![Sample our Social Sciences journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110822/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Social-Sciences.jpg"})
Abstract
Protection and management of common-pool natural resources are an international focus of government agencies and nongovernmental organizations. There is concern that an emphasis on protection has inadvertently led to the disenfranchisement of local stakeholders by prohibiting access to natural resources that they have traditionally relied upon. Management of these resources by state actors without local input has exacerbated the social and economic marginalization of poor and/or minority populations, leading to traditional interactions with natural resources being labeled as deviant or criminal. The complex nature of this issue, which lies at the nexus of natural-resource management, criminology and risk, makes it difficult to explore using a disciplinary view. The theoretical concept of conservation criminology is well suited to serve as a framework for this wicked problem. We examine the strain between resource management, environmental protection and local stakeholders’ rights via a case study (Abalone fishery in South Africa) using conservation criminology as a theoretical structure.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Maria Hauck to this manuscript. Dr Hauck's 15 years of research on South Africa fisheries form the basis of this study and she introduced us to the issues, the local fishers, and the research site. The interpretation of her prior research and the framework presented herein represent the opinion of the present authors and Dr Hauck is not responsible for any errors or omissions.
Notes
1. Some may view this problem as a “tragedy of the commons” (Hardin, Citation1968). “Tragedy of the commons” refers to a class of management problems in which a common resource, shared by a group of people, is degraded over time because individuals make economically rational decisions to maximize the use of the resource without regard to other users (Hardin, Citation1968). However, this view has been largely challenged by recent work which suggests that individuals are able to successfully share and utilize common resources (Ostrom, Citation1999). In the South African fishery, we believe that this label fails to acknowledge the complexity of the issue. The South African fishery is highly regulated; it has not been left to individuals to maximize the resource individually. In addition, individual decisions to exploit the resource cannot be reduced to economic rationally. These decisions have been made within a larger social context that can be addressed to better manage the resource.
2. The concept of “conservation criminology” was introduced by Herbig and Joubert (Citation2006). The framework presented herein was developed in Gibbs, Gore et al. (Citation2010).
3. The way that decision and judgment scholars examine decision behavior can be placed into three categories: normative, descriptive or prescriptive. Normative behavior refers to how people should behave when making a decision. A classic example of this is rational choice theory. In contrast, descriptive behavior explains how people actually make decisions. For example, prospect theory is a well-tested explanation of how people actually make decisions that fall short of normative behavior. Finally, prescriptive studies investigate ways for people to avoid the less than optimal outcomes often associated with the decision behavior identified in the study of descriptive behavior.
4. For example, power dynamics can shape what is defined as an environmental crime to the disadvantage of marginalized groups (Hauck, Citation2008).
5. A full review of the context of other common-pool natural-resource issues is beyond the scope of this paper. However, to demonstrate the need to understand the context of specific environmental issues in the application of the conservation-criminology framework, we contrast our current case study of a South African abalone fishery with other abalone fisheries and natural resource issues in footnotes throughout the paper.
6. In South Africa, these individuals are referred to as “colored.”
7. Permitting systems have been implemented to regulate Australian abalone fisheries as well. However, the existing literature does not indicate that the Australian licensing system disproportionately excluded certain groups, particularly those who have engaged in abalone fishing as a livelihood and way of life for generations (Prince & Shepherd, Citation1992; Tailby & Gant, Citation2002). Thus, the context of this South African fishery is unique from Australia.
8. As in Australia (Tailby & Gant, Citation2002), there is variation in the level of organization among poachers. Chinese organized crime syndicates are involved to some unknown extent in abalone poaching and other forms of environmental crime in South Africa (Gastrow, Citation2001). Local populations seem to have some interaction with these syndicates (Hauck & Sweijd, Citation1999). The unique context of locals and organized crime members is important to understanding and addressing their behavior. Locals historically engaged in abalone fishing as a way of life and a source of livelihood; their traditional behavior was criminalized during and after apartheid regimes (Hauck Citation2008). Organized crime syndicates have infiltrated South Africa for explicit criminal purposes (Gastrow, Citation2001). As such, these groups will likely require different policy interventions. For example, strict deterrence policies may be more important for targeting organized crime groups than the behavior of locals (see, e.g., Leader-Williams & Milner-Gulland, Citation1993). In the following sections, we focus explicitly on addressing the behavior and disenfranchisement of local populations. Consistent with Hauck (Citation2008), we focus on the link between human and environmental rights in this particular context.
9. Research in this unique context may also inform criminological theory. When livelihood is at stake, does fair process influence behavior more than the policy outcome (i.e., exclusion from the resource)? If not, theories of procedural justice may need to be adjusted or acknowledged as limited in scope.
10. An interesting research question would explore whether perceptions of injustice in this sphere correspondingly influence perceptions of justice and state legitimacy in other sectors.
11. The concept of transdisciplinary suggests a move beyond the integration of knowledge, theory and methods from multiple scientific disciplines but to also include “the personal, the local, and the strategic,” such as the knowledge of the traditional and commercial fishers in the South African example (Brown, Deane et al., Citation2010, p. 4). This is intended to complement rather than replace disciplinary, multi- and inter-disciplinary knowledge.