194
J. Scholtens and M. Bavinck
distance trips are hardly feasible and the regulation that limits a fi shing trip to 24 h
does not pose harsh constraints on trawl fi shers. Although boat owners did take the
rule to the High Court – where it was dismissed – it currently enjoys backing from
the entire fi shing sector.
How to explain the genesis and success of this rule? The fact that it was decided
at the level of the district – and not the state or the landing center – seems to have
played a major role. It can be argued that District of fi cials are ‘closer’ to the scene of
con fl ict and the parties involved than a state-level agency is, and therefore more
likely to bene fi t from the resolution of con fl ict. The validation of the district regulation by the High Court in Chennai provided an umbrella to protect it against legal
action. The security issue in Sri Lanka fi nally resulted in the establishment of a tight
control system. Trawl fi shers that want to go fi shing on a particular day, require a
daily permit issued by the Fisheries Department. Without this permit, the owner in
question cannot obtain subsidized diesel and runs the risk of being apprehended by
the navy or coast guard.
Attunement: Matching Through Appropriate Governance Modes
In the Palk Bay trawler fi sheries we can observe elements of each of the three modes
of governance. Hierarchical governance is performed by state and central governments through various rules and regulations. While informal authorities are not as
conspicuous in the Palk Bay as they are in other coastal regions, boat owner associations play an important role in self-regulating the trawler fi shery. Co-governance –
i.e. the situation in which government and fi sher representatives share governance
responsibilities formally – is virtually absent in the Palk Bay fi sheries.
In short, the Palk Bay trawler fi shery is characterized by the relative prevalence
of the hierarchical governance mode, an overall weakness of self-governance bodies
and the virtual absence of institutionalized co-governance. Hence, the governance
modes that are naturally more responsive are weak or absent, while hierarchical
governance is relatively prevalent but not always effective. Self-governance is weak
for two reasons: (a) diversity tends to inhibit effective cooperation; and (b) cooperation between landing centers to deal with larger scale issues is more of an exception
than the rule. Where co-governance occurs, with the district collector as facilitator,
it appears to build on the strengths of both governance modes, while modifying their
respective weaknesses.
Assessing the Governability of the Palk Bay Trawl Fishery
This chapter departed from the assumption that contextual variation is to be taken
seriously, and that governance solutions, contrary to panaceas, should match the
nature of the problems at hand. A proper match between a governing system and
system-to-be-governed is therefore a precondition for effective governance and high
J. Scholtens and M. Bavinck
distance trips are hardly feasible and the regulation that limits a fi shing trip to 24 h
does not pose harsh constraints on trawl fi shers. Although boat owners did take the
rule to the High Court – where it was dismissed – it currently enjoys backing from
the entire fi shing sector.
How to explain the genesis and success of this rule? The fact that it was decided
at the level of the district – and not the state or the landing center – seems to have
played a major role. It can be argued that District of fi cials are ‘closer’ to the scene of
con fl ict and the parties involved than a state-level agency is, and therefore more
likely to bene fi t from the resolution of con fl ict. The validation of the district regulation by the High Court in Chennai provided an umbrella to protect it against legal
action. The security issue in Sri Lanka fi nally resulted in the establishment of a tight
control system. Trawl fi shers that want to go fi shing on a particular day, require a
daily permit issued by the Fisheries Department. Without this permit, the owner in
question cannot obtain subsidized diesel and runs the risk of being apprehended by
the navy or coast guard.
Attunement: Matching Through Appropriate Governance Modes
In the Palk Bay trawler fi sheries we can observe elements of each of the three modes
of governance. Hierarchical governance is performed by state and central governments through various rules and regulations. While informal authorities are not as
conspicuous in the Palk Bay as they are in other coastal regions, boat owner associations play an important role in self-regulating the trawler fi shery. Co-governance –
i.e. the situation in which government and fi sher representatives share governance
responsibilities formally – is virtually absent in the Palk Bay fi sheries.
In short, the Palk Bay trawler fi shery is characterized by the relative prevalence
of the hierarchical governance mode, an overall weakness of self-governance bodies
and the virtual absence of institutionalized co-governance. Hence, the governance
modes that are naturally more responsive are weak or absent, while hierarchical
governance is relatively prevalent but not always effective. Self-governance is weak
for two reasons: (a) diversity tends to inhibit effective cooperation; and (b) cooperation between landing centers to deal with larger scale issues is more of an exception
than the rule. Where co-governance occurs, with the district collector as facilitator,
it appears to build on the strengths of both governance modes, while modifying their
respective weaknesses.
Assessing the Governability of the Palk Bay Trawl Fishery
This chapter departed from the assumption that contextual variation is to be taken
seriously, and that governance solutions, contrary to panaceas, should match the
nature of the problems at hand. A proper match between a governing system and
system-to-be-governed is therefore a precondition for effective governance and high