clams appear to be dying off in the southern part of their range, correlated with a rise in sea surface temperatures – a possible signature of global warming – they do not seem to be increasing in the southern New England parts of their range where temperatures should still favour this bivalve. This is possibly because one of the large submarine canyons of the region serves as an effective barrier to larval transport and successful recruitment (Powell, 2008). Vessels are responding to this state of affairs by focusing on a smaller area for fishing and may be endangering the healthier subpopulations of clams. As of early 2009 the situation has not called for major reassessment of the stocks or changes in the quota (MAFMC, 2008), but industry members, managers, and scientists are concerned, a major stock assessment is underway, and people have begun to talk about adopting temporary or rotating area closures to alleviate pressure on the healthier clam beds. The question is, as it was in the case of northern cod and in the case of abalone, whether a major change will actually take place in managing this fishery – either significant decline of the quota or area-based management, or both – to reduce the risk of unsustainable harvesting, or will the status quo persists? How will the ITQ structure of the surfclam industry and management systems and its history of experiences influence the outcome? Scholarship and experience would suggest that the ITQ system creates incentives to care enough for the future that people will act both privately and collectively to protect the resources involved (Scott, 1993, 1996). A recent worldwide survey suggests that ITQs and similar restricted catch allocation systems are somehow linked to improved stewardship, not just efficiency (Costello and Deacon, 2007; Costello et al., 2008). Indeed, the surfclam industry had formed a committee to explore the situation and alternatives facing it, including creating a self-governed system of rotating closures, following the example of the sea scallop fishery of the region (Valderrama and Anderson, 2005), but to this date (March 2009) had not come to agreement on such a system nor on including such measures in the next formal management plan. Outsider engagement has influenced the surfclam fishery and its options for adapting and responding to environmental change in this as in the other cases. Much wealthier overall than the local industries in the Newfoundland and Mexican cases, the US surfclam industry has not depended on NGOs for assistance. However, during the 1980s, economists who promoted and reviewed ITQs in other countries helped create the surfclam ITQ system (Anderson, 1989a,b). In addition, the surfclam industry established close relationships with academic and government scientists. The industry itself has been able to generate both collective action and financing to address problems and opportunities, and the capacity to do this may be attributed at least partially to incentives created by the market-oriented form of enclosure. With fewer “owners” and clear identification of stakeholders due to ITQs, it has been possible for this industry to present a united front in fisheries management (by meeting early to decide on what they will ask of the management council) and to invest in research, as predicted by fisheries economist A. Scott (1993). Industry-supported research became a priority when evidence was found of a major discrepancy in a key parameter in the stock assessment carried out by government scientists. The industry persuaded a university biologist to help them obtain cooperation from the government fisheries agency to do side-by-side analyses of catchability, which resulted in a major correction in stock assessment (Bochenek et al., 2005; Johnson, 2007).

Ommer_c23.indd 393

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

394


Consequently, the surfclam industry is prepared to collaborate with university and government biologists in monitoring effects of warming on the resource and in exploring options for both adapting to and mitigating the effects of observed and anticipated changes. It has the organizational capacity to do this, through a committee created for earlier projects that obtains and manages contributions from industry companies for research projects. The chances are good that the surfclam industry will find a way to adapt to the effects of climate change on the resource, at least in the short term, and thus join the ranks of “deviation-mitigating” fisheries. The wealth of fishery “owners” is not only used to help pay for research but also to explore problems linked to climate change. Indeed, one of the industry leaders has also taken a leadership role in developing offshore wind farms off the New Jersey coast (Fishermen’s Energy www.fishermensenergy.com), an important step towards responding correctively to the larger issue of anthropogenic emissions into the atmosphere.

Conclusion: Enclosures, feedback, and the future The Mexican case and the Newfoundland case represent two faces of place-based or community-based fishing, although many Newfoundland fishers may have found themselves in the position of having to extend their activities far beyond the local territories where they once worked and their communities are undergoing associated changes (Ommer and Team, 2007). Enclosures of different types have played a major role in transitions in fisheries, including the ability to cope with and adapt to global changes in environments and markets. In the Newfoundland case, the key “enclosure” at first was the moratorium on cod fishing, which has been in place since 1992 with only small openings for commercial and subsistence fishing. That has been a failure, or at least a big disappointment, in terms of northern cod recovery. It is possible that the cod fishery will never come close to what it was in the past, given the greater market value of crab and shrimp and the strong cultural claim for early reopening of the cod fisheries (Shelton, 2007). A cod fishery may be sustainable, but at a very low level. Meanwhile the inshore fishers and plant workers are even more vulnerable and resilience is attained mainly through outmigration of the young and able, responding to higher wages in the oil, gas, and mining industries of western Canada. Not mentioned here but extremely important is the enclosure that has occurred through licensing and other policies of the government (Matthews, 1993), including a new policy that encourages the remaining inshore fishing enterprises to “combine,” removing more people from the fishery and therefore from a direct stake in creating a more sustainable future. In the Pacifico Norte case in Mexico, the enclosure that has most transformed the nature of resource use is the concession, which grants to local fishery cooperatives exclusive rights to fish for the most lucrative species, particularly abalone and lobsters, within clearly demarcated areas adjacent to settlements. The concession, to which are attached contractual obligations and the threat of non-renewal, is one of the tools for the development and sustainability of practices that enable both sustainable fishing for lobster and some protection for and restoration of abalone. These include local involvement in monitoring stock status and contributing in other ways to research and knowledge production. A longer

Ommer_c23.indd 394

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM


395

history of co-management, or what is called there “co-responsibility”, plays a role as well and comes out of earlier efforts to cope with the effects of dramatic environmental changes, the El Niño events. This combination, as well as factors such as isolation and autonomy, contributes to the evident success of the Pacifico Norte cooperatives in achieving certification for sustainable fisheries even in the context of global environmental change and globalized markets. The role of isolation in these accomplishments points to the likely vulnerability of the system to the effects of tourist-led and other coastal development. At the same time, a new Fisheries Law in Mexico may be used to support regional systems of management that may help bolster systems such as that of the Pacifico Norte (Diario Official de la Federación, 2007; Ramirez-Sanchez et al., 2008). In the US surfclam case, enclosure is in the form of quasi-private property rights, or individual transferable quotas, which have intensified the strong market-orientation and may have diminished the place-based community orientation of this fishery, although many owners continue to try to keep local people employed. Those remaining in the industry have strong incentives it seems, to contribute to knowledge production through collaborative research, some of which is totally funded by the industry. They also have the facility to shift their operations to respond to the apparent demise of clams in their southern range. The smaller operations are less able to do so, and all are constrained by market limitations, but the most vulnerable are the processing plant workers. Enclosure and the property rights implied by it are critical to these cases but only part of the story. Knowledge and community are key variables as well. A question that deserves fuller attention is the production and use of knowledge in uncertain, complex, and conflicting situations, which some have identified as the conditions of “post-normal science” (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1993; Tognetti, 1999; Ravetz, 2004) or “wicked problems” (Rittel and Webber, 1973), which call into question the fundamentals of inherited ways of doing things, including fisheries management (Ludwig, 2001). In such conditions, the scope of knowledge producers needs to go beyond professional experts to include non-professional experts such as fishers, fishery workers, and others who have traditional and experiencebased knowledge and wisdom (Power, 2002; Neis and Felt, 2002). Our three cases show much greater integration of non-professional expertise into decision-making in the Mexican and United States cases than in the Newfoundland case. This may be explained by the fact that the scale of the fish stocks in the Newfoundland case is so large compared with the experiential scale of fishers, but it also appears related to the strongly entrenched top-down structure of fisheries management, which has been only modestly altered to incorporate the views of fishers and other stakeholders in recent years. We have used the language of negative and positive feedback, of deviation-amplifying and deviation-mitigating responses to environmental change, in presenting these cases. The critical question is what enables or prompts a switch to the mitigating or conserving strategies. In popular language, we are searching for “tipping points” (Gladwell, 2002), or conditions that lead people who are experiencing hard times to take stock, to learn and explore alternatives, and to make changes that help them adapt to the hard times better by finding ways to cope and to reduce vulnerability to the effects of environmental change. This is what “adaptation” appears to mean in climate change discourse. Diversifying fisheries and other income opportunities is a clear example of adaptation. But they may also be led to make changes that help make the situation better; “mitigation” in climate change discourse.

Ommer_c23.indd 395

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

396


The Baja California cooperatives are mitigating the effects of El Niños when they close abalone banks or reduce allowable harvests in those years. If the surfclam fishing industry agrees to a rotational system, it may be able to mitigate, or reduce, the effects of climate warming on the surfclam populations. Making the transition from responses that make matters worse to ones that enable adaptation or mitigation is no small accomplishment. Our cases support those who argue for the importance of some form of “enclosure” or exclusivity of rights to exploit fishery resources, because secure and exclusive rights provide stronger incentives for future-oriented actions than do systems with relatively loose or insecure rights. This has recently been found in a very large-scale survey, where exclusive catch shares have a statistically significant negative correlation with collapsed fish stocks. Our cases add some sense of the range of conditions that may lead to this outcome: not just the market-oriented, privatized ITQs of the surfclam case, but also the community-oriented, exclusive concessions of the Pacifico Norte cooperatives. It is intriguing and it may be telling that in addition, in both these cases, representatives of the fishing industries have argued for stricter measures – closed periods and areas in Mexican case, lower quotas in the US case – than were suggested by government scientists. We could add the Newfoundland inshore fishers from the 1980s, in that many of them were involved in an effort to get the government to reduce allowable catches. However, the big difference is that the Newfoundlanders failed in this quest, forced instead to be involved in continued overfishing when they knew better. The US surfclammers and the Mexican cooperative fishers instead have succeeded, at least at times, and this speaks to a critical factor: power. Simply, the structure of decision-making in the Newfoundland case had no place for the say of the fishers who experienced problems and asked for solutions, whereas in the Pacifico Norte, the cooperatives had long had semi-autonomy and were able to negotiate management agreements with government agencies. Similarly, in the US surfclam case, although the industry groups do not have formal decision-making authority, they do have power within the participatory management system. Consequently, our cases lead us to agree with both those who argue for more exclusive and secure property rights and those who argue for stronger local autonomy and co-management power.

