Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves in Brazil: resilient alternatives to fisheries?

This study uses the socio-ecological resilience concept to compare two categories of fisheries co-management in Brazil: Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves. Ecological resilience was estimated by the indicators: reserve areas, human density and the existence of buffer zones around the re...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of environmental planning and management 2011-05, Vol.54 (4), p.421-443
Hauptverfasser: Lopes, Priscila F.M, Silvano, Renato A.M, Begossi, Alpina
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 443
container_issue 4
container_start_page 421
container_title Journal of environmental planning and management
container_volume 54
creator Lopes, Priscila F.M
Silvano, Renato A.M
Begossi, Alpina
description This study uses the socio-ecological resilience concept to compare two categories of fisheries co-management in Brazil: Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves. Ecological resilience was estimated by the indicators: reserve areas, human density and the existence of buffer zones around the reserves. Indicators for social-resilience were grouped in two categories: flexibility (assessed by livelihood diversification and resources exploited) and capacity to organize (assessed by local/governrnenta1 demand for reserve creation, existence of fishing management rules or management plans, participation in the decision-making process and existence of self-monitoring). Amazonian reserves are larger, have buffer zones and people depend on a broader range of natural resources compared to those on the coast. However, the inhabitants of coastal reserves can rely on ecotourism and jobs outside the reserves, which may reduce local fishing pressure. Both regions have reserves created using top-down initiatives as well as those created from local demands. Yet, participation in decision making is not necessarily related to the origin of demand and the level of local involvement can be limited in either case. Unless co-management is followed by adaptive management, increased local participation of people in management and the diversification of economic sources. its benefit to resilience is limited.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/09640568.2010.508687
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1777114627</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2351938381</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c683t-911141f74e580211c6a53d3e709076ec49368321f03cd5b59d2c02d29afec3633</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkstuFDEQRVsIJELgD5BosYHNhPLbZhNBCC9FQiJkbTnu6sQj9wO7Z2D4etxqQIgFMwu7rPK513a5quoxgRMCGl6AkRyE1CcUSkqAllrdqY4Ik7ACIczdv9b3qwc5rwFAMCKPKnv-fUrOT2GLteub-nKTJxd6dx2xfoNbjMPYYT_VnzFj2mKuQ1-_Tu5HiC_rhDnEMO-6OGHq3eyS62mo25BvMQXMpw-re62LGR_9isfV1dvzL2fvVxef3n04e3Wx8lKzaWUIIZy0iqPQQAnx0gnWMFRgQEn03LDCUdIC8424FqahHmhDjWvRM8nYcfVs8R3T8HWDebJdyB5jdD0Om2xNqRNhgtK9pDaGSE6E3E9qTcplOT-MJAIOICXTRlNpCvn8vyRRSpWiSaoORAHk_Pqn_6DrYVO-Ls5HK0EZ17MfXyCfhpwTtnZMoXNpZwnYuePs746zc8fZpeOK7OMiSzii_6OZXLvGfuxu7NYyJ3iZdmUUJSkhlDGnxjlSYks17e3UFbPTxSz07ZA6921IsSleuzikNrneh2zZnus8WRxaN1h3k4rg6rIAHIAoXSD2E3ck-4k</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>867523487</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves in Brazil: resilient alternatives to fisheries?</title><source>RePEc</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Access via Taylor &amp; Francis</source><creator>Lopes, Priscila F.M ; Silvano, Renato A.M ; Begossi, Alpina</creator><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Priscila F.M ; Silvano, Renato A.M ; Begossi, Alpina</creatorcontrib><description>This study uses the socio-ecological resilience concept to compare two categories of fisheries co-management in Brazil: Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves. Ecological resilience was estimated by the indicators: reserve areas, human density and the existence of buffer zones around the reserves. Indicators for social-resilience were grouped in two categories: flexibility (assessed by livelihood diversification and resources exploited) and capacity to organize (assessed by local/governrnenta1 demand for reserve creation, existence of fishing management rules or management plans, participation in the decision-making process and existence of self-monitoring). Amazonian reserves are larger, have buffer zones and people depend on a broader range of natural resources compared to those on the coast. However, the inhabitants of coastal reserves can rely on ecotourism and jobs outside the reserves, which may reduce local fishing pressure. Both regions have reserves created using top-down initiatives as well as those created from local demands. Yet, participation in decision making is not necessarily related to the origin of demand and the level of local involvement can be limited in either case. Unless co-management is followed by adaptive management, increased local participation of people in management and the diversification of economic sources. its benefit to resilience is limited.