Navigating transformations in governance of Chilean marine coastal resources Stefan Gelcicha, Terry P. Hughesb, Per Olssonc, Carl Folkec,d, Omar Defeoe, Miriam Fernándeza,f, Simon Foaleb, Lance H. Gundersong, Carlos Rodríguez-Sickerth, Marten Schefferi, Robert S. Steneckj, and Juan C. Castillaa,f,1 aLaboratorio Internacional en Cambio Global (CSIC-PUC), Esporles 07190, Spain, and Departamento de Ecología, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Casilla 114-D, Chile; bAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Queensland 4811, Australia; cStockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden; dBeijer Institute of Ecological Economics, Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences, SE-104 05 Stockholm, Sweden; eFacultad de Ciencias, Montevideo 11400, Uruguay; fCenter of Advanced Studies in Ecology and Biodiversity, Facultad de Ciencias Biológicas, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Casilla 114-D, Chile; gEmory University, Atlanta, GA 30322; hEscuela de Administración, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Casilla 114-D, Chile; iWageningen University, 6700 DD, Wageningen, The Netherlands; and jDarling Marine Center, University of Maine, Walpole, ME 04573 Contributed by Juan C. Castilla, August 16, 2010 (sent for review May 7, 2010) Marine ecosystems are in decline. New transformational changes This approach ignores other critical species and processes that in governance are urgently required to cope with overfishing, sustain functioning ecosystems and is often incapable of dealing pollution, global changes, and other drivers of degradation. Here with ecological thresholds and surprises (2, 3). Therefore, shifts we explore social, political, and ecological aspects of a transfor- to new governance systems that support flexible, adaptive man- mation in governance of Chile’s coastal marine resources, from agement approaches are urgently needed (2, 3). 1980 to today. Critical elements in the initial preparatory phase Shifting from conventional management to new governance of the transformation were (i) recognition of the depletion of re- approaches has proven to be difficult, and there is a general lack of ii fi source stocks, ( ) scienti c knowledge on the ecology and resil- understanding about critical conditions and the range of spatial ience of targeted species and their role in ecosystem dynamics, scale under which such shifts are possible. Scholars in sustainability and (iii) demonstration-scale experimental trials, building on fi fi science recognize the need for fundamental change (9, 10) and smaller-scale scienti c experiments, which identi ed new man- have recently offered empirically based insights into policy de- agement pathways. The trials improved cooperation among scien- velopment within linked SES (11–13). Progress in this field reveals tists and fishers, integrating knowledge and establishing trust. the need to understand SES dynamics that facilitate shifts in gov- Political turbulence and resource stock collapse provided a window fi of opportunity that triggered the transformation, supported by ernance (11). Speci cally, there is still a lack of understanding of new enabling legislation. Essential elements to navigate this how to steer away from unsustainable development pathways – transformation were the ability to network knowledge from the toward improved social ecological trajectories that sustain and local level to influence the decision-making processes at the na- enhance marine ecosystem services and human well-being (3). tional level, and a preexisting social network of fishers that pro- Existing knowledge of transformation in governance is frag- vided political leverage through a national confederation of mented, and different disciplines have studied pieces of the artisanal fishing collectives. The resultant governance scheme puzzle, but these have rarely been analyzed together in a broader includes a revolutionary national system of marine tenure that social–ecological context. Although many scientists argue for the allocates user rights and responsibilities to fisher collectives. Al- need to change institutions to move into new pathways, others though fine tuning is necessary to build resilience of this new re- argue that whole societal regimes have to change to prompt gime, this transformation has improved the sustainability of the major shifts in governance (14). This literature recognizes that interconnected social–ecological system. Our analysis of how this transformation in governance requires more than mere in- transformation unfolded provides insights into how the Chilean stitutional change. Rather they are systemic shifts that include system could be further developed and identifies generalized changes in management