268
R. Chuenpagdee and R. Mahon
Johannes ( 1998 ) provides several examples in which the use of local knowledge and
commonsense led to improved management systems. He coined the term ‘data-less
management’, causing some controversy in fi shery science circles. However, he
points out that this does not mean management without information, but instead
refers to the use of information that is readily available from resource users. There
is increasing evidence to suggest that the use of LEK and TEK can greatly enhance
the information required for management. For example, fi shers contribute to the
collection of both fi shery-dependent and fi shery-independent data of the San Diego
red sea urchin fi shery (Schroeter et al. 2010 ) .
The debate about the compatibility of these different types of knowledge is ongoing.
So too is the discussion of their merits as a source of information versus a tool to
empower communities (Gilchrist and Mallory 2007 ) . These and other topics related
to the strengths and limitations of using fi sher knowledge are explored by Haggan
et al. ( 2006 ) and Davis and Ruddle ( 2010 ) . The struggles with LEK and TEK are not
strictly with respect to the utility of the knowledge but also the method of elicitation
and integration with scienti fi c knowledge. Basic rapid appraisal approaches that
seek to obtain and use this knowledge, such as community mapping, may be considered inevitable at an early stage, when the method was fi rst explored (Berkes 1999 ;
Berkes et al. 2000 ) . With the advancement of mapping technology, especially participatory GIS software, many different types of data can be integrated and more
sophisticated, accurate, maps can be produced, stored and easily shared with stakeholders (Douvere and Ehler 2009 ; Dalton et al. 2010 ) . The sensitivity around the
mapping of local knowledge does, however, need to be recognized because of rights
considerations. This is particularly so when concerning aboriginal peoples, as
territorial user rights may also be an issue. Roles of resource users, like fi shers,
in scienti fi c research may thus go beyond data acquisition or provision to involve
co-creation of knowledge and agreed-upon rules regarding intellectual property
rights.
Social System-to-Be-Governed
A range of tools exists to describe the social, cultural and economic characteristics
of people involved in coastal and ocean social ecological systems; in terms of their
diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale. For instance, household surveys and censuses are often used to obtain information about demographics, livelihood activities,
and income and expenditure. When employed on a regular basis, these methods can
provide statistics that enable the observation of change at the national and regional
levels. Oral history, fi eld observation, interviews and focus groups are used to obtain
detailed and speci fi c information about individuals, households and communities.
Similar to their use in the natural system-to-be-governed, rapid assessment methods
have been developed to collect snapshots of information for purposes such as
regional planning or aid distribution. They are often used in conjunction with the
natural assessment methods and with a range of socio-economic indicators, including
R. Chuenpagdee and R. Mahon
Johannes ( 1998 ) provides several examples in which the use of local knowledge and
commonsense led to improved management systems. He coined the term ‘data-less
management’, causing some controversy in fi shery science circles. However, he
points out that this does not mean management without information, but instead
refers to the use of information that is readily available from resource users. There
is increasing evidence to suggest that the use of LEK and TEK can greatly enhance
the information required for management. For example, fi shers contribute to the
collection of both fi shery-dependent and fi shery-independent data of the San Diego
red sea urchin fi shery (Schroeter et al. 2010 ) .
The debate about the compatibility of these different types of knowledge is ongoing.
So too is the discussion of their merits as a source of information versus a tool to
empower communities (Gilchrist and Mallory 2007 ) . These and other topics related
to the strengths and limitations of using fi sher knowledge are explored by Haggan
et al. ( 2006 ) and Davis and Ruddle ( 2010 ) . The struggles with LEK and TEK are not
strictly with respect to the utility of the knowledge but also the method of elicitation
and integration with scienti fi c knowledge. Basic rapid appraisal approaches that
seek to obtain and use this knowledge, such as community mapping, may be considered inevitable at an early stage, when the method was fi rst explored (Berkes 1999 ;
Berkes et al. 2000 ) . With the advancement of mapping technology, especially participatory GIS software, many different types of data can be integrated and more
sophisticated, accurate, maps can be produced, stored and easily shared with stakeholders (Douvere and Ehler 2009 ; Dalton et al. 2010 ) . The sensitivity around the
mapping of local knowledge does, however, need to be recognized because of rights
considerations. This is particularly so when concerning aboriginal peoples, as
territorial user rights may also be an issue. Roles of resource users, like fi shers,
in scienti fi c research may thus go beyond data acquisition or provision to involve
co-creation of knowledge and agreed-upon rules regarding intellectual property
rights.
Social System-to-Be-Governed
A range of tools exists to describe the social, cultural and economic characteristics
of people involved in coastal and ocean social ecological systems; in terms of their
diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale. For instance, household surveys and censuses are often used to obtain information about demographics, livelihood activities,
and income and expenditure. When employed on a regular basis, these methods can
provide statistics that enable the observation of change at the national and regional
levels. Oral history, fi eld observation, interviews and focus groups are used to obtain
detailed and speci fi c information about individuals, households and communities.
Similar to their use in the natural system-to-be-governed, rapid assessment methods
have been developed to collect snapshots of information for purposes such as
regional planning or aid distribution. They are often used in conjunction with the
natural assessment methods and with a range of socio-economic indicators, including