The European Journal of Development Research

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 621–640 | Cite as

From Indifference to Mutual Support – A Comparative Analysis of Legal Pluralism in the Governing of South Asian Fisheries

  • Maarten Bavinck
  • Derek Johnson
  • Oscar Amarasinghe
  • Janet Rubinoff
  • Sarah Southwold
  • Kaleekal T Thomson
Original Article

Abstract

This article presents findings on the current state of fisheries governance in South Asia from the perspective of legal pluralism. It is based on ethnographic fieldwork in six coastal districts of India and Sri Lanka and focuses on resource health and allocation. We suggest that interactions between state and non-state systems vary, and include indifference, conflict, accommodation and mutual support. None of the studied governance patterns appear to have been able to halt or reverse overfishing, though we identify some positive local innovations. The situation is more promising with regard to resource allocation. Fairness in allocation emerges as a prime concern of most non-state legal systems in South Asian fisheries, and state agencies do tend to become involved in resource allocation if non-state fishery authorities fail to achieve it. We conclude by arguing that addressing resource health and allocation concerns will require increased state and non-state cooperation.

Keywords

legal pluralism fisheries governance overfishing resource allocation India Sri Lanka 

Abstract

Cet article se penche sur l′état actuel de la gouvernance des pêches en Asie du Sud, dans la perspective du pluralisme juridique. Il s′appuie sur des recherches ethnographiques effectuées dans six districts côtiers de l′Inde et du Sri Lanka et s′intéresse plus particulièrement à l’état et la distribution des ressources. Nous notons que les interactions entre les systèmes étatiques et non-étatiques varient entre l′indifférence, le conflit, le compromis et le soutien mutuel. Aucun des modes de gouvernance étudiés ne semble être en mesure de stopper ou inverser la tendance à la surpêche, malgré certaines innovations positives constatées au niveau local. La situation est plus encourageante en ce qui concerne la distribution des ressources. Nous notons que l′équité dans la répartition constitue une préoccupation majeure pour la plupart des systèmes juridiques non-étatiques des pêcheries d′Asie du Sud, et que les organismes d′État ont tendance à intervenir lorsque les autorités de la pêche non-étatiques échouent dans leurs efforts redistributifs. Nous concluons que tant la préservation que la distribution des ressources nécessitent une coopération accrue entre les organisations étatiques et non gouvernementales.