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1360-0559</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0964-0568</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1360-0559</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2010.508687</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEPMF7</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Abingdon: Routledge</publisher><subject>Amazon ; Benefits ; Brazil ; Brazilian coast ; Categories ; Citizen participation ; co-management ; collaborative management ; Comparative analysis ; Decision making ; Demand ; Ecology ; Economic development ; Economics ; Ecotourism ; Employment ; Environmental policy ; Fisheries ; Fisheries management ; Fishery management ; humans ; livelihood ; Management ; Marketing ; Natural resources ; people ; Planning ; Reserves ; Resilience ; Resource management ; resource use ; small scale fisheries ; socio-ecological resilience ; Studies ; Sustainable development</subject><ispartof>Journal of environmental planning and management, 2011-05, Vol.54 (4), p.421-443</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2011</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd. 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c683t-911141f74e580211c6a53d3e709076ec49368321f03cd5b59d2c02d29afec3633</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c683t-911141f74e580211c6a53d3e709076ec49368321f03cd5b59d2c02d29afec3633</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09640568.2010.508687$$EPDF$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09640568.2010.508687$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginformaworld$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,4009,27869,27870,27928,27929,59651,60440</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/tafjenpmg/v_3a54_3ay_3a2011_3ai_3a4_3ap_3a421-443.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Priscila F.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvano, Renato A.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Begossi, Alpina</creatorcontrib><title>Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves in Brazil: resilient alternatives to fisheries?</title><title>Journal of environmental planning and management</title><description>This study uses the socio-ecological resilience concept to compare two categories of fisheries co-management in Brazil: Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves. Ecological resilience was estimated by the indicators: reserve areas, human density and the existence of buffer zones around the reserves. Indicators for social-resilience were grouped in two categories: flexibility (assessed by livelihood diversification and resources exploited) and capacity to organize (assessed by local/governrnenta1 demand for reserve creation, existence of fishing management rules or management plans, participation in the decision-making process and existence of self-monitoring). Amazonian reserves are larger, have buffer zones and people depend on a broader range of natural resources compared to those on the coast. However, the inhabitants of coastal reserves can rely on ecotourism and jobs outside the reserves, which may reduce local fishing pressure. Both regions have reserves created using top-down initiatives as well as those created from local demands. Yet, participation in decision making is not necessarily related to the origin of demand and the level of local involvement can be limited in either case. Unless co-management is followed by adaptive management, increased local participation of people in management and the diversification of economic sources. its benefit to resilience is limited.</description><subject>Amazon</subject><subject>Benefits</subject><subject>Brazil</subject><subject>Brazilian coast</subject><subject>Categories</subject><subject>Citizen participation</subject><subject>co-management</subject><subject>collaborative management</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Demand</subject><subject>Ecology</subject><subject>Economic development</subject><subject>Economics</subject><subject>Ecotourism</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Environmental policy</subject><subject>Fisheries</subject><subject>Fisheries management</subject><subject>Fishery management</subject><subject>humans</subject><subject>livelihood</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Marketing</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>people</subject><subject>Planning</subject><subject>Reserves</subject><subject>Resilience</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>resource use</subject><subject>small scale fisheries</subject><subject>socio-ecological resilience</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Sustainable development</subject><issn>1360-0559</issn><issn>0964-0568</issn><issn>1360-0559</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkstuFDEQRVsIJELgD5BosYHNhPLbZhNBCC9FQiJkbTnu6sQj9wO7Z2D4etxqQIgFMwu7rPK513a5quoxgRMCGl6AkRyE1CcUSkqAllrdqY4Ik7ACIczdv9b3qwc5rwFAMCKPKnv-fUrOT2GLteub-nKTJxd6dx2xfoNbjMPYYT_VnzFj2mKuQ1-_Tu5HiC_rhDnEMO-6OGHq3eyS62mo25BvMQXMpw-re62LGR_9isfV1dvzL2fvVxef3n04e3Wx8lKzaWUIIZy0iqPQQAnx0gnWMFRgQEn03LDCUdIC8424FqahHmhDjWvRM8nYcfVs8R3T8HWDebJdyB5jdD0Om2xNqRNhgtK9pDaGSE6E3E9qTcplOT-MJAIOICXTRlNpCvn8vyRRSpWiSaoORAHk_Pqn_6DrYVO-Ls5HK0EZ17MfXyCfhpwTtnZMoXNpZwnYuePs746zc8fZpeOK7OMiSzii_6OZXLvGfuxu7NYyJ3iZdmUUJSkhlDGnxjlSYks17e3UFbPTxSz07ZA6921IsSleuzikNrneh2zZnus8WRxaN1h3k4rg6rIAHIAoXSD2E3ck-4k</recordid><startdate>201105</startdate><enddate>201105</enddate><creator>Lopes, Priscila F.M</creator><creator>Silvano, Renato A.M</creator><creator>Begossi, Alpina</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor and Francis Journals</general><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Ltd</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201105</creationdate><title>Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves in Brazil: resilient alternatives to fisheries?