156
P. Onyango and S. Jentoft
operate, their development partners and academics (Smith 1979 ; Copes 1989 ; World
Bank 1992 ; Cunningham 1993 ; Béné 2003, 2004 ; FAO 2005 ; Jentoft and Eide
2011 ) . For instance, poverty has been perceived to occur in fi shing communities as
a result of a decline in fi sheries resources brought about by overexploitation. This is
an argument that rests on a conceptualization of sustainable fi sheries in which overexploitation occurs when the rate of fi shing exceeds the capacity of the natural
environment to replenish (Gordon 1954 ; Beverton and Holt 1957 ) . An alternative
explanation is that poverty is in itself a cause of overexploitation (Béné 2003 ) :
Small-scale fi shers, who are generally poor, will overexploit fi sheries resources as
they seek to meet their livelihood needs. Similarly, small-scale fi sheries may be
“an occupation of last resort” for people who cannot feed themselves in other sectors
and are thus attracted by the opportunity to take up a new livelihood in fi sheries
(Onyango 2011 ) .
To confront poverty among small-scale fi shers, the adoption of a sustainable
management system for the harvesting of fi sh resources is perceived by many as
paramount (WCED 1987 ; Jalal 1993 ) . Although it may be a necessary thing to
do, management alone is hardly suf fi cient given the multiple factors that are at play.
Small-scale fi sheries are too diverse, complex and dynamic for simple solutions, such
as restricting access or banning certain gear types. Poverty in small-scale fi sheries
requires an understanding that is embedded within a social, economic and political
framework, and must be addressed accordingly. Notably, poverty is experienced by
small-scale fi shers within their communities, and should therefore also be
addressed at that level as well as higher scales. It could be part of a problem that
links to how fi shers relate with themselves and with government. It could also be
part of a larger socio-cultural issue within these communities. Poverty is envisioned
here as multifaceted, extending beyond the income/expenditure nexus. It involves
more than fi sheries per se , including issues such as health, literacy, access to markets,
political participation and the like. Poverty therefore requires efforts beyond technical approaches. In order to understand how it can be alleviated in small-scale fi sheries,
it is important to note that poverty does not have technical or scienti fi c solutions, as
Garrett Hardin ( 1968 ) pointed out. This also means that there is no single way to
recognize and address the problem.
This chapter discusses how the poverty problem requires an interactive governance approach. While we agree that poverty in small-scale fi sheries is attributable
to multiple variables, including those mentioned above (Alkire 2008 ; Alkire and
Foster 2008 ) , we argue that these variables are related to each other. We note that
poverty is a result of systemic causes, and that governance may be part of both the
problem and the solution. Consequently, we need to focus on how poverty alleviation functions as a governance process and within governance settings. We
perceive governance beyond the characteristics of accountability and transparent
government, free and fair elections, and governance according to the rule of law.
In particular, we view governance as “the whole of interactions taken to solve societal problems and to create societal opportunities, including the formulation and
application of principles guiding those interactions and care for institutions that
enable them” (Kooiman et al. 2005 , 17).
P. Onyango and S. Jentoft
operate, their development partners and academics (Smith 1979 ; Copes 1989 ; World
Bank 1992 ; Cunningham 1993 ; Béné 2003, 2004 ; FAO 2005 ; Jentoft and Eide
2011 ) . For instance, poverty has been perceived to occur in fi shing communities as
a result of a decline in fi sheries resources brought about by overexploitation. This is
an argument that rests on a conceptualization of sustainable fi sheries in which overexploitation occurs when the rate of fi shing exceeds the capacity of the natural
environment to replenish (Gordon 1954 ; Beverton and Holt 1957 ) . An alternative
explanation is that poverty is in itself a cause of overexploitation (Béné 2003 ) :
Small-scale fi shers, who are generally poor, will overexploit fi sheries resources as
they seek to meet their livelihood needs. Similarly, small-scale fi sheries may be
“an occupation of last resort” for people who cannot feed themselves in other sectors
and are thus attracted by the opportunity to take up a new livelihood in fi sheries
(Onyango 2011 ) .
To confront poverty among small-scale fi shers, the adoption of a sustainable
management system for the harvesting of fi sh resources is perceived by many as
paramount (WCED 1987 ; Jalal 1993 ) . Although it may be a necessary thing to
do, management alone is hardly suf fi cient given the multiple factors that are at play.
Small-scale fi sheries are too diverse, complex and dynamic for simple solutions, such
as restricting access or banning certain gear types. Poverty in small-scale fi sheries
requires an understanding that is embedded within a social, economic and political
framework, and must be addressed accordingly. Notably, poverty is experienced by
small-scale fi shers within their communities, and should therefore also be
addressed at that level as well as higher scales. It could be part of a problem that
links to how fi shers relate with themselves and with government. It could also be
part of a larger socio-cultural issue within these communities. Poverty is envisioned
here as multifaceted, extending beyond the income/expenditure nexus. It involves
more than fi sheries per se , including issues such as health, literacy, access to markets,
political participation and the like. Poverty therefore requires efforts beyond technical approaches. In order to understand how it can be alleviated in small-scale fi sheries,
it is important to note that poverty does not have technical or scienti fi c solutions, as
Garrett Hardin ( 1968 ) pointed out. This also means that there is no single way to
recognize and address the problem.
This chapter discusses how the poverty problem requires an interactive governance approach. While we agree that poverty in small-scale fi sheries is attributable
to multiple variables, including those mentioned above (Alkire 2008 ; Alkire and
Foster 2008 ) , we argue that these variables are related to each other. We note that
poverty is a result of systemic causes, and that governance may be part of both the
problem and the solution. Consequently, we need to focus on how poverty alleviation functions as a governance process and within governance settings. We
perceive governance beyond the characteristics of accountability and transparent
government, free and fair elections, and governance according to the rule of law.
In particular, we view governance as “the whole of interactions taken to solve societal problems and to create societal opportunities, including the formulation and
application of principles guiding those interactions and care for institutions that
enable them” (Kooiman et al. 2005 , 17).