4.6 Article

Pathways to establishing managed access and networks of reserves

期刊

MARINE POLICY
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104580

关键词

Managed access; Marine reserves; Fisheries; Laws

资金

  1. Bloomberg Philanthropies Vibrant Ocean Initiative, United States

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Specifying user rights and devolving fisheries management decisions to local fishers and communities has been proven effective in enhancing fisheries management. Rare's Fish Forever program supports legal and functional community rights-based management, ensuring exclusive access rights to coastal fisheries through managed access with reserves. Establishment and implementation of managed access with reserves involve a mix of legal, regulatory, and institutional pathways, such as partnerships with leaders and community engagement, local champions, and scaling up from experience.
The specification of user rights and the devolution of fisheries management and allocation decisions to the local fisher and community level has been found to be an effective approach to improved fisheries management. Rare's Fish Forever's policy and governance work supports and strengthens legal and functional community rightsbased management and exclusive access rights to coastal fisheries through managed access with reserves (MA+R). This paper presents an analysis of the legal, regulatory and institutional pathways undertaken to establish MA+R in Brazil, Indonesia and the Philippines for local communities to secure and strengthen both legal and functional access rights to fisheries resources. The pathways used involved interpreting and adapting a mix of fisheries, marine conservation, marine protected area and government administrative and legal instruments at national and local levels. Several common pathways to establishing and implementing MA+R were identified including partnerships and engagement with leaders and community members, committed local champions and scaling up from experience.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据