This thesis provides information relevant to fisheries in which there is a desire to establish fisherfolk organizations, but where individualistic social networks rather than social cohesion and community prevail. Such situations in small-scale fisheries are poorly documented, but may define limits to the feasibility of co-management. In the case researched, the government of Barbados is designing a fisheries management planning process, but there is insufficient information on the social and economic characteristics of the unmanaged, small-scale, commercial fishery for migratory pelagics to determine whether either a state-structured (bioeconomic) or a cooperative (co-management) approach is appropriate. As a contribution to solving this practical, interdisciplinary problem, this study examined: the fishery-related uncertainties perceived by fisherfolk and government officials in Barbados; the social strategies of atomism, personal networks and formal organizations that fisherfolk may use to cope with uncertainty; and, whether the most appropriate initial management planning approach is bioeconomic or co-management. Research was conducted in Barbados between November 1993 and September 1994 involving surveys, social network analysis, participant observation and the study of official documents. Uncertainties related to fish catch and price were perceived by the majority of fisherfolk to be the most problematic, and the analysis focused on the means of coping with these. Evidence of social atomism was weak. Social networks, which tended to be individualistically-oriented among fishers, boat owners and processors, but more cooperative among vendors, were prevalent. Attempts by the harvest sector to formally organize to obtain market power had failed, but efforts to use this strategy persist. The state was found deficient in fishery planning and management capability. Barriers to communication within the state, and between it and the industry were apparent. Due mainly to the prevalence of networks and the state’s deficiencies, the bioeconomic approach is judged to be inappropriate in this setting. Due mainly to the high level of individualistic competition, the repeated failure of harvest sector organizations, and barriers to communication, co-management is problematic but more likely to be successffil. An incremental, institution-building approach to co-management is proposed due both to the flexibility of this approach and to the current political and planning environment that favours participative initiatives.

This thesis provides information relevant to fisheries in which there is a desire to establish fisherfolk organizations, but where individualistic social networks rather than social cohesion and community prevail. Such situations in small-scale fisheries are poorly documented, but may define limits to the feasibility of co-management. In the case researched, the government of Barbados is designing a fisheries management planning process, but there is insufficient information on the social and economic characteristics of the unmanaged, small-scale, commercial fishery for migratory pelagics to determine whether either a state-structured (bioeconomic) or a cooperative (co-management) approach is appropriate. As a contribution to solving this practical, interdisciplinary problem, this study examined: the fishery-related uncertainties perceived by fisherfolk and government officials in Barbados; the social strategies of atomism, personal networks and formal organizations that fisherfolk may use to cope with uncertainty; and, whether the most appropriate initial management planning approach is bioeconomic or co-management. Research was conducted in Barbados between November 1993 and September 1994 involving surveys, social network analysis, participant observation and the study of official documents. Uncertainties related to fish catch and price were perceived by the majority of fisherfolk to be the most problematic, and the analysis focused on the means of coping with these. Evidence of social atomism was weak. Social networks, which tended to be individualistically-oriented among fishers, boat owners and processors, but more cooperative among vendors, were prevalent. Attempts by the harvest sector to formally organize to obtain market power had failed, but efforts to use this strategy persist. The state was found deficient in fishery planning and management capability. Barriers to communication within the state, and between it and the industry were apparent. Due mainly to the prevalence of networks and the state’s deficiencies, the bioeconomic approach is judged to be inappropriate in this setting. Due mainly to the high level of individualistic competition, the repeated failure of harvest sector organizations, and barriers to communication, co-management is problematic but more likely to be successffil. An incremental, institution-building approach to co-management is proposed due both to the flexibility of this approach and to the current political and planning environment that favours participative initiatives. / Science, Faculty of / Resources, Environment and Sustainability (IRES), Institute for / Graduate