Group items tagged

"To halt degradation of benthic resources in Chile, management areas (MAs) were set up under the Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) framework in the late 1990s. Integrated into the global market, MAs have since expanded along the Chilean coast, involving thousands of small-scale artisanal fishers. This paper analyses how economic criteria relates to social and ecological performance of Chilean MAs, by applying TURFs, commons and co-management theory to two cases: MAs Peñuelas and Chigualoco. To collect and analyse data Participatory Rural Appraisal tools, interviews and official statistics and reports were used. Our results show that MAs' economic benefits are connected to fluctuations on the global market. Adapting to changing world market prices then becomes paramount. TURFs' main goal is ecological conservation, but achieving this seems to depend on meeting fishers' livelihoods; failure to do so likely results in failure to meet conservation objectives. A serious weakness of the Chilean TURFs system is that it does not pay enough attention to fishers' livelihoods or to the global market context. Furthermore, there is a strong relationship between good economic benefits and social sustainability. But irrespective of economic performance, fisher organizations have been empowered and gained increased resource control with the TURFs system. At policy level, a differentiated and more flexible system could be more suitable for existing heterogeneous MAs and their particular economic, social and ecological challenges. For improved economic sustainability and resource conservation, a system with multiple-species managing MAs could be promoted as well. Finally, to enhance theory of commons, co-management and TURFs, we argue for greater acknowledgement of TURFs' social benefits in addition to economic assessments. More attention should also be paid to global market conditions of which MAs are dependent and in which they are embedded: macrostructures tha

"To halt degradation o benthic resources in Chile, managementareas (MAs) were set up under the Territorial Use Rights in Fisheries (TURFs)ramework in the late 1990s. Integrated into the global market, MAs have sinceexpanded along the Chilean coast, involving thousands o small-scale artisanalshers. This paper analyses how economic criteria relates to social and ecologicalperormance o Chilean MAs, by applying TURFs, commons and co-managementtheory to two cases: MAs Peñuelas and Chigualoco. To collect and analyse dataParticipatory Rural Appraisal tools, interviews and ocial statistics and reportswere used. Our results show that MAs' economic benets are connected tofuctuations on the global market. Adapting to changing world market prices thenbecomes paramount. TURFs' main goal is ecological conservation, but achievingthis seems to depend on meeting shers' livelihoods; ailure to do so likely resultsin ailure to meet conservation objectives. A serious weakness o the ChileanTURFs system is that it does not pay enough attention to shers' livelihoods orto the global market context. Furthermore, there is a strong relationship betweengood economic benets and social sustainability. But irrespective o economicperormance, sher organizations have been empowered and gained increasedresource control with the TURFs system. At policy level, a dierentiated andmore fexible system could be more suitable or existing heterogeneous MAsand their particular economic, social and ecological challenges. For improvedeconomic sustainability and resource conservation, a system with multiple-species managing MAs could be promoted as well. Finally, to enhance theory o commons, co-management and TURFs, we argue or greater acknowledgement"

"nstitutions based on the concept"common property" have played socially beneficial roles in natural resources management from economic pre-history up to thepresent. These same institutions promisehelp in solving pressing resourcesproblems in both the devel- oped and the developing countries. It isall the more important that these institutions be the focus of an economic study because they have been misunderstood by modern day economists: We refer to the so-called "theory of common property resources" orwhat is oftentermed the "tragedy of the commons."1"

Uma boa parte da contribuição da comunidade dos economistas a gestão dos recursos pesqueiros se assenta nos pressupostos do individualismo metodológico, o que implica a desconsideração da pluralidade do valores que se expressam nos complexos processos de tomada de decisão. O autor atento a este detalhe, e, sensível aos preceitos da economia ecológica sugere e argumenta que " [....] the new approach to environmental problems by economists will have to be a political economy of Nature." O "norte" de Spash é claro e instigante, além de ter subjacente o programa da economia ecológica, eis suas palavras: "Within the field of environmental and resource economics discontent with the policy relevance of prescriptions is often evident, but neoclassical theory still seems to maintain a dominant role. That was true until the late 1980s when ecologists and economists started to talk in a more formal fashion. The result has been the formation of ecological economics, which is attempting to take a fresh look at how economic systems interact with Nature. The methodology of this newer approach is still refreshingly open, and part of the thrust of this paper is to suggest the direction that it should take."