Acknowledgements Support for the research that contributed to this chapter came from the US National Science Foundation (OCE-0410439); the New Jersey Sea Grant Program; the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration program for Cooperative Marine Education and Research, in affiliation with the Institute of Marine and Coastal Sciences, Rutgers University; the MidAtlantic Fisheries Management Council; the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; and the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station. We acknowledge the generosity and expertise of the many participants in these fisheries and fishery management systems who helped us understand them, but we blame no one but ourselves for misinterpretations of their realities. Finally, we thank Rosemary Ommer and Ian Perry for inviting our participation in the FAO Symposium and we thank them and anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions.

Ommer_c23.indd 396

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM


397

References Anderson, L. G. (1989a) Conceptual constructs for practical ITQ management policies. In: Rights Based Fishing (eds P. A. Neher, R. Arnason and N. Mollett), Kluwer Academic Publishing, Dordrecht, pp. 191–209. Anderson, L. G. (1989b) Property rights in fisheries: lessons from the New Zealand experience. Working Paper 89–22, Political Economy Research Center, Bozeman, Montana, p. 52. Bateson, G. (1963) The role of somatic change in evolution. Evolutionary Ecology Research 17, 529–539. Bateson, G. (1972) Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Ballantine, New York. Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (eds) (2003) Navigating Social-Ecological Systems; Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK, 393 p. Bochenek, E. A. et al. (2005) Surfclam management advice generated through partnering of academia, government, and industry. In: American Fisheries Society Symposium: Partnerships for a Common Purpose: Cooperative Fisheries Research and Management, Anchorage, Alaska. Broad, K., Pfaff, A. and Glantz, M. (2002) Effective and equitable dissemination of seasonal to interannual climate forecasts: policy implications from the Peruvian fishery during El Niño 1997–98. Climatic Change 54, 415–438. Charles, A. T. (2001) Sustainable Fishery Systems. Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK. Costello, C. and Deacon, R. (2007) The efficiency gains from fully delineating rights in an ITQ fishery. Marine Resource Economics 22(4), p. 347. Costello, C. J. and Kaffine, D. (2008) Natural resource use with limited-tenure property rights. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 55, 20–36. Costello, C. J., Gaines, S. D. and Lynham, J. (2008) Can catch shares prevent fisheries collapse? Science 321(19 Sept.), 1678–1681. Creed, C. F. and McCay, B. J. (1996) property rights, conservation and institutional authority: policy implications of the Magnuson Act Reauthorization for the Mid-Atlantic Region. Tulane Environmental Law Journal 9(2), 245–256. Davidson-Hunt, I. J. and Berkes, F. (2003) Nature and society through the lens of resilience: toward a human-in-ecosystem perspective. In: Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: Building Resilience for Complexity and Change (eds F. Berkes, J. Colding and C. Folke), Cambridge University Press: Cambridge UK, pp. 53–82. Diario Oficial de la Federación (2007) Ley general de pesca y acuacultura sustentables. Cámara de Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión. Finlayson, A. C. (1994) Fishing for Truth: A Sociological Analysis of Northern Cod Stock Assessment from 1977 to 1990. Social and Economic Studies No. 52. 1994, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John’s NF. Finlayson, A. C. and McCay, B. J. (1998) Crossing the Threshold of Ecosystem Resilience: The Commercial Extinction of Northern Cod. In: Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Institutional Learning for Resilience (eds C. Folke and F. Berkes), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK. pp. 311–337. Funtowicz, S. O. and Ravetz, J. R. (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25, 739–755. Gladwell, M. (2002) The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference. Back Bay Books, Boston MA. Gordon, H. S. (1954) The economic theory of a common property resource: the fishery. Journal of Political Economy 62, 124–142. Gunderson, L. H. and Holling, C. S. (eds) (2002) Panarchy: Understanding Transformations in Systems of Humans and Nature. Island Press: Washington DC.

Ommer_c23.indd 397

12/22/2010 3:28:23 PM

398


Hardin, G. (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162, 1243–1248. Hardin, G. (1994) The tragedy of the unmanaged commons. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 9, 199. Harris, M. (1998) Lament for an Ocean: The Collapse of the Northern Cod Fishery. McClelland and Stewart, Toronto. Healey, B. P. and Mahé, J. -C. (2005) An assessment of Greenland halibut in Subarea 2 + Divisions 3KLMNO, with projections under the Fisheries Commission rebuilding plan. NAFO Scientific Council Research Document 05/63. Hicks, R. L., Kirkley, J. E. and Strand, I. E. Jr. (2004) Short-run welfare losses from essential fish habitat designations for the Surfclam and Ocean Quahog fisheries. Marine Resource Economics 19(1), 113–129. Hutchings, J. A., Haedrich, R. L. and Walters, C. (1997a) Reply: Scientific inquiry and fish stock assessment in the Canadian Department of Fisheries and Ocean and Reply: The interplay of policy, politics, and science. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, 1430–1431. Hutchings, J. A., Walters, C. and Haedrich, R. L. (1997b) Is scientific inquiry incompatible with government information control? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54, 1198–1210. Johnson, T. (2007) Integrating fishermen and their knowledge in the science policy process: case studies of cooperative research in the northeastern US. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Ecology and Evolution, Rutgers the State University: New Brunswick, NJ. Ludwig, D. (2001) The era of management is over. Ecosystems 4, 758–764. Ludwig, D., Hilborn, R. and Walters, C. (1993) Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and conservation: lessons from history. Science 260(3 April), 17–18. MAFMC: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council in cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (2008) Overview of the Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fisheries and Quota Considerations for 2009, and 2010. Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council: Dover, Delaware. MAFMC: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, History of the Surfclam Ocean Quahog FMP. Available on-line: http://www.mafmc.org/mid-atlantic/fmp/history/scoq.htm. n.d., Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council: Dover, Delaware. Martin, C. (1992) No Fish and Our Lives. Creative Publishers, St John’s NF Martin, C. (1995) The collapse of the northern cod stocks. Fisheries 20(5), 6–8. Matthews, D. R. (1993) Controlling Common Property: Regulating Canada’s East Coast Fishery. University of Toronto Press, Toronto. May, A. (2009) The collapse of the northern cod. Newfoundland Quarterly 102(2), URL: http://www. mun.ca/harriscentre/reports/nlquarterly/NQ_article_Vol_102_No_2.pdf McCay, B. J. (1976) Appropriate technology and coastal fishermen of Newfoundland. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms. Doctoral Dissertation, Anthropology, Columbia University: New York. McCay, B. J. (1978) Systems ecology, people ecology, and the anthropology of fishing communities. Human Ecology 6(4), 397–422. McCay, B. J. (2002) Emergence of institutions for the commons: contexts, situations, and events. In: The Drama of the Commons (eds E. Ostrom, et al.), National Academy Press, Washington DC, pp. 361–402. McCay, B. J. (2003) Women’s rights, community survival, and the fisheries cooperative of Fogo Island. In: Retrenchment and Regeneration in Rural Newfoundland (ed. R. Byron), University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp. 158–176. McCay, B. J. and Acheson, J. M. (1987) The Question of the Commons: The Culture and Ecology of Communal Resources. Tucson: University of Arizona Press. xvi, 439 p.

Ommer_c23.indd 398

12/22/2010 3:28:24 PM


399

McCay, B. J. and Brandt, S. (2001) Changes in fleet capacity and ownership of harvesting rights in the United States Surfclam and Ocean Quahog Fishery. In: Case Studies on the Effects of Transferable Fishing Rights on Fleet Capacity and Concentration of Quota Ownership (ed. R. Shotton), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, pp. 44–60. McCay, B. J. and Creed, C. F. (1990) Social structure and debates on fisheries management in the Mid-Atlantic surfclam fishery. Ocean & Shoreline Management 13, 199–229. McCay, B. J. and Weisman, W. (2007) Greening the Red Rock Lobster: Ecolabeling and Control in a Mexican Fishery. Paper presented to annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, 27 November–2 December, Washington DC (Session Anthropology and Sustainability: Issues, Outcomes and Experiences in Mexican Fisheries and Coastal Communities, organized by Maria Cruz Torres). McEvoy, A. F. (1986) The Fisherman’s Problem; Ecology and Law in the California Fisheries, 1850– 1980. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, p. 368. Muciño-Díaz, M. M. and P. Sierra-Rodriguez, P. (2002) Informe de Investigación: Estado de las Poblaciones de Abulón Azúl Haliotis fulgens y Abulon Amarillo H. Corrugada por Zona Reglamentada en la Costa Occidental de la Península de Baja California. Temporada 2004–2005. Instituto Nacional de la Pesca, Dirección General de Investigación en el Pacifico Norte, Centro Regional de Investigación Pesquera [CRIP], La Paz, BCS, Mexico. Neis, B. and Felt, L. (eds) (2002) Finding Our Sea Legs: Linking Fishery People and Their Knowledge with Science and Management. ISER Books, St John’s NF. Ommer, R. E. and Team (2007) Coasts under Stress: Restructuring and Social-Ecological Health. McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal and Kingston. Pauly, D. et al. (1988) Fishing down marine food webs. Science 279(5352), 860–863. Penton, C. (2001) Fired Fogo Workers Reinstated, but Some Bittnerness Still Lingers. In: The Navigator, pp. 12–13. Ponce-Diáz, G. et al. (1998) Socioeconomic characteristics of the abalone fishery along the west coast of the Baja California peninsula, Mexico. Journal of Shellfish Research 17(3), 853–857. Ponce-Díáz, G., Weisman, W. and McCay, B. J. (2009) Co-responsabilidad y participación en el manejo de pesquerías en México: lecciones de Baja California Sur. Pesca y Conservación 1(1), 1–9. Powell, E. N. (2008) Haskin Shellfish Research Laboratory, Rutgers University, Bivalve, NJ, Personal communication. Power, N. G. (2002) Women processing workers as knowledgeable resource users. In: Finding Our Sea Legs: Linking Fishery People and Their Knowledge with Science and Management (eds B. Neis and L. Felt), ISER Books: St Johns NF, pp. 189–203. Princen, T. (2005) The Logic of Sufficiency. The MIT Press, Cambridge MA. Ramirez-Sanchez, S. et al. (2008) Small-scale Fishing Organizations of the Baja California peninsula, Mexico. A Preliminary Assessment. Technical Report, Department of Human Ecology, Rutgers the State University, New Brunswick NJ. Ravetz, J. (2004) The post-normal science of precaution. 36(3), 347–357. Rittel, H. and Webber, M. (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Science 4, 155–169. Rose, G. (2007) Cod: The Ecological History of the North Atlantic Fisheries. Breakwater Bools, St John’s NF. Schrank, W. E. (2005) The Newfoundland Fishery: ten years after the Moratorium. Marine Policy 29, 407–420. Scott, A. (1955) The fishery: the objectives of sole ownership. Journal of Political Economy 63, 116–124.

