Abstract
Social robustness is a neglected but crucial component of fisheries management. We present a conceptual framework for evaluating social robustness and we apply it to the analysis of four case studies. We understand social robustness to be a combination of two factors that allow a management regime to adapt to a broad range of potential ecological, economic and political situations: acceptance by stakeholders, reflected in how they perceive and respond to management, and capacity for institutional learning, the process in which institutions change in reaction to internal or external socio-economic or ecological pressures.
We apply five hypotheses about social robustness to four European case studies of innovations in fisheries management in the Baltic Sea, the Faroe Islands, the North Sea and the Western Shelf. The innovations represent a range of systems that incorporate both rights-based management, including transferable effort allocations, and participatory governance. The overall conclusions are that the innovations of the Faroe Islands and the North Sea are socially robust with relatively high degrees of stakeholder acceptance and the ability, in many situations, to institutionally learn. In the Basque fisheries, innovations seem to be socially robust with high institutional learning, but low in stakeholders’ acceptance. The Baltic innovations seem to be less socially robust compared to the other cases.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Anderson, J. (2006). The future of the market-based approach towards quota management in the UK – the case of the Shetland Isles. Paper presented at the “Sharing the Fish” Conference, March 2006, Perth, Western Australia.
Aranda, M., Murillas, A., & Motos, L. (2006). Command and control quota-based regimes. In L. Motos & D. Wilson (Eds.), The knowledge base for fisheries management (pp. 143–161). The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective, Addison-Wesley: Reading MA.
Arnason, R. (2000). Property rights as a means of economic organization. In R. Shotton (Ed.), Use of property rights in fisheries management. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 404/1. Rome: FAO.
Arnason, R. (2002). A Review of international experiences with ITQs. Annex to Future Options for UK Fish Quota Management. Report to the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. CEMARE, University of Portsmouth, June 2002.
Astorkiza, K., Del Valle, I., & Astorkiza, I. (2000). The regulatory capacity of the Cofradias in the Cantabric region. Management institutions and governance systems in European Fisheries (pp. 196–210). Portsmouth, UK: CEMARE Miscellaneous Publications.
Borrini-Feyerabend, G. (1996). Collaborative management of protected areas: Tailoring the approach to the context. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
Cabinet Office. (2004). Net benefits, a sustainable and profitable future for UK fishing. Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit. London, March 2004.
Christy, F. (1982). Territorial use rights in marine fisheries: Definitions and conditions. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 227. Rome: FAO Fisheries Department.
Christy, F. (1996). Paradigms lost: The death rattle of open access and the advent of property rights regimes in fisheries. 8th Biannual Conference of IIFET, July 1996, Morocco.
Davidse, W. (2001). The effects of transferable property rights on the fleet capacity and ownership of harvesting rights in the Dutch demersal North Sea fish. In FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 412. Rome: FAO Fisheries Department.
Delaney, A. (2007). Profiling of small-scale fishing communities in the Baltic Sea. Denmark: Innovative Fisheries Management, IFM, Aalborg University.
Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003). The struggle to govern the commons. Science, 302(5652), 1907–1912.
Dubbink, W., & van Vliet, M. (1997). The Netherlands: from ITQ to co-management. Comparing the usefulness of markets and co-management, illustrated by the Dutch flatfish sector. In OCDE (Ed.), Towards sustainable fisheries: Issue papers (pp. 177–202). OCDE/GD(97)54, Paris.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Gonzalez-Laxe, F. G. (2006). Transferability of fishing rights: the Spanish case. Marine Policy, 30, 379–388.
Goodlad, J. (1998). Sectoral quota management: Fisheries management by fish producer organizations. In T. S. Gray (Ed.), The politics of fishing (pp. 146–160). London: Macmillan.
Gray, T. (Ed.). (2005a). Participation in fisheries governance. Dordrecht: Springer.
Gray, T. (2005b). Theorising about Participatory Fisheries Governance. In T. Gray (Ed.), Participation in fisheries governance (pp. 1–25). Dordrecht: Springer.
Grote, J. R., & Gbikpi, B. (Eds.). (2002). Participatory governance: Political and societal implications. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Haas, E. B. (1990). When knowledge is power: Three models of chance in international organisations. Berkley: University of California Press.
Haas, P. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.
Hatcher, A. C. (1997). Producers’ organizations and devolved fisheries management in the United Kingdom: Collective and Individual Quota Systems. Marine Policy, 21(6), 519–533.
Hatcher, A., & Read, A. (2001). The allocation of fishing rights in UK fisheries. Portsmouth, UK: Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources (CEMARE).
Hatcher, A., Pascoe, S., Banks, R., & Arnason, R. (2002). Future options for UK fish quota management. CEMARE Report 58. A Report to the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Portsmouth.
