IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/natres/v44y2020i2p144-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A participatory decision making framework for artisanal fisheries collaborative governance: Insights from management committees in Chile

Author

Listed:
  • Rodrigo A. Estévez
  • Carlos Veloso
  • Gabriel Jerez
  • Stefan Gelcich

Abstract

Fisheries management is increasingly transitioning towards collaborative governance. Collaborative systems depend on stakeholders’ capacity to design and implement legitimate and scientifically robust management plans within collective action arenas. Here we propose that collaborative governance outcomes, in fisheries management, will benefit from using structured participatory decision making frameworks that enhance deliberative thinking among stakeholders. We tested our approach in the artisanal fishery of Chile, an important producer of marine resources. Recently in 2013, Chile made important changes to fisheries policies by creating multi‐sectorial management committees to manage de facto open access fishing areas. We applied a structured decision making framework to inform the restructuring of a management plan within a committee. As a result, we identified goals,objectives and indicators, including social, economic, biological and ecological dimensions; we explored tradeoffs, assessing the relative importance of the objectives; finally, we created scenarios and prioritized alternatives, reflecting on the interplay between self‐regulation and government control. Members of the management committee were able to rationalize the different steps of the framework and identify ways forward which highlighted the importance of self‐regulation in comparison to central authorities’ control. We concluded that structured decision making promotes spaces for rational analysis of alternatives costs and benefits. Promoting deliberative thinking in fisheries management can improve equity, legitimacy and sustainability of collaborative governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodrigo A. Estévez & Carlos Veloso & Gabriel Jerez & Stefan Gelcich, 2020. "A participatory decision making framework for artisanal fisheries collaborative governance: Insights from management committees in Chile," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 44(2), pages 144-160, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:natres:v:44:y:2020:i:2:p:144-160
    DOI: 10.1111/1477-8947.12200
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-8947.12200
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1477-8947.12200?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ralph L. Keeney & Robin S. Gregory, 2005. "Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-11, February.
    2. Estévez, Rodrigo A. & Gelcich, Stefan, 2015. "Participative multi-criteria decision analysis in marine management and conservation: Research progress and the challenge of integrating value judgments and uncertainty," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-7.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodrigo A. Estévez & Stefan Gelcich, 2021. "Public Officials’ Knowledge of Advances and Gaps for Implementing the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries in Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.

    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. Rodrigo A. Estévez & Valeria Espinoza & Roberto D. Ponce Oliva & Felipe Vásquez-Lavín & Stefan Gelcich, 2021. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Renewable Energies: Research Trends, Gaps and the Challenge of Improving Participation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Auriel M. V. Fournier & R. Randy Wilson & Jeffrey S. Gleason & Evan M. Adams & Janell M. Brush & Robert J. Cooper & Stephen J. DeMaso & Melanie J. L. Driscoll & Peter C. Frederick & Patrick G. R. Jodi, 2023. "Structured Decision Making to Prioritize Regional Bird Monitoring Needs," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 207-217, May.
    3. Timothy L. McDaniels & Stephanie E. Chang & David Hawkins & Gerard Chew & Holly Longstaff, 2015. "Towards disaster-resilient cities: an approach for setting priorities in infrastructure mitigation efforts," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 252-263, June.
    4. Carland, Corinne & Goentzel, Jarrod & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2018. "Modeling the values of private sector agents in multi-echelon humanitarian supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 269(2), pages 532-543.
    5. Jay Simon & Donald Saari & Donald Saari, 2020. "Interdependent Altruistic Preference Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 17(3), pages 189-207, September.
    6. Gönenç Yücel & Catherine Miluska Chiong Meza, 2008. "Studying transition dynamics via focusing on underlying feedback interactions," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 320-349, December.
    7. Yang, Guo-liang & Rousseau, Ronald & Yang, Li-ying & Liu, Wen-bin, 2014. "A study on directional returns to scale," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 628-641.
    8. Robin Gregory & Doug Easterling & Nicole Kaechele & William Trousdale, 2016. "Values‐Based Measures of Impacts to Indigenous Health," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(8), pages 1581-1588, August.
    9. Richard M. Anderson & Robert Clemen, 2013. "Toward an Improved Methodology to Construct and Reconcile Decision Analytic Preference Judgments," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(2), pages 121-134, June.
    10. Cleemput, Irina & Devriese, Stephan & Kohn, Laurence & Westhovens, René, 2018. "A multi-criteria decision approach for ranking unmet needs in healthcare," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(8), pages 878-884.
    11. Liu, Shuang & Proctor, Wendy & Cook, David, 2010. "Using an integrated fuzzy set and deliberative multi-criteria evaluation approach to facilitate decision-making in invasive species management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2374-2382, October.
    12. Ralph L. Keeney, 2007. "Modeling Values for Anti‐Terrorism Analysis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(3), pages 585-596, June.
    13. Abbas, Ali E. & Hupman, Andrea C., 2023. "Scale dependence in weight and rate multicriteria decision methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 309(1), pages 225-235.
    14. Cairns, George & Goodwin, Paul & Wright, George, 2016. "A decision-analysis-based framework for analysing stakeholder behaviour in scenario planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 1050-1062.
    15. Jamie Donatuto & Larry Campbell & Robin Gregory, 2016. "Developing Responsive Indicators of Indigenous Community Health," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-16, September.
    16. Angelis, Aris & Kanavos, Panos, 2017. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 137-156.
    17. Cinelli, Marco & Kadziński, Miłosz & Miebs, Grzegorz & Gonzalez, Michael & Słowiński, Roman, 2022. "Recommending multiple criteria decision analysis methods with a new taxonomy-based decision support system," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 302(2), pages 633-651.
    18. Failing, L. & Gregory, R. & Harstone, M., 2007. "Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: A decision-focused approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 47-60, October.
    19. de Castro, Mónica & Urios, Vicente, 2017. "A critical review of multi-criteria decision making in protected areas," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 16(02), January.
    20. Robin Gregory & Baruch Fischhoff & Tim McDaniels, 2005. "Acceptable Input: Using Decision Analysis to Guide Public Policy Deliberations," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 4-16, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:natres:v:44:y:2020:i:2:p:144-160. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1477-8947 .

    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.