Ommer_c23.indd 399

12/22/2010 3:28:24 PM

400


Scott, A. (1993) Obstacles to fishery self-government. Marine Resource Economics 8, 187–199. Scott, A. (1996) The ITQ as a property right: where it came from, how it works, and where it is going. In: Property Rights and Fishery Management on the Atlantic Coast (ed. B. L. Crowley), Atlantic Institute for Market Studies: Halifax NS, pp. 31–98. Shelton, P. A. (2007) The weakening role of science in the management of groundfish off the east coast of Canada. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64(4), 723–729. Shelton, P. A. et al. (2006) Fishing under low productivity conditions is further delaying recovery of Northwest Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 63, 235–238. Shester, G. G. (2008) Sustainability in small-scale fisheries: an analysis of ecosystem impacts, fishing behavior, and spatial management using participatory research methods.Unpublished Dotoral Dissertation, Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources, Stanford University: Palo Alto CA. Slobodkin, L. B. (1968) Toward a predictive theory of evolution. In: Population Biology and Evolution (ed. R.C. Lewontin), Syracuse University Press: Syracuse, pp. 187–205. Slobodkin, L. B. and Rapoport, A. (1974) An optimal stratgy of evolution. Quarterly Review of Biology 49, 181–200. Steele, D. H., Andersen, R. R. and Green, J. M. (1992) The managed commercial annihilation of northern cod. Newfoundland Studies 8(1), 34–68. Tognetti, S. S. (1999) Science in a double-bind: Gregory Bateson and the origins of post-normal science. Futures 31, 689–703. Valderrama, D. and Anderson, J. L. (2005) Improving Utilization of the Atlantic Sea Scallop Resource: An Analysis of Rotational Management of Fishing Grounds. In: 2005 North American Association of Fisheries Economists Forum. Weinberg, J. R. (2005) Bathymetric shift in the distribution of Atlantic surfclams: response to warmer ocean temperature. ICES Journal of Marine Science 62, 1444–1453. Weinberg, J. R., Dahlgren, T. G. and Halanych, K. M. (2002) Influence of rising sea temperature on commercial bivalve species of the US Atlantic coast. American Fisheries Society Symposium 32. In: Fisheries in a Changing Climate (ed. N. A. McGinn), American Fisheries Society, Bethesda MD, pp. 131–140. Weisman, W. (2006) Globalization and sustainable marine resource management in fishing cooperatives and communities of the Pacifico Norte, Baja California Sur: Risks and opportunities. Paper presented to the II Congreso Internacional de Sociología: Globalidad y Localidad. Ensenada, BC, México, 9–12 October 2006. Weisman, W. (2007) Something in the Bank: Co-management and Responses to Climate Variability in Fishing Cooperatives of the Pacific coast of central Baja California, Mexico. Paper presented to Annual Meeting of the Society for Applied Anthropology, Tampa FL. Weisman, W. et al. (2007) Vulnerabilidad institucional y potenciales medidas de adaptación de las comunidades pesqueras de la Pacífico Norte (costa occidental Baja California), ante el cambio climático. Paper presented to Meeting of the American Fisheries Society, Mexico Chapter, La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico, 2–4 May 2007. World Wildlife Fund (2008) Sustainable Seafood: Fisheries Certification. Vol. URL: www.panda.org.

Ommer_c23.indd 400

12/22/2010 3:28:24 PM

Part VI

Conclusions

Ommer_p06.indd 401

12/22/2010 4:31:47 AM

Chapter 24

Conclusion Hierarchy, Power, and Potential Regime Shifts in Marine Social-Ecological Systems Rosemary E. Ommer and R. Ian Perry

Abstract This chapter summarizes the message from the book, looking at the multi-dimensionality of marine social-ecological systems and the crucial interdependence and interconnectedness of the ecological and the social in global marine fisheries. It concludes that without clear understanding of this, responsible governance cannot be achieved. Keywords: Marine social-ecological systems, human agency, interconnectedness, adaptations, top-down, bottom-up governance, relationships, multi-dimensional The introductory chapter by Berkes sets the context for this book on world fisheries and social-ecological systems, by examining the interdependence of humans-in-nature. This connectedness, usually unrecognized in the literatures on fisheries governance, poses challenges for the successful management of what are, in fact, complex adaptive systems that operate at a range of scales and involve human agency. That agency is of paramount importance to the effective (or otherwise) outcome of management strategies and policies. This is why, according to Berkes, place-based case studies of local fisheries are vital: local dynamics are vital to successful outcomes. But, since different fisheries in the world are increasingly set within the context of a globalized trade in fish products, and an increasingly globalized catching technology, what the world’s fishing nations need to create is a sensitive interplay between place-based cases and global trends. With that as context and backdrop, this volume focuses for the most part, although not exclusively, on small-scale fisheries. The general findings recorded here identify and discuss the major global changes that face the marine social-ecological systems they examine. In the process, they underline and insist upon the vital importance of interdisciplinary research and social-ecological thinking in coming to grips with issues of scale, climate, power, technology, and the other challenges that face small-scale fisheries from both the perspective of the fish and the fishers. World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis, First Edition. Edited by Ommer, Perry, Cochrane and Cury. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2011 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Ommer_c24.indd 403

12/22/2010 3:28:37 PM

404


Recent thinking about marine ecosystems sees them in terms of top-down and bottomup forcings (Cury et al., 2003). In marine systems, this is energy from the bottom: the climate influences the oceanography, which controls the supply of food energy from phytoplankton to zooplankton to fish. Regime shifts occur because of a change in the relationship of power between different levels (de Young et al., 2008). They are produced by tipping points when a regime becomes unsustainable. There are similarities to human socioeconomic systems here, although (as Berkes warns) we must not fall into the trap of social determinism, human agency being always at play. In human terms, top-down pressures and responses to change are created in the exercise of economic and political (as policy and management) power, while bottom-up responses and pressures are more likely to arise from the need for sustenance at the local level, and the creation of local adaptations to change. The linked social-ecological system then, operates through complex and dynamic responses at many scales, and is thus ever-changing and a major challenge to societies as they seek to maximize product output from marine fisheries, while also attending to the needs of human populations at several scales that depend on and are interdependent with marine ecosystems, also at several scales. The chapters that comprise this volume are the result of scientific (writ large) thinking about the challenge of how to make the world’s social-ecological marine fisheries systems work in such a way as to make fisheries operable at a range of scales. That is why the volume has looked at modeling, knowledge gaps and issues, a range of important values that must be considered if fisheries managers are to achieve “buy-in” from fishers and the industry for their policies and programs, and finally examines governance options under the rubric of socialecological thinking. The interdisciplinary nature of the work is leading edge and can and should set the agenda for the next five years of fisheries analysis and governance thinking. The modeling exercises reported on here speak to major scholarly efforts to come to grips with the challenges of industrial large-scale fisheries where the main human driver has been profit. Whether through sophisticated modeling of northern industrial fisheries or game theory applications of tropical tuna fisheries, the essays by marine scientists and economists in this volume have demonstrated how crucial interdisciplinarity is to the effort to come to grips with difficult issues of industry, profit, management, and governance. There is also new work on how local knowledge might inform such modeling, and a discussion of how to integrate such work in a truly interdisciplinary manner while retaining the modeling methods that throw light on complex systems. One of the challenges faced by managers globally, and one of the reasons why modeling is such an essential methodology in marine policy, is the lack of knowledge of both scientists and managers locally, nationally, and globally: knowledge gaps exist in both parts of the social-ecological marine system. Without knowledge, as Neis points out, we cannot hope for “right action”, and that knowledge stretches from inadequate understanding of the marine ecosystems of the world, to equally inadequate understanding of the things that are crucial to fishers beyond the simplistic notion of profit as the all-important driver. While that is crucial to industrial fisheries, small-scale fisheries are not only economically important in the subsistence or very small business sense. They are also important in other ways, and this volume has pointed not only to knowledge gaps in economics and science, but to a slew of cultural, spiritual, and social values that small-scale fisheries support and enhance over the long term, both in terms of social well-being and that of the ecological habitat of marine fishes.

