The Fisheries Co-management Approach: Critiques and Theoretical Framework of the Research

  • Hoang Viet Thang


This chapter provides a critical analysis of co-management scholars’ thinking on the role of the state. In doing so, it refers to the definition of power by Dahl, in which “A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would not otherwise do.” The chapter then discusses state capacities in order to challenge the view that the state is equal with other actors in fisheries co-management arrangements. Based on critiques of Ostrom’s approach, co-management scholars’ thinking and the state-centric concept of meta-governance, it produces a research framework to investigate three selected case studies in fisheries co-management in Japan, Vietnam and Norway.


  1. Agrawal, A. 2003. Sustainable Governance of Common-Pool Resources: Context, Methods, and Politics. Annual Review of Anthropology 32: 243–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell, Stephen, and Andrew Hindmoor. 2009. Rethinking Governance. Cambridge: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berkes, Fikret. 1994. Co-management: Bridging the Two Solitudes. Northern Perspect 22 (2–3): 18–20.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 2007. Adaptive Co-management and Complexity: Exploring the Many Faces of Co-management. In Adaptive Co-management: Collaboration, Learning, and Multi-level Governance, ed. D. Armitage, F. Berkes, and N. Doubleday. Vancouver: UBS Press.Google Scholar
  5. ———. 2009. Evolution of Co-management: Role of Knowledge Generation, Bridging Organizations and Social Learning. Journal of Environmental Management 90: 1692–1702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ———. 2010. Devolution of Environment and Resources Governance: Trends and Future. Environmental Conservation 37 (4): 489–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berque, Joannes, and Osamu Matsuda. 2013. Coastal Biodiversity Management in Japanese Satoumi. Marine Policy 39: 191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlsson, L., and F. Berkes. 2005. Co-management: Concepts and Methodological Implications. Journal of Environmental Management 75: 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carswell, G. 2003. Continuities in Environmental Narratives: The Case of Kabale, Uganda, 1930–2000. Environmental History 9 (1): 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dahl, Robert. 1957. The Concept of Power. Behavioural Science 2: 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Delaney, Alyne Elizabeth. 2015. Japanese Fishing Cooperative Associations: Governance in an Era of Consolidation. In Interactive Governance for Small-Scale Fisheries, ed. S. Jentoft and R. Chuenpagdee. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
  12. Folke, Carl, Thomas Hahn, Per Olsson, and Jon Norberg. 2005. Adaptive Governance of Social-Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 30: 441–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Griffin, L. 2009. Scales of Knowledge: North Sea Fisheries Governance, the Local Fisherman and the European Scientist. Environmental Politics 18 (4): 557–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hart, Jeffrey. 1976. Three Approaches to the Measurement of Power in International Relations. International Organisation 30 (2): 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hobson, John. 2000. The State and International Relations. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Isaacs, M. 2012. Recent Progress in Understanding Small-Scale Fisheries in Southern Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 4: 338–343. Accessed 20 Apr 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jentoft, Svein. 2005. Fisheries Co-management as Empowerment. Marine Policy 29: 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. ———. 2007. In the Power of Power: The Understated Aspect of Fisheries and Coastal Management. Human Organization 66 (4): 426–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jentoft, Svein, and Ratana Chuenpagdee. 2015. Assessing Governability of Small-scale Fisheries. In Interactive Governance for Small-Scale Fisheries, ed. S. Jentoft and R. Chuenpagdee. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jentoft, S., K.H. Mikalsen, and H.K. Hernes. 2003. Representation in Fisheriesco-management. In The Fisheries Co-management Experience: Accomplishments, Challenges and Prospects, ed. D.C. Wilson, J.R. Nielsen, and P. Degnbol. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  21. Knoke, David. 1990. Political Networks: The Structural Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Krasner, Stephen. 1985. Approaches to the State: Alternative Conceptions and Historical Dynamics. Comparative Politics 16: 223–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Linke, Sebastian, and Karl Bruckmeier. 2015. Co-management in Fisheries—Experiences and Changing Approaches in Europe. Ocean and Coastal Management 104: 170–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lister, Michael, and D. Marsh. 