IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i5p1464-d145065.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysing Ecosystem User Perceptions of the Governance Interactions Surrounding a Brazilian Near Shore Coral Reef

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Glaser

    (Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT), 28359 Bremen, Germany)

  • Philipp Gorris

    (Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT), 28359 Bremen, Germany
    Institute of Environmental Systems Research (IUSF), Osnabrueck University (UOS), 49076 Osnabrueck, Germany)

  • Beatrice Padovani Ferreira

    (Federal University of Pernambuco (UFPE), Oceanography Department, 50740-550 Recife, Brazil)

  • Annette Breckwoldt

    (Leibniz Centre for Tropical Marine Research (ZMT), 28359 Bremen, Germany
    Alfred Wegener Institute Helmholtz Center for Polar and Marine Research (AWI), 27570 Bremerhaven, Germany)

Abstract

This study focuses on understanding stakeholder perceptions in environmental governance and management. Based on an application of the net-mapping method as the main approach for a comparative analysis of local ecosystem users’ perceptions, this research elucidates subjective local realities of fishers and tourism operators in two study sites of the governance system of a marine protected area in Northeast Brazil. The findings showed that fishers and tourism operators see themselves as part of specific webs of social relations with associated power asymmetries. The perceived governance interaction networks varied between stakeholder groups, since they see reef governance in relation to their own interests and vulnerabilities. These variations in perception set the scene for different actions. The results of this comparative study show that where ecosystem users perceived the environmental rule system to be equitable and legitimate, its implementation was enhanced, where they did not, it was fraught with difficulties. This points to the potential for applying a systematic approach for differentiating perceptions, and their change over time, as behavioural drivers to strengthen future sustainability research. The article concludes with reflections on net-mapping as a tool for analysing perceptions on environmental governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Glaser & Philipp Gorris & Beatrice Padovani Ferreira & Annette Breckwoldt, 2018. "Analysing Ecosystem User Perceptions of the Governance Interactions Surrounding a Brazilian Near Shore Coral Reef," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1464-:d:145065
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1464/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/5/1464/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Macedo, Heitor Schulz & Vivacqua, Melissa & Rodrigues, Helio Castro Lima & Gerhardinger, Leopoldo Cavaleri, 2013. "Governing wide coastal-marine protected territories: A governance analysis of the Baleia Franca Environmental Protection Area in South Brazil," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 118-125.
    2. Pomeroy, Robert S & Berkes, Fikret, 1997. "Two to tango: The role of government in fisheries co-management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 465-480, September.
    3. Rogerson, Jennifer J.M., 2015. "Being heard: Thinking through different versions of rationality, epistemological policing and dissonances in marine conservation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 325-330.
    4. Berghöfer, Augustin & Wittmer, Heidi & Rauschmayer, Felix, 2008. "Stakeholder participation in ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries management: A synthesis from European research projects," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 243-253, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashley Peiffer & Michael Harte, 2023. "Development from a distance: Exploring an international non‐profit's interactions with communities during the COVID‐19 pandemic," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(6), pages 979-994, August.
    2. Hamilton-Hart, Natasha & Stringer, Christina, 2016. "Upgrading and exploitation in the fishing industry: Contributions of value chain analysis," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 166-171.
    3. Mohammad Mojibul Hoque Mozumder & Aili Pyhälä & Md. Abdul Wahab & Simo Sarkki & Petra Schneider & Mohammad Mahmudul Islam, 2020. "Governance and Power Dynamics in a Small-Scale Hilsa Shad ( Tenualosa ilisha ) Fishery: A Case Study from Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-24, July.
    4. Barbara Quimby & Arielle Levine, 2018. "Participation, Power, and Equity: Examining Three Key Social Dimensions of Fisheries Comanagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Asproudis, Elias & Filippiadis, Eleftherios, 2021. "Bargaining for Community Fishing Quotas," MPRA Paper 107409, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Stefanie Engel & Charles Palmer & Alexander Pfaff, 2013. "On the Endogeneity of Resource Co-management: Theory and Evidence from Indonesia," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(2), pages 308-329.
    7. Fiona Nunan, 2007. "Reducing poverty through fisheries co-management: an analysis of design and intentions in Uganda," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(8), pages 1151-1164.
    8. Suéskeviécs, Monika, 2010. "Legitimacy analysis of multi-level governance of biodiversity: Evidence from 12 case studies across the EU," UFZ Discussion Papers 10/2010, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).
    9. Bockstael, Erika, 2017. "Critical Capacity Development: An Action Research Approach in Coastal Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 336-345.
    10. Plummer, Ryan & Armitage, Derek, 2007. "A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive co-management: Linking ecology, economics and society in a complex world," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 62-74, February.
    11. Sultana, Parvin & Thompson, Paul M., 2013. "Natural resource conflicts and community organizations in Bangladesh," CAPRi working papers 111, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    12. Gladun Elena & Chebotarev Gennady, 2015. "Participation of the Northern Indigenous Peoples in the Management of the Russian Arctic Territories and Its Legal Protection," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 8(1), pages 111-133, June.
    13. Fred A. Johnson & Mitchell J. Eaton & James H. Williams & Gitte H. Jensen & Jesper Madsen, 2015. "Training Conservation Practitioners to be Better Decision Makers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-20, June.
    14. Sander Van den Burg & Marian Stuiver & Jenny Norrman & Rita Garção & Tore Söderqvist & Christine Röckmann & Jan-Joost Schouten & Ole Petersen & Raul Guanche García & Pedro Diaz-Simal & Mark De Bel & L, 2016. "Participatory Design of Multi-Use Platforms at Sea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, January.
    15. Espectato, L.N., 2007. "Co-managing shared waters: a coastal governance experience of Western Visayas Region, Philippines," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 37462, April.
    16. Osei-Tutu, Paul & Pregernig, Michael & Pokorny, Benno, 2015. "Interactions between formal and informal institutions in community, private and state forest contexts in Ghana," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-35.
    17. Katrina J Davis & Marit E Kragt & Stefan Gelcich & Michael Burton & Steven Schilizzi & David J Pannell, 2017. "Why are Fishers not Enforcing Their Marine User Rights?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 661-681, August.
    18. Marian Stuiver & Sander van den Burg & Wenting Chen & Claire Haggett & David Rudolph & Phoebe Koundouri, 2020. "Stakeholder involvement in technological design: Lessons learned from the MERMAID and TROPOS projects," DEOS Working Papers 2019, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    19. Guanais, José Hugo Gondim & Medeiros, Rodrigo Pereira & McConney, Patrick A., 2015. "Designing a framework for addressing bycatch problems in Brazilian small-scale trawl fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 111-118.
    20. Dey, M.M. & Kanagaratnam, U., 2007. "Community based management of small scale fisheries in Asia: Bridging the gap between fish supply and demand," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 37170, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:5:p:1464-:d:145065. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.