Abstract

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. Huentelauquen’s and Guayacan’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 should therefore consider both, the local particularities of specific fishing communities and the larger structural context in which they emerge, that if not paid attention to, can weakens TURFs’ viability for sustainable fisheries.

Highlights

  • The adoption of Territorial User Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) within smallscale fisheries in Chile are shown worldwide as an example of success (Castilla et al 2007), apparently improving the social-ecological system’s sustainability (Gelcich et al 2010)

  • This study shows that both social embeddedness, and geographical location matter, resulting in different access to the coast for different TURFs, determining some important differences between our cases in at least three relevant areas: entrance, social relations between the fishers’ organization and the landowner and the existence or absence of fishing and general infrastructure

  • Struggles for access to and control of natural resources on/and around the coast are not absent (Gallardo and Friman 2010). This led us to ask the following questions: How are collective action conditions influenced when the new commons, in the form of TURFs, do not emerge in a vacuum, but in already occupied spaces? What are the main differences between Management Areas (MA) located in rural caletas and those embedded in urban centres? Does the setting and material conditions surrounding the MAs influence their possibilities to become sustainable? This paper explores these conditions

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The adoption of Territorial User Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) within smallscale fisheries in Chile are shown worldwide as an example of success (Castilla et al 2007), apparently improving the social-ecological system’s sustainability (Gelcich et al 2010). Emerging commons within artisanal fisheries social embeddedness, geographical location, infrastructure and general material conditions. To this not much attention has been paid, the conditions in which fishers produce and reproduce their livelihoods, and in which TURFs emerge, may greatly influence outcomes. The Chilean TURFs, run under a co-management approach, represent a clear example of a new commons institutions (Gallardo 2008).. The Chilean TURFs, run under a co-management approach, represent a clear example of a new commons institutions (Gallardo 2008). Under the TURFs, artisanal fishers manage the resources in common, harvest in common and negotiate the price of the harvest in common; designed to manage a common pool resource, i.e. characterized by non-excludability and substractability (Ostrom 2002)

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call