34
S. Jentoft and R. Chuenpagdee
Here we explain a way to operationalize and apply it to examine concerns, problems
and issues related to fi sheries and aquaculture. First and foremost, the complex set of
concerns related to fi sheries and aquaculture governance needs to be recognized in
order to enable an understanding of the nature of the problems that are to be solved.
Only when this happens can we move into identifying the structural and functional
aspects of fi sheries and aquaculture governance determined by the characteristics of the
systems-to-be-governed, the governing system, and their interactions. The chapter
serves as an introduction to the following chapters in this section of the book, each of
which elaborates on the relation of the basic concerns facing fi sheries governance outlined in the Fish for Life volume, i.e., social justice, livelihoods, food security and
ecosystem health ( Kooiman et al. 2005 ), to governability. These concerns are valueladen, sometimes irreconcilably so, and therefore require a comprehensive and holistic
governance approach. The conceptualization of the relationship between these concerns and the problems that must be solved, as well as the exploration of limitations and
possibilities that may exist, are the fi rst steps in improving governability.
The persisting and re-occurring problems in fi sheries and aquaculture suggest that
there may be some features related to these resource systems and the governing mechanisms that make governance particularly challenging. In their discussion of planning,
Rittel and Webber ( 1973 ) conceptualize these problems as “wicked.” By this, they
mean that the problem is neither simple nor easy to de fi ne, but requires a deliberative
process, an aspect that is also suggested in the interactive governance theory (Kooiman
2003 ) . As is commonly perceived as ideal in fi sheries management, the planning process starts by de fi ning the problem, setting the goal, seeking and analysing information,
outlining the available alternative solutions, calculating their relative merits, making
and implementing a decision, and, fi nally, evaluating outcomes and, if needed, making
modi fi cations (cf. Gilmore and Camilius 1996 ) . This systematic methodology is typical
of engineering or scienti fi c inquiry, and, according to Rittel and Webber ( 1973 ) , may
work for what they call “tame” (or benign) problems. It does not, however, apply to
societal problems in real life situations. These are messy and uncertain, and therefore
require a process that allows for interactive communication and learning.
In the following sections, we draw on Rittel and Webber ( 1973 ) to examine how
fi sheries and aquaculture concerns and problems can be conceptualized and how they
can give rise to governance challenges. We then present the underlying hypotheses for
assessing governability and provide an explanation of the ways in which key attributes
may cause fi sheries and aquaculture systems to be more or less governable.
Conceptualization of Concerns and Problems
Concerns are ‘meta-order’ governance issues that are deeply situated in social
values, norms and principles about things we care for and consider important
( Kooiman and Jentoft 2009 ) . Thus, ecosystem health, social justice, livelihoods and
food security are aspects that require governance attention, most likely all at once,
and addressing one of them alone in any instance may result in the worsening of
S. Jentoft and R. Chuenpagdee
Here we explain a way to operationalize and apply it to examine concerns, problems
and issues related to fi sheries and aquaculture. First and foremost, the complex set of
concerns related to fi sheries and aquaculture governance needs to be recognized in
order to enable an understanding of the nature of the problems that are to be solved.
Only when this happens can we move into identifying the structural and functional
aspects of fi sheries and aquaculture governance determined by the characteristics of the
systems-to-be-governed, the governing system, and their interactions. The chapter
serves as an introduction to the following chapters in this section of the book, each of
which elaborates on the relation of the basic concerns facing fi sheries governance outlined in the Fish for Life volume, i.e., social justice, livelihoods, food security and
ecosystem health ( Kooiman et al. 2005 ), to governability. These concerns are valueladen, sometimes irreconcilably so, and therefore require a comprehensive and holistic
governance approach. The conceptualization of the relationship between these concerns and the problems that must be solved, as well as the exploration of limitations and
possibilities that may exist, are the fi rst steps in improving governability.
The persisting and re-occurring problems in fi sheries and aquaculture suggest that
there may be some features related to these resource systems and the governing mechanisms that make governance particularly challenging. In their discussion of planning,
Rittel and Webber ( 1973 ) conceptualize these problems as “wicked.” By this, they
mean that the problem is neither simple nor easy to de fi ne, but requires a deliberative
process, an aspect that is also suggested in the interactive governance theory (Kooiman
2003 ) . As is commonly perceived as ideal in fi sheries management, the planning process starts by de fi ning the problem, setting the goal, seeking and analysing information,
outlining the available alternative solutions, calculating their relative merits, making
and implementing a decision, and, fi nally, evaluating outcomes and, if needed, making
modi fi cations (cf. Gilmore and Camilius 1996 ) . This systematic methodology is typical
of engineering or scienti fi c inquiry, and, according to Rittel and Webber ( 1973 ) , may
work for what they call “tame” (or benign) problems. It does not, however, apply to
societal problems in real life situations. These are messy and uncertain, and therefore
require a process that allows for interactive communication and learning.
In the following sections, we draw on Rittel and Webber ( 1973 ) to examine how
fi sheries and aquaculture concerns and problems can be conceptualized and how they
can give rise to governance challenges. We then present the underlying hypotheses for
assessing governability and provide an explanation of the ways in which key attributes
may cause fi sheries and aquaculture systems to be more or less governable.
Conceptualization of Concerns and Problems
Concerns are ‘meta-order’ governance issues that are deeply situated in social
values, norms and principles about things we care for and consider important
( Kooiman and Jentoft 2009 ) . Thus, ecosystem health, social justice, livelihoods and
food security are aspects that require governance attention, most likely all at once,
and addressing one of them alone in any instance may result in the worsening of