Ommer_c24.indd 404

12/22/2010 3:28:37 PM

Conclusion

405

Governance, then, is extremely complex. It needs to be place- and society-based, while also responding to industrial (some of this multi-national), national, and global requirements. The accounts of local and national governance models and issues in this book, and the detailed examination of a potential solution through networking and cooperative comanagement arrangements, highlight this point. The range and breadth of the chapters in this volume is unusual, and makes it clear that not all global changes will be negative, that there will be winners and losers. It is also clear that we must always proceed with caution since some industrial development strategies, intended to reduce poverty in fishing communities, may inadvertently undermine their economic basis and make their poverty worse. It also needs to be recognized that “one size does not fit all”, that exposure, susceptibility, and resilience vary immensely, and that one framework and policy response may not apply to all situations. The important question is: How do we develop policies that are flexible and support a wide range of adaptation situations? Fisheries stock assessments have yet to fully integrate the environment, climate change, ecology, and human behavior into their models and management recommendations. This is a critical step in the implementation of sciencebased ecosystem approaches and should be a priority. Thus, continued development of models will remain very important, as will continued synthesis and integration of the work of natural and social scientists. Such inter-disciplinary teams will have to think outside the box of their disciplinary expertise and work together cooperatively, creatively, and imaginatively to address these challenging problems. The book shows that already progress has been made on the social science side of conceptualizing marine ecosystems, and there is a firm foundation for moving ahead on ecosystem approaches to natural marine resource conservation and management now that human beings have been brought into the equation. This book moves us nearer to agreement concerning what we mean by, and how we will formalize and operationalize, such concepts as resiliency, adaptability, flexibility, and capacity. We must, however, always keep in mind that fisheries are a human phenomenon in which human activities interact with natural ecosystems. We should therefore never think of a fishery as just a particular stock in a particular geographic region. Moreover, the politics or political economy of fisheries remains under-developed, particularly with regard to the metropolitan countries while, despite the small size of many fisheries in national economies, they continue to be politically troublesome. Understanding the interests, values, and practices of those involved in fisheries issues from within the broader political economy will be valuable. We need to make sure that government, business, and managers get to experience the sweep of ideas that are contained in this book with its strong insights into the kind of pragmatic policy guidelines in fisheries management practice that are needed to prevent future overfishing, including new guidelines for the application of stock assessment science, which will reduce data errors. We need to work on these ideas with fishers and others in fishing and coastal communities, and others using marine ecosystems, and we should enhance our communication of the significance of global changes on marine ecological systems to the general public. That said, although life is mostly lived locally, we must continue to think globally, while remembering that most fishers’ perspectives are decidedly local, and their lives are embedded in the particular local environment in which they live, upon which they depend, and from which they derive important aspects of their individual and cultural identities. Their long-term and intimate embedding in these environments gives local people insights and specialized knowledge from which the visiting

Ommer_c24.indd 405

12/22/2010 3:28:37 PM

406


expert can always learn. Finally, we must promote international cooperation and support to help humanity face the challenges posed by global change. A coordinated worldwide system to monitor global changes needs much additional development. New conventions may also be needed to help the world’s nations to cooperatively engage in problem solving and coping with global change – in particular as it impacts marine environments. Organizations and programs such as FAO, UNEP, GLOBEC, and others can play important leadership roles to bring about this enhanced international cooperation. Overall, this book has taught us a great deal about the relationships between global (in particular, climate) changes and marine ecosystems, made them more visible, generating models to help us understand and model the future and starting to build humans and social and economic impacts into these models. It begins to provide a common language across disciplines, increasingly more sophisticated conceptual frameworks, with a strong focus on drivers and system dynamics, couplings/interactivities, scale (spatial, temporal, organizational), complexity, coping and adaptation, and governance including considering the contributions of traditional and local knowledge. In terms of gaps and weaknesses, in systems theory there is a tendency towards teleological or circular thinking (are we really getting at cause and effect?), blunt distinctions (i.e., between things that are functional and nonfunctional for systems), stretched concepts (do we really mean the same thing by drivers?), and paradigmatic stasis. Building the social into the ecological requires more than adding on a couple of variables, because social power is multi-dimensional and operates at multiple scales, especially during periods of rapid change. Adaptive co-management works best when it can handle both bottom-up and top-down “drivers” in society, but – as this volume shows – we are still in need of identifying and practicing creative ways of managing articulation points between the local fisher and ecosystem and the national or international drivers of economics, fisheries policies, and sustainable livelihoods. Only when we have come to grips with that problem, and identified positive and balanced ways of dealing with it, will we be able to achieve flexibility in world fisheries management, leading to that productive adaptive capacity, which can enhance ecological wellbeing and human sustainability, and also respond to negative shifts in the ecological part of the social-ecological system as and when these occur. That day is not yet here, but this volume – at the cutting edge of social-ecological fisheries thinking – shows that there is much to encourage policy-makers as they seek to find and employ the kind of balancing act between the many factors that are crucial to the good governance of world fisheries and the social-ecological resilience that such management will bring about.

References Cury, P., Shannon, L. and Shin, Y. -J. (2003) The functioning of marine ecosystems: a fisheries perspective. In: Responsible Fisheries in the Marine Ecosystem (eds M. Sinclair and G. Valdimarsson), CAB International, Wallingford, pp. 103–123. de Young, B., Barange, M., Beaugrand, G. et al. (2008) Regime shifts in marine ecosystems: detection, prediction and management. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 238, 402–409.

Ommer_c24.indd 406

12/22/2010 3:28:37 PM

Index

aboriginal groups (of Pacific Northwest), 133, 185–6, 224–7, 229, 232–3, 235, 244, 246 aboriginal leaders, 224 ACIA report (2004), 364, 378 acidification, 129, 139–40, 149, 237, 362–3 activism, 15, 17 adaptation, 44, 48, 53, 128, 141, 143, 149, 165, 188, 311, 386–7, 390, 395, 404–6 to environmental feedback, 260 high-latitude fishing communities, 361, 364, 370, 377 measures, 36, 44 policies for, 10 socio-ecological, 371 strategies, 130 aerial photography, 269 agency, 22, 63, 102, 186, 207, 213, 329, 387–8, 393 human, 23, 403–4 of knowers, 184 Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 367, 370 algal blooms, 140, 237 analysis, 3–4, 8, 10, 12, 16, 20, 23–4, 44, 52, 61–2, 67–8, 72–4, 86, 90–93, 95, 97, 127, 130–132, 142–3, 155–6, 168–9, 170, 173–4, 176–7, 180, 187–8, 192, 207, 213, 216, 249, 266–7, 274, 282, 343–4, 387, 404, Plate 4 affinity, 179 assumption, 108, 110–11 bibliographical, 172, 174, 176 bio-economic, 104 comparative, 101, 174, 176 conjoint, 45 cost/benefit (social), 143, 230, 236 economic, 143, 233 environmental, 268 factor, 47 focus group, 270 FOK-based, 125–8, 131

forced simulations, 39 gap, 174, 177 impact, 159 indicator-based, 34 joint, 126, 163 matrix (structural), 168, 170, 174, 176 multivariate, 45, 47 network, 334, 340–341 social, 334, 340, 344 problems, 180 quantitative, 156, 348 risk, 140, 152 satellite remote sensing, 265, 269–70, 272 scientific, 130, 143 sensitivity, 45, 108, 110–11 social-ecological, 17, 24 statistical, 109 structural, 179 anchovy, 49, 93, 96–7, 111–14, 116, Plate 4, Plate 11 artisanal fisheries, 3, 4, 53, 155, 179, 203, 332, 383 fishers, 126, 228, 310, 315–17 assumption analysis, 108, 110–11 ATLAFCO (Ministerial Conference on Fisheries Cooperation among African States Bordering the Atlantic Ocean), 154–5, 166, 403–4 backcasting, 46–7, 54, 196 Bahía de Amatique, Guatemala, 310 balance, 33, 53, 111–12, 117, 153, 210, 232, 238, 306, 324, 331, 381, 406 checks and, 195 chemical, 141 contribution, 105, 118 energy demands, 36 modeling, 109 payoffs, 80 types of constraints, 84 Bali Strait, 203–7, 209, 212–13, 215, 218


Ommer_bindex.indd 407

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

408

Index

banks, 210, 215–16, 369, 396 Bay of Biscay, 6, 90 changes in fisheries operating within, 92–3, 96–102, Plate 4, Plate 5 beam trawling, 354 benthic, 33, 37, 43, 93, 100, 352, 354–6, 382 bequest value, 231–2, 238, 282, 287 biodiversity, 10, 13–16, 18, 37, 123–4, 148, 189, 266, 311, 318, 324 community and, 389 ecosystem, 362 French Biodiversity Institute, 102 loss of, 231 maintenance of, 352 bio-economic, 5, 10, 48–9, 67, 73, 170, 174 biogeochemical cycling, 3 bio-geographic ecotone, 97 biotic-commodification, 227 bioturbation, 355 bonuses, 209 bottom conditions, 125 bottom trawling, 282 bottom up approaches, 312 “drivers”, 406 impacts of climate change, 53 integration, 343 knowledge, 6, 118, 122, 130, 132 linkages, 343 processes, 124 responses, 404 trophic alterations, 130 Buddhism, 235 Buguma Community, 274, 276 Burutu Community, 274–6 bushmeat, 228 buy-out schemes (fishing licenses), 373 California Current Large Marine Ecosystem, 386 Canadian Council of Professional Fish Harvesters, 252–3 cannery(ies), 206, 214, 294–6, 298 capacity, 7, 10, 15–16, 21–2, 34, 44, 49–51, 53, 65–7, 69–72, 74, 84, 94–5, 142, 157, 160, 163–4, 171, 179, 190–191, 193–4, 196, 229, 251, 259, 306, 321, 323, 332, 334, 338–9, 343, 346, 360–361, 367, 369, 372, 375, 382, 389, 393–4, 405 adaptive, xx, 10, 34, 44–7, 53–4, 250, 260, 339, 343, 346–7, 406 carrying, 351, 353, 356 effort, 74, 76, 80 government, 180