References

  1. Alexander, P. (1982) Sri Lankan Fishermen. Rural Capitalism and Peasant Society. Canberra: ANU Monographs on South Asia.Google Scholar
  2. Amarasinghe, O. (1989) Technological change, transformation of risks and patronage relations in a fishing community of South Sri Lanka. Development and Change 20 (4): 684–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amarasinghe, O. (2006) Cooperation in a Context of Crisis: Public Private Management of Marine Fisheries in South Asia – The Sri Lankan Case. New Delhi and The Hague: Indo-Dutch Program on Alternatives in Development, pp. 93 IDPAD Working Paper 5.Google Scholar
  4. Amarasinghe, O. and Bavinck, M. (2011) Building resilience: Fisheries cooperatives in southern Sri Lanka. In: S. Jentoft and A. Eide (eds.) Poverty Mosaics: Realities and Prospects in Small-scale Fisheries. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 383–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bailey, F.G. (1969) Strategems and Spoils: A Social Anthropology of Politics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. Bathal, B. (2005) Historical Reconstruction of Indian Marine Fisheries Catches, 1950–2000, as a Basis for Testing the Marine Trophic Index. Vancouver: University of British Colombia, pp. 122 Fisheries Centre Research Report.Google Scholar
  7. Bavinck, M. (2001) Marine Resource Management. Conflict and Regulation in the Fisheries of the Coromandel Coast. New Delhi, India: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Bavinck, M. (2003) The spatially splintered state: Myths and realities in the regulation of marine fisheries in Tamil Nadu, India. Development and Change 34 (4): 633–657.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bavinck, M. (2005) Understanding fisheries conflicts in the South – A legal pluralist perspective. Society and Natural Resources 18 (9): 805–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bavinck, M. (2011) Wealth, poverty, and immigration – The role of institutions in the fisheries of Tamil Nadu, India. In: S. Jentoft and A. Eide (eds.) Poverty Mosaics: Realities and Prospects in Small-scale Fisheries. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer, pp. 173–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bavinck, M. and Karunaharan, K. (2006a) Legal Pluralism in the Marine Fisheries of Ramnad District, Tamil Nadu, India. New Delhi and The Hague: Indo-Dutch Program on Alternatives in Development, IDPAD Working Paper 2.Google Scholar
  12. Bavinck, M. and Karunaharan, K. (2006b) A history of nets and bans: Restrictions on technical innovation along the Coromandel Coast of India. Maritime Studies 5 (1): 45–59.Google Scholar
  13. Bavinck, M. and Vivekanandan, V. (2011) Conservation, conflict and the governance of fisher wellbeing – Analysis of the establishment of the Gulf of Mannar National Park and biosphere reserve. Environmental Management 47 (4): 593–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bavinck, M. and Woodman, G.R. (2009) Can there be maps of law? In: F. von Benda-Beckmann, K. von Benda-Beckmann and A. Griffiths (eds.) Spatialising Law: An Anthropological Geography of Law in Society. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, pp. 195–218.Google Scholar
  15. Bavinck, M., Chuenpagdee, R., Jentoft, S. and Kooiman, J. (eds.) (2013) Governability of Fisheries – Theory and Applications. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Berkes, F., Mahon, R., McConney, P., Pollnac, R. and Pomeroy, R. (eds.) (2001) Managing Small-scale Fisheries: Alternative Directions and Methods. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  17. Berman, P.S. (2006) Global legal pluralism. Southern California Law Review 80: 1155–1237.Google Scholar
  18. Chuenpagdee, R. et al (2005) Challenges and concerns in capture fisheries and aquaculture. In: J. Kooiman, M. Bavinck, S. Jentoft and R. Pullin (eds.) Fish for Life – Interactive Governance for Fisheries. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 25–44.Google Scholar
  19. Jentoft, S. (1989) Fisheries co-management: Delegating government responsibility to fishermen's organizations. Marine Policy 13 (2): 137–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jentoft, S., Bavinck, M., Johnson, D. and Thomson, K. (2009) Co-management and legal pluralism: How a methodological problem becomes an institutional one. Human Organization 68 (1): 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jentoft, S. (2013) Social justice in fisheries – A governability challenge. In: M. Bavinck, R. Chuenpagdee, S. Jentoft and J. Kooiman (eds.) Governability of Fisheries – Theory and Applications. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Johnson, D. (2002) Emptying the sea of wealth: Globalisation and the Gujarat Fishery, 1950 to 1999. PhD dissertation, University of Guelph.Google Scholar
  23. Johnson, D. and Bavinck, M. (2010) Social justice and fisheries governance: The view from India. In: R. Metzner, D. Isokawa, Y. Liu, F. Well (eds.) Proceedings of the Sharing the Fish Conference. Freemantle, Australia 2006. Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  24. Johnson, D. and Sathyapalan, J. (2006) Legal Pluralism in the Marine Fisheries of Junagadh District and the Union Territory of Diu. New Delhi and The Hague: Indo-Dutch Program for Alternatives in Development, IDPAD Working Paper 6.Google Scholar
  25. Kooiman, J., Bavinck, M., Jentoft, S. and Pullin, R. (eds.) (2005) Fish for Life – Interactive Governance for Fisheries. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kurien, J. (1985) Technical assistance projects and socio-economic change. Norwegian intervention in Kerala's fisheries development. Economic and Political Weekly 20 (25–26): A70–A88.Google Scholar
  27. Kurien, J. and Achari, T.R.T. (1988) Fisheries development policies and the fishermen's struggle in Kerala. Social Action 38 (Jan–Mar): 15–36.Google Scholar
