361
19 Improving Governability – Re fl ections for Future Applications
opens the door to a great deal of obscurity (Kooiman 2003 ) . Concern or problem
de fi nitions for systems-to-be-governed are social constructions. They are not objective certainties outside the realm of the people (including researchers) who experience them, want to solve them, or study them. The attention span of public arenas
largely determines what will fi lter through and who or what will be the winners and
losers in the competition for attention (see section on “ Governing Interaction
Systems ” below).
For many decades, fi sheries have received considerable attention. This attention
typically concerns the problems fi sheries face in terms of natural resource depletion.
In part II of this book, which follows-up on Fish for Life (Kooiman et al. 2005 ) , the
concern approach serves as a foundation for studying the governability of fi sheries.
This approach culminates in tables that describe fi sheries in terms of their diversity,
complexity, dynamics and scale. On this basis, increasingly detailed analytical
boxes can be composed with appropriate macro and micro components. The four
concerns (others may be added) are juxtaposed with one another to form higherlevel images of the diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale of a fi shery or aquaculture as systems-to-be-governed.
Alternatively, one may use a conceptual methodology I developed earlier
(Kooiman 2003 ) . It consists of the following cyclical steps:
Step 1: Stocktaking and ordering of those having a problem or concern – dealing
with diversity.
Step 2: Identi fi cation of relevant interactions between units and their mutual
relations – fi rst reduction of complexity.
Step 3: Bringing the sources of problems or concerns to the surface by locating
pockets of tensions in interactions – analysing dynamics.
Step 4: Shift to the solution side in terms of their diversity, complexity, dynamics
and scale.
Step 5: Drawing a boundary around the recognized system from the problem and
the solution side, focussing on governing options – second reduction of
complexity.
The above two routes, a more descriptive one for identifying major characteristics and features of system-to-be-governed, and a conceptually-driven method, are
fruitful ways to deal with the features of any fi shery.
Governing System
Realms: State, Market, Civil Society, and Hybrids
From the viewpoint of governability, the governing system is the capacity to instigate, organize, implement and evaluate governing activities for societal systems.
Individual governors and governing institutions form a governing system together.
For many spatially bound fi sheries, governing systems can be identi fi ed with relative
19 Improving Governability – Re fl ections for Future Applications
opens the door to a great deal of obscurity (Kooiman 2003 ) . Concern or problem
de fi nitions for systems-to-be-governed are social constructions. They are not objective certainties outside the realm of the people (including researchers) who experience them, want to solve them, or study them. The attention span of public arenas
largely determines what will fi lter through and who or what will be the winners and
losers in the competition for attention (see section on “ Governing Interaction
Systems ” below).
For many decades, fi sheries have received considerable attention. This attention
typically concerns the problems fi sheries face in terms of natural resource depletion.
In part II of this book, which follows-up on Fish for Life (Kooiman et al. 2005 ) , the
concern approach serves as a foundation for studying the governability of fi sheries.
This approach culminates in tables that describe fi sheries in terms of their diversity,
complexity, dynamics and scale. On this basis, increasingly detailed analytical
boxes can be composed with appropriate macro and micro components. The four
concerns (others may be added) are juxtaposed with one another to form higherlevel images of the diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale of a fi shery or aquaculture as systems-to-be-governed.
Alternatively, one may use a conceptual methodology I developed earlier
(Kooiman 2003 ) . It consists of the following cyclical steps:
Step 1: Stocktaking and ordering of those having a problem or concern – dealing
with diversity.
Step 2: Identi fi cation of relevant interactions between units and their mutual
relations – fi rst reduction of complexity.
Step 3: Bringing the sources of problems or concerns to the surface by locating
pockets of tensions in interactions – analysing dynamics.
Step 4: Shift to the solution side in terms of their diversity, complexity, dynamics
and scale.
Step 5: Drawing a boundary around the recognized system from the problem and
the solution side, focussing on governing options – second reduction of
complexity.
The above two routes, a more descriptive one for identifying major characteristics and features of system-to-be-governed, and a conceptually-driven method, are
fruitful ways to deal with the features of any fi shery.
Governing System
Realms: State, Market, Civil Society, and Hybrids
From the viewpoint of governability, the governing system is the capacity to instigate, organize, implement and evaluate governing activities for societal systems.
Individual governors and governing institutions form a governing system together.
For many spatially bound fi sheries, governing systems can be identi fi ed with relative