Towards Adaptive Co-management of Artisanal Fisheries in Coastal Uruguay

399 Pages·2013·6.46 MB·English

Towards Adaptive Co-management of Artisanal Fisheries
in Coastal Uruguay: Analysis of Barriers and Opportunities,
with Comparisons to Paraty (Brazil)

by

Micaela Trimble Nuñez

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies of
The University of Manitoba
in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Natural Resources Institute
Clayton H Riddell Faculty of Environment, Earth and Resources
University of Manitoba
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
R3T 2N2

Copyright © 2013 by Micaela Trimble Nuñez

i
ii
Abstract

The overall purpose of this research was to investigate barriers to and opportunities for adaptive
co-management of artisanal fisheries in coastal Uruguay, with comparisons to Paraty
(Southeastern Brazil). Following a qualitative approach, two case studies were developed; one in
the Piriápolis area (Río de la Plata coast) and one in Praia Grande/Ilha do Araújo (Rio de Janeiro
State), the former with more depth than the latter. Findings indicate that, first, artisanal fisheries
have been under a social-ecological crisis (e.g. catches have been declining; fishing effort has
increased; relationships among fishers have been eroded), opening windows of opportunity for
alternative management. Second, a multilevel social capital analysis conducted by studying the
relationships embedded in the bonding, bridging, and linking networks among fishery
stakeholders (artisanal fishers, fish buyers, unions, universities, NGOs, government agencies)
enabled the identification of more barriers than opportunities for co-management. For example,
fishers are only weakly organized, and these bonding connections at the local level were
undermined by conflict-laden linking relationships. Third, fishers from the two sites stated that
they would like to be involved in resource management, and the proposed fisheries law in
Uruguay (before the Parliament) would be an enabling policy for a consultative degree of
participation, through the creation of national and zonal councils. Nevertheless, the negative
impact that external agents have had on fishing communities are among the causes of low fisher
participation. Fourth, findings from a participatory research initiative involving fishery
stakeholders in Piriápolis (creating a multi-stakeholder body, POPA) showed that this approach
can help overcome some of the barriers to co-management. These barriers include conflict-
ridden relationships between fishers and the fisheries agency; stakeholders’ lack of capacity; and
weak fisher organization. Moreover, the case showed that participatory research can pave the
way for adaptive co-management by injecting a dynamic learning element into the early stages of
the collaborative process. These findings, as well as the multilevel conception of social capital,
represent contributions to adaptive co-management theory. The thesis identified contributions to
policy based on the barriers and opportunities found for this transition, and suggested areas for
further research.

i
Acknowledgements
The PhD process has been an extraordinary experience, and if somebody asked me if I
would do it again, I would definitely say Yes! These four years have been full of new experiences,
amazing people and wonderful places, all of which have helped me grow as a person.
My supervisor, Fikret Berkes, and committee members, Derek Johnson (University of
Manitoba), Marila Lázaro (Universidad de la República) and Cristiana Seixas (Universidade
Estadual de Campinas), have been very supportive. I really liked working with them throughout
the PhD process (instead of just meeting occasionally). Thank you all for being there when I
needed advice and guidance (and for trusting that I could work well from Uruguay)! Special
thanks to Marila for helping me find "my way" when I finished my Masters and was not sure what
to do. Since then she has been a constant companion! After I decided to work on fisher
participation (back in 2009), Stefan Gelcich from Chile suggested doing the PhD with Fikret, so I
thank him also. Ryan Plummer (External Examiner) made valuable contributions to this thesis.
Most importantly, my deepest gratitude goes to all the fishers from the Piriápolis area,
Praia Grande and Ilha do Araújo, and their families, for their unconditional support. Words are not
enough to thank them for all that they taught me. I also acknowledge the non-fisher stakeholders
from coastal Uruguay and Paraty who accepted to be interviewed for this research. Moreover, I
particularly thank each member of POPA (Por la Pesca Artesanal en Piriápolis) for their
commitment to the participatory research initiative, which was full of uncertainties but also
achievements! This experience has definitely changed my life, in a wonderful way. Special
thanks to Patricia Iribarne for her fantastic assistance in the field, including workshop facilitation.
Several friends from the NRI, from Winnipeg and Brazil, were great company during the
PhD process and my time in these countries (where part of my heart is!): Ale & Ryan, Andrés,
Jane, Jim, Joanne, Julia, Laura, Luciana, Luiz (my PhD buddy!), Marta, Melanie, Mya & Josh,
Prateep, Vinicius & Fernanda, and others! Some of them reviewed parts of this thesis and also
helped me improve my English. The maps were made by Ignacio Berro (Nacho) and Phillip
Miller. Jackie, Dalia, Tammy and Jason at the NRI were always very helpful.
My loved partner, Nacho, has been incredibly supportive. I cannot avoid mentioning that
he worked hard on building our tiny and wonderful house (the galpi-ranchi), in Piriápolis, while I
was in Brazil and Canada. The galpi-ranchi was just the perfect place to get inspiration to write
this thesis. I would also like to thank my friends in Uruguay (Majo in particular!), and most
importantly, my mom, dad and brothers, for their unconditional support.
Lastly, I acknowledge the financial support I received: University of Manitoba Graduate
Fellowship; UofM International Student Entrance Scholarship; Manitoba Graduate Scholarship;
and the IDRC/SSHRC International Research Chairs Initiative, Community-based resource
management and food security in coastal Brazil. The Canada Research Chair in Community-
Based Resource Management provided additional support.
ii
iii
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract ..........................................................................................................................................i
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. ii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ ix
List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xi
List of Boxes ............................................................................................................................ xi
List of Acronyms ..................................................................................................................... xii
Glossary of Terms.................................................................................................................. xiv

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1
1.1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1. From conventional fisheries management to adaptive co-management .............................. 1
1.1.2. Artisanal fisheries management in Uruguay and Brazil ....................................................... 4
1.2. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................ 5
1.3. OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH METHODS ............................................................................. 6
1.4. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH .................................................................................. 8
1.5. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH ............................................................... 9
1.6. ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS ..................................................................................... 10

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................................... 12
2.1. CO-MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE ......................................................................... 12
2.1.1. Co-management: What? When? What for? ...................................................................... 12
2.1.2. Evolution of co-management ........................................................................................... 13
2.1.3. Linking adaptive co-management to adaptive and interactive governance ........................ 22
2.1.4. Summary......................................................................................................................... 29
2.2. SOCIAL CAPITAL .............................................................................................................. 29
2.2.1. Social capital: What are we talking about? ....................................................................... 29
2.2.2. Social capital in natural resources and environmental management (NREM) ................... 31
2.2.3. Social capital – a critical reflection ................................................................................... 36
2.2.4. Summary......................................................................................................................... 37
2.3. PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH .......................................................................................... 38
2.3.1. What is participatory research?........................................................................................ 38
2.3.2. The positive side of participatory research: Is it faint due to numerous challenges? .......... 41
2.3.3. Participatory research and natural resources management .............................................. 42
2.3.4. Summary......................................................................................................................... 46
2.4. CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING THE RATIONALE OF THIS RESEARCH ......................... 46

CHAPTER 3: STUDY AREAS .................................................................................................. 49
3.1. FISHERIES IN URUGUAY ................................................................................................. 49
3.1.1. Fishery sectors (industrial vs. artisanal) ........................................................................... 49
3.1.2. Fisheries history .............................................................................................................. 51
3.1.3. Fisheries management .................................................................................................... 54
3.1.4. Artisanal fisheries in the Río de la Plata ........................................................................... 55
3.2. FISHERIES IN BRAZIL, WITH COMPARISONS TO URUGUAY......................................... 60
3.2.1. Paraty (Ilha Grande Bay) ................................................................................................. 62

CHAPTER 4: METHODS .......................................................................................................... 66
4.1. RESEARCH APPROACH................................................................................................... 66
4.1.1. Research worldview ........................................................................................................ 66
4.1.2. Research design (qualitative approach) and strategy of enquiry (case studies) ................ 67
4.2. FIELDWORK PHASES, TIMELINE AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS............................. 69
4.3. PHASE I (Objectives 1-3): DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES ....................................... 72
4.3.1. Participant observation .................................................................................................... 72
4.3.2. Semi-structured interviews with artisanal fishers .............................................................. 73
4.3.3. Semi-structured interviews with non-fisher stakeholders .................................................. 75
v
4.3.4. Document analysis .......................................................................................................... 77
4.4. PHASE II (Objective 4): PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN PIRIÁPOLIS ............................ 78
4.4.1. Organizing and facilitating the participatory research process .......................................... 79
4.4.2. Initial stages: topic selection and stakeholder convening .................................................. 81
4.4.3. Addressing the sea lions’ impact on artisanal fisheries ..................................................... 85
4.4.4. Addressing another major problem (pangasius imports): First Artisanal Fisheries Festival,
organized by POPA – Por la Pesca Artesanal en Piriápolis .............................................. 87
4.4.5. POPA’s activities after the First Artisanal Fisheries Festival ............................................. 92
4.4.6. Data collection procedures for investigating the participatory research case..................... 94
4.5. ANALYSIS AND VALIDATION OF DATA ........................................................................... 95

