Governing the commons beyond harvesting: An empirical illustration from fishing.

Xavier Basurto,Abigail Bennett,Emilie Lindkvist,Maja Schlüter,Sergio Villamayor-Tomas

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0231575

Abstract

Harvesting has received most theoretical, empirical, and policy attention towards understanding common-pool resource dilemmas. Yet, pre-harvesting and post-harvesting activities influence harvesting outcomes as well. Broadening the analytical focus beyond harvesting is needed to imagine new ways of theorizing and governing the commons. Fishing—which is synonymous with harvesting—is a case in point. We contribute to a beyond-harvesting research agenda by incorporating concepts from common-pool resources theory that have not received enough attention in the literature. We compare two ubiquitous self-organizing strategies (i.e., fishing cooperatives and patron-client relationships) fishers use to access means of production and analyze their effects on the distribution of benefits resulting from harvesting. We use rarely available longitudinal data of monetary loans to fishers in Mexican small-scale fisheries and find that cooperatives can deliver broader distribution of benefits than patron-client relationships. Our study highlights the importance of historically and contextually situating analyses linking the effects of pre-harvesting processes on harvesting outcomes, and the benefits of broadening the scope of inquiry beyond a narrow policy attention on harvesting to move towards a fuller understanding of commons dilemmas.

Highlights

Understanding how to govern harvesting of common-pool resources has been a central concern for the development of common-pool resources theory [1]
Our study highlights the importance of historically and contextually situating analyses linking the effects of pre-harvesting processes on harvesting outcomes, and the benefits of broadening the scope of inquiry beyond a narrow policy attention on harvesting to move towards a fuller understanding of commons dilemmas
We argue that increased attention to the concepts of constitutional levels of analysis and linked action situations, two different conceptual devices anchored on institutional analysis and the Institutional and Analysis Development (IAD) Framework, would encourage analysis of common-pool resources governance beyond harvesting

Summary

Introduction

Understanding how to govern harvesting of common-pool resources has been a central concern for the development of common-pool resources theory [1]. In certain types of commons like fisheries, the label ‘fishing’ is synonymous with harvesting. Harvesting is only one aspect informing how users structure and govern their interactions, regulations tend to focus on issues related solely to harvesting (i.e., regulating access to harvesting or harvesting methods). Is this policy-making focus on harvesting at the expense of pre- or post-harvesting well warranted? We hypothesize that it is not, and the goal of this paper is to offer avenues towards broadening the scope towards a ’beyond-harvesting’ research agenda for common-pool resources and policy analysis Is this policy-making focus on harvesting at the expense of pre- or post-harvesting well warranted? We hypothesize that it is not, and the goal of this paper is to offer avenues towards broadening the scope towards a ’beyond-harvesting’ research agenda for common-pool resources and policy analysis

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion