Search results

The book is a transdisciplinary endeavour with contributions by scholars from geography, history, sociology, anthropology, political studies, planning, human ecology, cultural and applied ecology, environmental and development studies, . ; Accepted version

Large-scale shrimp aquaculture can have major social and environmental impacts. Can community-based approaches be used instead? We examined three coastal community-based shrimp aquaculture operations in northwestern Sri Lanka using a case study approach. These shrimp farms were individually owned by small producers and managed under community-level rules. The system was characterized by three layers of institutions: community-level shrimp farmers associations; zone-level associations; and a national-level shrimp farming sector association. The national level was represented by a joint body of government and sector association. We evaluated the effectiveness of this institutional structure especially with regard to the management of shrimp disease that can spread through the use of a common water body. Lower operational costs make them a highly attractive alternative to large-scale aquaculture. In many ways, private shrimp aquaculture ownership with community-level institutions, and government supervision and coordination seem to work well. ; Published version

Much coastal fisheries literature supports the idea that shrimp aquaculture has the potential to cause considerable social and environmental destruction. The aim of the paper is to highlight the two faces of shrimp aquaculture as a wicked driver, emphasizing its potential role in activating systematic conversion of lagoon based fisheries commons to non-commons and vice versa. We use the cases of aquacultureled privatisation in Chilika Lagoon, located in the Bay of Bengal area of India, and collective action surrounding shrimp aquaculture in Northwestern Sri Lanka. For both studies, data are collected through mixed research methods, including semi-directive interviews, focus group discussions, and participant observations. Our analysis shows clear evidence that shrimp aquaculture can potentially contribute to either making commons or losing commons depending on the context and influences of multi-level drivers. Aquaculture-led factors contributing to the process of losing commons in Chilika are: large-scale, individually owned aquaculture operations; encroachment of customary fishery commons; loss of commons rights (access and entitlements); breakdown of commons institutions; policy changes; caste politics and resource conflicts; ecological disturbances; change in fishing practices. In Sri Lanka, aquaculture related factors contributing to making commons are: coordinating discharge; built-in incentive for stewardship; multi-level commons institutions; collective decision-making; bottom-up management approach; mixed commons regime; and small-scale operations. ; Published version

Unexpected temperature variations and rainfall patterns have direct, adverse impacts on shrimp farmers in northwestern Sri Lanka. Specifically, changing climatic conditions impact patterns of shrimp disease spread along an interconnected lagoon and make it difficult for shrimp farmers to predict and control the lagoonthe primary water source for coastal shrimp aquaculture. This paper examines how small-scale shrimp farmers adapt to the impacts of climate change by collectively managing shrimp disease. We studied three shrimp farming communities in northwestern Sri Lanka and analysed adaptation using a social-ecological resilience approach with a four-part framework: (1) living with uncertainty shrimp farmers deal with the uncertain nature of the shrimp business by controlling (rather than trying to eliminate) disease; (2) nurturing diversity farmers tend to diversify their income sources to include other activities and they also increase the risk of disease by dispersing pond waste water in space and time; (3) employing different kinds of knowledge farmers combine their experience with large-scale (failed) companies, their own experience, government technical expertise, and new knowledge from adaptive management (the zonal crop calendar system); and (4) creating opportunities for self-organization farmers have built on their experiences with producer cooperatives, known as samithi, to self-organize into a multi-level community-based management structure. Collaboration and collective action are central features of this adaptation mechanism. This small-scale shrimp aquaculture system is persistent, i.e. sustainable and resilient because it is continually adapting. ; Published version

Governments, businesses, and civil society organizations have diverse policy tools to incentivize adaptation. Policy tools can shape the type and extent of adaptation, and therefore, function either as barriers or enablers for reducing risk and vulnerability. Using data from a systematic review of academic literature on global adaptation responses to climate change (n = 1549 peer-reviewed articles), we categorize the types of policy tools used to shape climate adaptation. We apply qualitative and quantitative analyses to assess the contexts where particular tools are used, along with equity implications for groups targeted by the tools, and the tools relationships with transformational adaptation indicators such as the depth, scope, and speed of adaptation. We find diverse types of tools documented across sectors and geographic regions. We also identify a mismatch between the tools that consider equity and those that yield more transformational adaptations. Direct regulations, plans, and capacity building are associated with higher depth and scope of adaptation (thus transformational adaptation), while economic instruments, information provisioning, and networks are not; the latter tools, however, are more likely to target marginalized groups in their design and implementation. We identify multiple research gaps, including a need to assess instrument mixes rather than single tools and to assess adaptations that result from policy implementation. Key policy insights Information-based approaches, networks, and economic instruments are the most frequently documented adaptation policy tools worldwide. Direct regulations, plans, and capacity building are associated with higher depth and scope of adaptation, and thus more transformational adaptation. Capacity building, economic instruments, networks, and information provisioning approaches are more likely to target specific marginalized groups and thus equity challenges. There are many regions and sectors where certain tools are not widely documented (e.g. regulations and plans in Africa and Asia), representing a key research gap. ; Published version