Abstract
ABSTRACT By introducing Territorial Use Rights for Fisheries (TURF), the Chilean government has devolved authority over the appropriation of benthic fisheries to local fishers’ organisations. Yet there is little evidence of how this local governance works for membership organisations. Drawing on the theory of lateral network governance, the role of legitimacy in governance outcomes is examined by conducting a comparative case study of two TURF networks in northern Chile. Counterintuitively, more effective governance outcomes were found in the TURF network characterised by a less favourable legitimacy structure of decision-making than the case with a better legitimacy structure. Considering context and network evolution, it is suggested that although organisational renewal and high membership turnover potentially fragment legitimacy, they also enable novel collective action and better governance outcomes. The observed divergence of actual legitimacy from formal governance structure underscores the need for dynamic analysis of collective resource governance beyond the formal chart.
Submitted Version (
Free)
Published Version
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.
