4.7 Article

Mobility in the mangroves: Catch rates, daily decisions, and dynamics of artisanal fishing in a coastal commons

期刊

APPLIED GEOGRAPHY
卷 59, 期 -, 页码 98-106

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.12.008

关键词

Artisanal fisheries; Decision making; Common pool resource theory; Optimal foraging theory; Fisheries management; Ecuador

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [BCS-0819376]
  2. Wenner-Gren Foundation [8003]
  3. Institute for International Education Fulbright Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper integrates institutional theories of the commons with insights from geography and human behavioral ecology to explore the spatial and temporal dynamics of artisanal fishing in Ecuador's coastal mangrove swamps. The focus is on the cockle fishery commons characterized by a mixture of formal institutional arrangements and an informal division of fishing space that partially influences fisher decisions about where and when to fish. Individual decisions are further explained to a certain degree by the patch choice model since fishers often move on to new grounds when their catch rates fall below average. These optimizing strategies requiring rotation within a socially produced fishing space may contribute to resource renewal, perceived reliable returns for individuals, and a relative stability in fishing effort, potentially mitigating against resource depletion in open-access areas not managed as a common property regime. This study of the interaction between shellfish harvesters, cultural institutions, and the environment contributes to a spatially explicit theory of the commons and points to the crucial role of resource user mobility and dynamic cultural institutions for the ecological sustainability of shellfish fisheries. A better understanding of feedback between individual decision-making and the self-organization of a social-ecological system has critical implications for policy design and fisheries management at similar scales. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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