Aqui a Elinor Ostrom ressalta as implicações econômica da distinção entre o estoque e fluxo de recursos de propriedade comum. O estoque ela associa a um bem público e o fluxo a um bem privado, mas dado os custos de estabelecer uma propriedade muitos dos recursos de propriedade comum são de fato de acesso livre. Para ela é, portanto necessário que, c.p, é necessário dar-se um tratamento institucional distinto ao estoque e ao fluxo (pode ser agasalhadas institucionalmente no direito de propriedade (ITQs,TURFs, e, em decorrência comprado e vendido), mas chama atenção que o mero estabelecimento de um direito de propriedade sobre o fluxo pode não ser suficiente para assegurar a sustentabilidade da exploração do estoque, por meio do que chama atenção para a relevância da de estrutura de governança por meio da qual se revela toda a hibridez das organizações e instituições necessárias . Ihering Guedes Alcolforado "Let me now provide some definitions, so we can share a common language for analysis. First, let us define common-pool resources. Common-pool resources (CPRs) are natural or human-made facilities (or stocks) that generate flows of usable resource units over time. CPRs share two characteristics: (1) it is costly to develop institutions to exclude potential beneficiaries from them, and (2) the resource units harvested by one individual are not available to others (E. Ostrom, Gardner, and Walker 1994; Gardner, Ostrom, and Walker 1990). The first characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as public goods. The second characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as private goods in the economics literature. Given that it is difficult and costly to design institutions that successfully exclude some potential beneficiaries from access to CPRs, many CPRs are in fact open-access resources where anyone who wishes can gain access and appropriate resource units. Given that

Evidenciada a natureza hibrida (nem mercado, nem estado) dos recursos de propriedade comum, Elinor Ostrom considera as instituições como um capital social que evolui ao longo do tempo: "[....] institutions are a form of social capital resulting from the time and effort invested by their creators in improving their productivity. The institutions, of course, have not remained entirely fixed over their lifetimes. Ali of them are complex and have had to change over time", mas chama atenção para sua relativa estabilidde, já que para ela as " institutions are, however "robust" or in "institutional equilibrium" in the sense defined by Shepsle (1989, 143), who regards "an institution as 'essentially' in equilibrium if changes transpired according to an ex ante plan (and hence part of the original institution) for institutional change." Esta estabilidade associa as rules-in-use (mas não associa a um conjunto de regras particlares) que se origina dos "[....] the appropriators (users) designed their own rules, created organizations to undertake the day-to-day management of their resources, and modified their own rules over time in light of past experience. The specific rules-in-use, however, differ markedly from one case to the next. Given the great variation in rules-in-use, the sustainability of these resources and their institutions cannot be cxplained by the presence or absence of particular rules. That the rules do differ partly explains the sustainability of these systems. By differing, the rules take into account specific attributes of the physical systems, cultural views of the world, and the economic and politicai relationships that exist in the setting. Without different rules, appropriators could not take advantage of the positive features of a local CPR or avoid potential pitfalls that could occur in one setting but not in others.

Fundamental. The term "common-property resource" is an example of a term repeatedly used to refer to property owned by a government or by no one. It is also used for property owned by a community of resource users. Such usage leads to confusion in scientific study and policy analysis. In this paper we develop a conceptual schema for arraying property-rights regimes that distinguishes among diverse bundles of rights ranging from authorized user, to claimant, to proprietor, and to owner. We apply this conceptual schema to analyze findings from a variety of empirical settings including the Maine lobster industry.

