68
D. Johnson
in fi shing are intertwined with conceptions of the practice of fi shing. These
conceptions are, in turn, deeply important in shaping the contours of livelihoods in
different fi sheries, and for different fi shers and their households. As a governability
problem, sustaining livelihoods in fi sheries involves both material and interpretive
considerations. Fisheries governance that seeks to support fi shers’ abilities to make
a living must do so in ways that recognize local perceptions of what is right, satisfying, worthwhile, and appropriate.
An understanding of employment and livelihoods in fi sheries that takes this
position is in keeping with research on livelihoods that is now 25 years old
(Chambers 1987 ) . This chapter links livelihoods and wellbeing approaches in
fi sheries to interactive governance theory and, speci fi cally, the notion of governability. My intent is thus to address the key question of how livelihoods in fi sheries
can be seen as a governability concern. What is the place of livelihoods in the
larger problem of fi sheries governability? In answering, I argue that a livelihoods
perspective for governance not only provides insights into how people make a living, but it also reveals how they feel about their work. These considerations are
important for governability, because the material, relational, and subjective dimensions of work in fi sheries (Gough et al. 2007 ; Coulthard et al. 2011 ) have a
signi fi cant in fl uence on possibilities for change. More than this, however, the
chapter highlights the connections between livelihoods, wellbeing, and interactive
governance when the three perspectives are brought together. My principal argument here is that there is a logical fi t among the perspectives due to their similar
conceptual foundations.
Governability in fi sheries is a wicked problem, and sustaining fi sheries livelihoods is no exception to this. Following Jentoft and Chuenpagdee’s ( 2009 ) logic,
sustaining livelihoods in fi sheries is a wicked problem for the following reasons:
(1) the perception of a desirable and meaningful livelihood varies among the
many actors and institutions related to it; (2) livelihoods in fi sheries are constantly subject to modi fi cation and are never de fi nitively ideal or sustainable; (3)
problems with livelihoods are complicated by being embedded in larger social,
cultural, political, economic, and ecological systems; (4) the diversity, complexity, and dynamics of fi sheries livelihoods makes each case distinct; and, (5)
fi sheries governance, even that which is livelihoods sensitive, generally creates
irreversible change for the ways in which fi shers and aquaculturalists make their
living.
In this chapter, I propose two ways to conceptually extend the understanding of
livelihoods in fi sheries as a wicked problem. First, linking livelihoods to the notion
of wellbeing strengthens the livelihoods perspective, while also making useful connections to interactive governance theory’s approach to governability. Second, in
keeping with the meta-governance concern of interactive governance theory, I show
that livelihoods approaches, wellbeing, and interactive governance are linked foundationally by their basis in a shared set of principles. These are inclusion, re fl exivity,
attention to particularity, fostering adaptation, precaution, and the overarching
principle of social justice.
D. Johnson
in fi shing are intertwined with conceptions of the practice of fi shing. These
conceptions are, in turn, deeply important in shaping the contours of livelihoods in
different fi sheries, and for different fi shers and their households. As a governability
problem, sustaining livelihoods in fi sheries involves both material and interpretive
considerations. Fisheries governance that seeks to support fi shers’ abilities to make
a living must do so in ways that recognize local perceptions of what is right, satisfying, worthwhile, and appropriate.
An understanding of employment and livelihoods in fi sheries that takes this
position is in keeping with research on livelihoods that is now 25 years old
(Chambers 1987 ) . This chapter links livelihoods and wellbeing approaches in
fi sheries to interactive governance theory and, speci fi cally, the notion of governability. My intent is thus to address the key question of how livelihoods in fi sheries
can be seen as a governability concern. What is the place of livelihoods in the
larger problem of fi sheries governability? In answering, I argue that a livelihoods
perspective for governance not only provides insights into how people make a living, but it also reveals how they feel about their work. These considerations are
important for governability, because the material, relational, and subjective dimensions of work in fi sheries (Gough et al. 2007 ; Coulthard et al. 2011 ) have a
signi fi cant in fl uence on possibilities for change. More than this, however, the
chapter highlights the connections between livelihoods, wellbeing, and interactive
governance when the three perspectives are brought together. My principal argument here is that there is a logical fi t among the perspectives due to their similar
conceptual foundations.
Governability in fi sheries is a wicked problem, and sustaining fi sheries livelihoods is no exception to this. Following Jentoft and Chuenpagdee’s ( 2009 ) logic,
sustaining livelihoods in fi sheries is a wicked problem for the following reasons:
(1) the perception of a desirable and meaningful livelihood varies among the
many actors and institutions related to it; (2) livelihoods in fi sheries are constantly subject to modi fi cation and are never de fi nitively ideal or sustainable; (3)
problems with livelihoods are complicated by being embedded in larger social,
cultural, political, economic, and ecological systems; (4) the diversity, complexity, and dynamics of fi sheries livelihoods makes each case distinct; and, (5)
fi sheries governance, even that which is livelihoods sensitive, generally creates
irreversible change for the ways in which fi shers and aquaculturalists make their
living.
In this chapter, I propose two ways to conceptually extend the understanding of
livelihoods in fi sheries as a wicked problem. First, linking livelihoods to the notion
of wellbeing strengthens the livelihoods perspective, while also making useful connections to interactive governance theory’s approach to governability. Second, in
keeping with the meta-governance concern of interactive governance theory, I show
that livelihoods approaches, wellbeing, and interactive governance are linked foundationally by their basis in a shared set of principles. These are inclusion, re fl exivity,
attention to particularity, fostering adaptation, precaution, and the overarching
principle of social justice.