Elsevier

Marine Policy

Volume 40, July 2013, Pages 100-110
Marine Policy

Suggestions for fixing top-down coastal fisheries management through participatory approaches

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.033Get rights and content

Abstract

Marine protected areas created in a top-down way can be costly and ineffective due to low compliance of resource users. Conversely, employing users’ local knowledge and involving them in decision-making processes could decrease costs and conflicts, in addition to increasing the chances of management success. Here the potential to change conflicting MPAs into conservation areas that take into account fishers’ use and knowledge is assessed based on a case study on the Brazilian coast (Paraty town). Fishers (n=206) from 11 villages were interviewed regarding their main fishing targets and gear, and then only the experienced ones (n=41) were interviewed from three main fishing villages about the most important commercial species. Fish landings were sampled for one year in these three villages (n=823), where participatory mapping and group interviews with fishers were also conducted to determine their opinions regarding management and how they thought it should be undertaken. Management measures should not be equivalent across the whole region, as there were clear differences in the target species and gear used. Fishers identified 55 important fishing spots, eight of which were important for more than five villages, while the experts identified 10 important fishing areas for the target species, which was supported by the sampling of fish landings. The fishers were not opposed to management and no-take reserves but would make some changes in the current design of these measures if it were up to them. Based on these data, a few changes were indicated in the design of these areas that would likely reduce the conflict between fishers and enforcement agencies. This kind of approach could be used as a framework for adapting conflictive MPAs or to support the establishment of new ones where fisheries are relevant.

Highlights

Marine protected areas (MPAs) can be ineffective when users are not involved in their management. ► Two areas in Brazil had their potential assessed to reduce conflicts with fishers. ► Fishers’ knowledge and participation were used as a tool to propose new MPA designs. ► Minor changes would likely reduce conflicts and increase compliance. ► The framework devised in this study could be used to create more effective MPA’s.

Introduction

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a widely celebrated strategy to promote the conservation or restoration of marine biodiversity (species, habitats, and ecosystem functions and services, such as fisheries) [1], [2], [3]. In some cases, MPAs have also been proposed as a tool to alleviate poverty, given sufficient time and financial investment [4], and to allow mitigation of and adaption to the possible effects of climate change [5].

It is no surprise then that multiple studies have attempted to evaluate the results of the implementation of MPAs around the world [3], [6], [7], [8], [9], although relatively few of them have been able to assess the outcomes of MPAs outside of their boundaries [8], [9], [10]. The ecological effectiveness of an MPA may depend on its goals. For example, protecting large migratory species would require larger MPAs than would be necessary for species with a smaller home range [11]. However, such ecological factors will only be the sole cause of success of an MPA if it is an enforced no-take reserve. Otherwise, socio-economic drivers will play a role as well, such as those affecting fishers’ motivation to comply with the rules [12]. Nevertheless, no-take reserves are only one type of MPA: around the world, MPAs have been managed through a variety of governance regimes that define how, when and where users, who are generally fishers, access the reserve [13].

In such cases, fishers’ social and economic characteristics are likely to play a role in the success of the MPA, as these factors will drive their behavior and compliance with fisheries restrictions [14]. Compliance appears to be affected by how involved fishers are/were in the establishment of rules, how legitimate the rules are for them, the expectations created towards management [15], and how economically dependent they are on fishing in the MPA area.

As such, assuming that the ecological conditions for effective MPAs can be met, involving and empowering the fishers and resource users associated with these areas appear to be relevant conditions to assure resource conservation [16], [17]. Additionally, involving resource users would reduce transaction costs, as they can provide important information in the form of local ecological knowledge, which in many instances is not available in a different form or may be costly to acquire [18], [19]. Transaction costs can also be reduced after the establishment of the MPA if empowered users can assist in monitoring and enforcement [20], [21] and if they can trust the governmental initiative [22].

In Brazil, numerous MPAs have been established, beginning in 1979 [23], and attention has only recently begun to be given to users, who in this case are mostly fishers and/or shellfish extractors [24]. However, the older MPAs are still a source of conflict between fishers and the environmental agency responsible for monitoring and enforcement [25]. Fishers, who are the primary users of these areas, are reallocated to the position of wrongdoers in situations like this.

To address this situation, in the present study, one of the first MPAs established in Brazil (Tamoios Ecological Station) was considered, together with another land park (Bocaina National Park) whose buffer zone affects fishers as well, to compare how the design of such areas would have been different had fishers been considered in their establishment. Both of these study areas are situated on the Rio de Janeiro coast. It was also considered what kind of changes would be necessary to adapt such areas to current fishers’ needs to reduce ongoing conflicts. Several conflicts were observed in this area due to restrictions on fishing by governmental environmental agencies and to the invasion of small-scale fishing grounds by industrial fisheries [26].

