171
9 Poverty in Lake Victorian Fisheries – Understanding Governability
experts’ (see Chuenpagdee and Juntarashote 2011 ) . Rather than the poor themselves,
they are the ones who are perceived to hold the ideas for designing alleviation mechanisms and mobilizing resources for poverty alleviation. Poor fi shers are therefore
hardly consulted when poverty alleviation policies are developed and implemented,
as they are perceived to be void of any knowledge or ability to get themselves out of
poverty. Accordingly, they are people who only need to be assisted. This perception
has had implications for governing poverty and could also explain why poverty has
not been wiped out from the fi shing communities.
Within the systems-to-be-governed, an assessment of the governability of poverty alleviation at the second order warrants an investigation of how social practices
formulate their own laws, interests and power and are institutionalized. How such
institutions ensure access and distribution of resources, structure relations with
regards to conducting beach meetings, patrolling fi shing grounds, etc. are among
the things that also needs to be assessed.
Within governing interactions, the assessment looks at the characteristics of
governing interactions that takes place among and between poverty alleviation
governors. How do LVFO and the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development
interact with the non-governmental organizations previously discussed? It examines the rules of participation and representation and the modes established to
facilitate communication and cooperation between the system-to-be governed and
the governing system. In other words, it asks: are decisions made at the top and
implemented in a top-down fashion, from bottom-up, or in a more interactive cogovernance way? Do the decisions correspond to the way poverty is experienced in
the fi shing communities? What characterizes the processes within which poverty is
de fi ned, assessed and deliberated? Is the actual governing mode inhibiting or facilitating a constructive process? (See Table 9.1 ).
In the third order or ‘meta’ governance, the assessment of governability within
the governing system must examine the ways in which LVFO, TAHEA, EMEDO
and FINCA, among other organizations, de fi ne poverty in general, as well as in the
speci fi c cases of the Nyakasenge and Kasheno fi shing villages. In doing so, it must
ask: which values, norms and principles underpin their approach to poverty alleviation? In the systems-to-be-governed, how is poverty experienced and de fi ned within
and among these fi shing communities? How do governors perceive it? Which values, norms and principles are considered crucial for poverty alleviation? Lastly,
within the governing interaction, the assessment looks at how values, norms and
principles are shared among governors as they interact to alleviate poverty.
Governability Challenges at the Community Level
The governability challenge is not only experienced by an external authority vis-a-vis
a local community; it is also an issue for local people. In the case of the Kasheno and
Nyakasenge villages, this is illustrated by issues like regulatory compliance and the
banning of beach seine equipment, for which the BMUs are responsible. In both communities, fi shing activities that use beach seining equipment enable people to get food
9 Poverty in Lake Victorian Fisheries – Understanding Governability
experts’ (see Chuenpagdee and Juntarashote 2011 ) . Rather than the poor themselves,
they are the ones who are perceived to hold the ideas for designing alleviation mechanisms and mobilizing resources for poverty alleviation. Poor fi shers are therefore
hardly consulted when poverty alleviation policies are developed and implemented,
as they are perceived to be void of any knowledge or ability to get themselves out of
poverty. Accordingly, they are people who only need to be assisted. This perception
has had implications for governing poverty and could also explain why poverty has
not been wiped out from the fi shing communities.
Within the systems-to-be-governed, an assessment of the governability of poverty alleviation at the second order warrants an investigation of how social practices
formulate their own laws, interests and power and are institutionalized. How such
institutions ensure access and distribution of resources, structure relations with
regards to conducting beach meetings, patrolling fi shing grounds, etc. are among
the things that also needs to be assessed.
Within governing interactions, the assessment looks at the characteristics of
governing interactions that takes place among and between poverty alleviation
governors. How do LVFO and the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries Development
interact with the non-governmental organizations previously discussed? It examines the rules of participation and representation and the modes established to
facilitate communication and cooperation between the system-to-be governed and
the governing system. In other words, it asks: are decisions made at the top and
implemented in a top-down fashion, from bottom-up, or in a more interactive cogovernance way? Do the decisions correspond to the way poverty is experienced in
the fi shing communities? What characterizes the processes within which poverty is
de fi ned, assessed and deliberated? Is the actual governing mode inhibiting or facilitating a constructive process? (See Table 9.1 ).
In the third order or ‘meta’ governance, the assessment of governability within
the governing system must examine the ways in which LVFO, TAHEA, EMEDO
and FINCA, among other organizations, de fi ne poverty in general, as well as in the
speci fi c cases of the Nyakasenge and Kasheno fi shing villages. In doing so, it must
ask: which values, norms and principles underpin their approach to poverty alleviation? In the systems-to-be-governed, how is poverty experienced and de fi ned within
and among these fi shing communities? How do governors perceive it? Which values, norms and principles are considered crucial for poverty alleviation? Lastly,
within the governing interaction, the assessment looks at how values, norms and
principles are shared among governors as they interact to alleviate poverty.
Governability Challenges at the Community Level
The governability challenge is not only experienced by an external authority vis-a-vis
a local community; it is also an issue for local people. In the case of the Kasheno and
Nyakasenge villages, this is illustrated by issues like regulatory compliance and the
banning of beach seine equipment, for which the BMUs are responsible. In both communities, fi shing activities that use beach seining equipment enable people to get food