Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recentering the commons: assessing citizen mapping as an environmental practice

  • Research
  • Published:
Maritime Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The last three decades have seen waves of coastal development paradigms, the most recent being that of ‘blue economy’ and ‘blue growth’ — terms used in conjunction with sustainable development. The blue economy paradigm has its share of discontents across Indian Ocean nations who resist further commodification of coastal spaces and its perverse outcomes in the garb of sustainability. Community-based conservation, citizen mapping of traditional tenure arrangements over coastal commons are emerging counter-strategies in India, to prevent land alienation, and coastal and oceanic ‘grab’. The paper does a reflexive assessment of a case of citizen mapping of coastal commons as a legal pluralistic conservation engagement from India. It examines the effectiveness of such localised collaborative civil society exercises against systemic shifts in coastal protection regimes. It details beneficial practices and knowledge generated by such citizen mapping exercises with reflexive insights for civil society actors. It also critically examines the limitations of such civil society efforts constrained by fixed coastal governance frameworks. The paper argues that Indian coastal regulation law’s built-in iniquities motivate as well as limit civil society efforts to democratise coastal governance. Local actors’ capabilities and social positions themselves further cramp the utility of legal options, making the alienation of the commons all too commonplace under neoliberal environmental governance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Kaibarta is a caste group present in Assam, West Bengal, and Odisha. The term Kaibarta samaj can be loosely translated to this caste group’s governance institution. However, the Odia fishers we met used the term village committee to refer to the body. This English term was widely used by fishers of both non Kaibarta fishers of Telugu and Kaibarta fishers of Odia origin. As such, this term has been used throughout the article to indicate traditional fisher caste governance institution in the fishing village.

  2. For example, see Fomento Resorts and Hotels Ltd. and Another versus Minguel Martins and Others, Civil Appeal No.4154 of 2000 with Civil Appeal Nos. 4155 and 4156 of 2000 decided on 20th January 2009 where the Supreme Court of India upheld the traditional access to the beach and directed demolition of a private construction that obstructed it. In M.C Mehta vs Kamal Nath and Others decided on 13th December 1996. In this case, the Supreme Court of India observed that the Himachal Pradesh state government breached public trust doctrine by leasing out an ecologically fragile land to a private company for commercial gains.

  3. Chilika lake is a Ramsar site with around 150 traditional caste-based fishing villages in its vicinity.

  4. Lepidochelys olivacea is categorised as vulnerable by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). For more details, see Chandarana et al. 2017 listed in the reference.

  5. The Indian Army initially acquired this coastal stretch of land from the Odisha state government for setting up an Army Air Defence College within the Gopalpur cantonment in 1984.The initial resettlement site was far from the sea and after sustained efforts on the part of the fishers a sea-facing site was provided.

  6. Nua Golabandha is Telugu speaking fishing hamlet that comprised around 900 households at the time of the study. The presence of the Army Air D College nearby has impacted the fisher livelihoods as they are stopped frequently from going to sea during weapons-training sessions and few households had relocated to the nearby localities as a result. The villagers who stayed back in Nua Golabandha are persisting with their demand for higher compensation before agreeing to be relocated once again.

  7. A ‘ward’ is the smallest electoral constituency for local self-government in India. A gram panchayat is divided into multiple wards based often on the registered resident population.

  8. See the PILs filed by Goa Foundation://goa foundation.org/pil/ .This repository contains several public interest litigations categorised into PILs against resort hotels coming up in coastal area (pre-CRZ notification), PILs against resort hotels violating CRZ 1991, and cases of general CRZ violations.

  9. See Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs Union of India and Others, Writ Petition (C) No. 664 of 1993 decided on 18 April 1996.

  10. Based on data available on the PARIVESH website of MoEFCC, CRZ 1991 was amended 23 times before the promulgation of CRZ 2011, and CRZ 2011 was amended 16 times before promulgation of CRZ 2019.

  11. For example, see Union Territory of Lakshadweep and Others vs Seashells Beach Resort and Others. Civil Appeal Nos of 2012 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.5967-5968 of 2012) decided on 11 May 2012 and Krishnadevi Malchand Kamathia and Others vs Bombay Environmental Action Group and Others. Interlocutory Application No. 23 of 2010 in Civil Appeal No 4421 of 2010 with Contempt Petitions (C ) Nos.169 and 266 of 2010 in Civil Appeal No 4421 of 2010 decided on 31 January 2011.