  28. Merry, S.E. (1988) Legal pluralism. Law & Society Review 22 (5): 869–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Meynen, W. (1989) Fisheries development, resource depletion and political mobilization in Kerala: The problem of alternatives. Development and Change 20 (4): 735–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Moore, S.F. (2001) Certainties undone: Fifty turbulent years of legal anthropology, 1949–1999. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 7 (1): 95–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Newman, R.S. (1984) Goa: The transformation of an Indian region. Pacific Affairs 57 (3): 429–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paul, A. (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pospisil, L. (1971) Anthropology of Law. A Comparative Theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  34. Rheinstein, M. (1954) Max Weber on Law in Economy and Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sathyapalan, J., Srinivasan, J.T. and Scholtens, J. (2008) Fishing Fleet Reduction and Its Livelihood Implications – A Case Study of Palk Bay Resource Users in the East Coast of Tamil Nadu, India. Hyderabad, India: Centre for Economic and Social Studies.Google Scholar
  36. Scholtens, J., Bavinck, M. and Soosai, A.S. (2012) Fishing in dire straits: A Sri Lankan perspective on trans-boundary incursions of Indian trawlers in the Palk Bay. Economic and Political Weekly 47 (25): 87–96.Google Scholar
  37. Sikor, T. and Lund, C. (2009) Access and property: A question of power and authority. Development and Change 40 (1): 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sonak, S., Rubinoff, J. and Sonak, M. (2006) Conflicting interests and institutional pluralism: A case of fishing ban in Goa. In: S. Sonak (ed.) Multiple Dimensions of Global Environmental Change. New Delhi, India: TERI Press, pp. 300–321.Google Scholar
  39. Southwold-Llewellyn, S. (2006) Legal Pluralism in the Marine Fisheries of East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh, India. New Delhi and The Hague: Indo-Dutch Program on Alternatives in Development, IDPAD Working Paper 4.Google Scholar
  40. Southwold-Llewellyn, S. (2010) State and non-state marine fisheries management: Legal pluralism in East Godavari District, Andhra Pradesh, India. Available at: http://edepot.wur.nl/149674.
  41. Spiertz, J. and Wiber, M.G. (eds.) (1996) The Role of Law in Natural Resource Management. 's-Gravenhage: VUGA Uitgeverij.Google Scholar
  42. Suryanarayan, V. (2005) Conflict over Fisheries in the Palk Bay Region. New Delhi, India: Lancer Publishers.Google Scholar
  43. Thomson, K.T. (2006a) Co-operation in a Context of Crisis: Public-private Management of Marine Fisheries in Kerala. New Delhi and The Hague: Indo-Dutch Program on Alternatives in Development. IDPAD Working Paper 3.Google Scholar
  44. Thomson, K.T. (2006b) The role of self-regulating systems in Kerala fisheries: Implications for co-management. Paper presented at the international congress of the Commission on Folk Law and Legal Pluralism; 29 June, Jakarta, Indonesia.Google Scholar
  45. Thomson, K.T. (2007) Politics, legal pluralism and conflict management: Evolving negotiations of marine fisheries governance in Kerala, India. Paper presented at the conference People and the Sea IV; 5–7 July 2007, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  46. Thomson, K.T. and Gray, T. (2009) From community-based to co-management: Improvement or deterioration in fisheries governance in the Cherai Poyil fishery in the Cochin Estuary, Kerala, India? Marine Policy 33 (4): 537–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Dijk, M. and Mamadouh, V. (2011) When megaengineering disturbs ram: The Sethusamudram Ship Canal Project. In: S.D. Brunn (ed.) Engineering Earth: The Impacts of Megaengineering Projects. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, pp. 297–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Vanderlinden, J. (1972) Le pluralisme juridique, essai de synthèse. In: J. Gilissen (ed.) Le pluralisme juridique. Brussels: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
  49. von Benda-Beckmann, F. (1989) Scapegoat and magic charm: Law in development theory and practice. Journal of Legal Pluralism 28: 129–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. von Benda-Beckmann, F. (2002) Who's afraid of legal pluralism? Journal of Legal Pluralism 47: 37–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. von Benda-Beckmann, F. and von Benda-Beckmann, K. (2006) The dynamics of change and continuity in plural legal orders. Journal of Legal Pluralism 53–54: 1–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. von Benda-Beckmann, K. (1981) Forum shopping and shopping forums: dispute processing in a Minangkabau village in West Sumatra. Journal of Legal Pluralism 19: 117–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wiber, M. (2009) The spatial and temporal role of law in natural resource management: The impact of state regulation of fishing spaces. In: F. von Benda-Beckmann and K. von Benda-Beckmann and A. Griffiths (eds.) Spatializing Law – An Anthropological Geography of Law in Society. Farnham, UK: Ashgate, pp. 75–94.Google Scholar
  54. Wiber, M. and Milley, C. (2007) Introduction. Seeking clarity, legitimacy and respect: The struggle to implement special rights. Journal of Legal Pluralism 55: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wickramasinghe, W.A.R. (2008) Role of institutions with regard to fisher livelihoods and resource conservation: Small-scale craft fishery in Sri Lanka. Paper presented at the International Institute for Fisheries Economics and Trade conference; 22–25 July, Nha Trang, Vietnam.Google Scholar
  56. Wilson, D.C., Nielsen, J.R. and Degnbol, P. (eds.) (2003) The Fisheries Co-management Experience – Accomplishments, Challenges and Prospects. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maarten Bavinck
    • 1
  • Derek Johnson
    • 2
  • Oscar Amarasinghe
    • 3
  • Janet Rubinoff
    • 4
  • Sarah Southwold
    • 5
  • Kaleekal T Thomson
    • 6
  1. 1.University of AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.University of ManitobaWinnipegCanada
  3. 3.University of RuhunaMataraSri Lanka
  4. 4.York UniversityTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Wageningen University (retired)WageningenThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Cochin University of Science and TechnologyCochinIndia

Personalised recommendations