harvesting, 82–3, 87, 196 ideological, 194 national management, 343 productive, xx, 24 cap and trade, 144 capital markets, 144 carbon, 38, 39 carbonate, 37 carbonate, calcium, 141, 363 carbon-based, 141, 144 carbon footprint, 376 carbon free society, 144 carbonic acid, 362 carbon-limited, 144 carbon tax, 144 career changes, 187 Caribbean Fisheries Forum, 346 Caribbean Sea Ecosystem Assessment, 334 case studies, xx, 4–5, 7, 47–8, 52, 101–2, 259, 312, 359–60, 364, 376, 403 cash crop, 152 catch per unit effort, 189 causal relationships, 129, 132 CECAF (Fishery Committee for Eastern Central Atlantic), 154–6 Celtic Sea fishing community, 92 Central Statistical Bureau (BPS Indonesia), 211–12 CESPAGOH (Service Center for Artisanal Fishery in the Gulf of Honduras), 317–19 Chichilniski criterion, 232–3 Chilean fisheries, 6, 168–70, 172–4, 176, 181 Christianity (with respect to destruction of nature), 226, 235 CISP (Italian NGO), 316–17 class(social), 185, 324 climate change, 5, 6, 14, 31–9, 43–6, 48, 51–4, 91–2, 94, 100–101, 120–121, 124, 128, 132, 139–42, 144–9, 183, 191, 227, 230, 232, 236–7, 247–9, 259–61, 355, 361–3, 374–7, 382–3, 391, 394–5, 405–6 biophysical impacts of, 6 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 32 climate variability, 5, 36, 48, 51–2, 61, 109, 164, 335 clusters of minimum knowledge (CMK), 169, 174 coalition, 76, 80, 82, 87, 195 formation of, 80, 87 coastal, xx, 3–8, 15–16, 35, 37–8, 41, 53, 60–61, 63, 67–79, 84, 87, 111, 123–6, 128, 130, 132, 142, 144–6, 152–3, 171–2, 175–6, 178, 184–5, 196, 226–7, 229–30, 250–252, 255, 260–261, 267, 294, 299, 302, 306, 310–11, 314, 317–19, 327–8, 333, 335, 337–9, 341, 347–8, 350,

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

Index

355–7, 359–63, 365–9, 371–4, 376, 383–5, 390–391, 395–6, 405, Plate 2 aquifers, 142 bays, 185, 367, 369 estuaries, 391 Coasts Under Stress, 7, 249, 385 Code of Conduct For Responsible Fisheries, 17–18, 311, 313, 318 cod fishery, 252–3, 384, 394 Canadian Northern, 382 cod stocks, Atlantic collapse, 192, 250 co-governance, 196 Colin Clark (fisheries economist), 227 collaborative, 6, 10, 19, 21–2, 128, 132, 181, 183, 186, 195, 211–12, 261, 265, 343, 346, 387, 395 collapse, 14, 16, 91, 93, 95, 182, 184, 192, 196, 233, 250–252, 362–4, 381, 384–5, 396 collective action, 339, 343, 393 co-management (of fisheries), 10, 21–3, 121, 164, 186–9, 327, 329, 339, 387–8, 395–6, 406 commodification, 293 biotic, 227 commodity chain, 312 Common Fisheries Policy, 94 community(ies) based co-management, 331–2 development, 293 maritime, 121, 129 of practice, 21, 343 competing users, 335 complexity, xix, 5, 11, 14, 18–19, 22, 36, 40, 48, 106, 121, 131, 148, 164, 188, 192, 194, 236, 390, 406 conceptual approaches, 112, 120, 129–32 Confucianism, 235 Connectivity, 53, 192, 340 Conservation, 17, 20, 65–6, 123, 130, 147, 188–9, 192, 196, 224, 231, 235, 239, 247, 259, 304, 311–12, 314, 317–18, 329–30, 337, 351–3, 356, 375–6, 389, 405 Alianza Trinacional de ONGs para la Conservación del Golfo de Honduras (TRIGOH: Tri-national Alliance of NGOs for the Conservation of the Gulf of Honduras), 316 Conservation and Management Measures (CMMs), 65–6 Convention for the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Cantral Pacific Ocean, 65 FAO Agreement to Promote Compliance With International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas, 61


409

Fundación para el Ecodesarrollo y la Conservación (FUNDAECO; Foundation for Eco-Development and Conservation), 317 goals, 60 International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), 337–8, 342, 344 Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA), 304, 306 World Conservation Union (IUCN), 165 Consilience, xix continental shelf, 38, 102, 124, 152, 282, 391, Plate 10 contingent valuation, 231, 236, 285 cooperatives, 312–13, 382, 386–91, 394–6 coping strategies (in fisheries), 247–9, 259–61 coral reefs, 237, 281–7, 334, 337 co-responsibility, 387, 390, 395 corporate memory, 185 corporatization (of fisheries), 247, 249–50, 256 cost/benefit analysis, 143, 230, 236 creationism, 225 credit system, 327 culture, xix, 6, 8, 13, 140, 143, 148, 183–5, 191, 225–6, 229, 235, 266, 306–7, 324, 335, 369, 386, agriculture, 4, 18, 142, 152, 203, 303, 305, 314–15, 338–9, 342, 363, 396 aquaculture, 13, 15–16, 18–19, 32, 48–51, 53, 93, 128, 237, 288, 315 mariculture, 216 monoculture, 16 polyculture, 16 subculture, 17 cutting edge issues, 192 Dab, 99 Daoism, 235 data triangulation, 207 Dawkins (Richard), 229, 235–6 dead zones, 140, 237 debt, 204, 209–10, 215, 217, 388 decentralization (of wealth and power), 15, 18 deep water, 38, 184 corals, 282 fisheries, xx deferred use value, 235 demographic (change), 148, 153, 252 denitrification, 37 deviation amplification, 381, 383–5 deviation mitigation, 381, 387 Dillingham, Alaska, 367–70, 373

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

410

Index

diminishing marginal utility, 275 diminishing returns to scale, 275 discarding (fishery practice), 189, 196, 206, 208–9, 353 disciplinary boundaries, 106, 191 discount rates, 144, 175–6, 178, 218–19, 232–3 disease(s), 15–16, 142, 190, 227, 288, 315 distant-water fishing nation (DWFN), 5–6, 60, 62, 65 diversification, 47, 260, 371, 385–6, 388 divisions of labor, 183 double feedback (within social-ecological systems), 14 drift gillnetting, 316 drivers of change, 7, 9, 11, 14–15, 24, 44, 46–8, 90, 92–3 dynamics, 10, 12, 14, 17, 23, 43, 48, 51, 53, 72, 101, 115–16, 129, 182, 185–6, 194–5, 340, 375, 383, 403 compensatory, 33 competitive, 61 economic, 34, 49 ecosystem, 14, 106 marine ecosystem, 23, 375 Global Ocean Ecosytem Dynamics (GLOBEC) program, 4, 8, 220 hydro, 126 market, 34 population, 65, 90, 109, 384 price, 49 stock, 68, 188 surplus production, 50 system, 110–12, 385, 406 thermo-, 36 trophic, 106 EAF (ecosystem approach to fisheries), 120–121, 130, 132 Eastern Little Tuna, 204 eco-labeling, 15–16 ecological, xix, 4–5, 9–16, 21–24, 32, 35, 39–40, 49, 52–3, 90–92, 101, 120–123, 152, 170, 183, 185, 190, 194, 196, 207, 224, 233, 237, 247, 250, 252–3, 259–60, 268, 270, 275, 288, 293, 297, 299–300, 303, 306, 312–13, 316, 322–3, 328, 331, 334, 337, 340, 343, 356, 363, 369, 385, 388, 404, 406 biological-, 169, 171, 173–4, 176–7, 179–80 cultural, 370 -economic, 92 equilibrium, 50 ethno-, 122 heterogeneity, 187 indicators, 139–40


macro-, 32–3, 35, 40–41, 53, 97 marine, 360, 363–4, 369, 374–5, 403, 405 ocean-, 363, 368 rent(s), 65 restoration, 233, 235 social-, xix–xx, xxii, 4–7, 9, 11–24, 46, 52, 105–6, 111, 120, 124, 128–30, 182–7, 190–192, 194–6, 220, 247–50, 258–61, 293, 297, 299, 306–7, 314, 318, 334–5, 337, 339–40, 347, 361, 370–372, 376, 381, 383, 403–4, 406 sustainability, xx value (of recreational fisheries), 6, 234, 284 value of social values, 5, 248 ECOST/ISTAM survey, 155 ecosystem approach to fisheries, 105, 110, 120, 322 ecosystem-based management, 319, 321–3, 327–9, 331 marine ecosystem habitat values, 281 modifications, 6 services (estimation of value of), 224–5, 229–30, 234–5, 237, 258–61, 268 eco-theology, 224, 235 efficiency, 42, 147, 155–6, 159, 189, 250, 355, 375, 393 inefficiency, 83 ejido system, 387 El Niño Southern Oscillation, 48, 396 embedded knowledge, 184 Embeddedness, 182, 306 embodied knowledge, 184, 186 emissions, 36, 40, 145, 147–9, 171, 360, 394, Plate 3 employment, 4, 15, 17, 140, 142, 146, 159, 252, 297, 324–5, 328, 337, 366, 372, 375 unemployment, 252, 365 empowerment, 123, 317 enclosure, 250, 260, 262, 381–3, 393–6 end users, 147 environmental change, 4–5, 10–11, 14, 23, 34, 44, 46, 48, 52, 139–40, 148, 189, 191, 268, 352, 362–4, 371, 381–90, 393, 395 environmentalists, 195–6 episteme, 23 equity, 15, 144, 210, 215, 248, 338, 386 ethnic origin, 185 ethno -ichthyology, 123 -oceanography, 6, 119, 121–2, 124, 128–32 European Community, 18, 87 Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), 62, 67–8, 304, 336–7, 375