2006. Conclusion. In The State: Theories and Issues, ed. C. Hay, M. Lister, and D. Marsh. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  25. Makino, Mitsutaku, and Hiroyuki Matsuda. 2005. Co-management in Japanese Coastal Fisheries: Institutional Features and Transaction Costs. Marine Policy 29: 441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mann, Michael. 1988. States, War and Capitalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Mikalsen, Knut H., Hans-Kristian Hernes, and Svein Jentoft. 2007. Leaning on User-Groups: The Role of Civil Society in Fisheries Governance. Marine Policy 31: 201–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nielsen, Jesper Raakjær, Degnbola Poul, K. Kuperan Viswanathanb, Mahfuzuddin Ahmedb, Mafaniso Harac, and Nik Mustapha Raja Abdullah. 2004. Fisheries Co-management—An Institutional Innovation? Lessons from South East Asia and Southern Africa. Marine Policy 28: 151–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nielsen, Jesper Raakjær, and Tomas Vedsmand. 1999. User Participation and Institutional Change in Fisheries Management: A Viable Alternative to the Failures of a Top-down Driven Control? Ocean and Coastal Management 42 (1): 19–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institution for Collective Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pinkerton, Evelyn. 2003. Toward Specificity in Complexity: Understanding Comanagement from a Social Science Perspective. In The Fisheries Co-management Experience, ed. D.C. Wilson, J.R. Nielson, and P. Degnbol. Accessed 5 August 2014.Google Scholar
  32. Pomeroy, Robert S. 1995. Community-based and Co-management Institutions for Sustainable Coastal Fisheries Management in Southeast Asia. Ocean and Coastal Management 27: 143–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. ———. 2001. Devolution and Fisheries Co-management. In Collective Action, Property Rights and Devolution of Natural Resource: Exchange of Knowledge and Implication for Policy, ed. R. Meinzen-Dick, A. Knox, and Di Gregorio. Feldafing, Germany: M. DSE/GTZ. Accessed 1 July 2014.Google Scholar
  34. Pomeroy, Robert S., and Fikret Berkes. 1997. Two to Tango: The Role of Government in Fisheries Co-management. Marine Policy 21 (5): 465–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pomeroy, Robert S., Len Garces, Michael Pido, and Geronimo Silvestre. 2010. Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management in Small-scale Tropical Marine Fisheries: Emerging Models of Governance Arrangements in the Philippines. Marine Policy 34: 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pomeroy, R.S., and R. Rivera-Guieb. 2006. Fisheries Co-management: A Practical Handbook. Cambridge: International Development Research Center.Google Scholar
  37. Sandström, Annica, and Carl Rova. 2010. Adaptive Co-management Networks: A Comparative Analysis of Two Fishery Conservation Areas in Sweden. Ecology and Society 15 (3): 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sen, Sevaly. 1997. The Evolution of High-Seas Fisheries Management in the North-East Atlantic. Ocean and Coastal Management 35 (2–3): 85–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sen, S., and J. Raakjær Nielsen. 1996. Fisheries Co-management: A Comparative Analysis. Marine Policy 20 (5): 405–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Skocpol, T. 1985. Bringing the State Back In: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research. In Bringing the State Back In, ed. P.B. Evans, D. Rueschemeyer, and T. Skocpol. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Sørensen, Eva. 2006. Meta-Governance: The Changing Role of Politician in Processes of Democratic Governance. American Review of Public Administration 36: 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sowman, M., D. Scott, L.J.F. Green, M.M. Hara, M. Hauck, K. Kirsten, B. Paterson, et al. 2013. Shallow Waters: Social Science Research in South Africa’s Marine Environment. African Journal of Marine Science 35 (3): 385–402. Accessed 20 Aug 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wamukota, A., J.E. Cinner, and T.R. McClanahan. 2012. Co-management of Coral Reef Fisheries: A Critical Evaluation of the Literature. Marine Policy 36 (2012): 481–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Whitehead, M. 2003. ‘In the Shadow of Hierarchy’: Meta-governance, Policy Reform and Urban Regeneration in the West Midlands. Area 35 (1): 6–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wilson, D.C., J. Raakjær, and P. Degnbol. 2006. Local Ecological Knowledge and Practical Fisheries Management in the Tropics: FA Policy Brief. Marine Policy 30 (6): 794–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hoang Viet Thang
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Political Science and International StudiesUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations