179
10 South Indian Trawl Fisheries – Assessing Their Governability
therefore places different demands on the governing system. According to Jentoft
( 2007 ) , a fi shery’s governability, understood as the overall capacity for governance
of a societal entity or system, is largely dependent on whether a governing system
is capable of handling the constellation of features prevalent in the system-to-begoverned. A proper match between the natural and socio-economical characteristics
of a given fi shery and the institutions that are governing this fi shery is therefore a
condition for effective governance (Jentoft 2007 ; Mahon 2008 ) .
2
How can match be imagined? The kitchen provides a suitable metaphor in the
form of a pot and a lid, which constitute a functional unit. As a badly fi tting lid negatively affects the cooking process, the cook will try to improve the fi t by adjusting
one of the two pieces. Translated to the terminology of interactive governance, we
are interested in improving the match between the system-to-be-governed (pot)
and the governing system (lid). Governability enquiries ask to what extent the architecture of governing institutions is appropriate given the features and scale of the
system it is to govern.
The pot-and-lid metaphor highlights the structural side of match, but ignores the
fact that fi sheries systems consist of people, ecosystems and institutions that not
fi xed, but rather in a constant state of fl ux. In view of the dynamic nature of the
components, a proper match can therefore never be a matter of architecture alone.
Without continuous fi ne-tuning, a governing system would soon lose its grip on the
system-to-be-governed, resulting in a poor match and hence low governability.
Building upon the discussion above, we suggest de fi ning match in terms of
architectural compatibility as well as attunement. Note that match is not a blackor-white issue. The states of ‘match’ and ‘non-match’ merely represent extreme
positions on the scale of the relationship between the governing system and systemto-be-governed. Many positions, in fact, exist in between them. Thus “governability
is a condition fl uctuating on a continuing scale without ever reaching the extremes;
it is never total or complete, and […] it is never wholly absent either” (Bavinck and
Kooiman 2008 ) .
In the following section, we consider architectural compatibility particularly from
the perspective of matching the spatial scales available in a fi sheries system. In addition, we consider the extent to which linkages between different governing actors, as
well as between governors and those being governed, compensate for existing disjunctures. We then turn to the issue of attunement and the question of whether a governing system is able to meet the demands emanating from a system-to-be-governed.
2 The notion that institutions must fi t with the context in which they are to work is not unique to
interactive governance. Young ( 2002 , 54) for example, argues that: “all accounts of the problem of
fi t start from the same premise: the effectiveness of environmental and resource regimes … is
determined in considerable measure by the degree to which they are compatible with the biogeophysical systems with which they interact.” Ostrom ( 2007 ) broadens the analyses by also including
the social system. She suggests an institutional diagnostics approach that highlights critical features of a resource problem followed by an effort to specify the most suitable institutional arrangement. This corresponds with interactive governance theory on all but one count: whereas Ostrom
takes the objectives of governance as externally given, scholars in the fi eld of interactive governance consider objectives to be subjected to negotiation (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft 2009 ) .
10 South Indian Trawl Fisheries – Assessing Their Governability
therefore places different demands on the governing system. According to Jentoft
( 2007 ) , a fi shery’s governability, understood as the overall capacity for governance
of a societal entity or system, is largely dependent on whether a governing system
is capable of handling the constellation of features prevalent in the system-to-begoverned. A proper match between the natural and socio-economical characteristics
of a given fi shery and the institutions that are governing this fi shery is therefore a
condition for effective governance (Jentoft 2007 ; Mahon 2008 ) .
2
How can match be imagined? The kitchen provides a suitable metaphor in the
form of a pot and a lid, which constitute a functional unit. As a badly fi tting lid negatively affects the cooking process, the cook will try to improve the fi t by adjusting
one of the two pieces. Translated to the terminology of interactive governance, we
are interested in improving the match between the system-to-be-governed (pot)
and the governing system (lid). Governability enquiries ask to what extent the architecture of governing institutions is appropriate given the features and scale of the
system it is to govern.
The pot-and-lid metaphor highlights the structural side of match, but ignores the
fact that fi sheries systems consist of people, ecosystems and institutions that not
fi xed, but rather in a constant state of fl ux. In view of the dynamic nature of the
components, a proper match can therefore never be a matter of architecture alone.
Without continuous fi ne-tuning, a governing system would soon lose its grip on the
system-to-be-governed, resulting in a poor match and hence low governability.
Building upon the discussion above, we suggest de fi ning match in terms of
architectural compatibility as well as attunement. Note that match is not a blackor-white issue. The states of ‘match’ and ‘non-match’ merely represent extreme
positions on the scale of the relationship between the governing system and systemto-be-governed. Many positions, in fact, exist in between them. Thus “governability
is a condition fl uctuating on a continuing scale without ever reaching the extremes;
it is never total or complete, and […] it is never wholly absent either” (Bavinck and
Kooiman 2008 ) .
In the following section, we consider architectural compatibility particularly from
the perspective of matching the spatial scales available in a fi sheries system. In addition, we consider the extent to which linkages between different governing actors, as
well as between governors and those being governed, compensate for existing disjunctures. We then turn to the issue of attunement and the question of whether a governing system is able to meet the demands emanating from a system-to-be-governed.
2 The notion that institutions must fi t with the context in which they are to work is not unique to
interactive governance. Young ( 2002 , 54) for example, argues that: “all accounts of the problem of
fi t start from the same premise: the effectiveness of environmental and resource regimes … is
determined in considerable measure by the degree to which they are compatible with the biogeophysical systems with which they interact.” Ostrom ( 2007 ) broadens the analyses by also including
the social system. She suggests an institutional diagnostics approach that highlights critical features of a resource problem followed by an effort to specify the most suitable institutional arrangement. This corresponds with interactive governance theory on all but one count: whereas Ostrom
takes the objectives of governance as externally given, scholars in the fi eld of interactive governance consider objectives to be subjected to negotiation (Chuenpagdee and Jentoft 2009 ) .