Diagnosis and the management constituency of small-scale fisheries

Diagnosis and adaptive management can help improve the ability of small-scale fisheries (SSF) in the developing world. This paper presents a framework for diagnosis and adaptive management and discusses ways of implementing the first two phases of learning: diagnosis and mobilising an appropriate management constituency. The authors highlight key issues, suitable approaches and tools and sources of information to better manage SSF in the developing world. Reform efforts are based on the assumption that fisheries management is not working and needs revamping.

The paper identifies the following learning phases:

• bringing management processes closer to the realities of a particular fishery system
• involving and empowering all relevant stakeholders will improve social feedback mechanisms and will contribute to the legitimacy and durability of management decisions
• forming a management constituency includes the purposeful facilitation of interactions, supported by structures, which facilitate knowledge exchange, networking, learning and innovation.         

Fishery systems are complex because they have non-linear and unpredictable dynamics. Fundamentals of fisheries management include assessment, setting objectives, designing performance indicators, and monitoring and evaluation. The systems perspective takes into account the social and natural dimensions of fisheries. The diagnostic process identifies and analyses strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats from the natural system, people and livelihoods, governance and institutions, and external drivers. Threats and opportunities are clarified and prioritised, and a management constituency brings in stakeholders most concerned with issues specific to fishery. The participatory diagnosis and adaptive management (PDAM) framework is suitable for achieving SSF results. Implementation frameworks tailored to the special demands of SSF in the developing world can address some of the constraints like poor research capacity, stakeholder marginalisation, and vulnerability to external threats.

The paper concludes with the following observations: 

• systems that enhance flexibility, diversity, and sensitivity of feedback and learning should be supported
• the process will improve fisheries management when it enables more adaptive and legitimate management of fishery-specific risk
• the diagnostic process will trigger transformation of fisheries management to focus more on reducing internal weaknesses and defense against external threats that are beyond the control of fisheries managers
• 'management’ must move beyond the control and manipulation of resources for productivity and stability, and beyond blueprint approaches
• panaceas are inappropriate for the fisheries management problem and, instead, diagnostic approaches that seek to contextualise fisheries and seek appropriate entry points are proposed.