  12. Ramdas Janardan Koli versus the Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) judgement of National Green Tribunal Application No. 19/2013 decided on 27 February 2015.

  13. Geographic Information System.

  14. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) underwent a nomenclature change in 2014 and was renamed as the ‘Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change’ (MoEFCC).

  15. CRZ-3 refers to relatively undisturbed coastal areas (e.g. in rural areas) and those areas not under CRZ-2. It is further subdivided into CRZ 3A, 3B and No Development Zone (NDZ).

  16. See Annexure IV, guideline 5, clause (iii) states the following: “In the CRZ areas, the fishing villages, common properties of the fishermen communities, fishing jetties, ice plants, fish drying platforms or areas infrastructure facilities of fishing and local communities such as dispensaries, roads, schools, and the like, shall be indicated on the cadastral scale maps. States and Union territories shall prepare detailed plans for long term housing needs of coastal fisher communities in view of expansion and other needs, provisions of basic services including sanitation, safety, and disaster preparedness” and section 3.5 about management of critically vulnerable coastal areas.

  17. Fishers in Odisha mostly belong to Odia caste groups who traditionally practise riverine/estuarine fishers, and marine fishing castes who belong to Telugu or Bangla speaking groups.

  18. The individuals mentioned were associated with sea turtle monitoring prior to Dakshin’s inception, when such activities were undertaken under the aegis of other organisations, namely Indian Institute of Science and Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE) (Shanker 2020).

  19. As of June 2023, the Odisha government’s web portal on land records states that it contains updated information and records. See http://www.bhulekh.ori.nic.in/Help.aspx

  20. Purunabandha fishing village is a part of the larger revenue village of Pallibandha. It prominently consists of fishers belonging to the Keuta caste ( a sub caste of the Kaibarta caste).

  21. We met with the ward members, village committee leaders (previous and incumbent) and fishing committee leaders. A month later, a community meeting was organised where the mapping proposal was discussed in detail. We then met with various community members to prepare the prompts for the transect walks. Volunteers from the community accompanied the mapping team in the transect walks and pointed out the areas considered as commons.

  22. Annexure 4 section 4(i) states “Local level CZM Maps are for the use of local bodies and other agencies to facilitate implementation of the Coastal Zone Management Plans. (ii) Cadastral (village) maps in 1:3960 or the nearest scale, as available with revenue authorities, shall be used as the base maps. (iii) HTL, LTL, other CRZ regulatory lines and the Hazard line shall be demarcated in the cadastral maps and classifications shall be transferred into local level CZM maps.”

  23. Currently, CZMPs are made on a scale of 1:25000.

  24. https://tribal.nic.in/FRA.aspx

References

  • Ashaletha, S., Ramachandran, C. , Sheela Immanuel, A.D Diwan and R. Sathiadhas .2002. Changing roles of fisherwomen of India issues and perspectives. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Women in Fisheries, 2002, Mumbai. 21-43.

  • Ayilu, Raymond K. 2023. Limits to blue economy: challenges to accessing fishing livelihoods in Ghana’s port communities. Maritime Studies 22 (2): 11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-023-00302-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Balasubramanian, Gomathy N. 2006. The role of traditional panchayats in coastal fishing communities with special reference to their role in mediating tsunami relief and rehabilitation. In: ICSF post-tsunami rehab workshop proceedings 211-244. Chennai: International Collective in Support of Fishworkers. https://aquadocs.org/bitstream/handle/1834/18236/tsunami_proceedings.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.

  • Banerjee-Guha, Swapna. 2013. Accumulation and dispossession: Contradictions of growth and development in contemporary India. South Asia: Journal of South Asian Studies 36 (2): 165–79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00856401.2013.804026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavinck, Maarten. 2001. Caste panchayats and the regulation of fisheries along Tamil Nadu’s Coromandel coast. Economic and Political Weekly 36 (13): 1088–1094. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4410454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bavinck, Maarten. 2005. Understanding fisheries conflicts in the South—A legal pluralist perspective. Society and Natural Resources 18 (9): 805–820. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920500205491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavinck, Maarten, Derek Johnson, Oscar Amarasinghe, Janet Rubinoff, Sarah Southwold, and Kaleekal T. Thomson. 2013. From indifference to mutual support—A comparative analysis of legal pluralism in the governing of South Asian fisheries. The European Journal of Development Research 25: 621–640. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejdr.2012.52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavinck, Maarten, Fikret Berkes, Anthony Charles, Ana Carolina Esteves. Dias, Nancy Doubleday, Prateep Nayak, and Merle Sowman. 2017. The impact of coastal grabbing on community conservation–a global reconnaissance. Maritime studies 16: 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40152-017-0062-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benda-Beckmann, Franz von, and Keebet von Benda-Beckmann. 2010. Law in motion: Understanding the dynamics of plural legal orders and their social consequences 69-82. https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0011-902F-8

