40
S. Jentoft and R. Chuenpagdee
with a feedback loop, meaning the governing system is held accountable by the
social system-to-be governed. In a democratic system, representatives of the social
system-to-be governed are the ones with the power to interfere with the ways in
which the governing system works. When resource crises hit, the governing system
is questioned and governance reform may follow.
Governance theory argues that the system-to-be-governed and the governing
system must be compatible in order to be mutually responsive. Thus, for instance,
diversity within the system-to-be-governed would require that the governing system
be contextually sensitive and therefore it also becomes structurally diverse. Similarly,
governing mechanisms need to be tailored to the particularities of the targeted
system-to-be-governed. The greater the variations between different system-to-begoverned, the more diverse the governing systems may need to be.
In the same vein, the system’s complexities, dynamics and scales demand an
adequate response requiring the governing system to mirror those traits (Chap. 10 ,
Scholtens and Bavinck, this volume). Hence, governability will hinge upon the
extent to which the governing system achieves this (cf. Jentoft 2007 ) . This is not a
matter of natural adaptation, but of deliberate planning and structural design by
societal actors such as legislative bodies, planning agencies and civic organizations.
This can happen alone or, preferably, in concert. We say preferably because governing capacity and interaction is enhanced through collaboration. Governing interactions are about the two-way mediation between the governing system and the
systems-to-be-governed. These interactions identify the various ways in which the
governing system is sensitive to the diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale within
the systems-to-be-governed, and the ways in which the governing system responds
accordingly. These connections structure the ways in which information is collected
and communicated, representation is organized, and stakeholders participate, as
well as the manner in which learning occurs among the actors involved in both
systems. Furthermore, governing interactions can enable adaptation and capacity
building and reveal the negotiation process of setting goals and objectives, resolving
con fl icts, and achieving compromise.
Functional Governability
Governability lies within the inherent and constructed traits of fi sheries and aquaculture systems. The diversity, complexity, dynamics and scales of these systems present
real challenges to governance, thus affecting their governability. Diversity, whether it
regards resource units or relevant stakeholders, is about the heterogeneity of system’s
elements and its variability. A marine ecosystem in the tropics, especially those containing coral reefs, is much more diverse in terms of ecological biodiversity than one
situated in a temperate zone. These areas tend also to be more heterogeneous. For
example, they contain subsistence, commercial, small-scale and large-scale fi shing
sectors using different types of boats and gears and targeting multiple species. This
kind of diversity calls for fi ne-tuned, particularistic governing approaches. For
S. Jentoft and R. Chuenpagdee
with a feedback loop, meaning the governing system is held accountable by the
social system-to-be governed. In a democratic system, representatives of the social
system-to-be governed are the ones with the power to interfere with the ways in
which the governing system works. When resource crises hit, the governing system
is questioned and governance reform may follow.
Governance theory argues that the system-to-be-governed and the governing
system must be compatible in order to be mutually responsive. Thus, for instance,
diversity within the system-to-be-governed would require that the governing system
be contextually sensitive and therefore it also becomes structurally diverse. Similarly,
governing mechanisms need to be tailored to the particularities of the targeted
system-to-be-governed. The greater the variations between different system-to-begoverned, the more diverse the governing systems may need to be.
In the same vein, the system’s complexities, dynamics and scales demand an
adequate response requiring the governing system to mirror those traits (Chap. 10 ,
Scholtens and Bavinck, this volume). Hence, governability will hinge upon the
extent to which the governing system achieves this (cf. Jentoft 2007 ) . This is not a
matter of natural adaptation, but of deliberate planning and structural design by
societal actors such as legislative bodies, planning agencies and civic organizations.
This can happen alone or, preferably, in concert. We say preferably because governing capacity and interaction is enhanced through collaboration. Governing interactions are about the two-way mediation between the governing system and the
systems-to-be-governed. These interactions identify the various ways in which the
governing system is sensitive to the diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale within
the systems-to-be-governed, and the ways in which the governing system responds
accordingly. These connections structure the ways in which information is collected
and communicated, representation is organized, and stakeholders participate, as
well as the manner in which learning occurs among the actors involved in both
systems. Furthermore, governing interactions can enable adaptation and capacity
building and reveal the negotiation process of setting goals and objectives, resolving
con fl icts, and achieving compromise.
Functional Governability
Governability lies within the inherent and constructed traits of fi sheries and aquaculture systems. The diversity, complexity, dynamics and scales of these systems present
real challenges to governance, thus affecting their governability. Diversity, whether it
regards resource units or relevant stakeholders, is about the heterogeneity of system’s
elements and its variability. A marine ecosystem in the tropics, especially those containing coral reefs, is much more diverse in terms of ecological biodiversity than one
situated in a temperate zone. These areas tend also to be more heterogeneous. For
example, they contain subsistence, commercial, small-scale and large-scale fi shing
sectors using different types of boats and gears and targeting multiple species. This
kind of diversity calls for fi ne-tuned, particularistic governing approaches. For