Advertisement

Co-governance of Small-Scale Shellfisheries in Latin America: Institutional Adaptability to External Drivers of Change

  • Mauricio Castrejón
  • Omar Defeo
Part of the MARE Publication Series book series (MARE, volume 13)

Abstract

The resilience of small-scale shellfisheries in Latin America is increasingly threatened by climatic and human drivers acting simultaneously at multiple temporal and spatial scales. Co-governance is emerging as a potential solution to enhance the capability of governing systems to respond to the social-ecological impacts of external drivers of change. Although there is an increasing understanding of the factors that determine the success and failures of diverse co-governance arrangements in Latin America, there is still a poor understanding about how this mode of governance responds to different crises, and how these responses are shaped by past experiences and by the features of the governing system and the system-to-be-governed. In this chapter, we evaluate how institutions learn, self-organize and respond to diverse climatic and human drivers in seven co-governance arrangements, and identify the factors that enable or inhibit building institutional adaptability. Our analysis shows that the combined impact of different drivers produced social-ecological impacts on local fishing communities’ wellbeing. In this context, institutions and actors displayed coping and adaptive responses to prevent or mitigate the damage on fishery resources and fishers’ livelihoods. These varied according to the magnitude, extent, periodicity and intensity of press and pulse perturbations, and were shaped by past crises, social-ecological memory and the particular social features of fishing communities in which institutions are embedded. In most cases, after severe crises, small-scale fishers took collaborative actions for re-organizing their cooperatives and their harvesting and trading strategies in order to prevent future crises and enter into more sustainable pathways. In conclusion, the same factors that promote (or preclude) high governability are also those that enable (or inhibit) building institutional adaptability and resilience.

Keywords

Co-management Adaptability Social–ecological systems Small-scale Drivers Latin America 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Svein Jentoft and Ratana Chuenpagdee for their comments on an extended version of this chapter. We are also grateful to Cristiana Seixas and Ian Perry for their helpful suggestions and comments. MC acknowledges the financial support provided by the Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT) and the World Wildlife Fund’s Russell E. Train Education for Nature Program. OD is grateful for the financial support provided by The Pew Fellows Program in Marine Conservation and DINARA’s UTF and GEF projects.