  • Bennett, Nathan James, Jessica Blythe, Carole Sandrine White, and Cecilia Campero. 2021. Blue growth and blue justice: Ten risks and solutions for the ocean economy. Marine Policy 125: 104387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blythe, Jessica L., David A. Gill, Joachim Claudet, Nathan J. Bennett, Georgina G. Gurney, Jacopo A. Baggio, Natalie C. Ban, Miranda L. Bernard, Victor Brun, Emily S. Darling, Antonio Di Franco, Graham Epstein, Phil Franks, Rebecca Horan, Stacy D. Jupiter, Jacqueline Lau, Natali Lazzari, Shauna L. Mahajan, Sangeeta Mangubhai, Josheena Naggea, Rachel A. Turner, and Noelia Zafra-Calvo. 2023. Blue justice: A review of emerging scholarship and resistance movements. Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures 1: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/cft.2023.4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campling, Liam. 2012. The tuna ‘commodity frontier’: Business strategies and environment in the industrial tuna fisheries of the Western Indian Ocean. Journal of Agrarian Change 12 (2–3): 252–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00354.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandarana, Ridhi, Muralidharan Manoharakrishnan, and Kartik Shanker. 2017. Long-term monitoring and community-based conservation of olive ridley turtles in Odisha. CMPA Technical Series (7). New Delhi: Indo-German Biodiversity Programme, GIZ-India.

  • Centre for Policy Research-Namati Environmental Justice Program. 2018. Legal framework on protecting common lands in Odisha. Author, New Delhi. https://cprindia.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Legal-Framework-for-Protecting-Common-Lands-in-Odisha.pdf

  • Chambers, Roberts. 2006. Participatory mapping and geographic information systems: Whose map? Who is empowered and who disempowered? Who gains and who loses? The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries 25 (1): 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chainani, Shyam Hashmatrai. 2007. Heritage & environment: An Indian diary. Mumbai: Urban Design Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Comptroller and Auditor General of India. 2022. Institutional frameworks. In: Performance audit report on conservation of coastal ecosystems, 7-13. https://cag.gov.in/uploads/download_audit_report/2022/Chapter%202-062f1f1d0a6f573.14543971.pdf Accessed 25 June 2023.

  • Das, Biswa Swaroop, and Madhushree Rao. 2022. An assessment of fishing practices & fisheries governance in Ganjam. Bengaluru: Dakshin Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dias, Lisann, and Aarthi Sridhar. 2021. How CRZ violations are being regularized instead of regulated across India’s shoreline. The Bastion. https://thebastion.co.in/politics-and/environment/conservation-and-development/how-crz-violations-are-being-regularized-instead-of-regulated-across-indias-shoreline/. Accessed 26 June 2023.

  • Downey, Liam. 2006. Using geographic information systems to reconceptualize spatial relationships and ecological context. American Journal of Sociology 112 (2): 567–612. https://doi.org/10.1086/506418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elwood, Sarah. 2006. Critical issues in participatory GIS: Deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Transactions in GIS 10 (5): 693–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9671.2006.01023.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ertor, Irmak. 2021. ‘We are the oceans, we are the people!’: Fisher people’s struggles for blue justice. The Journal of Peasant Studies 50 (3): 1157–1186. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2021.1999932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabinyi, Michael, Ben Belton, Wolfram H. Dressler, Magne Knudsen, Dedi S. Adhuri, Ammar Abdul Aziz, Md Ali Akber, Jawanit Kittitornkool, Chaturong Kongkaew, Melissa Marschke, Michael Pido, Natasha Stacey, Dirk J. Steenbergen, and Peter Vandergeest. 2022. Coastal transitions: Small-scale fisheries, livelihoods, and maritime zone developments in Southeast Asia. Journal of Rural Studies 91: 184–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.02.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganseforth, Sonja. 2021. Blue revitalization or dispossession? Reform of common resource management in Japanese small-scale fisheries. The Geographical Journal 189-204:216. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12414

  • Gopalakrishnan, Shankar. 2017. The forest rights act: Political economy of ‘environmental’ questions. Economic and Political Weekly 52 (31): 71–76. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26695938).

