(The source for much of this section is: Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2000.) Prior to beginning the negotiation, rules, procedures and equity issues need to be considered. Any negotiation is based on cultural and political realities.
There may already exist in the community procedures for developing and negotiating plans and agreements that are simple, effective and inexpensive.
These procedures may or may not be suitable for the co-management planning process. In cases where they are not suitable or where no procedures exist, new procedures will need to be designed. The CO may propose a schedule of meetings, some rules and procedures for participation, and a structure for a co- management body to conduct and oversee the planning process. The CO should present this proposal to representatives from the local government and community organizations. They may discuss and modify them, but a first meeting among the co-management stakeholders is proposed. The CO should Box 10.2. Using Adaptive Management in Fisheries.
ADMAFISH is a continually evolving programme that actively applies the principles of adaptive management to identify, test and refine methodologies that support co- management. ADMAFISH monitors fish catch throughout the project area primarily through village monitors. These village monitors, retired and active fishers, collect catch data from the fishers at the landing site and ensure that they follow the rules. Data collected through these efforts are used to ensure that proper fishing fees are paid to the co-management organization. They are also used to continually adjust the fishing quotas set by the co-management organization. If there is too much catch of a certain species, then the quota is adjusted down. This investment in data collection and analysis has resulted in a co-management programme that allows for fisher input, questions about the resource to be asked and answered, and rules to be enforced.
work with the stakeholders to obtain an agreement on the place, date, hour, participants, agenda, logistics and facilities needed for the meeting that will begin the actual co-management process. It is important to consider fairness and equity issues; that is, to ensure that the previous less empowered segments of the community are fully involved in the process (Boxes 10.3 and 10.4). This is done through the community organizations, but also by recognizing entitlements and promoting fair negotiations (Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2000).
Edmunds and Wollenberg (2002) have identified a number of steps for negotiation, especially for disadvantaged groups:
● Neutral conditions are created including time, place, language, terms of communication, materials for illiterate participants and information sources.
● Inform participants fully about to whom conveners and facilitators are accountable.
● Create possibilities for disadvantaged groups to pursue alliances with more powerful groups in negotiations.
● Acknowledge the right of disadvantaged groups to identify ‘non-negotiable’
topics or items they view as inappropriate for discussion in the negotiation.
Co-management Plan and Agreement 169
Box 10.3. Issues in Plan Preparation – Differing Objectives and Co-management Arrangements.
Two issues are critical to consider and address while in the co-management plan preparation process since the issues can cause problems later in the programme. The first is the analysis of stakeholder objectives for wanting to engage in co-management.
Each individual stakeholder and stakeholder group, including government and community organization, has their own reasons and objectives to engage in co-management. These may be similar or may be widely different. During the co-management plan process these objectives need to be openly and clearly stated, clarified, discussed and negotiated among the stakeholders. If they are not, it can cause problems later as the stakeholders will have differing expectations and takes on why they are involved in the programme.
The second issue is where on the continuum of co-management arrangements to begin the co-management programme. As presented in Chapter 2, Section 2.1, there is a hierarchy or range of possible co-management arrangements, from those in which government consults fishers before making a decision, to those in which the community of fishers make decisions and consult with government. It is generally acknowledged that not all responsibility and authority should be vested at the community level. The amount and type of responsibility and/or authority that the partners have will need to be negotiated during the planning stage. It will depend on legal authority, government’s willingness to devolve responsibility and authority, the capacity of the partners, among other issues. Too much responsibility and authority being retained by government may stifle community initiative, while too much responsibility and authority too early for the community may lead to problems due to lack of capacity. The partners need to negotiate the initial arrangement from positions of equal power, which is why organizing and empowerment activities are undertaken early in the co-management programme, and be realistic about what they are capable of doing.
● Acknowledge that each group may not fully and unconditionally support proposed agreements. Encourage stakeholders to express their doubts about agreements. View ‘consensus’ as likely to mask differences in perspective and discount the input of disadvantaged groups.
● Assess the likelihood that agreements may need to be renegotiated in the future.
● Prepare disadvantaged groups to the possibility that the good will demonstrated among groups may not last.
● Stakeholders share information fully and openly.
● Assess the legitimacy of processes, decisions and agreements in terms of the role and implications for disadvantaged groups. Analyse the reasons for participation or non-participation of each group in negotiations, their objectives and strategies, how groups are represented, and the history of relationships underlying agreements.
● Open communication among the groups.
Box 10.4.Promoting Equity in Co-management: Some Examples and Ideas.
● Disseminating information on environmental values, opportunities and risks of relevance to potential stakeholders.
● Disseminating information on various natural resource management options.
● Ensuring freedom to express views and organize for action.
● Giving a fair hearing to every stakeholders’ grounds for entitlements, with no discrimination in favour of some with respect to others (discrimination may be based on ethnicity, gender, age, caste, economic power, religion, residence and so forth).
● Helping the stakeholders to participate in the negotiation process, for instance, by supporting them to organize, to develop a fair system of representation and to travel to meetings.
● Organizing discussion platforms where all the stakeholders can voice their ideas and concerns, selecting the least discriminatory places, times, languages, formats, etc.
● Supporting the negotiation of a fair share of management functions, rights, benefits and responsibilities.
● Ensuring effective and unbiased facilitation during negotiations.
● Supporting (via training and allocation of resources) the skills and capability of stakeholders to negotiate.
● Promoting a tight proportionality between the management entitlements and responsibilities and the benefits and costs assigned to each stakeholder.
● Keeping an open door for new stakeholders who may arrive on the scene.
● Supporting participatory democracy and multi-party agreements and organizations in all sorts of social decisions.
● Ensuring a fair measure of democratic experimentalism, allowing the adjustment of management plans, agreements, organizations and rules on the basis of learning-by- doing.
● Ensuring that the negotiated co-management plans, agreements and rules are enforced effectively.
Source: Borrini-Feyerabend et al. (2000, p. 33).