Em Neither Market nor State - Governance of Common-Pool Resource in the Twenty-First Century, Elinor Ostrom volta a problemática semantica dos recursos de propriedade comum, tendo como base uma distinção entre estoque e fluxo do recurso natural renovavel, ressaltando as implicações econômica da distinção entre o estoque e fluxo de recursos de propriedade comum. O estoque ela associa a um bem público e o fluxo a um bem privado, mas dado os custos de estabelecer uma propriedade muitos dos recursos de propriedade comum são de fato de acesso livre. Para ela é, portanto necessário que, c.p, é necessário dar-se um tratamento institucional distinto ao estoque e ao fluxo (pode ser agasalhadas institucionalmente no direito de propriedade (ITQs,TURFs, e, em decorrência comprado e vendido), mas chama atenção que o mero estabelecimento de um direito de propriedade sobre o fluxo pode não ser suficiente para assegurar a sustentabilidade da exploração do estoque, por meio do que chama atenção para a relevância da de estrutura de governança por meio da qual se revela toda a hibridez das organizações e instituições necessárias . Ihering Guedes Alcolforado "Let me now provide some definitions, so we can share a common language for analysis. First, let us define common-pool resources. Common-pool resources (CPRs) are natural or human-made facilities (or stocks) that generate flows of usable resource units over time. CPRs share two characteristics: (1) it is costly to develop institutions to exclude potential beneficiaries from them, and (2) the resource units harvested by one individual are not available to others (E. Ostrom, Gardner, and Walker 1994; Gardner, Ostrom, and Walker 1990). The first characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as public goods. The second characteristic is held in common with those goods and services referred to as private goods in the economics literature. Given that it is diff

Ontem na Banca de Jéssica Cruz, no Instituto de Biologia da UFBA inciamos uma interloculação em torno da institucionalização das funções ecosistêmicas embutidas nos Sistemas Socioecológico. O ponto de partida da discussão foi a instrumentalização e problematização da tipologia de funções ecosistêmicas proposta por DE GROOT et al A typology for the clasification, description and valuation of ecosystems functions, goods and services in Ecological Economics, 2002. v.42, pp. 393-408. A problematização foi feita por um dos orientadores, em cuja tese de doutoramento descontrói a compreensão vigente da função ecosistêmica da biodiversidade e da especie, ancorando-a no organismo (Ver NUNES-NETO, Function in Ecology: an organizational approach in Biol. PHilophy, 2013 (no prelo). A partir da sua reconstrução das funções ecosistêmicas, chamamos atenção para a possibilidade de considerar, do ponto de vista do policymaking, os diferentes tipos de funções, não como concorrentes, mas como complementar, e assim poder considerá-las com funções associadas aos estoques e as funções vinculadas ao fluxo, integrando no programa de pesquisa dos sistemas socioecológicos a Teoria das Funções Ecosistêmicos. Resultado: ponto de pauta para um grupo em processo de articulação que deverá tratar da relação da Economia Ecológica com a Teoria da Funções Ecosistêmicas.

"The idea that decision-making processes andmanagement in public policy and publicadministration are complex has entered theminds of practitioners and scholars in publicadministration. Insights from theories oncomplexity, however, have hardly been usedin public administration and management. Inother social sciences, like economics forinstance, an evolutionary approach hasreceived far more attention. The questionwhether such a complexity theory approachcould help to increase our understanding ofpublic management phenomena is an intri-guing one. In this volume the reader will finda selection of articles on public managementusing insights from the complexity theory.Before we present the seven articles, whichall deal with notions from the complexitytheory and apply them to phenomena in thepublic sector, we will briefly introduce somebasic ideas concerning this theory. Key words Complexity theory, public administration,complex decision-making, complex systems Vol. 10 Issue 3 2008 287-297Public Management Review ISSN 1471-9037 print/ISSN 1471-9045 online Ó 2008 Taylor & Francishttp://www.tandf.co.uk/journalsDOI: 10.1080/14719030802002451 "