</title><author>Lopes, Priscila F.M ; Silvano, Renato A.M ; Begossi, Alpina</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c683t-911141f74e580211c6a53d3e709076ec49368321f03cd5b59d2c02d29afec3633</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Amazon</topic><topic>Benefits</topic><topic>Brazil</topic><topic>Brazilian coast</topic><topic>Categories</topic><topic>Citizen participation</topic><topic>co-management</topic><topic>collaborative management</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Demand</topic><topic>Ecology</topic><topic>Economic development</topic><topic>Economics</topic><topic>Ecotourism</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Environmental policy</topic><topic>Fisheries</topic><topic>Fisheries management</topic><topic>Fishery management</topic><topic>humans</topic><topic>livelihood</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Marketing</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>people</topic><topic>Planning</topic><topic>Reserves</topic><topic>Resilience</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>resource use</topic><topic>small scale fisheries</topic><topic>socio-ecological resilience</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Sustainable development</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lopes, Priscila F.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Silvano, Renato A.M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Begossi, Alpina</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental planning and management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lopes, Priscila F.M</au><au>Silvano, Renato A.M</au><au>Begossi, Alpina</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves in Brazil: resilient alternatives to fisheries?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental planning and management</jtitle><date>2011-05</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>421</spage><epage>443</epage><pages>421-443</pages><issn>1360-0559</issn><issn>0964-0568</issn><eissn>1360-0559</eissn><coden>JEPMF7</coden><abstract>This study uses the socio-ecological resilience concept to compare two categories of fisheries co-management in Brazil: Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves. Ecological resilience was estimated by the indicators: reserve areas, human density and the existence of buffer zones around the reserves. Indicators for social-resilience were grouped in two categories: flexibility (assessed by livelihood diversification and resources exploited) and capacity to organize (assessed by local/governrnenta1 demand for reserve creation, existence of fishing management rules or management plans, participation in the decision-making process and existence of self-monitoring). Amazonian reserves are larger, have buffer zones and people depend on a broader range of natural resources compared to those on the coast. However, the inhabitants of coastal reserves can rely on ecotourism and jobs outside the reserves, which may reduce local fishing pressure. Both regions have reserves created using top-down initiatives as well as those created from local demands. Yet, participation in decision making is not necessarily related to the origin of demand and the level of local involvement can be limited in either case. Unless co-management is followed by adaptive management, increased local participation of people in management and the diversification of economic sources. its benefit to resilience is limited.</abstract><cop>Abingdon</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/09640568.2010.508687</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1360-0559
ispartof Journal of environmental planning and management, 2011-05, Vol.54 (4), p.421-443
issn 1360-0559
0964-0568
1360-0559
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1777114627
source RePEc; PAIS Index; Access via Taylor & Francis
subjects Amazon
Benefits
Brazil
Brazilian coast
Categories
Citizen participation
co-management
collaborative management
Comparative analysis
Decision making
Demand
Ecology
Economic development
Economics
Ecotourism
Employment
Environmental policy
Fisheries
Fisheries management
Fishery management
humans
livelihood
Management
Marketing
Natural resources
people
Planning
Reserves
Resilience
Resource management
resource use
small scale fisheries
socio-ecological resilience
Studies
Sustainable development
title Extractive and Sustainable Development Reserves in Brazil: resilient alternatives to fisheries?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-16T13%3A45%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Extractive%20and%20Sustainable%20Development%20Reserves%20in%20Brazil:%20resilient%20alternatives%20to%20fisheries?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20planning%20and%20management&rft.au=Lopes,%20Priscila%20F.M&rft.date=2011-05&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=421&rft.epage=443&rft.pages=421-443&rft.issn=1360-0559&rft.eissn=1360-0559&rft.coden=JEPMF7&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/09640568.2010.508687&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2351938381%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=867523487&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true