References

  1. Aburto, J., & Stotz, W. (2013). Learning about TURFs and natural variability: Failure of surf clam management in Chile. Ocean & Coastal Management, 71, 88–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adger, W. N., Hughes, T. P., Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., & Rockström, J. (2005). Social-ecological resilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309, 1036–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Badjeck, M. C., Mendo, J., Wolff, M., & Lange, H. (2009). Climate variability and the Peruvian scallop fishery: The role of formal institutions in resilience building. Climatic Change, 94, 211–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (Eds.). (1998). Linking social and ecological systems: Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berkes, F., Mahon, R., McConney, P., Pollnac, R., & Pomeroy, R. (2001). Managing small-scale fisheries: Alternative directions and methods. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  6. Carr, D. L. (2007). Resource management and fertility in Mexico’s Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve: Campos, cash, and contraception in the lobster-fishing village of Punta Allen. Population and Environment, 29(2), 83–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Castilla, J. C., & Defeo, O. (2001). Latin American benthic shellfisheries: emphasis on co-management and experimental practices. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 11, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Castrejón, M. (2011). Co-manejo pesquero en la Reserva Marina de Galápagos: Tendencias, retos y perspectivas de cambio. Mexico: Fundación Charles Darwin/Kanankil/Plaza-Valdés.Google Scholar
  9. Castrejón, M., & Charles, A. (2013). Improving fisheries co-management through ecosystem-based spatial management: The Galapagos Marine Reserve. Marine Policy, 38, 235–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Castrejón, M., Defeo, O., Reck, G., & Charles, A. (2014). Fishery science in Galapagos: From a resource-focused to a social-ecological systems approach. In J. Denkinger & L. Vinueza (Eds.), The Galapagos Marine Reserve: A dynamic social-ecological system. Social and ecological sustainability in the Galapagos Islands (pp. 159–186). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Collins, S. L., Carpenter, S. R., Swinton, S. M., Orenstein, D. E., Childers, D. L., Gragson, T. L., et al. (2011). An integrated conceptual framework for long-term social–ecological research. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 9(6), 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cook, P. A., & Gordon, H. R. (2010). World abalone supply, markets, and pricing. Journal of Shellfish Research, 29(3), 569–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Miras, C., Marco, A., & Carranza, C. (1996). Evaluación socioeconómica de la pesca experimental de pepino de mar en Galápagos (p. 198). Quito: ORSTROM/Fundación Charles Darwin.Google Scholar
  14. Defeo, O. (2014). Enfoque ecosistémico pesquero: Conceptos fundamentales y su aplicación en Uruguay. Final Report, Project CP/URU/030/GFF Piloting of an Ecosystem-based Approach to Living Aquatic Resources Management (p. 99). Uruguay: DINARA.Google Scholar
  15. Defeo, O., & Castilla, J. C. (2012). Governance and governability of coastal shellfisheries in Latin America and the Caribbean: Multi-scale emerging models and effects of globalization and climate change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4, 344–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Defeo, O., Castilla, J. C., & Castrejón, M. (2009). Pesquerías artesanales de invertebrados en América Latina: Paradigmas emergentes de manejo y gobernanza. In C. Lodeiros, J. Alió, L. Freites, N. González, A. Guerra, & M. Rey-Méndez (Eds.), Foro Iberoamericano de los Recursos Marinos y la Acuicultura II (pp. 89–117). Cumaná: Fondo Editorial Universidad de Oriente.Google Scholar
  17. Defeo, O., Castrejón, M., Ortega, L., Kuhn, A. M., Gutiérrez, N. L., & Castilla, J. C. (2013). Impacts of climate variability on Latin American small-scale fisheries. Ecology & Society, 18(4), 30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Defeo, O., Castrejón, M., Pérez-Castañeda, R., Castilla, J. C., Gutiérrez, N., Essington, T. E., & Folke, C. (2014). Co-management in Latin American small-scale shellfisheries: assessment from long-term case studies. Fish & Fisheries. doi: 10.1111/faf.12101.Google Scholar
  19. Fiedler, P. C. (2002). Environmental change in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean: Review of ENSO and decadal variability. Marine Ecology: Progress Series, 244, 265–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Folke, C., Colding, J., & Berkes, F. (2003). Synthesis: Building resilience and adaptive capacity in socio-ecological systems. In F. Berkes, J. Colding, & C. Folke (Eds.), Navigating the dynamics of social–ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change (pp. 325–383). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Fonseca-Larios, M. E., & Briones-Fourzán, P. (1998). Fecundity of the spiny lobster Panulirus argus (Latreille, 1804) in the Caribbean coast of Mexico. Bulletin of Marine Science, 63(1), 21–32.Google Scholar
  22. Gelcich, S., Hughes, T. P., Olsson, P., Folke, C., Defeo, O., Fernandez, M., Foale, S., Gunderson, L. H., Rodríguez-Sickert, C., Scheffer, M., Steneck, R. S., & Castilla, J. C. (2010). Navigating transformations in governance of Chilean marine coastal resources. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107(39), 16794–16799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Goldenberg, S. B., Landsea, C. W., Mestas-Nuñez, A. M., & Gray, W. M. (2001). The recent increase in Atlantic hurricane activity: Causes and implications. Science, 293, 474–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gutiérrez, N. L., Hilborn, R., & Defeo, O. (2011). Leadership, social capital and incentives promote successful fisheries. Science, 470, 386–389.Google Scholar
  25. Guzmán, S. A., Pérez, J. B., & Laguna, J. C. (2003). Effects of the “El Niño” event on the recruitment of benthic invertebrates in Bahía Tortugas, Baja California Sur. Geofísica Internacional, 42(3), 429–438.Google Scholar
  26. Hall, S. J. (2011). Climate change and other external drivers in small-scale fisheries: Practical steps for responding. In R. S. Pomeroy & N. Andrew (Eds.), Small-scale fisheries management: Frameworks and approaches for the developing world (pp. 132–159). London: CABI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hearn, A., Martínez, P., Toral-Granda, M. V., Murillo, J. C., & Polovina, J. (2005). Population dynamics of the exploited sea cucumber Isostichopus fuscus in the western Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. Fisheries Oceanography, 14(5), 377–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. ITAM-CEC. (2007a). Programa maestro estatal langosta Quintana Roo (p. 324). Mexico: CONAPESCA.Google Scholar
