359
19 Improving Governability – Re fl ections for Future Applications
The world-systems approach to commodity chains stresses their role in the
structuring and reproduction of capitalist society and the international division of
labor at a macro level (Hopkins and Wallerstein 1977, 1986 ; Kaplinski 2001 ) . They
are seen as cyclical contraction and expansion processes over-time (many are historical analyses), with notions of competition at their basis. The theory posits that
cyclical patterns have taken place numerous times in the last few centuries.
Accordingly, globalization is not understood to be a recent phenomenon, but has
instead been in existence for quite some time. This is demonstrated in particular by
the emergence of a worldwide commodity system in the sixteenth Century.
The Fisheries Governance Network views fi sh chains as running from the ecosystem, through harvesting and processing, marketing and distribution, to the endconsumer (Kooiman et al. 2005 ) . Fish chains can be local or regional as they pass
from resource to consumer and back. They can also be worldwide as marine life and
consumers are sometimes distributed widely across oceans and continents. Various
chapters in this volume dedicate sections to fi sh chains. Chapter 10 , for example,
pays attention to the different chain roles played by stakeholders. Chapter 13 zeroes
in on the (micro) case of mariculture, where shell- fi sher women, canning companies, and market dynamics play a role. The authors of the macro analysis of the
salmon industry in Chap. 11 use the chain concept to identify a set of governability
issues arising from the aquatic environment and the production system, as well as
from consumer concerns over food safety. The availability of these examples does
not mean that the chain concept has been suf fi ciently applied to fi sheries and aquaculture. It is in many respects a very useful approach. First of all, the chain concept
provides a set of images for studying societal fi eld with readily available macro and
micro theoretical perspectives. Secondly, the chain concept facilitates the integration of disciplinary insights: natural scientists for the ecological aspects, social scientists on the human side. Thirdly, the concept enables the bridging of geographical
scale levels, acknowledging global as well as local processes and events.
System-to-Be-Governed as Socio-ecological System (SES)
There is an immense body of literature on the relation between human and natural
systems. Nevertheless, truly interdisciplinary and inter-level perspectives are rare
(see e.g. Scoones 1999 ) . Three approaches do, however, come close: Resilience or
Panarchy, Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) and Human Ecosystem (HEM).
The fi rst of these receives the most attention.
Panarchy , a metaphor of the adaptive (renewal) cycle originally coined by
Holling ( 1973 ) , lies at the basis of resilience studies (Berkes and Folke 1998 ;
Gunderson and Holling 2002 ; Berkes et al. 2003 ) . It rests on the idea that dynamic
natural and societal systems do not tend towards some kind of stable state, but
instead pass through phases or cycles. There are four such phases or cycles:
exploitation or growth, conservation, release or destruction, and reorganization.
The fi rst two are relatively long and marked by slow transformations. The latter
19 Improving Governability – Re fl ections for Future Applications
The world-systems approach to commodity chains stresses their role in the
structuring and reproduction of capitalist society and the international division of
labor at a macro level (Hopkins and Wallerstein 1977, 1986 ; Kaplinski 2001 ) . They
are seen as cyclical contraction and expansion processes over-time (many are historical analyses), with notions of competition at their basis. The theory posits that
cyclical patterns have taken place numerous times in the last few centuries.
Accordingly, globalization is not understood to be a recent phenomenon, but has
instead been in existence for quite some time. This is demonstrated in particular by
the emergence of a worldwide commodity system in the sixteenth Century.
The Fisheries Governance Network views fi sh chains as running from the ecosystem, through harvesting and processing, marketing and distribution, to the endconsumer (Kooiman et al. 2005 ) . Fish chains can be local or regional as they pass
from resource to consumer and back. They can also be worldwide as marine life and
consumers are sometimes distributed widely across oceans and continents. Various
chapters in this volume dedicate sections to fi sh chains. Chapter 10 , for example,
pays attention to the different chain roles played by stakeholders. Chapter 13 zeroes
in on the (micro) case of mariculture, where shell- fi sher women, canning companies, and market dynamics play a role. The authors of the macro analysis of the
salmon industry in Chap. 11 use the chain concept to identify a set of governability
issues arising from the aquatic environment and the production system, as well as
from consumer concerns over food safety. The availability of these examples does
not mean that the chain concept has been suf fi ciently applied to fi sheries and aquaculture. It is in many respects a very useful approach. First of all, the chain concept
provides a set of images for studying societal fi eld with readily available macro and
micro theoretical perspectives. Secondly, the chain concept facilitates the integration of disciplinary insights: natural scientists for the ecological aspects, social scientists on the human side. Thirdly, the concept enables the bridging of geographical
scale levels, acknowledging global as well as local processes and events.
System-to-Be-Governed as Socio-ecological System (SES)
There is an immense body of literature on the relation between human and natural
systems. Nevertheless, truly interdisciplinary and inter-level perspectives are rare
(see e.g. Scoones 1999 ) . Three approaches do, however, come close: Resilience or
Panarchy, Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) and Human Ecosystem (HEM).
The fi rst of these receives the most attention.
Panarchy , a metaphor of the adaptive (renewal) cycle originally coined by
Holling ( 1973 ) , lies at the basis of resilience studies (Berkes and Folke 1998 ;
Gunderson and Holling 2002 ; Berkes et al. 2003 ) . It rests on the idea that dynamic
natural and societal systems do not tend towards some kind of stable state, but
instead pass through phases or cycles. There are four such phases or cycles:
exploitation or growth, conservation, release or destruction, and reorganization.
The fi rst two are relatively long and marked by slow transformations. The latter