139
8 Applying the Governability Concept in Fisheries…
viewpoint of a governing system, highlighting again the effects of diversity, complexity,
dynamics and scale. Kooiman and Chuenpagdee ( 2005 , 328) explain: “The governing system and the framework of actors engaged in governing are often as diverse,
complex, and dynamic as the system to be governed.” These features greatly
in fl uence its potential performance.
Theorists argue that a governing system makes use of elements – images, instruments and willpower, or action – for its operation (Kooiman 2003 ) . Ideally, the
governing system also possesses various ‘levels’ or ‘orders’ of functioning.
Managers at the ground level make decisions about routine and urgent issues, applying the tools that they have available in accordance with their estimation of risks and
opportunities. At a secondary, institutional level, governors re fl ect on and adapt the
rules and organizational structures at their disposal. Thirdly, at a meta-governance
level, discussions take place on the basic values, principles and norms that should
drive governance activity (Kooiman and Jentoft 2009 ).
In the pages below, we discuss the diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale of
governing system under three headings. Diversity is considered from the perspective of legal pluralism, which argues that societal systems often possess multiple
sources of law. The degree of legal pluralism in a fi sheries system impacts its governability. We then present complexity and scale from the viewpoint of institutional
nestedness. Finally, we consider the dynamics of a governing system through the
notion of institutional adaptability and learning.
Diversities in Legal Pluralism
Governors are the people or organizations that address societal problems and opportunities. Our approach allows for the inclusion of part-time or incidental governors
in addition to full-time ones. It suggests the existence of informal governors – without uniforms, of fi ces and business cards – operating next to of fi cial governors with
formal mandates. Additionally, it notes that community and market institutions
coexist with governmental frameworks. All these governors have opinions about
and undertake action with regard to societal problems and opportunities. Together,
these actors constitute the diversity of the governing system.
Governors are of course not completely free in their choice of action. As pointed
out before, governing actors are constrained or enabled by conditions in their social
and natural environments. These conditions include a range of institutions and,
more speci fi cally, the rules of the game (North 1991 ) . Such rules generally do not
come singly. Instead they are coupled in sets that can be analyzed as legal systems.
Contrary to a formal de fi nition of law, such legal systems may be anchored outside
of government in realms such as religion, ethnicity or professional life.
Scholars in the fi eld of legal pluralism argue that most societies are characterized
by some form of legal pluralism (Merry 1988 ; von Benda-Beckmann 2002 ) , i.e. the
incidence of multiple legal systems applying to similar situations (Vanderlinden
1971 ) . This is certainly the case for fi sheries. There are numerous descriptions of
strong, non-state legal systems governing fi sheries that are connected to speci fi c
8 Applying the Governability Concept in Fisheries…
viewpoint of a governing system, highlighting again the effects of diversity, complexity,
dynamics and scale. Kooiman and Chuenpagdee ( 2005 , 328) explain: “The governing system and the framework of actors engaged in governing are often as diverse,
complex, and dynamic as the system to be governed.” These features greatly
in fl uence its potential performance.
Theorists argue that a governing system makes use of elements – images, instruments and willpower, or action – for its operation (Kooiman 2003 ) . Ideally, the
governing system also possesses various ‘levels’ or ‘orders’ of functioning.
Managers at the ground level make decisions about routine and urgent issues, applying the tools that they have available in accordance with their estimation of risks and
opportunities. At a secondary, institutional level, governors re fl ect on and adapt the
rules and organizational structures at their disposal. Thirdly, at a meta-governance
level, discussions take place on the basic values, principles and norms that should
drive governance activity (Kooiman and Jentoft 2009 ).
In the pages below, we discuss the diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale of
governing system under three headings. Diversity is considered from the perspective of legal pluralism, which argues that societal systems often possess multiple
sources of law. The degree of legal pluralism in a fi sheries system impacts its governability. We then present complexity and scale from the viewpoint of institutional
nestedness. Finally, we consider the dynamics of a governing system through the
notion of institutional adaptability and learning.
Diversities in Legal Pluralism
Governors are the people or organizations that address societal problems and opportunities. Our approach allows for the inclusion of part-time or incidental governors
in addition to full-time ones. It suggests the existence of informal governors – without uniforms, of fi ces and business cards – operating next to of fi cial governors with
formal mandates. Additionally, it notes that community and market institutions
coexist with governmental frameworks. All these governors have opinions about
and undertake action with regard to societal problems and opportunities. Together,
these actors constitute the diversity of the governing system.
Governors are of course not completely free in their choice of action. As pointed
out before, governing actors are constrained or enabled by conditions in their social
and natural environments. These conditions include a range of institutions and,
more speci fi cally, the rules of the game (North 1991 ) . Such rules generally do not
come singly. Instead they are coupled in sets that can be analyzed as legal systems.
Contrary to a formal de fi nition of law, such legal systems may be anchored outside
of government in realms such as religion, ethnicity or professional life.
Scholars in the fi eld of legal pluralism argue that most societies are characterized
by some form of legal pluralism (Merry 1988 ; von Benda-Beckmann 2002 ) , i.e. the
incidence of multiple legal systems applying to similar situations (Vanderlinden
1971 ) . This is certainly the case for fi sheries. There are numerous descriptions of
strong, non-state legal systems governing fi sheries that are connected to speci fi c