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

Index

USA EEZ regions, 282–4, 286 existence value, 171, 228, 230–231, 234–5, 239, 285 experience-based observation, 385 exploitation, worldwide fisheries, 16, 32, 41, 43, 51–3, 62, 65, 90, 92, 96, 100, 121, 130, 152, 156, 163, 171, 227, 230, 266, 301, 304, 306, 311, 314, 317, 337 externalities, 4, 145, 171, 175, 178, 230 external shocks, 33 extinction, 227–8, 231, 234, 237, 311, 362 fair trade coffee, 313 FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, 17, 311, 318 FAO Compliance Agreement, 61 Feedback, 6, 8, 12–14, 17, 21–2, 49, 120, 122, 130–131, 260, 312, 361, 382–3, 394–5 loops, 14, 16, 260, 340 fish abundance, 7, 53, 351–3 distributions, 5 harvesters, 183, 185, 188, 249, 252–3, 255–6, 258, 260–262 -packing plant, 296 vendors, 17 fisher canoe fishers, 126–7, Plate 7 folk, 17, 24, 335, 339, 341, 343, 345–6 folk organizations, 335, 339, 343, 345–6 fisheries Alaska, 299, 302 bottom-up integration in, 343 Caribbean, 334 Chilean, viii, 168–169 commercial, 91, 100, 189, 227, 293–307, 315, 317, 371 Council, Fisheries Management, 396 -dependant areas, 19, 249, 251, 306, 335, 337, 384–5, 391 eco-system based, 121, 311, 318, 322 European, 187 Indonesia, 213 landings, 91–3, 100–102, 186, 211, 315, 363, 365, 384, 391–2, Plate 4 management, 15, 17, 19, 22, 75–7, 105–6, 112, 155–6, 162–5, 170, 174, 179, 184, 188, 233, 305, 311, 331, 339, 343, 345, 368, 376, 383–5, 390, 393, 406 organizations, 85–6, 346, 364, 376 policies, 364 practices, 6, 405


411

RED, 317 regimes, 360, 383 science, 10, 120–121, 162–3, 183, 185–8, 192, 335, 344–5, 390 science networks, 187, 341, 343 systems, 359–61, 367, 369, 372, 374–5, 385 fisheries ecosystems, xix fisher’s oceanological knowledge, 120 fishing capacity, 51, 94 -day limits, 83 down the food web, 91, 385 effort, 67–8, 80, 95, 151, 155, 162, 171, 175, 178, 300, 311, 315, 317–18, 356, 363–4, 368–9, 375 license, 189, 257 lobbies, 162 mortality, 40, 43, 53, 79, 83, 86, 90–91, 100–101, 162, 171, 189 safety, 184 strategies, 116, 123, 125, 384 trips, 206 fishmeal, 32, 34, 40, 47–51, 53, 300 fleet separation policy, 255 flexibility, 7, 47, 250, 260–261, 366, 375, 405–6 focus groups, 269–70 Fogo Island, Newfoundland, 383–91 FOK, 120, 124, 126–32 food security, 15, 17, 32, 130, 300, 321, 324, 328, 335, 371, 373 web, 16, 33, 40–41, 53, 90–92, 126, 141, 311, 330–331, 385, Plate 11 footloose capital, 228 Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA), 63 frame-based modeling, 6, 105, 112–13, 115 frame switch, 113 French fleets, 91–4, 96, 101–2, Plate 4 Future, xix, 6–8, 31–3, 36–7, 39, 41, 44–7, 51–4, 86, 128, 139, 144, 146, 148, 153, 165, 169, 179–83, 193, 196, 227–8, 230–234, 238, 250–252, 257–8, 335, 352, 355–6, 360–364, 366, 372, 375–6, 383, 393–4, 396, 405–6 Game, 51, 61, 68, 71, 76, 299, 367, 370, Plate 12 bio-economic, 67 dynamic single-season grid, 73 harvesting, 67, 87 model, 60, 66 RMFO-guided seasonal, 70, 72 theoretic, 61, 68 theory, 404 three stage (3 stage), 71

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

412

Index

Game (cont’d) two-coalition, 76, 82 two-fleet interior, 68 GDP, 140, 146, 227–8, 230, 233, 323–4 gear(s), 63, 65, 69, 124, 156, 186, 204–5, 207, 250–251, 253, 260, 282, 298, 300, 337, 347, 367–8, 370, 372, 383 gender, 20, 184–5, 207, 386 GEOND (geoprocessing model), 272–4 Global Circulation Model (also Global Climate Models)(GCM), 31, 34, 36–9, 52 global monitoring system, 360 networks, 183 Global Environmental Facility (GEF, World Bank), 35, 147 Globalization, 10–11, 14–18, 23–4, 251, 335, 390 of trade, 11 golden rules (of the Pacific Northwest), 226 governance, 5–7, 9–13, 16–19, 21–4, 35, 53, 120, 128, 131–2, 148, 155, 164, 168–70, 179–81, 188, 196, 250, 259, 261, 291, 311, 318, 333–5, 337–41, 343–4, 347–8, 381, 389, 403–6 filter, 12–13 Gray literature, 249 Great Lakes fisheries, 230, 233 greenhouse gases (GHG), 140, 142, 144–5, 147–8 gross registered tonnage of fishing vessels, 94–6 groundfish trawl, 255, 262 habitat, 7, 11, 14–15, 23, 68, 122, 126, 129, 192, 229, 236, 282–8, 311, 315, 335, 337, 351–3, 355–6, 369, 386, 404 associated values (of species), 5, 281–7 marine, 5, 7, 23, 281, 282, 285, 287 Haddock, 99 Halibut, 253–5, 257, 385 harvesting power, 250–251 harvest sub-sector, 153 health, 13, 49–50, 141–3, 146, 182–3, 189–95, 234, 236, 309, 337, 363, 382–3 Heimaey, Iceland, 365, 372 hierarchy (theory), 12–13 high-grading, 89, 208–9, 215 high-latitude fishing communities, 359, 364, 373–4 high seas, 5, 60, 62, 66–8, 71, 74–8, 80–85, 87 Hinduism, 235 historical transitions, 293 HIV (among fishers), 15, 17–18, 24 hook and line, 316, 383 household surveys, 268–9, 273 Hubbel and Waller (Seattle company), 296–7, 306–7 human agency, 23


Human Development Index, 47 human dimensions, xxii, 305–7 human-environment integration, 11 human-ocean interactions, 7 humans-in-nature, 2, 8, 11–12, 340, 402 Humboldt, 39, 47, 49, Plate 3 Hurricane Katrina, 144, 148 Hydrocarbon, 266, 314–15 Ibiraquera Lagoon (Brazil), 313 ice age, 225, 375 new, 362 iconic species, 285–6 ideology, 194 ILGRA, 164 illegal fishing, 87, 151, 153, 314, 389 IUU (illegal, unreported, unregulated), 6, 203–4, 218 unregulated, unreported, 203 indicator species, 126, 331 indigenous knowledge (for management), 20 individualism, 248, 258–9 individual transferable quotas (ITQ), 250, 331, 381, 392, 395 Indonesia Central Bank (Bank Indonesia), 215–16, 219 industrial coastal communities, 3 inertia (Societal resistance to change), 149 information flow, 131, 142, 260, 345 innovations, 61, 144, 292 inshore fisheries, 384 institutional, 92, 150, 153–4, 159–60, 169–70, 182, 190–194, 204, 293, 299, 305, 331, 335, 340–342, 385–6, 388, 391 arrangements, 21, 35, 334, 338, 348 capacities, 160–162 constraints, 188 context, 92, 94, 96 development, 23 experimentation, 22 foundations, 148 framework, 95, 151, 164–5 inertias, 191 infrastructure, 340 interactions, 23 inter-institutional coordination, 180 interplay, 23 learning, 10, 19, 21 power, 185 priorities, 293 recognition, 6 relationships, 63 structure, 179–81, 194, 383, 387

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

Index

values, 193 instrumental role, 163 value, 224, 228, 234 integrated analysis, 90 Integrated Coastal Management (ICM), 311, 317 intensification (of fishing effort), 32, 151 interactions, between fishing and climate, 91 interdisciplinarity, 105, 132, 265, 277, 404 inter-generational fishing, 148, 184 intergovernmental organizations, 338 intermediaries (fish trade), 313–15, 317–19 internal stratification, x, 247, 249, 253 International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas. (ICCAT), 337, 344 international markets, 15, 49, 367 inter-organizational linkages, 339 intrinsic value, 7, 224, 228, 230, 234–5 investment priorities, 144 IPCC, 32–3, 36, 44–7, 140, 359–61, 364 Islam, 226, 235 Isolation, 51, 237, 353, 369–71, 389–90, 395 ITQ system, 250, 323, 365, 372, 391–3 Jainism, 235 Japanese fisheries (in Alaska), 300, 302, 304 Judaism, 226, 235 Jukung, 205 Jurisdictions, 12, 35, 204, 207–8, 211–14, 220, 299, 301, 335, 338–9, 341, 343, 346 Justice, 237 environmental, 312 social, 144, 192, 316 Kasahara and Burke Report, 300–301 knowledge clusters, 177, 180 collaborative, 6, 22, 183 elements, 170–181 matrix, 169, 172 production, 6, 9, 11, 22, 183–4, 187, 191, 194–6, 394–5 transfers (KT), 183, 185 labor force (percentage involved in fishery), 252 landing(s) tax exemption, 203 LANDSAT (satellite system), 268–9 La Niña, 64, 383, 386 large marine ecosystems (LME), 35 larval dispersal, 130, 337 latitudinal analysis of fishing countries, 33 learning by doing, 20–22


413

least advanced countries, 152 Lemuru (Sardine species), 204–9, 211–15, 218 lending predatory, 204, 215 rate, 275 schemes, 215 liberalization of trade, 95 line-fishing (in Caribbean), 124 livelihood, xx, 5, 13, 15–19, 32, 48, 53, 140, 184, 189, 219, 270, 309, 315, 317–18, 331, 333–5, 337, 343, 406 liability(ies), 210, 270 local ecological knowledge (LEK), 183, 185–7, 189 elites, 253 knowledge (LK), 20–21, 164, 183, 194–5, 270, 312, 329, 404, 406 in primary data collection, 270 local and traditional knowledge (as qualitative indicators), 19 log books, 208, 219 lunar spawning cycles, 20 Maastricht Treaty, 18 Mackerel, 97, 204, 253, 337, Plate 11 macro-ecological, 32, 40–41, 53, 97 rules, 33 management strategies, 6, 73, 112, 375, 403 mangrove(s) land-cover, 272 products, 271, 275–6 resource, economic value of, 266–74 marine ecosystem stewardship, 23 Marine Protected Areas, 7, 20, 351 Marine Resources Committee, 229 Marine Stewardship Council, 16, 313, 387, 389 market dynamics, 34 matrix analysis, 167, 170, 174, 176 Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY), 73, 311 mechanical harvesting aids, 251 mentorship, 185 Mesoamerican Reef Ecoregion (MAR), 314 meso-scale eddies, 124 migration, 68, 122, 128, 171, 225, 337, 383 capelin, 189 out-, 251, 394 stock, 60 millennium development goals, 17–18, 211–12 Millennium Ecological Assessment, 12, 23 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 24, 45, 231, 234–5, 335 Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries (DKP Indonesia), 211–13, 220