"This paper investigates how common property institutional arrangementscontribute to sustainable mangrove sheries in coastal Ecuador, ocusing onthe shery or the mangrove cockle (  Anadara tuberculosa and  A. similis ), abivalve mollusk harvested rom the roots o mangrove trees and o particularsocial, economic, and cultural importance or the communities that dependon it. Specically, this study examines the emergence o new civil societyinstitutions within the historical context o extensive mangrove deorestationor the expansion o shrimp arming, policy changes in the late 1990s thatrecognized "ancestral" rights o local communities to mangrove resources, andhow custodias, community-managed mangrove concessions, aect the cockleshery. Findings rom interviews with shell collectors and analysis o catch-per-unit-eort (CPUE) indicate that mangrove concessions as common propertyregimes promote community empowerment, local autonomy over resources,mangrove conservation and recovery, higher cockle catch shares, and larger shellsizes, but the benets are not evenly distributed. Associations without custodias and independent cockle collectors eel urther marginalized by the loss o gathering grounds, potentially defecting problems o overexploitation to "open-access" areas, in which mangrove sheries are weakly managed by the State.Using Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) ramework, theexplicit link between social and ecological systems is studied at dierent levels,examining the relationship between collective action and the environment throughquantitative approaches at the shery level and qualitative analysis at the level"

"Scholars of common property resource theory (CPR) have long asserted that certain kinds of institutional arrangements based on collective action result in successful environmental stewardship, but feedback and the direct link between social and ecological systems remains poorly understood. This paper investigates how common property institutional arrangements contribute to sustainable mangrove fisheries in coastal Ecuador, focusing on the fishery for the mangrove cockle (Anadara tuberculosa and A. similis), a bivalve mollusk harvested from the roots of mangrove trees and of particular social, economic, and cultural importance for the communities that depend on it. Specifically, this study examines the emergence of new civil society institutions within the historical context of extensive mangrove deforestation for the expansion of shrimp farming, policy changes in the late 1990s that recognized "ancestral" rights of local communities to mangrove resources, and how custodias, community-managed mangrove concessions, affect the cockle fishery. Findings from interviews with shell collectors and analysis of catch-per-unit-effort (CPUE) indicate that mangrove concessions as common property regimes promote community empowerment, local autonomy over resources, mangrove conservation and recovery, higher cockle catch shares, and larger shell sizes, but the benefits are not evenly distributed. Associations without custodias and independent cockle collectors feel further marginalized by the loss of gathering grounds, potentially deflecting problems of overexploitation to "open-access" areas, in which mangrove fisheries are weakly managed by the State. Using Ostrom's Institutional Analysis and Development (IAD) framework, the explicit link between social and ecological systems is studied at different levels, examining the relationship between collective action and the environment through quantitative approaches at the fishery level and qualitative analysis at the level

"Territorial User Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) have spread in Chile, since the late 1990s, in the form of commons institutions. TURFs are presented by some scholars as a social-ecological success; by others as showing economic and compliance problems. Studies looking at the material conditions in which fishers produce and reproduce their livelihoods, and in which TURFs emerge, are scarcer. Ostrom's theory on the commons claims that certain collective action conditions have to be met to become thriving commons institutions. Our hypothesis is that while institutions are moulded by local material conditions, such as geographical location and social embeddedness, these impose challenges and constraints upon fishers influencing TURFs' long-term viability. How are collective action conditions influenced when the new TURFs commons do not emerge in tabula rasa contexts but in occupied spaces? Do material conditions influence TURFs' sustainability? This paper set out to explore these conditions. Huentelauquén's and Guayacán's TURFs (central-northern Chile) were chosen, as they represent two extremes (rural-urban; on private property-on State/municipal property; mainly diver - mainly fisher) contexts in which TURFs have emerged. We mainly used Participatory Rural Approach (PRA) tools triangulated with other qualitative methods. This study shows that both social embeddedness (private/State lands), and geographical location (rural/urban) matter, resulting in different access to the coast for different TURFs, thus determining some important differences between our cases in at least three relevant areas: entrance, social relations between the fishers' organization (entitled the TURFs) and the landowner (private or municipal/State) and the existence or absence of fishing and general infrastructure. Competition for space among key actors seems to affect the process of acquiring a TURF as well as the conditions conductive to collective action. TURFs' assessments s

