Abstract
A random sample attitude survey concluded a ten-year research effort on fisheries co-management that was carried out in Malawi, Mozambique and Zambia. The survey responses were analyzed using a two-level hierarchical model that allowed conclusions about village-level institutions to be based on individual-level survey responses. The present paper describes the surveys background, methodology, and conclusions. Three of these conclusions are very clear from the survey results. The first is that co-management that is more responsive to the community is more effective. The second is that co-management institutions made up mainly of fishers are more effective than ones that incorporate a broad range of stakeholders. The third is that local conservation efforts being seen as making a positive contribution to village life is unrelated to their being seen as rule enforcement mechanisms.
Highlights
Agencies responsible for the management of aquatic ecosystems in Southern Africa have had to work on large scales because their primary mandate has been fisheries management
The second is that co-management institutions made up mainly of fishers are more effective than ones that incorporate a broad range of stakeholders
The first is a general confirmation of what has long been an insight from qualitative research that a more responsive management institution is seen as a more effective one
Summary
Agencies responsible for the management of aquatic ecosystems in Southern Africa have had to work on large scales because their primary mandate has been fisheries management. Fisheries are fugitive resources that force these agencies to address the management of long rivers and large lakes and swamps as units. To do this, these agencies look for help from communities, fishers, village headmen and traditional authorities. The resulting ‘fisheries co-management’ programmes are arrangements where responsibility for resource management is shared between the government and user groups. Local co-management groups often emphasise their role as enforcers of government rules and routinely demand increased enforcement powers from the Departments of Fisheries (DoF). The WCRPFC qualitative research found the perceived behaviour and levels of corruption of the local DoF officers to vary widely
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