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

414

Index

Mobility, 15, 17, 121 modeling, v, vii, 5–6, 29, 32, 34, 38–9, 50–52, 54, 101, 105–13, 115, 117–18, 120–121, 163, 183, 195, 268, 404 frame-based, 6, 105, 112–13, 115 modeling (pertaining to interdisciplinary research), 6, 104, 106–7, 109, 111, 117 models coupled physical-biological, 109 monitoring, 7, 10, 15, 21–2, 32, 65, 71, 87, 142, 146, 148, 163, 193, 238, 299–301, 306, 312, 329–32, 353, 360, 372–3, 375–6, 387–8, 390, 394 monoculture, 16 monsoon(s), 204 moratorium, 381, 384–5, 392, 394 MPAs, evaluation of effectiveness, 351–3, 355–7 multi-agency, 207, 213 multi-dimensional, 403, 406 multinational, 3, 60 National Income Accounts, 146 Nature, 4–5, 9, 11–12, 20, 23, 32, 34, 44–5, 52, 59, 141, 143, 179, 193–4, 204, 223–6, 229–30, 234–6, 249, 256, 265, 340, 347, 355, 365–6, 385, 390, 394, 403–4 as the “new poor”, 236 Nauru Agreement, 63 nautical maps, 207 neoclassical economics, 230 nested systems, 12, 52, 54, 249 net income, 210, 217, 268, 272, 275 benefit, 268 from mangrove resources, 268–70, 273, 275 net present value, 216, 232–3 network(s), 21–2, 49, 51, 154, 163, 165, 170, 183–7, 190, 193–5, 236, 306, 312, 334, 339–47, 351–2, 356–7 advice, 154 analysis, 334, 340–341, 344 approach, 334–5, 341 economics, 49 European Network of Excellence for Ocean Ecosystems Analysis, 8 fisheries, 7, 185, 187, 334 fisheries science, 341, 343–4 governance, 340 knowledge, 190, 192, 194, 196 social-ecological, 194 perspective, 7, 343, 346–7 Red, Network of the artisanal fishers of the Guatemalan Caribbean and of Lake Izabal, 309, 314, 316


simulated topological, 183, 187, 194 social-ecological, 183, 187, 194 theory, 340–341, 348 New Fisheries Law (Guatemala), 317 Niger Delta, 265–70, 272, 276–7 non-decomposability, 14 non-equilibrium processes, 12 non-linear processes, 14, 249–50 non-market values (of fisheries industries), 248 North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC), 304–5 Northwest passage (opening), 227 Nushagak Bay, 367, 369 Nutrients, 33, 37, 141–2, 171, 356 observer data, 189 occupational health, 183, 194, 262 ocean economy (value of), 143 warming, 33, 130, 362 ocean acidification, 139–40, 237, 363 open access, 82, 89, 91–2, 94, 96–7, 101, 312, 339, 370, 382, 392 option value, 230–231, 238 oral history, 249, 262 otter trawl, 250, 253, 301 Pacifico Norte, Mexico, 382, 386–7, 389–91, 394–6 Pacto de Caballeros, 316–18 paradigm shift, 142, 145–6, 148 parameterization, 36, 53 participatory methodology(ies), 9, 11, 24 patron-client relationship, 206, 209 pay-for-pollution, 11, 14, 128, 147, 305, 310, 314–15, 337, 353 pelagic (recycling), 33, 37 Peruvian fish-meal production, 366 Peter Pan Seafoods, 366, 377 Phronesis, 23 place-based fishing, 10, 12, 16, 23, 306, 311, 346, 390–391, 394–5, 403 management, 311 Plaice-box (fishery case study), 351, 353–5 Plankton, 33, 39, 109, 114, 175, 331 functional types, 38 phytoplankton, 37–8, 41–2, Plate 11 production, 32 zooplankton, 37–8, 404, Plate 11 PNA, 62–8, 71, 76, 80, 87 Pokkali polyculture, 15–16 Policy, xxii, 4, 18, 63–5, 72–4, 76, 80, 84, 86–7, 146, 148–9, 152–4, 162–5, 169, 187, 191, 196, 225,

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

Index

236, 238, 255, 262, 298, 331, 333, 337, 340–344, 346–7, 353, 367, 384–5, 394, 404–5 change, 194 choices, 61–2, 66, 72–4, 139 Common Fisheries-, 94 consequences, 60 coordination, 329 designs, 66 dynamic strategic-, 67 fisheries, 17, 61 fleet separation, 255 formation, 294 -makers, 139–42, 145, 148, 152, 162, 183, 195, 288, 343–4, 352, 356, 406 -making, 141, 145, 148, 179, 183 management, 4, 61, 67, 262 measure, 322–3, 328, 332 National Environment Policy Act (NEPA), 303 objectives, 257, 352 options, 46–7, 54, 70, 80 outcomes, 140 performance, 62 preferences, 74 public sector, 7 RFMO, 60, 80, 84 transition(s), 306 variables, 72 Pollack, 93, 99, 285, 302, 329, Plate 4 Pollution, 11, 14, 128, 147, 305, 310, 314–15, 337, 353 population dynamic, 65, 90, 109, 384 poverty index, 203–4, 210, 217–19 Poverty Reduction Strategy (programs), 18 power, 5, 18, 21, 36, 41–2, 53, 65, 82, 94, 113, 146–7, 180, 182–3, 190–191, 194–6, 226, 235, 250–251, 296, 299, 305, 313–14, 318, 323, 338, 342–3, 347, 353, 369, 381, 396, 403–4, 406 predator-prey relationship, 42–3, 171, 186 prey, 33, 43, 90–91, 238, 353–5 biomass, 7, 351, 353, 355–6 privatization of science, 193–4 production primary, 31, 33, 35, 37–44, Plate 3 profit maximization, 51 Project Global, 15, 17 property rights, 7, 47, 227, 380, 382–3, 390, 392, 395–6 secure, 7, 381, 396 prototype, 109–12, 115, 118 psychology, 8


415

public good, 193 managers, 155–6, 165 sector policy, 7, 334 qualitative indicators, 19 quantitative modeling, 12, 46, 115, 122, 305 quasi-option value, 231, 238 QUEST_Fish, 30–31, 34–41, 44–9, 51–4, Plate 1 quota(s) fisheries, 227 race for fish, 94 rapid prototyping, vii, 11, 105, 109, 115, 117 recommendations, 44, 156–7, 168, 187, 204, 219, 305, 314, 335, 344, 359–61, 372–3, 405 Red (Network of Artisanal Fishers), 309, 314, 316–19 reef and lagoon tenure, 20 reflexivity, 182, 184, 187, 190, 192, 194 regime shifts, 16, 121, 403–4 regional fisheries management organizations, 346, 364, 376 regional models, 34, 38, 52, 120, 132 regions of freshwater influence, 355 regulated open access, 91–2, 94, 96, 101 regulatory measures, 155, 166 relationships between people and nature, 9, 12, 73, 226 relative poverty, 204, 210, 217 resilience (of ecosystems), 4, 12–13, 16, 19, 24, 100–101, 311, 352, 376, 406 resilience perspective, 12 resource-rich, 3 responses to change, 40, 53, 366, 368, 371, 404 restructuring economic, 203, 219, 259, 385 revenue, 209–10, 216–17, 234, 251, 322, 385 RFMO (regional fisheries management organizations), 60–62, 65, 67–74, 76, 80, 82–4, 86, 376 Rio Dulce-Polochic, 315 Rio Motagua, 315 risk manager, 152 risk-taking, 17 risky, 17 “Roving Bandit” model of resource exploitation, 16–18, 24 Russian fisheries (in Alaska), 303 Sablefish, 255 Sacred, 224, 235 Salience, 187–8

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

416

Index

Salinity, 124, 129, 141, 353, 355, 374, 377 Salmon stock decline, 373 salt water intrusion, 142 sampan, 205 sardine, 49, 93, 102, 110–14, 116, 124, 203–6, 209, 213, Plate 4, Plate 11 satellite remote sensing, 265–6, 277 scale, xix–xx, 3–7, 11–14, 18–23, 31–2, 34–41, 45, 47–9, 53–4, 90, 92–3, 96–7, 106, 112, 120–121, 124–7, 129–31, 145, 156, 163, 171, 175–6, 178, 181–2, 184, 187–8, 192, 194–6, 203–6, 208–12, 214–16, 219–21, 230, 237, 249, 265, 267, 275, 283, 285, 306, 310–15, 317–19, 323, 328, 332, 334–5, 337–41, 343, 346, 352, 363, 365, 375–6, 382–7, 389–91, 395–6, 403–4, 406, Plate 7 scarcity, 87, 151, 189, 194–6 scenarios, 36, 38–9, 44–9, 51–3, 130–132, 144, 160, 231, 286, 354–5 science informed policy, 4, 139, 162–4, 323, 343–4, 404 scientific advice, 65, 151–2, 154–61, 163–5, 329–30, 343–4 credentials, 187 integrity, 193 knowledge, 6, 121, 123, 131, 183, 312, 357, 385 sea agitation, 126–7 level rise, 13, 126, 130, 132, 143, 146, 359–64, 366, 368–9, 372–4, Plate 6 urchin(s) fishery, 16, 24, 337, 388 warming (and effects on fish), 97 water cooling, 126 Sealords, 392 Seamounts, 124, 281–7 Seasonality, 33, 206, 382 security food, 15, 17, 32, 130, 300, 322, 324, 328, 335, 371, 373 self-organization, 14, 339, 343, 346, 361 sensitivity analysis, 45, 108, 110–11 sentinel fisheries, 384 separate silos, 4 sequential depletion cycles, 16 serok, 205 shared vision, 107 shellfish, 13, 262, 282 Shiretoko approach, 329, 331–2 peninsula, 329 World Natural Heritage Site Scientific Council, 330