"While most of the attention in the scientific and policy literature onrights-based institutions has been devoted to Individual Transferable Quotas(ITQs), there are alternatives that involve different configurations of use rights.One such alternative is a space-based option commonly referred to as Territo-rial Use Rights Fisheries (TURFs). TURFs have been utilized in island fisheriesoff Southeast Asia for decades, and they have been well studied, particularly byanthropologists and sociologists. This paper discusses case studies of TURF or-ganizations in Japan and Chile from an economics perspective. We discuss thehistorical origins of each system, outline the legal and institutional structures of the systems, and then discuss how each system manages nearshore coastal re-sources. We discuss similarities and differences across the many specific collectivemanagement structures adopted by Japanese and Chilean TURF organizations.We then discuss how outcomes differ from what might emerge under ITQs"

A vertente institucionalista no âmbito da política é, em boa parte, fundamentada na Economia dos Direitos de Propriedade, a qual é tomada na maioria das vezes acítica, dado que se considera uma critica a abordagem convencional que mesmo reconhecendo o direito de propiredade, não o considera como possível de ser objeto da política, ou seja, afasta--o do âmbito analítico considerando-o constante, por meio do suposto do "tudo o mais constante". Aqui, a Economia dos Direitos de Propriedade e problematizada.

Particularmente interessante as caracteristicas dos direiros de propiedade reas. Artigo seminal. To what extent is the recently invented individual catch quota a form of real property right? This article introduces six quantitative characteristics of all personal interests in land and natural resources. It is shown that medieval fishing rights had some of these characteristics, but these rights were not developed in the common law of property. The article then turns to modern regulatory licenses and catch quotas and examines the extent to which they embody property characteristics. In a digression, the obstacles to political acceptance of the individual fishery property concept are surveyed. The paper concludes by suggesting that catch quotas may develop into shares in the fish stock or biomass itself.

Uma premissa importante na estruturação do argumento é que para o autor, as instituições são "unchanging relative, relative to the more rapid fluctuations of economic activities", o que justifica nas evidências históricas mostrarem queas políticas govrnamenais não tem tido sucesso em imort novs intituições não governamentais, como imaginam os economia que defendem os "new`rights-based regimes",enfim novos direitos de propriedade não são facilmente instituidos,. Na verdade segundo o autor, o que acontece é que as sociedades já dispõe de um conjunto de direitos de propriedade padrão que podem ser introduzido s regimes pesqueiros. Este entendimento põe os regimes de propriedade vigentes como os recursos a ser manejados na configuração dos regimes pesqueiros, o que pressupõe que o policymaking tenha um domínio do direito positivo (vigente) de propriedade..

O call for parte parte da constatação da existência de um viés ideológico que faz parte de " part of an agenda to strengthen individual property rights" o que debita a "a limited understanding of Hardin's "the tragedy of the commons.", já que não consideram que " Hardin later attempted to clarify the meaning of the essay- that tragedy occurred in the unregulated commons." E, com esta orientação inspira-se nas investigações de Elinor Ostrom para mostrar " [...] how commons can be effectively managed, and how alternate ways to manage the commons can lead to different outcomes with respect to inequality." É a partir deste background que convoca uma ampliação e aprofundamento do debate, incentivando por meio desta "call for papers" "a broad heterodox inquiry into the world of the common." Os tópicos sugeridos são instigantes, principalmente para pesquisadores com Hugo Ballesteros que, na sua busca de compreender o "furtivismo", depara-se a todo momento com a questão da legitimidade cultural de uma atividade ilegal: i) How is it to be understood; ii) how do people engaged in common endeavors interact and manage themselves; iii) how do gender, race, and other divisions intertwine with the commons; iv) how do we protect and enlarge what we hold in common? v) Who benefits from the existence of different aspects of the commons, and vi) who might be harmed by them?"