    Google Scholar 

  • Guha, Ramachandra, and Joan Martínez Alier. 2013. Varieties of environmentalism: Essays North and South. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Derek. 2003. The international political ecology of industrial shrimp aquaculture and industrial plantation forestry in Southeast Asia. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies 34 (2): 251–64. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022463403000249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Shalini, and Aarthi Sridhar. 2022. Labour at sea — an outline towards migrant fishers’ well-being in India. Bengaluru: Dakshin Foundation.

  • Jordan, Lisa, Anthony Stallins, I.V. Shereitte Stokes, Elijah Johnson, and Richard Gragg. 2011. Citizen mapping and environmental justice: Internet applications for research and advocacy. Environmental Justice 4 (3): 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2010.0048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kankara, R.S., M.V. Ramana Murthy, and M. Rajeevan. 2018. National assessment of shoreline changes along Indian coast—A status report for 1990–2016. Chennai: National Centre for Coastal Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapur, Meenakshi. 2020. How coastal law was diluted after closing it for public input. IndiaSpend. https://www.indiaspend.com/how-coastal-law-was-diluted-after-closing-it-for-public-input/. Accessed 9 Jun 2023.

  • Kocherry, Thomas. 2000. Indian fisheries over the past 50 years part 1: The impact of mechanisation on the coastal fisheries. Kachhapa 2: 5–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, Kundan, Neera M. Singh, and Y. Giri Rao. 2017. Promise and performance of the Forest Rights Act. Economic & Political Weekly 52: 25–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, Mukul, K. Saravanan, and Nityanand Jayaraman. 2014. Mapping the coastal commons: Fisherfolk and the politics of coastal urbanisation in Chennai. Economic and Political Weekly 49 (48): 46. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/24481080).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurien, John. 2007.The blessing of the commons: Small-scale fisheries, community property rights, and coastal natural assets. In Reclaiming nature: Environmental justice and ecological restoration. ed. Boyce, James K.,Sunita Narain and Elizabeth A. Stanton 1: 23-54. Anthem Press.

  • Lobe, Kenton, and Fikret Berkes. 2004. The padu system of community-based fisheries management: Change and local institutional innovation in south India. Marine Policy 28 (3): 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-597X(03)00087-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mondal, Madhuri. 2019. Assessing health & developmental needs of fisher communities in southern Odisha. Bengaluru: Dakshin Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menon, Manju, Meenakshi Kapoor, Preeti Venkatram, Kanchi Kohli, and Satnam Kaur. 2015. CZMAs and coastal environments: Two decades of regulating land use change on India’s coastline. Centre for Policy Research-Namati Environmental Justice Program.

  • Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. 2018. Notification. S.O. 1002(E). Notified on March 6, 2018. https://environmentclearance.nic.in/writereaddata/CRZ_Notifications/CRZ_Notification_2011/15.pdf. Accessed 27 Jun 2023.

  • Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change. 2019. Notification. G.S.R. 37(E). Notified on 18 January, 2019. https://environmentclearance.nic.in/writereaddata/CRZ_Notifications/CRZ_Notification_2019/0.pdf. Accessed 27 Jun 2023.

  • Nandakumar, D., and M. Muralikrishna. 1998. Mapping the extent of coastal regulation zone violations of the Indian coast. Thiruvananthapuram: National Fish workers Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nair, Tamara. 2016. Deepening divides: Decentralized development and the ‘tyranny’ of participation. Journal of International Development 28 (8): 1323–1336. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Campaign for Protection of Coasts. 2007. Statement Issued by the National Consultation on Impending Threat to the Coastal Zone, Chennai. https://ncpcindia.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/national-consultation-on-impending-threat-to-the-coastal-zone-chennai.pdf Accessed 27 Jun 2023.

