4.6 Article

Livelihood strategies in a marine extractive reserve: Implications for conservation interventions

Journal

MARINE POLICY
Volume 59, Issue -, Pages 44-52

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.05.004

Keywords

Extractive reserve; Livelihoods; Artisanal fisheries; Institutions; Brazil

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant (DDRI) [BSC-1234156]
  2. Department of Geography
  3. NSF IGERT Applied Biodiversity Sciences (ABS) Program at Texas AM University [DGE-0654377]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The marine extractive reserve (RESEX), a sustainable use and co-management conservation instrument, is increasingly being established in coastal Brazil because of international and national pressure to protect coastal-marine environments. RESEX establishment is producing ambiguous outcomes despite claims of protecting rural livelihoods. This paper presents the case of the Cassuruba RESEX and demonstrates that a recent fishery agreement contradicts with fisherfolk livelihood diversification strategies and produces differentiated impacts on households. The findings are drawn from mixed methods adapting a household livelihoods approach to develop household typologies. Three household typologies emerged: (1) high market orientation, high income, (2) low market orientation, low income, and (3) high market orientation, low income. Low income households are the most impacted by new institutions that contradict with temporal and spatial livelihood diversification strategies of resource users. Also, they have lost fishing grounds, material assets (gear), and access to subsistence farmland. These findings support claims that sustainable use conservation agendas need to better consider the differential livelihood strategies of fisherfolk, and other resource users, or efforts for livelihood protection and improvement will be undermined. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available