Special Issue: The Commons and The Common Call for Papers The Commons (or the common) is of interest to radicals on the left for many reasons. Most obvious at present is the condition of the earth we share-everyone's common. Global warming and environmental degradation threaten human existence and that of other living creatures and things. Yet agreement on how to better treat planet Earth has proven elusive. Another reason for interest in the commons is the left's fight against privatization, for decades now a hallmark of neoliberalism. Enclosure of common space and resources was part of the development of the capitalist system, and it continues today. Can this process be stopped; reversed? The terms commons and common do not simply refer to open access resources (res nullins). This category of common resource is the air we breathe, or the ocean. Another category of the commons is res communis, a commonly held resource. It has figured prominently in projects and aspirations of socialists, anarchists, feminists, and communists. Privatization can be associated with a world of scarcity, and the common with abundance. In addition, more than property is held in common. Language, stories, images, humor, culture and other aspects of communal interaction share this root. In addition, more than property is held in common. Language, stories, images, humor, culture and other aspects of communal interaction share this root. How can a clearer sense of the commons help inform a renewal of left trajectories: a more egalitarian and sustainable world? While advocated to overcome problems presumed to be inherent in managing the commons, privatization substitutes problems fundamental to an individualized world. One of the most obvious of these problems is inequality: of access, control, income, and resources. Inequality is reflected in class-riven societies, as well as those characterized by differential a

O Furtivismo (pesca ilegal), objeto de uma intervenção de Hugo Ballestero da USCompostela pode ser considerada uma forma/tipo ilegal que, a despeito da sua importância ainda não foi captada pelos sensores dos pesquisadores de tais atividades, a exemplo do texto de Hudson que " [...] selectively to draw upon and use the available evidence to summarise the various forms/types of illegal activities, their relationships to the formal legal economy, their various spatialities and geographies, and to identify some of the theoretical and conceptual issues raised by recognising the absence of consideration of the illegal/illicit in the economic geography literature and to consider in a preliminary way some of the implications of this lacuna". Logo, temos aqui uma interface possível de ser explorada.

Artisanal fisheries are of great importance in Brazil, as they are responsible for more than 50% of national fish production. This importance, associated with the necessity of conserving marine environments threatened by multiple competing uses, leads us to propose mechanisms for co-management of fisheries by users and public authorities. This proposal takes into account: a) local conflicts between artisanal and industrial fishers; b) local rules overthe use of fishing areas established by artisanal fishers; c) the advent of protectedareas that close ac-cess to some fishing areas used by artisanal fisheries; and d) co-management options being explored betweengovernment and fishers. This study suggests policy and technical alternatives under consideration to managethe artisanal fisheries of southeastern Brazil with a focus on Ilha Grande bay in Rio de Janeiro. In our casestudy, based on field research conducted in 2009, we show that artisanal fishers are squeezed into a marinespace between protected areas and industrial fishing. We suggest that a combination of fishing agreements(FAs),based on experience in Amazonian fisheries and extractive reserves,and payment for environmental ser-vices(PES),based onforest and related ate rresource experience,could improve management and livelihoods for local artisanal fisheries by stimulatin gandre warding fsher swho participate in conservation efforts.The two instruments (FAs and PES) are the subject of considerable research and practical experience.Their integration in an instrument mix represents a contribution from transdisciplinary fields of human ecology and ecological economics.

Richard Hovitt e seu companheiros colocam o conflito de interesses no âmbito dos sistemas interclultural de gestão dos recursos naturais na Australia e Malaysia. Eles exploram as maneiras pelas quais o " ontological pluralism and the interplay of socio-cultural, political-economic and biophysical influences shape NRM systems", uma problemática muito próxima aos nossos territórios pesqueiros. O objetivo dos autores é ampliar " discursive space in which to reframe the challenges of capacity building in the rapidly changing spaces of intercultural NRM systems." Para nós a relevância do texto deve-se em boa parte porque eles "...synthesizes the conceptual arguments of field research to conclude that capacity deficits of dominant institutions, processes and knowledge systems drive many systemic failures in land and sea management affecting Indigenous peoples. We advocate urgent action to build intercultural competence and new capacities and competencies in those institutions." Enfim, segundo eles, " The paper reframes intercultural NRM in terms of coexistence an and invites wider debate about these 'new geographies of coexistence' in intercultural NRM systems"