paradigms, regulatory frameworks, un- pathways for improved governance of marine resources around derlying norms and values, knowledge production systems, eq- the world. uity, and power distribution (9, 15, 16). To understand such processes we use the concept of path de- fi – artisanal shing | ecosystem services | human dimensions | social ecological pendence. A system is path dependent if future choices are systems | window of opportunity canalized by previous decisions into a particular pathway channel and these constraints make it difficult to move forward in a dif- s the magnitude of human impacts on ecosystems continues ferent direction (17). Because of such stabilizing feedback Ato grow and becomes more apparent (1), there is an in- mechanisms, shifting into new pathways might be very difficult. creasing appreciation of the intimate coupling between ecosys- For example, in the United States and elsewhere marine zoning tems and human well-being. This represents a fundamental and shifts to ecosystem-based management have been severely paradigm shift, from the traditional view of people as external constrained by inflexible institutions, limited public support, and disrupters of otherwise pristine ecosystems, to a focus on the fi – dif culties in developing acceptable legislation (8). Attempts and dynamics of linked social ecological systems (SES) (2, 3). Most initiatives to move toward place-based ecosystem management current approaches to governance and management of marine often fail because there are mechanisms like peoples’ attitudes ecosystems do not adequately link social and ecological pro- and worldviews, economic incentives, power relations, and cesses and have demonstrably failed to halt or reverse environ- institutions that do not facilitate such shifts. mental decline at a global scale (refs. 4 and 5; but see refs. 6 and 7). The reasons behind this failure are complex. Often gover- nance is ineffective because of political impediments, missing or Author contributions: S.G., T.P.H., P.O., C.F., O.D., M.F., S.F., L.H.G., C.R.-S., M.S., R.S.S., and dysfunctional institutions, weak environmental legislation, lack J.C.C. designed research; S.G., T.P.H., P.O., C.F., M.F., and J.C.C. performed research; S.G., of public support, inadequate enforcement, or poor monitoring T.P.H., P.O., C.F., O.D., M.F., and J.C.C. analyzed data; and S.G., T.P.H., P.O., C.F., O.D., S.F., and evaluation systems (8). Typically, management of marine L.H.G., C.R.-S., M.S., R.S.S., and J.C.C. wrote the paper. systems focuses on a few exploited species in an attempt to de- The authors declare no conflict of interest. liver efficiency, reliability, and optimization of fisheries yields. 1To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]. 16794–16799 | PNAS | September 28, 2010 | vol. 107 | no. 39 www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1012021107 Downloaded by guest on October 2, 2021 Despite difficulties in changing trajectory, the literature rec- The FAL provided formal recognition of artisanal fishers and ognizes that there are critical junctures from which policies and incorporated two new regulations that established user rights. governance move into new pathways (18). Studying the sequence First, artisanal fishers were assigned exclusive fishery access rights of events that leads to such junctures is of crucial importance for (to all species) within a zone that extends 5 nautical miles (9.3 km) understanding transformations in SES (19). Such shifts are often from the shoreline along ca. 2,500 km of coast (18°36′–41°27′ S) multilevel and multiphase processes that involve incremental as and around Chilean oceanic islands (Fig. 1); This regulation aimed well as abrupt change. Transformation is about shifting to to reduce conflict, especially between midscale artisanals and the a fundamentally new SES when ecological, economic, or social industrial fleet. Second, the FAL assigned TURFs over inshore structures make the existing system untenable. Recent studies areas of seabed to registered artisanal fisher associations (unions, suggest that transformations consist of three phases: (i) pre- cooperatives) for the management of benthic resources, under the paring for transformation, (ii) navigating the transition, and (iii) term Management and Exploitation Areas for Benthic Resources building resilience of the new governance regime. Phase 1 is (MEABR). This regulation targets small-scale artisanals (Fig. 1) often protracted until a window of opportunity allows pro- as a response to overexploitation of benthic fisheries (15). gression to phases 2 and 3 (20–22). Important factors for accomplishing transformations include innovation and strategies Governance Transformations in Small-Scale Artisanal Benthic developed by key players. Using