  • National Fishworkers Forum. 2018. Coastal regulations in India: From protection to destruction. New Delhi: National Fishworkers Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nayak, Prateep Kumar, and Fikret Berkes. 2011. Commonisation and decommonisation: Understanding the processes of change in the Chilika Lagoon. India. Conservation and Society 9 (2): 132–45 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393037).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paul, Antonyto. 2005. Rise, fall, and persistence in Kadakkodi: an enquiry into the evolution of a community institution for fishery management in Kerala. India. Environment and Development Economics. 10 (1): 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X04001767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pomeroy, Robert S. 1995. Community-based and co-management institutions for sustainable coastal fisheries management in Southeast Asia. Ocean & Coastal Management 27 (3): 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0964-5691(95)00042-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, J.B., and T.P. Haribabu. 2016. Matsya Sabha: Inclusion of fisher people in local governance. Journal of Political Economy and Fiscal Federalism 1: 179–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rangarajan, Mahesh. 2009. Striving for a balance: Nature, power, science and India’s Indira Gandhi, 1917–1984. Conservation and Society 7 (4): 299–312. (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26392987).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, Sudarshan. 2010. Claims for survival: Coastal land rights of fishing communities. Bangalore: Dakshin Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenneth RuddleArif Satria 2010 An introduction to pre-existing local management systems in Southeast Asia. In Managing coastal and inland waters: Pre-existing aquatic management systems in Southeast Asia, ed Ruddle, Kenneth and Arif Satria 1:1-30

  • Sahu, Geetanjoy. 2022. The case of Ramdas Janardan Koli, or how an underdog successfully won an environmental case. The Wire. https://thewire.in/environment/ramdas-janardan-koli-uran-fishing-community. Accessed 9 June 2023.

  • Scott, James C. 2020. Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. Yale University Press.

  • Segi, Shio. 2014. Protecting or pilfering? Neoliberal conservationist marine protected areas in the experience of coastal Granada, the Philippines. Human ecology 42: 565–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-014-9669-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seto, Katherine, and Brooke Campbell. 2019. The last commons: (Re) constructing an ocean future. In Predicting future oceans: Sustainability of ocean and human systems amidst global environmental change. ed. Cheung, William, Yoshitaka Ota and Andres Cisneros-Montemayor, 365-376. Elsevier.

  • Shanker, Kartik. 2020. From soup to superstar: The story of sea turtle conservation along the Indian coast. Marine Turtle Newsletter 161 (33): 360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinha, Subir. 2012. Transnationality and the Indian Fishworkers’ movement, 1960s–2000. Journal of Agrarian Change 12 (2–3): 364–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2011.00349.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sridhar, Aarthi, Rohan Arthur, Debi Goenka, T. BharathJairaj, Sudarshan Rodriguez Mohan, and Kartik Shanker. 2006. Review of the Swaminathan Committee report on the CRZ notification. New Delhi: United Nations Development Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sridhar, Aarthi, Manju Menon, Sudarshan Rodriguez, and Seema Shenoy. 2008. Coastal management zone notification ‘08 — The last nail in the coffin. Bangalore: Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian, Ajantha. 2009. Shorelines: space and rights in South India. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sundar, Aparna. 2014. From regulation to management and back again: Exploring governance shifts in India’s coastal zone. Conservation and Society 12 (4): 364–375. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26393171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venugopal, Vineetha, BiswaSwaroop Das, Naveen Namboothri, and Aarthi Sridhar. 2021. Commoning Coastal Odisha. Bengaluru: Dakshin Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voyer, Michelle, Genevieve Quirk, Alistair McIlgorm, and Kamal Azmi. 2018. Shades of blue: What do competing interpretations of the blue economy mean for oceans governance? Journal of environmental policy & planning 20 (5): 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2018.1473153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge Naveen Namboothri, Madhuri Mondal, Madusudan Behera, Magata Behera, Surendra Behera, Judishtir Behera, Bipro Behera, Mahendra Nayak, and Sanjeeb Behera for their support with the mapping. We would also like to acknowledge the support extended by Pooja Kumar of Coastal Resource Centre, Chennai, and Mangaraj Panda of the United Artists Association, Ganjam.

Funding

The citizen mapping initiative received funding support from the Duleep Matthai Nature Conservation Trust and Rohini Nilekani Philanthropies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dakshin Foundation, Bengaluru, India

    Vineetha Venugopal, Biswa Swaroop Das & Aarthi Sridhar

Authors
  1. Vineetha Venugopal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Biswa Swaroop Das
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aarthi Sridhar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aarthi Sridhar.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Venugopal, V., Das, B.S. & Sridhar, A. Recentering the commons: assessing citizen mapping as an environmental practice. Maritime Studies 23, 16 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-024-00353-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-024-00353-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation