The social-ecological system framework as a knowledge classificatory system for benthic small-scale fisheries

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors use Ostrom's social-ecological system framework to build a classification system for small-scale benthic fisheries, regarding their governance processes and outcomes.

Abstract: Ostrom proposed the underpinnings of a framework for the systematic study of the governance of complex social–ecological systems. Here we hypothesize that Ostrom's social–ecological system framework can be useful to build a classification system for small-scale benthic fisheries, regarding their governance processes and outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to knowledge accumulation of benthic fisheries. To tailor the framework, we relied on discussions among experts and a systematic literature review of benthic fisheries from 1980 to 2010. This literature review helped us refine variable definitions and provide readers with illustrative reference papers. We then illustrate the approach and its potential contributions through two studies of the emergence of self-organization in Mexico and Chile. We highlight synthetic lessons from the cases and the overall approach as well as reflect on remaining challenges to the development of a social–ecological system framework as a diagnostic tool for knowledge accumulation and synthesis.

Summary

1. Introduction

• Ontologies, or systems of classification, can serve these functions.
• Here the authors hypothesize that Ostrom’s social–ecological system (SES) framework can be useful to build a classification system for small-scale benthic fisheries, regarding their governance processes and outcomes.

2. Theoretical background

• Here the authors contend that the SES framework’s multitiered organizational structure could be useful to develop a diagnostic approach for the study and governance of SESs (McGinnis and Ostrom, 2013; Ostrom, 2007, 2009).
• These variables (also conceptualized as processes) make up the focal CPR system that links to exogenous factors like other Related Ecosystems (ECO) and Social, Economic, and Political Settings (S).
• The Governance System (GS) includes characteristics pertaining to central and local government and factors shaping rules and governance arrangements in Mexico and Chile.
• These determine incentives and behavior for Actors (A) involved in the fisheries.

3.1. Developing a classificatory system for benthic small-scale fisheries

• The authors began by updating the second-tier factors proposed by Ostrom (2009) according to recent modifications suggested by McGinnis and Ostrom (2013).
• The authors then reviewed the updated list for relevance to benthic fisheries SESs.
• This process resulted in the replacement or exclusion of second-tier variables in Ostrom (2009) and the development of new third-, fourth-, and fifth-tier variables presented in Table 1.
• Paper selection was limited to resources harvested through diving and/or intertidal gathering on the marine benthos.
• The authors used ISI Web of Knowledge, a major indexing database aggregate of peer-reviewed literature.

3.2. Applying the SES framework to studies of benthic fisheries in Mexico and Chile

• The authors selected two benthic small-scale fishing settings in Mexico and Chile for which peer-reviewed documentation was available and for which the authors had significant first-hand knowledge.
• The study conducted in Mexico looked at three different fisheries (Puerto Peñasco, Kino, and the Seri) within the Gulf of California.
• The study conducted in Chile compared the same community in three different time periods.
• Both studies looked at the combination of factors that could be associated with the fishers’ ability to self-organize to control access to other fishers.
• The main purpose of drawing on these studies was to provide an empirical example of how the SES framework can be useful to analyze complex SES interactions, because it makes it feasible to keep track of how different combinations of conditions are associated with similar outcomes.

4.1. Changes to the general SES framework to create a benthic fisheries SES framework

• Below the authors provide a summary of the modifications made to the original SES general list of variables proposed by Ostrom (2009).
• The table is organized by: Resource Systems (RS), Resource Units (RU), Actors (A) and Governance Systems (GS).
• The Resource System was extended to include second- and third-tier variables/processes.
• In order to acknowledge their role in determining outcomes, the authors added aspects of species life history traits and spatial distribution as third-tier variables/processes.
• The authors added around 37 second-, third-, and fourth-tier variables, mainly to represent the diversity of rules-in-use present in the management of benthic artisanal fisheries.

4.2. Two illustrative applications of the benthic fisheries SES framework

• The authors illustrate how an analyst can use the benthic SES framework depending on their interests by using Table 1 to select different components.
• The first application shows how factors influenced three Mexican fisheries’ capability to avoid the tragedy of open access.
• Variables related to the Governance System, Resource System, and Actors explained self-organization capabilities among these fisheries.
• In the Chilean case, the Resource System and Resource Units remained constant over time and therefore did not need to be included in the analysis.
• Variables within the Governance System and Actors explain changes in self-organization capacity.