CHAPTER 5: CHANGES IN THE ARTISANAL FISHERY IN COASTAL URUGUAY ................ 96
5.1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 96
5.2. CHANGES IN FISHING RESOURCES ............................................................................... 96
5.2.1. Fishers’ perceptions about changes in fishing resources .................................................. 96
5.2.2. Perceptions from non-fisher stakeholders about changes in fishing resources ............... 102
5.3. CHANGES IN FISHING PRACTICES AND RELATIONSHIPS AMONG FISHERS ............ 104
5.3.1. Increased technology and fishing effort .......................................................................... 104
5.3.2. Fishers’ mobility along the coast according to fish movements ....................................... 106
5.3.3. Changes in relationships among fishers ......................................................................... 110
5.4. CHANGES IN DINARA FISHERIES POLICIES AND REGULATIONS .............................. 111
5.4.1. Increased DINARA attention to the artisanal fisheries sector .......................................... 112
5.4.2. Creation of a no-fishing zone within 300 meters off the shoreline ................................... 116
5.5. TRANSITION IN FISHERS’ WAY OF LIFE ....................................................................... 119
5.5.1. Fishing as a way of life .................................................................................................. 119
5.5.2. Looking towards the future ............................................................................................ 122
5.6. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 124
5.6.1. Social-ecological crisis in coastal artisanal fisheries in Uruguay ..................................... 125
5.6.2. Window of opportunity for improved fisheries management ............................................ 127
5.6.3. Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 129

CHAPTER 6: MULTILEVEL SOCIAL CAPITAL ANALYSIS IN ARTISANAL FISHERIES IN
URUGUAY .................................................................................................................... 130
6.1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 130
6.2. RELATIONSHIPS AMONG FISHERS: BONDING AND BRIDGING SOCIAL CAPITAL AT
THE LOCAL LEVEL....................................................................................................... 131
6.2.1. Solidarity and Reciprocity norms .................................................................................... 134
6.2.2. Local rules and norms related to fishing resources use .................................................. 137
6.2.3. Weak organization and collective action ........................................................................ 139
6.3. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FISHERS AND EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS: LINKING
SOCIAL CAPITAL ......................................................................................................... 143
6.3.1. Fishers’ relationship with fish buyers or middlemen ........................................................ 144
6.3.2. Fishers’ relationship with the National Union of Seamen (SUNTMA) .............................. 149
6.3.3. Fishers’ relationship with the National University and NGOs .......................................... 151
6.3.4. Fishers’ relationship with the Coast Guard (PNN) .......................................................... 153
6.3.5. Fishers’ relationship with the Port Authority (DNH) ......................................................... 156
6.3.6. Fishers’ relationship with the Municipal Government ...................................................... 158
6.3.7. Fishers’ relationship with DINARA ................................................................................. 160
6.4. RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS: BRIDGING SOCIAL CAPITAL
AT THE EXTERNAL LEVEL .......................................................................................... 167
6.4.1. Relationship between DINARA and SUNTMA ................................................................ 168
6.4.2. Relationship between DINARA and the Coast Guard (PNN) .......................................... 169
6.4.3. Relationship between DINARA and the Port Authority (DNH) ......................................... 171
6.4.4. Relationship between DINARA and Local Governments ................................................ 171
6.4.5. Relationship among PNN, DNH and the Local Government in Piriápolis ........................ 172
6.4.6. Inter-institutional linkages among government agencies................................................. 173
vi
6.5. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 174
6.5.1. Contributions of the multivelel social capital analysis ..................................................... 175
6.5.2. Fishers’ bonding, bridging and linking (interconnected) relationships .............................. 176
6.5.3. Government social capital: bonding and bridging at the external level ............................ 180
6.5.4. Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 181

CHAPTER 7: ARTISANAL FISHER PARTICIPATION IN DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES IN
URUGUAY .................................................................................................................... 183
7.1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 183
7.2. STAKEHOLDERS’ PERCEPTIONS ABOUT FISHER PARTICIPATION ........................... 184
7.2.1. The fishers’ perspectives ............................................................................................... 184
7.2.2. The perspectives of non-fisher stakeholders .................................................................. 186
7.3. GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES FOR FISHER PARTICIPATION ......................................... 189
7.3.1. Fisheries Consultative Meetings .................................................................................... 191
7.3.2. New fisheries law .......................................................................................................... 193
7.4. BARRIERS TO THE TRANSITION TOWARDS CO-MANAGEMENT ................................ 205
7.5. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 209
7.5.1. Opportunities for fisheries co-management .................................................................... 209
7.5.2. Challenges for fisheries co-management ....................................................................... 212
7.5.3. Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 215