Hedberg, B. (1981). How organizations learn and unlearn. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design (Vol. 1, pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heinelt, H., Getimis, P., Kafkalas, G., Smith, R., & Swyngedouw, E. (Eds.). (2002). Participatory governance in multi-level context: Concepts and experience. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
ICES. (2007). Report of the ICES Advisory Committee on Fishery Management, Advisory Committee on the Marine Environment and Advisory Committee on Ecosystems, 2007. Book 4. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea: Copenhagen, Denmark.
Hoefnagel, E. (2005). The Netherlands. In L. van Hoof et al. (Eds.), Sharing responsibilities in fisheries management. Part 2 – Annex: Case studies (pp. 161–211). The Hague.
Jákupsstovu, S. H. Í, Cruz, L. R., Maguire, J.-J., & Reinert, J. (2007). Effort regulation of the demersal fisheries at the Faroe Islands: a 10-year appraisal. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 64, 730–737.
Jentoft, S. (2000). Legitimacy and disappointment in fisheries management. Marine Policy, 24, 141–148.
Kearney, J., Berkes, F., Charles, A., Pinkerton, E., & Wiber, M. (2007). The role of participatory governance and community-based management in integrated coastal and ocean management in Canada. Coastal Management, 35(1), 79–104.
Kooiman, J. (2002). Governance: A social-political-perspective. In B. Gbikpi (Ed.), Participatory governance: Political and societal implications (pp. 71–96). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Le Gallic, B. (2003). Why is it difficult for governments to move towards using market-based instruments in fisheries? XVth Annual EAFE Conference, Brest, May 2003.
Levy, J. S. (1994). Learning and Foreign Policy: Sweeping a conceptual minefield. International Organization, 48(2), 279–312.
Løkkegaard, J., Andersen, J., Boje, J., Frost, H., & Hovgård, H. (2004). Rapport om den færøske regulering af fiskeriet – Færømodellen. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, Report no. 166 Copenhagen, Denmark.
May, J. V., & Wildavsky, A. B. (1979). The policy cycle. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Mikalsen, K., & Jentoft, S. (2008). Participatory practices in fisheries across Europe: making stakeholders more responsible. Marine Policy, 32(2), 169–177.
Nautilus Consultants. (2006). A review of UK Producer Organisations: the effectiveness of service provision in Quota Management, Quota Trading and Market/Price Support. Authored by Carletin Crick, Southall Tristan and Cappell Rod.
Nye, J. S. (1987). Nuclear Learning and U.S.-Soviet Security Regimes. International Organization, 41(3), 371–402.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.
Phillipson, J. (1999). The fish producers’ organisations in the UK – A strategic analysis. In D. Symes (Ed.), Alternative management systems for fisheries (pp. 79–92). Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Phillipson, J. (2002). Widening the net: Prospects for fisheries Co-management. Newcastle: CRE Press.
Pomeroy, R. S., & Riviera-Guieb, R. (2006). Fishery Co-management: A practical handbook. Oxfordshire, UK: CABI Publishing.
Sabatier, P. (2004). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Netherlands: Springer.
Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (Eds.). (1993). Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach (pp. 41–56). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Scott, A. (1988). Development of property in the fishery. Marine Resource Economics, 5, 289–311.
Scott, A. (1996). The ITQ as a property right: Where it came from, how it works, and where it is going. In B. L. Crowley (Ed.), Property rights and fishery management on the Atlantic coast (pp. 31–98). Halifax, Nova Scotia: Atlantic Institute for Market Studies.
Scott, A. (2000). Introducing property in fisheries management. In R. Shotton (Ed.), Use of property right in fisheries management. Proceeding of the FishRight99 Conference, Western Australia, 11–19 November 1999, FAO.
Symes, D. (2006). Fisheries governance: A coming of age for fisheries social science? Fisheries Research, 81(2–3), 113–117.
UK Fisheries Department. (2005). Securing the benefits. The joint UK response to the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit Net Benefits report on the future of the fishing industry in the UK. London.
van Ginkel, R. (2005). Between top-down and bottom-up governance: Dutch beam trawl fishermen’s engagement with fisheries management. In T. S. Gray (Ed.), Participation in fisheries governance. Netherlands: Springer.
Wilson, D. C., Raakjær Nielsen, J., & Degnbol, P. (Eds.). (2003). The fisheries Co-management experience: Accomplishments, challenges, and prospects. Dordrecht: Springer.
WWF. (2007). The use of rights-based measures in fisheries management. UK.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to the European Commission and to all institutions and individuals in the Baltic Sea, the North Sea, the Western Shelf, and the Faroe Islands who have devoted their time and expertise to help us with our endeavours; and to Sarah Wise from Rutgers University for proof-reading.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Christensen, AS. et al. (2009). Understanding Social Robustness in Selected European Fisheries Management Systems. In: Hauge, K., Wilson, D. (eds) Comparative Evaluations of Innovative Fisheries Management. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2663-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2663-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-2662-0
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-2663-7
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)