Shrimp, 13, 15–16, 18–19, 24, 32, 91, 124, 153, 158, 165, 184, 250, 253–4, 285, 302, 313, 316, 385–6, 394 simulations Monte Carlo, 203–4, 208, 220 slerek (fishing method), 204–6, 209–10, 216–19, Plate 8 “slipper skipper”, 255 small boat harvesters, 184, 252 Small Island Developing States (SIDS), 335 small-scale coastal community(ies), xx fisheries, 3–4, 7, 19, 21, 210, 237, 334–5, 337, 341, 390, 403–4 small-vessel enterprises, 365 fisheries, 372 snowball sampling, 207 social change, 7, 183, 196 -ecological history (of Alaska), 293 interactivity, 182 resilience, 361, 406 systems, 1, 4–12, 14, 16–20, 22–4, 46, 104–5, 111, 118, 124, 128, 183–4, 191, 194–5, 220, 237, 247–9, 334–5, 339, 361, 381, 403 -ecology (of our bodies), 181, 183–4, 190, 196 -economic (status), 35, 53, 61, 155, 265–8, 275, 277–8, 404 engineering, 192 inclusion, 123 infrastructure, 142 justice, 144, 192, 316 management, 7 organization, 19 power, 190–191, 194, 406 values, changes in the fishing life, 7, 247–8, 259, 261, 404 Social Vulnerability Index (SOVI), 143 socio-economic characteristics, 274 sociology of science, 183, 193 Southern Oscillation Index, 209 spatial ownership, 125 spawning zone, 296 species at risk, 3 species shift, 301 spiritual value, 5, 7, 224–9, 231, 234–5, 248 spiritual value of nature, 224–6, 236 stakeholders, 7, 20, 47–8, 106, 110, 120–121, 132, 147, 155, 164, 179, 267, 270, 304, 306–7, 312, 316, 324, 332, 334, 339–40, 342–4, 346, 357, 393, 395 State-and-Transition (approach), 112

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

Index

stock assessment science, 186–8, 196, 405 highly migratory, 60–61, 65, 171, 374, 376 recruitment, 68, 70, 73 restoration, 73 stream barricades, 296 Striped Shiner, 231 Sub Regional Fisheries Commission (West Africa), 153–4, 157–8, 161 subsistence fishery, 316, 370, 373 subsystems, biophysical and social, 8–14 Surfclam fishery, 382–3, 391–3 surprise(s), 12, 14, 17, 19–20, 225, 231 survey instrument, community derived, 270–271 sustainability, xx, 5–6, 10, 12, 14–15, 17, 23, 34, 51, 61, 123, 162, 306, 318, 348, 370, 389, 392, 394, 406 systemic responses, 381 system model, 111–13 techne, 22 “techno-hubris”, 192 Tellus Institute, 147 territorial waters, 3 thematic maps, 269–70 thermohaline circulation, 129 third industrial revolution, 144, 148 tipping point (re, global warming), 6, 141, 404 tipping points, 6, 141, 147–8, 395, 404 top-down (knowledge), 6, 119, 122, 130, 132, 188, 312, 342–3, 381, 383, 387, 395, 404, 406 top-down mandates, 387 total economic value, 224–5, 229–35, 237 tourism, 53, 128, 238, 287, 313, 329–30, 333–5, 337, 339, 366, 390 traditional canoe fishing, 125 ecological knowledge (TEK), 121–3, 125–6, 185 fishing communities, 247, 251–2, 256, 258–61 Tragedy of the Commons, 312, 386 Transboundary, 61, 66, 68, 195, 337–9, 346 Transdisciplinarity, 192 transformational technology, 293 transformative, 183–4 triggers, 381, 388 TRIGOH (conservation alliance), 316 trophic interactions, 35, 43 level (of targeted species), 33, 39–42, 91–3, 97, 99–100, Plate 11 trust agreements, 255–6


417

tsunami, 2004 South-east Asia, 15, 225 Tuna fisheries, 5, 60, 62–3, 65, 341, 345, 404 Turbot, 253, 385 UNCED, 17 Uncertainty, 7, 13–14, 22, 41, 45, 106, 108–9, 121, 123, 129, 139, 148, 164, 192, 194, 196, 203, 207, 215, 218, 231, 238, 252, 260, 351, 356, 360, 363 uncertainty (in fisheries), 13, 22, 45, 121, 123, 129, 192, 203, 215, 356, 360, 363 under-reporting, 203, 219 unemployment, 252, 365 United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA), 61, 375–6 United Nations International Law of the Sea, 306, 310 upwelling, 37–8, 40, 111–14, 124, 152, 206, 386, 388 use values, 230–231, 233, 235, 268, 281–3, 286–8 variability, 13, 39–40, 93, 129, 186, 311, 371, 374–5 climate, 5, 36, 48, 51–2, 61, 105, 109, 164, 335, 359, 365–7, 373, 377 climate driven, 60 inter-annual climate, 36 ecological, 13 marine-ecological, 363 ecosystem, 373 marine-ecosystem, 360, 374, 376 environmental, 85, 109, 364–5 marine-environmental, 364 fisheries, 129 fish stock, 366 flow of resources, 13 inter-annual, 39, 185 natural, 225 short-term, 40 vertical, 38, 323 gradients, 171, 175, 178 integration, 391 levels, 36 linkages, 21, 23, 343 mixing, 33, 38 resolution, 37 stratification, 33 vested interests, 191–2, 194 virtuous behaviour (of fishers), 309, 318 vulnerability, 5, 10, 15–17, 32–4, 44–8, 52–3, 128, 143, 189, 195, 304, 306, 372, 376, 395 indices, 45–6 Walleye Pollock, Plate, 11 warming sea, 6

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

418

Index

Warri (city), 266, 276 wave induced mortality, 356 weak institutions, 338 well-being, 12, 18, 23–4, 67, 73, 190, 306, 319, 363, 404 West African fisheries, 152–3 Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, 65 Whaling, 295, 302–3 Whitemouth croaker, 124 willingness to pay (for ecosystem survival), 231–4, 236, 239, 285


Wilson, E.O., xix, 236 wind tunneling, 46–7 Wisconsin, Northern Highland Lake District, 14 world model, 108–10 real, 73, 76, 87, 108–11 World War II (WWII), 250, 299–300, 302 World Wildlife Fund (WWF), 165, 389 Yup’ik community, Alaska, 367, 369–70, 373

12/22/2010 3:29:01 PM

World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Krill: Biology, Ecology and Fisheries (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

World Fisheries Resources

Fish Cognition and Behavior (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Bacteria from Fish and Other Aquatic Animals

Bacteria from Fish and Other Aquatic Animals:

Fish Conservation: A Guide to Understanding and Restoring Global Aquatic Biodiversity and Fishery Resources

Bacteria from Fish and Other Aquatic Animals

Mussels: Anatomy, Habitat and Environmental Impact (Fish, Fishing and Fisheries)

Participation in Fisheries Governance (Reviews: Methods and Technologies in Fish Biology and Fisheries)

The Handbook of Fish Biology and Fisheries Volume 2

State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture, 2010

Water resources systems analysis

Reef Fish Spawning Aggregations: Biology, Research and Management (Fish & Fisheries Series)

Photographic Atlas of Fish Otoliths of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean (Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Scienc)

Limnology and Aquatic Birds

Cost-Benefit Analysis And Water Resources Management

Tropical Fish Otoliths: Information for Assessment, Management and Ecology (Reviews: Methods and Technologies in Fish Biology and Fisheries)

Fish

Fish

World Bank: A Critical Analysis

Biology and Management of the World Tarpon and Bonefish Fisheries

Fish

Fish in a Barrel

Fish In A Barrel

Multilingual Dictionary of Fish and Fish Products

Fisheries Management: A manual for still-water coarse fisheries

World Fisheries: A Social-Ecological Analysis (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Krill: Biology, Ecology and Fisheries (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Fisheries Acoustics: Theory and Practice (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

World Fisheries Resources

Fish Cognition and Behavior (Fish and Aquatic Resources)

Bacteria from Fish and Other Aquatic Animals

Bacteria from Fish and Other Aquatic Animals:

Fish Conservation: A Guide to Understanding and Restoring Global Aquatic Biodiversity and Fishery Resources

Bacteria from Fish and Other Aquatic Animals

Mussels: Anatomy, Habitat and Environmental Impact (Fish, Fishing and Fisheries)

Participation in Fisheries Governance (Reviews: Methods and Technologies in Fish Biology and Fisheries)

The Handbook of Fish Biology and Fisheries Volume 2

State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture, 2010

Water resources systems analysis

Reef Fish Spawning Aggregations: Biology, Research and Management (Fish & Fisheries Series)

Photographic Atlas of Fish Otoliths of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean (Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Scienc)

Limnology and Aquatic Birds

Cost-Benefit Analysis And Water Resources Management

Tropical Fish Otoliths: Information for Assessment, Management and Ecology (Reviews: Methods and Technologies in Fish Biology and Fisheries)

Fish

Fish

World Bank: A Critical Analysis

Biology and Management of the World Tarpon and Bonefish Fisheries

Fish

Fish in a Barrel

Fish In A Barrel

Multilingual Dictionary of Fish and Fish Products

Fisheries Management: A manual for still-water coarse fisheries

Recommend Documents