4.2.1. An example from three Mexican fisheries on the emergence of local organization capacity to control access

• Like many other small-scale fisheries in Mexico, the Seri, Kino, and Peñasco fisheries, and the benthic sessile species that they target, are not actively regulated by government authorities.
• Kino Bay and Puerto Peñasco fishers seem to have also developed significant knowledge about the benthic resources they harvest (RS3, RS6) because such knowledge is likely germane to being a successful fisherman.
• Early positive results allowed divers to link their monitoring and enforcement efforts with an increase in the stock of their benthic resource units (Cudney-Bueno and Basurto, 2009).
• In sum, the absence of these factors at Kino Bay likely elevated the costs of organizing to the extent that surpassed the likely expected benefits of organizing into a common-property regime.

4.2.2. An over-time example from a Chilean bull-kelp fishery on the loss and recovery of local organization capacity

• Fishers from Puertecillo have been harvesting bull-kelp for generations (A3.2).
• Fishers in Puertecillo historically enjoyed a significant level of autonomy to determine their own operational access and harvesting rules (GS6.2), which led to the creation of a traditional management system held in place for more than 100 years until challenged by a national TURFs policy adopted in Puertecillo in 2003.
• This strongly affected the equity and social cohesion of the system, particularly as it related to trust and reciprocity among fishers (A6.1).

5. Discussion

• Most understanding of key factors affecting governance of benthic small-scale fisheries has been derived from case studies (but see Cinner et al., 2012; Gutiérrez et al., 2011 for large-n approaches).
• Depending on the purposes of analysis, a scholar could take into account variables/processes at different levels of aggregation or develop further tiers according to the needs generated in specific comparative studies.
• Organizing the Mexico study using the benthic SES framework illustrates what combinations of conditions allowed Puerto Peñasco and the Seri to self-organize to control access to their fisheries, while Kino failed to move away from an open-access regime (Table 2).
• This was particularly relevant from the Chilean case study, where learning (i.e. individual, social, and institutional) is hypothesized to have played an important role in the emergence of self-organization through time.
• Leaders are also expected to see possibilities and to discern and develop paths of action that might otherwise go unexplored (Gelcich et al., 2010).

6. Conclusion

• In closing, the authors note some common misunderstandings and remaining challenges to the implementation of the approach presented here.
• First, it is often misunderstood that all variables in the SES framework are needed for one particular analysis.
• Classificatory frameworks, however, can also slow down knowledge accumulation and be misused as checklists for problem analysis, and because they necessarily embed a certain worldview and the normative values held within such worldview, they can create blind spots toward other potential relevant processes and variables, or different worldviews.
• The authors take the position that exploration, debate, and design of a classificatory framework like the SES framework constitutes an important enterprise because it offers the promise to make headway toward building diagnostic theories for policy analysis (McGinnis and Ostrom, 2013; Ostrom, 2007, 2009; Young, 2002; Young et al., 2008).

Figures

Table A.3 (Continued )

Table A.1 Resource Systems (RS).a

Table A.4 Actors (A).a

Fig. 1. Revised SES framework with multiple first-tier components. Source. McGinnis and Ostrom (2013).

Table A.3 (Continued )

Table 3 Comparison of key SES variables for three distinct governance time periods in Puertecillo, Chile.

Table 1 Second to fifth-tier variables of an SES for benthic small-scale fisheries. Factors modified from Ostrom (2009) and specific for benthic small-scale fisheries are noted with color red and italic font. Tiers for Interactions and Outcomes are not included as they were not modified from the original.

Table A.2 Resource Units (RU).a

Table A.1 Resource Systems (RS).a

Full text

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights

Author's personal copy
The
social–ecological
system
framework
as
a
knowledge
classificatory
system
for
benthic
small-scale
fisheries
Xavier
Basurto
a,
*
,
Stefan
Gelcich
b,c,1
,
Elinor
Ostrom
d,2
a
Division
of
Marine
Science
and
Conservation,
Nicholas
School
of
the
Environment,
Duke
University,
135
Duke
Marine
Lab
Road,
Beaufort,
NC
28516,
USA
b
Centro
de
Conservacio
´
n
Marina,
Departamento
de
Ecologı
´
a,
Facultad
de
Ciencias
Biolo
´
gicas,
Pontificia
Universidad
Cato
´
lica
de
Chile,
Alameda
340,
Santiago,
Chile
c
Laboratorio
Internacional
en
Cambio
Global,
Consejo
Superior
de
Investigaciones
Cientı
´
ficas
(CSIC),
Esporles,
Spain
d
The
Vincent
and
Elinor
Ostrom
Workshop
in
Political
Theory
and
Policy
Analysis,
Indiana
University,
513
North
Park
Avenue,
Bloomington,
IN
47408,
USA
1.
Introduction
Small-scale
fisheries
are
increasingly
conceptualized
as
inte-
grated
social–ecological
complex
adaptive
systems
in
part
because
of
the
type
of
problems
they
exhibit
(Berkes,
2006,
2011;
Folke
et
al.,
2005;
Gelcich
et
al.,
2010;
Mahon
et
al.,
2008;
McConney
and
Charles,
2010;
Wilson,
2006).
These
problems,
such
as
avoiding
overexploitation,
are
rarely
attributable
to
a
single
cause
(Anderies
et
al.,
2007).
As
Holling
et
al.
(1998,
p.
352)
state:
Characteristically,
these
problems
tend
to
be
systems
problems,
where
aspects
of
behavior
are
complex
and
unpredictable
and
where
causes,
while
at
times
simple
(when
finally
understood),
are
always
multiple.
They
are
non-linear
in
nature,
cross-scale
in
time
and
in
space,
and
have
an
evolutionary
character.
This
is
true
for
both
natural
and
social
systems.
In
fact,
they
are
one
system,
with
critical
feedbacks
across
temporal
and
spatial
scales.
The
role
of
multiple
cau ses
has
also
been
described
by
Ostrom
(2005)
when
discussing
the
behavior
of
social
rule
systems
and
the
governance
outcomes
they
produce.
Sets
of
rules
interact
in
complex
patterns,
and
the
addition
or
removal
of
a
particular
rule
may
affect
the
int eractio ns
of
the
rest
of
the
set
and
thus
the
governance
outcome
(Cox,
2011).
Scholars
studying
small-scale
fisheries
have
made
great
strides
toward
identifying
key
processes
affecting
their
governance
(Castilla
and
Defeo,
2001;
Cinner
et
al.,
2007;
Defeo
and
Castilla,
2005;
Gelcich
et
al.,
2010;
Hilborn,
2007;
Orensanz
et
al.,
2013;
Pauly,
2006).
However,
the
role
of
rule
configurations
in
social–ecological
int eractions,
and
how
it
challenges
our
ability
to
establish
causal
mechanisms
linking
conditions
and
governance
outcomes,
has
received
considerably
less
attention.
One
of
the
many
challenges
of
understanding
what
configurations
of
conditions
may
lead
to
particular
governance
outcomes,
consists
of
devising
a
tractable
way
to
organize
and
document
them.
Ontologies,
or
systems
of
classification,
can
serve
these
functions.
For
instance,
the
Latin
alphabet
constitutes
a
relatively
simple
system
of
classification,
and
its
dictionary
serves
as
the
framework
in
which
empirical
configurations
of
this
ontology
are
expressed
for
a
particular
language.
In
this
example,
past
and
future
books
that
have
or
will
be
written
on
diverse
topics
are
expressions
of
how
systems
of
classification
allow
knowledge
accumulation
and
future
Global
Environmental
Change
23
(2013)
1366–1380
A
R
T
I
C
L
E
I
N
F
O
Article
history:
Received
18
July
2012
Received
in
revised
form
3
July
2013
Accepted
4
August
2013
Keywords:
Benthic
small-scale
fisheries
Social–ecological
system
(SES)
framework
Mexico
Chile
Human
dimensions
A
B
S
T
R
A
C
T
Ostrom
proposed
the
underpinnings
of
a
framework
for
the
systematic
study
of
the
governance
of
complex
social–ecological
systems.
Here
we
hypothesize
that
Ostrom’s
social–ecological
system
framework
can
be
useful
to
build
a
classification
system
for
small-scale
benthic
fisheries,
regarding
their
governance
processes
and
outcomes.
The
purpose
of
this
paper
is
to
contribute
to
knowledge
accumulation
of
benthic
fisheries.
To
tailor
the
framework,
we
relied
on
discussions
among
experts
and
a
systematic
literature
review
of
benthic
fisheries
from
1980
to
2010.
This
literature
review
helped
us
refine
variable
definitions
and
provide
readers
with
illustrative
reference
papers.
We
then
illustrate
the
approach
and
its
potential
contributions
through
two
studies
of
the
emergence
of
self-organization
in
Mexico
and
Chile.
We
highlight
synthetic
lessons
from
the
cases
and
the
overall
approach
as
well
as
reflect
on
remaining
challenges
to
the
development
of
a
social–ecological
system
framework
as
a
diagnostic
tool
for
knowledge
accumulation
and
synthesis.
ß
2013
Elsevier
Ltd.
All
rights
reserved.
*
Corresponding
author.
Tel.:
+1
252
504
7540;
fax:
+1
252
504
7648.
E-mail
addresses:
xavier.basurto@duke.edu
(X.
Basurto),
sgelcich@bio.puc.cl
(S.
Gelcich),
workshop@indiana.edu
(E.
Ostrom).
1
Tel.:
+56
2
3541914.
2
Tel.:
+1
812
855
0441;
fax:
+1
812
855
3150.
Contents
lists
available
at
ScienceDirect
Global
Environmental
Change
jo
ur
n
al
h
o
mep
ag
e:
www
.elsevier
.co
m
/loc
ate/g
lo
envc
h
a
0959-3780/$
–
see
front
matter
ß
2013
Elsevier
Ltd.
All
rights
reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.08.001

Author's personal copy
innovation.
Using
the
concep t
of
ontologies,
the
pertinent
question
for
SESs
is
then:
How
can
the
SES
research
agenda
develop
an
approach
that
all ows
for
knowledge
accumulation
that
can
inform
typologies
of
governance
arrangements
for
particular
small-scale
fishery
outcomes?
In
2007,
Ostrom
proposed
the
underpinnings
of
a
framework
for
the
systematic
study
of
the
governance
of
complex
SESs.
Here
we
hypothesize
that
Ostrom’s
social–ecological
system
(SES)
framework
can
be
useful
to
build
a
classification
system
for
small-scale
benthic
fisheries,
regarding
their
governance
pro-
cesses
and
outcomes.
The
first
step
in
this
process
is
to
develop
a
suite
of
key
SES
variables
or
processes
potentially
relevant
to
anyone
considering
conducting
a
study
on
benthic
small-scale
fisheries.
This
is
referred
to
as
an
ont ology.
By
analyzing
the
literature,
this
paper
develops
a
benthic
small-scale
fisheries
ontology.
It
then
illustrates
the
use
of
the
SES
framework
through
two
short
studies
concerning
Mexican
and
Chilean
benthic
fisheries.
Both
studies
focused
on
teasing
out
the
underlying
factors
affecting
the
self-organization
capacity
of
the
fisheries
to
avoid
tragedies
associated
with
open
access.
We
conclude
with
some
lessons,
cautionary
notes,
and
remaining
challenges
for
the
use
of
the
SES
approach
developed
here.
2.
Theoretical
background
Theories
of
collective
action
and
common-pool
resources
(CPRs)
have
contributed
to
our
understanding
of
processes
and
conditions
facilitating
the
likelihood
of
local
self-organization
(Acheson,
2003;
Baland
and
Platteau,
1996;
Berkes,
1989;
Bromley
et
al.,
1992;
NRC,
1986,
2002;
Ostrom,
1990,
2005),
but
scholars’
ability
to
establish
causal
linkages
among
factors
and
determine
their
relevance
at
local
contexts,
and
regardless
of
context,
is
still
quite
limited
(Agrawal,
2002).
Young
(2002)
argued
for
the
need
to
develop
an
‘‘institutional
diagnostic’’
approach
as
a
way
to
overcome
these
challenges.
In
medicine,
doctors
usually
follow
a
diagnostic
approach
toward
identifying
a
solution
to
a
medical
problem.
A
doctor
will
ask
us
a
number
of
initial
questions
and
do
some
regular
measurements.
In
light
of
that
information,
the
doctor
proceeds
down
a
medical
ontology
to
ask
further
and
more
specific
questions
(or
prescribes
tests)
until
a
reasonable
hypothesis
regarding
the
source
of
the
problem
can
be
found
and
supported.
When
we
begin
to
think
about
a
particular
SES
puzzle,
we
think
about
which
of
the
attributes
of
a
particular
SES
system
are
likely
to
have
a
major
impact
on
particular
patterns
of
interactions
and
outcomes.
While
each
human
being
is
unique,
illnesses
can
be
identified
and
diagnosed
in
a
similar
way
to
an
entire
population.
A
diagnostic
approach
for
SESs
should
be
capable
of
teasing
out
what
makes
each
resource
use
problem
unique
and
what
makes
each
case
generalizable
and
comparable
across
settings.
Here
we
contend
that
the
SES
framework’s
multitiered
organizational
structure
could
be
useful
to
develop
a
diagnostic
approach
for
the
study
and
governance
of
SESs
(McGinnis
and
Ostrom,
2013;
Ostrom,
2007,
2009).
The
point
of
entry
to
the
SES
framework
begins
with
the
first-
tier
variables
that
a
researcher
would
need
to
define
to
determine
the
particular
focal
CPR
system
of
int erest
(Fig.
1):
The
Resource
Units
(RU)
are
part
of
the
Resource
Systems
(RS),
the
Governance
Systems
(GS)
define
and
set
rules
for
Actors
(A).
All
of
them
influence
the
resultant
Interactions
(I)
and
Outcomes
(O)
and
create
feedbacks.
These
variables
(also
concep tualized
as
processes)
make
up
the
focal
CPR
system
that
links
to
exogenous
factors
like
oth er
Related
Ecosystems
(ECO)
and
Social,
Economic,
and
Political
Settings
(S).
In
this
paper,
the
Resource
System
(RS)
is
the
small-scale
fishery
sector
and
the
Resource
Units
(RU)
are
the
benthic
resources
harvested
by
commercial
fishers.
The
Governance
System
(GS)
includes
characteristics
pertaining
to
central
and
local
gov ernment
and
factors
shaping
rules
and
governance
arrangements
in
Mexico
and
Chile.
These
determine
incentives
and
behavior
for
Actors
(A)
involved
in
the
fisheries.
Such
actors
include
local
and
non-local
fishers,
researchers,
non-govern-
mental
organizations,
and
government
officials.
The
Social,
Economic,
and
Political
Setting
(S)
is
the
Gulf
of
California
in
northwest
Mexico,
and
the
rural
central
Chilean
coast.
We
aim
to
diagnose
what
combinations
of
SES
variables
were
associated
with
fishers’
ability
to
self-organize
and
avoid
overexploiting
their
fisheries,
and
which
interactions
led
to
continued
over-
harvesting.
define and set rules for
participate in
are inputs to
are part of
r
ofsnoiti
dnoc
tesrof
sno
it
i
dnoctes
Governance
Systems
(GS)
Resource Systems
(RS)
Resource Units
(RU)
Social, Economic, and Poli
tical
Settings
(S)
Related
Ecos
ystem
s (ECO)
Direct link
Feedback
Focal Action Situations
Interactions (I)
→
Outcomes (O)
Actors
(A)
Fig.
1.
Revised
SES
framework
with
multiple
first-tier
components.
Source.
McGinnis
and
Ostrom
(2013).
X.
Basurto
et
al.
/
Global
Environmental
Change
23
(2013)
1366–1380
1367

Author's personal copy
The
SES
framework
is
hierarchical
in
that
it
is
multitiered.
Each
of
the
variables
contained
in
the
first
tier
unpacks
to
reveal
a
number
of
second-tier
variables,
which
could
further
unpack
into
a
third
tier,
and
so
on
and
so
forth.
Ostrom’s
(2009)
selection
of
second-tier
variables
was
based
on
three
decades
of
empirical
work
studying
CPRs
(Acheson,
2003;
Baland
and
Platteau,
1996;
McKean,
1992,
2000;
Ostrom,
1990;
Ostrom
et
al.,
1992;
Schlager,
1994;
Tang,
1992;
Wade,
1994).
These
variables
are
particularly
salient
to
tease
out
the
likelihood
that
a
local
or
self-governing
association
will
be
constituted
by
developing
rules
and
norms
to
limit
their
harvesting
or
protect
the
use
of
the
resource
in
some
manner.
However,
the
use
of
the
SES
framework
by
scholars
thus
far
suggests
its
versatility
to
accommodate
the
investigation
of
a
diversity
of
governance-related
questions
(Blanco,
2011;
Cinner
et
al.,
2012;
Fleischman
et
al.,
2010;
Gutie
´
rrez
et
al.,
2011).
3.
Methods
3.1.
Developing
a
classificatory
system
for
benthic
small-scale
fisheries
We
began
by
updating
the
second-tier
factors
proposed
by
Ostrom
(2009)
according
to
recent
modifications
suggested
by
McGinnis
and
Ostrom
(2013).
We
then
reviewed
the
updated
list
for
relevance
to
benthic
fisheries
SESs.
This
process
resulted
in
the
replacement
or
exclusion
of
second-tier
variables
in
Ostrom
(2009)
and
the
development
of
new
third-,
fourth-,
and
fifth-tier
variables
presented
in
Table
1.
For
the
review
and
development
of
new
third-,
fourth-,
and
fifth-tier
variables,
we
relied
on
our
own
practical
experience,
the
assistance
of
fisheries
ecologists,
and
on
a
literature
review
on
benthic
small-scale
fisheries
using
the
key
words
‘‘small-scale’’
or
‘‘artisanal.’’
Paper
selection
was
limited
to
resources
harvested
through
diving
and/or
intertidal
gathering
on
the
marine
benthos.
Searches
were
conducted
for
the
time
period
between
1980
and
2010,
encompassing
98%
of
the
indexed
literature
on
the
topic.
We
used
ISI
Web
of
Knowledge,
a
major
indexing
database
aggregate
of
peer-reviewed
literature.
For
each
variable
in
the
framework,
a
working
definition
and
illustrative
citation
is
provided.
Listed
citations
for
each
definition
are
not
presented
as
definitive
authoritative
sources;
they
constitute
illustrations
of
how
other
scholars
may
have
applied
the
concept
in
other
benthic-related
published
studies.
3.2.
Applying
the
SES
framework
to
studies
of
benthic
fisheries
in
Mexico
and
Chile
We
selected
two
benthic
small-scale
fishing
settings
in
Mexico
and
Chile
for
which
peer-reviewed
documentation
was
available
and
for
which
the
authors
had
significant
first-hand
knowledge.
The
study
conducted
in
Mexico
looked
at
three
different
fisheries
(Puerto
Pen
˜
asco,
Kino,
and
the
Seri)
within
the
Gulf
of
California.
The
study
conducted
in
Chile
compared
the
same
community
in
three
different
time
periods.
Both
studies
looked
at
the
combina-
tion
of
factors
that
could
be
associated
with
the
fishers’
ability
to
self-organize
to
control
access
to
other
fishers.
The
main
purpose
of
drawing
on
these
studies
was
to
provide
an
empirical
example
of
Table
1
Second
to
fifth-tier
variables
of
an
SES
for
benthic
small-scale
fisheries.
Factors
modified
from
Ostrom
(2009)
and
specific
for
benthic
small-scale
fisheries
are
noted
with
color
red
and
italic
font.
Tiers
for
Interactions
and
Outcomes
are
not
included
as
they
were
not
modified
from
the
original.
Social,
Economic,
and
Political
Settings
(S)
S1
–
Economic
development.
S2
–
Demographic
trends.
S3
–
Political
stability.
S4
–
Other
governance
systems.
S5
–
Markets.
S6
–
Media
organizations.
S7
–
Technology
Resource
Systems
(RS)
Actors
(A)
RS1
–
Sector
(e.g.
water,
forests,
pasture,
fish)
A1
–
Number
of
relevant
actors
GS5
–
Organizations
RS1.1
Marine
benthos
A2
–
Socioeconomic
attributes
GS5.1
Government
organizations
RS2
–
Clarity
of
system
boundaries
A3
–
History
or
past
experiences
GS5.1.1
Support
enforcement
RS3
–
Size
of
resource
system
A3.1
Crisis
GS5.1.2
Support
funding
RS3.1
Carrying
capacity
A3.2
Duration
GS5.1.3
Restoration
efforts
RS4
–
Productivity
of
system
A4
–
Location
GS5.2
Non-government
organizations
RS4.1
Stock
status
A5
–
Leadership/entrepreneurship
GS5.2.1
Capacity
building
RS4.2
Biophysical
factors
A6
–
Social
capital
GS5.2.2
Linking
RS5
–
Equilibrium
properties
A6.1
Trust
and
reciprocity
GS5.2.3
Bridging
RS6
–
Predictability
of
system
dynamics
A7
–
Knowledge
of
SES/mental
models
GS5.2.3.1
Unions
RS7
–
Storage
characteristics
A7.1
Mechanism
to
share
knowledge
about
the
fishery
GS5.2.3.2
Cooperatives
RS7.1
Storage
in
their
natural
habitat
A8
–
Importance
of
resource
GS6
–
Rules-in-use
RS7.2
Storage
in
a
human-designed
facility
A8.1
Economic
dependence
GS6.1
Property
rights
RS8
–
Connectivity
A8.2
Cultural
dependence
GS6.1.1
Open
access
RS9
–
Location
A9
–
Technologies
available
GS6.1.2
Moratory
and
total
allowable
catch
A9.1
Ownership
of
technology
by
fishers
GS6.1.3
Catch
shares
Resource
Units
(RU)
A9.2
Homogeneity
GS6.1.4
Territorial
use
privileges
RU1
–
Resource
unit
mobility
GS6.1.4.1
Sea-bed
tracts
RU2
–
Growth
or
replacement
rate
Governance
Systems
(GS)
GS6.1.4.2
Individually
owned
fishing
spots
RU3
–
Interaction
among
resource
units
GS1
–
Policy
area
GS6.1.4.3
Territorial
use
communal
rights
RU3.1
Reproduction
GS1.1
Environment
GS6.2
Operational
rules
RU3.2
Settlement
GS1.1.1
Benthic
marine
GS6.3
Collective-choice
rules
RU4
–
Economic
value
GS2
–
Geographic
range
GS6.4
Constitutional
rules
RU5
–
Number
of
units
GS3
–
Population
GS7
–
Norms
and
strategies
RU6
–
Distinctive
characteristics
GS4
–
Regime
type
GS8
–
Network
structure
RU6.1
Hatchery
GS4.1
Democratic
GS8.1
Horizontal
RU6.2
Wild
GS4.2
Autocratic
GS8.2
Vertical
RU7
–
Spatial
and
temporal
distribution
GS9
–
Monitoring
RU7.1
Patchy
GS9.1
Social
RU7.2
Random
GS9.2
Biophysical
GS10
–
Sanctions
GS10.1
Graduated
sanctions
GS10.2
Grim
trigger
strategies
Related
Ecosystems
(ECO)
ECO1
–
Climate
patterns.
ECO2
–
Pollution
patterns.
ECO3
–
Flows
into
and
out
of
focal
SES
Modified
from
Ostrom
(2009,
p.
421).
X.
Basurto
et
al.
/
Global
Environmental
Change
23
(2013)
1366–1380
1368

Author's personal copy
how
the
SES
framework
can
be
useful
to
analyze
complex
SES
interactions,
because
it
makes
it
feasible
to
keep
track
of
how
different
combinations
of
conditions
are
associated
with
similar
outcomes.
4.
Results
4.1.
Changes
to
the
general
SES
framework
to
create
a
benthic
fisheries
SES
framework
Below
we
provide
a
summary
of
the
modifications
made
to
the
original
SES
general
list
of
variables
proposed
by
Ostrom
(2009).
We
used
Ostrom
(2009)
modified
by
McGinnis
and
Ostrom
(2013)
as
a
template
for
our
benthic
fisheries
SES
framework
because
their
general
SES
framework
is
the
most
up
to
date.
The
benthic
SES
framework
is
presented
in
Table
1.
The
table
is
organized
by:
Resource
Systems
(RS),
Resource
Units
(RU),
Actors
(A)
and
Governance
Systems
(GS).
A
detailed
summary
of
the
modifications
is
found
in
Appendix
A,
followed
by
Tables
A.1–A.4
containing
definitions
and
illustrative
exam-
ples
from
the
broader
literature
for
each
variable
presented
in
Table
1
above.
The
Resource
System
was
extended
to
include
second-
and
third-tier
variables/processes.
These
tiers
focus
on
the
heteroge-
neity
of
the
systems’
productivity
and
connectivity,
as
these
factors
can
drive
resource
availability.
In
addition,
differences
in
resource
storage
characteristics
were
added.
Resource
Unit’s
characteristics
have
been
described
as
important
in
small-scale
fisheries
governance.
In
order
to
acknowledge
their
role
in
determining
outcomes,
we
added
aspects
of
species
life
history
traits
and
spatial
distribution
as
third-tier
variables/processes.
There
is
a
high
diversity
of
governance
arrangements
in
benthic
fisheries.
Thus,
the
development
of
new
tiers
for
the
Governance
System
was
most
profound
in
our
adaptation
of
the
SES
to
benthic
fisheries.
We
added
around
37
second-,
third-,
and
fourth-tier
variables,
mainly
to
represent
the
diversity
of
rules-in-use
present
in
the
manage-
ment
of
benthic
artisanal
fisheries.
The
monitoring
and
sanctioning
diversity
was
an
important
addition
as
new
tiers
for
the
governance
system.
Finally,
we
added
third-tier
variables
in
the
Actors’
domain.
These
variables
were
mainly
third-tier
aspects
related
to
fishers’
history
of
past
experiences,
leadership,
impor-
tance
of
resources
for
livelihoods,
and
access
to
harvesting
technology
(Table
1).
4.2.
Two
illustrative
applications
of
the
benthic
fisheries
SES
framework
We
illustrate
how
an
analyst
can
use
the
benthic
SES
framework
depending
on
their
interests
by
using
Table
1
to
select
different
components.
The
first
application
shows
how
factors
influenced
three
Mexican
fisheries’
capability
to
avoid
the
tragedy
of
open
access.
Variab les
related
to
the
Governance
System,
Resource
System,
and
Actors
explained
self-organization
capabilities
among
these
fisheries.
In
the
Chilean
cas e,
the
Resource
System
and
Resource
Units
remained
constant
ove r
time
and
therefore
did
not
need
to
be
included
in
the
analysis.
Variab les
within
the
Governance
System
and
Actors
explain
changes
in
self-organization
capacity.
In
the
following
section,
we
provid e
a
detailed
description
of
each
of
the
two
studies
in
Chile
and
Mexico.
4.2.1.
An
example
from
three
Mexican
fisheries
on
the
emergence
of
local
organization
capacity
to
control
access
Like
many
other
small-scale
fisheries
in
Mexico,
the
Seri,
Kino,
and
Pen
˜
asco
fisheries,
and
the
benthic
sessile
species
that
they
target,
are
not
actively
regulated
by
government
authorities.
As
a
result,
these
fisheries
enjoy
significant
levels
of
autonomy
to
determine
their
own
operational
access
and
harvesting
rules
(GS6.2)
unless
challenged.
These
fishers
harvest
sessile
species
of
mollusks
(mainly
sea
pen
shells
–
Atrina
spp.,
Pinna
rugosa,
but
also
rock
scallops
–
Spondylus
calcifer,
and
murex
snails
–
Hexaples
nigritus).
In
all
cases,
fishers
use
the
same
technology
of
exploitation
common
among
small-scale
divers
in
the
region
(A9.2):
a
rudimentary
underwater
breathing
apparatus
called
hookah
adapted
to
a
small
(8
m)
fiberglass
outboard
motorboat
(Basurto,
2006).
The
towns
of
Puerto
Pen
˜
asco
and
Kino
Bay
were
first
established
as
sea
bass
totoaba
(Totoaba
macdonaldi)
fishing
camps
during
the
1930s
(Bahre
et
al.,
2000).
The
Seri
–
a
nomadic
group
at
the
time
–
had
an
active
participation
in
the
highly
profitable
Totoaba
fishery
in
Kino,
which
in
1940
would
eventually
prompt
the
Seri
to
establish
their
own
fishing
camp
and
become
a
sedentary
group
(Smith,
1954).
Since
their
establishment,
Puerto
Pen
˜
asco
and
Kino
have
attracted
fishers
from
all
over
Mexico,
lured
to
settle
by
the
promise
of
local
booming
fisheries
and
coastal
development-
related
economic
activities.
Between
1945
and
1950,
the
popula-
tion
of
Puerto
Pen
˜
asco,
Kino,
and
the
Seri
was
around
2500
(Ives,
1989),
500
(Moreno
et
al.,
2005a),
and
300
(Felger
and
Moser,
1985),
respectively.
In
the
early
1970s,
fishing
of
benthic
resources
with
hookah
diving
equipment
began
in
these
villages
and
all
accounts
indicate
that
before
the
1980s,
they
were
open-access
regimes;
that
is,
no
rules
had
been
established
to
control
access
to
benthic
resources
(Basurto
et
al.,
2012;
Cudney-Bueno
and
Basurto,
2009).
As
the
population
increased
through
natural
growth
and
immigration
(particularly
Puerto
Pen
˜
asco
and
Kino),
so
did
the
number
of
fishers
and
their
likely
competition
for
benthic
resources.
In
2005,
the
population
of
Puerto
Pen
˜
asco,
Kino,
and
the
Seri
stood
at
about
40,000,
5000,
and
600
inhabitants,
respectively
(INEGI,
2005).
The
need
to
self-organize
to
control
access
and
use
to
their
benthic
resources
became
evident.
Kino’s
failed
attempts
to
establish
local
vigilance
and
enforcement
committees
to
control
access
to
outsiders
have
been
documented
by
Cinti
et
al.
(2010).
Those
in
control
of
the
committees
often
found
it
in
their
own
self-interest
to
allow
outsiders
to
participate
in
their
fisheries,
undermining
the
committees’
legitimacy
within
the
fishing
community
(Cinti
et
al.,
2010).
It
is
widely
perceived
that
pen
shells
are
less
abundant
or
overexploited
in
Kino
Bay
(Basurto
et
al.,
2012;
Moreno
et
al.,
2005a).
The
available
official
statistical
data
reported
by
Moreno
et
al.
(2005b)
indicates
that
in
1992
the
production
in
Kino
Bay
was
almost
170
tones
of
sea
pen
shells
(Atrina
spp.
and
P.
rugosa).
Production
has
steadily
dropped
since
1992,
and
has
averaged
only
20
tons
per
year
from
1997
to
2003.
Local
overexploitation
of
benthic
resources
has
resulted,
in
turn,
in
an
increased
pressure
by
Kino
fishers
to
attempt
to
gain
access
to
still
other
abundant
fishing
grounds
like
those
used
by
Pen
˜
asco
or
the
Seri,
their
neighbors
to
the
north.
Since
the
1980s,
the
Seri
have
found
incentives
to
face
the
costs
of
organizing
to
control
access
to
their
resources
(Basurto
et
al.,
2012).
The
number
of
incentives
to
organize
relies
on
the
Seri’s
collective
knowledge
accumulated
over
thousands
of
years
of
inhabiting
the
area
and
using
benthic
resources
(A4)
(Felger
and
Moser,
1985).
The
Seri
have
developed
relevant
notions
of
their
resources’
spatial
boundaries
and
extent
(RS3)
and
traditional
knowledge
about
aspects
of
the
biology
and
ecology
that
allow
them
to
make
rough
predictions
(RS6)
about
how
their
actions
might
affect
the
future
state
of
their
benthic
resources
(Basurto,
2008).
Despite
being
relative
newcomers
to
the
region
in
comparison
to
the
Seri,
Kino
Bay
and
Puerto
Pen
˜
asco
fishers
seem
to
have
also
developed
significant
knowledge
about
the
benthic
resources
they
harvest
(RS3,
RS6)
because
such
knowledge
is
likely
germane
to
being
a
successful
fisherman.
X.
Basurto
et
al.
/
Global
Environmental
Change
23
(2013)
1366–1380
1369