  29. ITAM-CEC. (2007b). Programa maestro nacional de langosta (p. 324). Mexico: CONAPESCA.Google Scholar
  30. Jenkins, M., & Mulliken, T. A. (1999). Evolution of exploitation in the Galapagos Islands: Ecuador’s sea cucumber trade. Traffic Bulletin, 17(3).Google Scholar
  31. Kooiman, J., & Bavinck, M. (2013). Theorizing governability: The interactive governance perspective. In M. Bavinck, R. Chuenpagdee, S. Jentoft, & J. Kooiman (Eds.), Governability of fisheries and aquaculture. Theory and applications (pp. 9–30). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Leslie, K. (2000). The privatization of common-property resources in a Mexican lobster cooperative: Human ecological perspectives. In E. P. Durrenberger & T. D. King (Eds.), State and community in fisheries management. Power, policy, and practice (pp. 41–56). Wesport: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  33. Ley, K., & Quintanar, E. (2010). Chakay: Marca colectiva con identidad de origen de las cooperativas de Quintana Roo. Biodiversitas, 90, 10–15.Google Scholar
  34. McCay, B. J., Micheli, F., Ponce-Díaz, G., Murray, G., Shester, G., Ramirez-Sanchez, S., & Weisman, W. (2014). Cooperatives, concessions, and co-management on the Pacific coast of Mexico. Marine Policy, 44, 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Micheli, F., Saenz-Arroyo, A., Greenley, A., Vazquez, L., Espinoza Montes, J. A., Rossetto, M., & De Leo, G. A. (2012). Evidence that marine reserves enhance resilience to climatic impacts. PLoS One, 7(7), e40832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Monnereau, I., & Helmsing, A. H. J. (2011). Local embedding and economic crisis: Comparing lobster chains in Belize, Jamaica and Nicaragua. In A. H. J. Helmsing & S. Vellema (Eds.), Value chains, inclusion and endogenous development. Contrasting theories and realities (pp. 178–197). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  37. Noticaribe. (2010). Golpea a pescadores caída del precio de la langosta. Retrieved February, 24, 2014, from http://noticaribe.com.mx/2010/02/24/golpea_a_pescadores_caida_del_precio_de_la_langosta/
  38. Ortega, L., Castilla, J., Espino, M., Yamashiro, C., & Defeo, O. (2012). Effects of fishing, market price, and climate on two South American clam species. Marine Ecology: Progress Series, 469, 71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325, 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pérez-Ramírez, M., Ponce-Díaz, G., & Lluch-Cota, S. (2012). The role of MSC certification in the empowerment of fishing cooperatives in Mexico: The case of red rock lobster co-managed fishery. Ocean & Coastal Management, 63, 24–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Perry, R. I., Ommer, R. E., Barange, M., & Werner, F. (2010). The challenge of adapting marine social–ecological systems to the additional stress of climate change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 2, 356–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Perry, R. I., Ommer, R. E., Barange, M., Jentoft, S., Neis, B., & Sumaila, U. R. (2011). Marine social-ecological responses to environmental change and the impacts of globalization. Fish & Fisheries, 12, 427–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ramírez, J., Castrejón, M., & Toral-Granda, M. V. (Eds.). (2012). Mejorando la pesquería de langosta en la Reserva Marina de Galápagos. Quito: World Wildlife Fund.Google Scholar
  44. Riascos, J. M., Carstensen, D., Laudien, J., Arntz, W. E., Oliva, M. E., Güntner, A., & Heilmayer, O. (2009). Thriving and declining: Climate variability shaping life-history and population persistence of Mesodesma donacium in the Humboldt Upwelling System. Marine Ecology: Progress Series, 385, 151–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. SCS. (2011). California spiny lobster fishery Baja California, Mexico. MSC re-certification final report (p. 92). California, USA: Scientific Certification System.Google Scholar
  46. Searcy-Bernal, R., Ramade-Villanueva, M. R., & Altamira, B. (2010). Current status of abalone fisheries and culture in Mexico. Journal of Shellfish Research, 29(3), 573–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Seijo, J. C. (1993). Individual transferable grounds in a community-managed artisanal fishery. Marine Resource Economics, 8, 78–81.Google Scholar
  48. Sen, S., & Nielsen, J. R. (1996). Fisheries co-management: A comparative analysis. Marine Policy, 20(5), 405–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Shepherd, S. A., Martinez, P., Toral-Granda, M. V., & Edgar, G. J. (2004). The Galapagos sea cucumber fishery: Management improves as stocks decline. Environmental Conservation, 31, 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sosa-Cordero, E., Liceaga-Correa, M. L. A., & Seijo, J. C. (2008). The Punta Allen lobster fishery: Current status and recent trends. In R. Townsend, R. Shotton, & H. Uchida (Eds.), Case studies in fisheries self-governance (pp. 149–162). Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  51. Toral-Granda, V. (2008). Galapagos Islands: A hotspot of sea cucumber fisheries in Latin America and the Caribbean. In V. Toral-Granda, A. Lovatelli, & M. Vasconcellos (Eds.), Sea cucumbers: A global review of fisheries and trade (Fisheries and aquaculture technical paper no. 516, pp. 231–256). Rome: FAO.Google Scholar
  52. UNDP. (2012). Fish production cooperative societies of Cozumel and Vigía Chico (Equator initiatives case studies series, p. 11). New York: United Nations Development Programme.Google Scholar
  53. Vega, A. (2003). Reproductive strategies of the spiny lobster Panulirus interruptus related to the marine environmental variability off central Baja California, Mexico: Management implications. Fisheries Research, 65, 123–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vega, A., Treviño, E., Espinoza, G., & Zuñiga, L. (2010). Evaluación de la pesquería de langosta roja (Panulirus interruptus) en la región centro occidental de la Península de Baja California, mediante modelos dinámicos de biomasa: Puntos de referencia y recomendaciones de manejo (p. 21). La Paz, B.C.S: Instituto Nacional de Pesca.Google Scholar
  55. Viteri, C., & Chávez, C. (2007). Legitimacy, local participation, and compliance in the Galápagos Marine Reserve. Ocean & Coastal Management, 50(3–4), 253–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Walker, B., Carpenter, S., Anderies, J., Abel, N., Cumming, G., Janssen, M., et al. (2002). Resilience management in social-ecological systems: A working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conservation Ecology, 6(1), 14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Interdisciplinary PhD ProgramDalhousie UniversityHalifaxCanada
  2. 2.Facultad de CienciasUNDECIMARMontevideoUruguay
  3. 3.DINARAMontevideoUruguay

Personalised recommendations