Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Fragmented participation in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish in South Africa – inclusion of small-rights holders is a complex matter

Fragmented participation in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish in South Africa –... The reasons why most small-rights holders do not participate in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish (‘small pelagics’) in South Africa, despite legislation and policy encouraging their participation, were analysed. Membership of the Small Pelagics Management Working Group (SPMWG), the main participatory governance organ, is limited to representatives of recognised stakeholder associations. Rights holders therefore have to belong to a stakeholder association, which then selects a member or members to represent them on the SPMWG. Small quotas and the difficulties of sourcing capital mean that small-rights holders are not able to invest in infrastructure. Besides, most of the small-rights holders and their companies lack experience and management skills to survive independently in this highly competitive industry, which is based on high volume and low profit margins. As a result, most of the small-rights holders have no option but to enter into complex catching and processing agreements with vessel- and factory owners belonging to the existing recognised stakeholder associations. For the small-rights holders, it does not make sense to join these associations or even to form their own if they cannot actively participate in the industry independently. Greater participation by small-rights holders should start with their genuine integration into the industry through improved ability to invest in infrastructure and through management skills development. Most likely, this will require an interventionist approach by government. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png African Journal of Marine Science Taylor & Francis

Fragmented participation in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish in South Africa – inclusion of small-rights holders is a complex matter

Download PDF

Fragmented participation in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish in South Africa – inclusion of small-rights holders is a complex matter

Abstract

The reasons why most small-rights holders do not participate in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish (‘small pelagics’) in South Africa, despite legislation and policy encouraging their participation, were analysed. Membership of the Small Pelagics Management Working Group (SPMWG), the main participatory governance organ, is limited to representatives of recognised stakeholder associations. Rights holders therefore have to belong to a stakeholder association, which...
Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/fragmented-participation-in-management-of-the-fishery-for-small-HXsVHj08U3
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright © NISC (Pty) Ltd
ISSN
1814-2338
eISSN
1814-232X
DOI
10.2989/1814232X.2014.930708
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The reasons why most small-rights holders do not participate in management of the fishery for small pelagic fish (‘small pelagics’) in South Africa, despite legislation and policy encouraging their participation, were analysed. Membership of the Small Pelagics Management Working Group (SPMWG), the main participatory governance organ, is limited to representatives of recognised stakeholder associations. Rights holders therefore have to belong to a stakeholder association, which then selects a member or members to represent them on the SPMWG. Small quotas and the difficulties of sourcing capital mean that small-rights holders are not able to invest in infrastructure. Besides, most of the small-rights holders and their companies lack experience and management skills to survive independently in this highly competitive industry, which is based on high volume and low profit margins. As a result, most of the small-rights holders have no option but to enter into complex catching and processing agreements with vessel- and factory owners belonging to the existing recognised stakeholder associations. For the small-rights holders, it does not make sense to join these associations or even to form their own if they cannot actively participate in the industry independently. Greater participation by small-rights holders should start with their genuine integration into the industry through improved ability to invest in infrastructure and through management skills development. Most likely, this will require an interventionist approach by government.

Journal

African Journal of Marine Science – Taylor & Francis

Published: Apr 3, 2014

Keywords: fragmentation; genuine involvement; government intervention; small pelagics; stakeholder participation

References

  • Why management procedures approach? Some positives and negatives
  • Draft terms of reference for management working groups (MWG)
  • 2009/10 Performance review of fishing right holders. Overall report/summary: limited commercial and full commercial rights holders
  • Small pelagic approved initial anchovy TAC and final sardine TAC
  • General policy on the allocation and management of long term commercial fishing rights, 2005
  • Policy for the allocation and management of commercial fishing rights in the small pelagics (anchovy and sardine purse-seine) fishery: 2005
  • Invitation to comment on the draft policy for transfer of commercial fishing rights
  • OMP-08. Unpublished DAFF scientific working group document MCM/2008/SWG-PEL/23
  • A knowledge base for management of the capital-intensive fishery for small pelagic fish off South Africa
  • Efficacy of rights-based management of small pelagic fish within an ecosystems approach to fisheries in South Africa
  • Policy evolution in South African fisheries: the governance of the sector for small pelagics
  • What is good for the fishermen is good for the nation: co-management in the Norwegian fishing industry in the 1990s
  • Marine fisheries monitoring programmes in South Africa
  • Has reforming South African fisheries contributed to wealth redistribution and poverty alleviation?
  • Fisheries co-management: delegating government responsibility to fishermen's organisations
  • User participation in fisheries management: lessons drawn from international experiences
  • User-group participation in Norwegian fisheries management
  • Transforming ownership and governance: lessons from capital intensive pelagic fisheries in South Africa and Zimbabwe
  • Achieving transdisciplinary co-operation for EAF: a South African case study
  • EAF implementation in southern Africa: lessons learnt
  • Tracking the implementation of an ecosystem approach to fisheries in southern Africa
  • Transformation of South African industrial fisheries
  • Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 108 of 1996)
  • National Environmental Management Act (Act No. 107 of 1998)
  • Marine Living Resources Act (Act No. 18 of 1998)
  • Promotion of Access to Information Act (Act No. 2 of 2000)
  • National Small Business Amendment Act (Act No. 26 of 2003)
  • NEMA: Air Quality Act (Act No. 39 of 2004)
  • Policy for the transfer of commercial fishing rights
  • Fisheries co-management: a comparative analysis
  • Developing a science base for implementation of the ecosystems approach to fisheries in South Africa
  • Governance innovation and the citizen: the Janus face of governance-beyond-the-state
  • Co-governance in marine and coastal fisheries
  • Fisheries governance: a coming of age for fisheries social science?