CHAPTER 8: PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH IN THE PIRIÁPOLIS ARTISANAL FISHERY .. 216
8.1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 216
8.2. EVALUATION OF PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH ........................................................... 217
8.2.1. Evaluating participatory research through Process criteria ............................................. 218
8.2.2. Evaluating participatory research through Outcomes criteria .......................................... 233
8.2.3. Summarizing the evaluation of the participatory research initiative ................................. 240
8.2.4. Applicability of participatory research ............................................................................. 245
8.3. PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH FOR ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT ............................. 248
8.3.1. Participatory research and co-management as power sharing ....................................... 248
8.3.2. Participatory research and co-management as institution building .................................. 250
8.3.3. Participatory research and co-management as social capital building ............................ 251
8.3.4. Participatory research and co-management as process ................................................. 256
8.3.5. Participatory research and co-management as social learning and knowledge co-
production ..................................................................................................................... 257
8.3.6. Participatory research and co-management as problem solving ..................................... 261
8.3.7. Participatory research and co-management as governance ........................................... 262
8.3.8. What is lacking to achieve fisheries co-management in Piriápolis? ................................. 263
8.4. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 264
8.4.1. Lessons from evaluating the participatory research initiative in Piriápolis ....................... 264
8.4.2. Participatory research for transitioning to adaptive co-management ............................... 266
8.4.3. Towards the continuation of POPA and the replication of participatory research............. 268
8.4.4. Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 272

CHAPTER 9: PROCESSES AFFECTING THE EMERGENCE OF FISHERIES CO-
MANAGEMENT IN PARATY ......................................................................................... 273
9.1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 273
9.2. CHANGES IN THE FISHERY AS A SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEM ............................. 273
9.2.1. Fishers’ job and way of life ............................................................................................ 273
9.2.2. Changes in fish resources, fishing practices and climate ................................................ 275
9.2.3. Changes in fishers’ livelihoods ....................................................................................... 276
9.2.4. Looking towards the future ............................................................................................ 278
9.3. MULTILEVEL SOCIAL CAPITAL: BONDING, BRIDGING AND LINKING
RELATIONSHIPS .......................................................................................................... 279
9.3.1. Relationships among fishers: bonding and bridging social capital ................................... 280
9.3.2. Relationships between fishers and external stakeholders: linking social capital .............. 289
vii
9.4. FISHERS’ ACTUAL AND DESIRED PARTICIPATION IN DECISION-MAKING ................ 299
9.4.1. Fishers’ perspective regarding their participation in fisheries management ..................... 300
9.4.2. Fishers’ willingness to participate in decision-making ..................................................... 303
9.4.3. Reasons behind low fisher participation in meetings with the government ...................... 304
9.4.4. Towards higher fisher participation in co-management................................................... 307
9.5. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................... 308
9.5.1. Through the transition of artisanal fisheries .................................................................... 308
9.5.2. Relationships among fishery stakeholders: barriers to co-management?........................ 311
9.5.3. Fisheries co-management in Paraty: one or two to tango? ............................................. 316
9.5.4. Conclusions .................................................................................................................. 317

CHAPTER 10: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ............................................................... 319
10.1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 319
10.2. MAIN RESEARCH FINDINGS ........................................................................................ 319
10.3. BARRIERS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT .................... 323
10.3.1. Fishers’ migration as a striking challenge ..................................................................... 325
10.3.2. Overcoming barriers through participatory research and co-management .................... 328
10.4. CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE THESIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 331
10.4.1. Theoretical contributions .............................................................................................. 331
10.4.2. Methodological contributions ....................................................................................... 333
10.4.3. Policy contributions...................................................................................................... 335
10.4.4. Recommendations for future research ......................................................................... 337
10.5. CONCLUDING REMARKS ............................................................................................. 338

LITERATURE CITED .............................................................................................................. 340

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................ 358
Appendix 1. Guide used during interviews (in Spanish) with fishers in Piriápolis (Uruguay) ...... 358
Appendix 2. Guide used during interviews (in Portuguese) with fishers in Paraty (Brazil) ......... 364
Appendix 3. Pictures of the participatory research initiative in Piriápolis ................................... 366
Appendix 4. Guides for planning and facilitating participatory research workshops ..................368
Appendix 5. Protocol generated collectively by the participatory research group (POPA)
to study the sea lion impact on long-lines.............................................................. 372
Appendix 6. Brochures (triptychs) produced by POPA and distributed to every visitor of the
First Artisanal Fisheries Festival in Piriápolis (February 2012) .............................. 376
Appendix 7. Press release regarding the First Artisanal Fisheries Festival in Piriápolis, on
the front page of the national newspaper La Diaria ............................................... 378
Appendix 8. Interview guide (translated from Spanish) of the final interviews with POPA
members in Piriápolis ........................................................................................... 380

viii