First, local differences in the type of fishing performed in the region were considered in order to determine whether the same management measures are applicable to the whole region, which is how they are currently implemented. Then, it was considered how fishers’ knowledge could have affected the zoning of the protected areas if such knowledge was taken into account. By doing so, as an exercise, a new zoning was proposed taking into account the peculiarities of local fisheries and fishers’ knowledge, without disregarding the management options that are currently in place. Although this framework is purely conceptual, it is hoped to show that integrated and more parsimonious MPAs could be established or existing ones could be changed with the goal of achieving conservation without inflating resource-use conflicts.

Section snippets

Case study

Paraty is a historical town on the southeast coast of Brazil in Rio de Janeiro State, with 180 km of coastal line that is inhabited by approximately 37,533 people (IBGE, 2010; http://www.ibge.gov.br/censo2010). Although tourism is very important for Paraty and for the villages that occupy the islands and beaches in the area, fishing is still practised by at least 11 villages (in addition to some fishing neighborhoods in the town), representing an economic occupation for approximately 485

General interviews

In 2009, 11 villages were visited on the coast of Paraty in addition to six neighborhoods in the town itself (grouped as “town”). After arriving in a village, the first few fishers met by the researchers were asked for an estimate of the number of fishers older than 18, which was a necessary step due to the large number of unregistered fishers. During the day(s) spent in each village, this number was reconfirmed with different people. Because these villages are generally small, there was an

General interviews—Are all the villages the same?

The fishers from the 11 villages (plus the town) mentioned 14 local species (based on local names) as their main targets (cited by a minimum of 5% of the fishers in at least one village). The cluster analysis grouped together the villages situated to the south of the town (Trindade, Ponta Negra and Sono) based on two fishes, the blue runner and blue fish. For the other groups, the species are not as clear, but they represent villages that are geographically close to each other. One exception to

Discussion

Before being established in areas used by people, parks (MPAs or others) should undergo a thorough evaluation of local uses, considering how, when, why and with what intensity such uses are performed, to assure that management will have the smallest disruptive impact possible [28]. In some cases, local management measures may already be in place [29], and disrupting them without giving them due consideration could actually reduce local resilience [30].

In the case study considered here, even

Conclusions

Although multiple MPAs in Brazil and around the world have been forcefully implemented, which has increased conflicts and not necessarily resulted in conservation, this does not mean that there is no solution for such areas. As demonstrated here and in other studies [41], fishers can understand the need for conservation and might be willing to compromise part of their fishing areas, for example, in the name of protecting reproductive grounds. However, fishers do not always understand or agree

Role of the funding source

IDRC (Canada) and FAPESP (Brazil) supported this project (grants Nos. 104519-004 and 2009/11154-3, respectively), but played no role in the design, analysis, writing or in the decision to submit this manuscript.

Acknowledgments

To all the fishers who gave us part of their time and shared their knowledge. Special thanks to Robson Posidonio, a fisher from Trindade, who not only sampled fish landings in his own village but also articulated meetings, helped us with the interviews and provided information for the maps.

References (44)

  • R. Johannes

    The case for data-less marine resource management: examples from tropical nearshore finfisheries

    Trends Ecol Evol

    (1998)
  • N Heck et al.

    Stakeholders’ expectations towards a proposed marine protected area: a multi-criteria analysis of MPA performance criteria

    Ocean Coast Manage

    (2011)
  • M Osmond et al.

    Lessons for marine conservation planning: a comparison of three marine protected area planning processes

    Ocean Coast Manage

    (2010)
  • K Leleu et al.

    Fishers' perceptions as indicators of the performance of marine protected areas (MPAs)

    Mar Policy

    (2012)
  • BS. Halpern

    The impact of marine reserves: do reserves work and does reserve size matter?

    Ecol Appl

    (2003)
  • ER Selig et al.

    A global analysis of the effectiveness of marine protected areas in preventing coral loss

    PLoS One

    (2010)
  • JE McLeod et al.

    Designing marine protected area networks to address the impacts of climate change

    Front Ecol Environ

    (2009)
  • R Weeks et al.

    Effectiveness of marine protected areas in the Philippines for biodiversity conservation

    Conserv Biol

    (2010)
  • MR Christie et al.

    Larval connectivity in an effective network of marine protected areas

    PLoS One

    (2010)
  • HE Fox et al.

    Reexamining the science of marine protected areas: linking knowledge to action

    Conserv Lett

    (2012)
  • C Camargo et al.

    Community involvement in management for maintaining coral reef resilience and biodiversity in southern Caribbean marine protected areas

    Biodivers Conserv

    (2009)
  • CM Roberts et al.

    Designing marine reserve networks: why small, isolated protected areas are not enough

    Conserv Pract

    (2001)
  • Cited by (68)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text