|
Abstract:
|
"Conflicts over the imposition of restrictions in common-pool resources management institutions are expected to arise
from variations in human values, perceptions of justice, and the disparate demographic scales of benefits and costs. We hypothesized
and tested a series of propositions about how the demographic scale and context of common restrictions would influence coral reef
fisheries of 4 African countries. We surveyed the preferences and perceived benefits of 1849 people in 89 fish landing sites for 6 common
restrictions of increasing severity. Variability in perceived benefits within and between neighboring communities was evaluated to
determine how perceptions changed with the severity of the proposed benefit/cost restriction scale, perceived benefits, disparities
between beneficiaries, and national context. Within-community variability declined strongly (r² > 0.90) as perceived benefit increased
but was either weak or not significantly associated with the neighbor-community’s variation. Within-community variation was less
than between-community variation and differed by nation. There was generally broader scale agreement on the benefits of weaker
restrictions of minimum sizes of fish and allowable fishing gear and more disagreement on stronger restrictions on species, time, and
space use. Reduced variability was strongly associated with less perceived disparity in the benefits received by local versus government
beneficiaries. These findings indicate potential conflicts between neighboring communities for most, but particularly the strongest,
restrictions. Consequently, the broadscale management benefits of strong restrictions will need to address between-community
compliance and justice procedures. Demographic variability requires coordinating governance and management to account for
restriction-specific variability in the perceptions of management benefits."
|