1

5555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555

55555w

Global Adaptive Governance and Networks The curious case of the Pirate Fishers

Andrew Merrie Stockholm Resilience Centre

SERSD Masters Programme 06 March 2014

So who the hell am I then? • New Zealander with a background in Political Science and

International Business • EGG Alumni, class of 2011 (EGG is cooler than SERSD

right?) • Master’s Thesis with Per Olsson and Victor Galaz on the

emergence and spread of Marine Spatial Planning as a tool for ecosystem management

• Now doing a Phd with Henrik Österblom, Per Olsson and

Victor Galaz on Global Governance of Marine Resources as part of the Nereus Program (Predicting the Future Ocean)

• PhD focusing on understanding adaptive capacity of existing governance institutions, the emergence of new forms of governance and contributing to generating plausible scenarios of future governance of marine resources.

Global Networks and Fisheries – What do we mean by a Global Network?

Defined As: “Globally spanning information sharing and collaboration patterns between organizations, including governmental and/or nongovernmental actors. Each individual participating organization is not necessarily global, but the network as a whole aims to affect global processes.”

(Galaz et al 2013, p.3)

Spatial Expansion of Fisheries– Genuinely Global Spatial Expansion of EU and non EU Fishing Fleets into the Global Ocean 1950 to today:

UBC Fisheries and WWF Netherlands

A Refresher: Networks and Polycentricity (Elinor Ostrom in Galaz et al 2011)

Three Propositions on Polycentricity: • Prop 1 - Polycentricity is a matter of

degree, ranging from weak coordination to strong polycentric order.

• Prop 2 - Degrees of polycentric order are defined by features such as communication dynamics, degree of formalization, and network structural patterns.

• Prop 3 - External and internal tensions affect the ability of actors to maintain a certain degree of polycentric order.

A Global Network Emergence Case Study Pirate Fishing and the IMCS Network

Pirate fishing is an entertainingly named but actually terrible scourge of the oceans.

You have all seen the movie – What exactly is IUU? Pirate fishing vessels are legally classified as Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated (IUU) vessels: • Illegal – vessels operate in violation of

regional laws, i.e., fishing out of season, catching wrong species, using wrong gear, catching more than their quota, not having the proper license.

• Unreported – either not reporting or

misreporting size of catch.

• Unregulated – vessels that have no national registration, flying wrong flag, or fish where there are no conservation measures in place.

Global IUU – By the numbers Not a Trivial Problem – (Agnew 2009)

Photo: Matttias Klum

IUU; Sophisticated, Adaptive and Innovative – Amateurs need not apply

Adaptive Governance for fighting illegal fishing in the Southern Oceans

Österblom & Folke, Ecology and Society, 2013

Photo: Australian Customs Service

• A diverse network of actors and institutions have managed to dramatically reduce illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean

• Informal and formal networks have been instrumental to the successful outcomes

• The network included national governments, civil society and the fishing industry all working in collaboration over many years

Busting Fisheries Pirate Punks across scales

From regional initiative to global network– In the Beginning there was talk • CCAMLR and beyond…

• Hey, I know you from that Toothfish

thing!

• A core informal group: USA, Australia, Chile, Peru, Canada, Norway…

• Could we envision an ‘interpol’ for fisheries?

• Discussions in FAO committee on Fisheries

• Birth of the IMCS Network

1

2

4

3

Individual Actors with Shared Interests chat informally

Emergence of an informal communications & knowledge sharing network

Incremental moves towards the establishment of a a formal network structure

A formalised organisational structure is put in place – IMCS is institutionalised

The History of the International Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Network (IMCS)

• Scoping meeting in Santiago, Chile 1999 • Responsible fishing declaration drafted

• Founding meeting Key Largo, USA, 2000 • Establishment of terms of reference • Establishment of Website imcsnet.org

• Secretariat established in 2008 focused on improving fisheries MCS through: • Enhanced cooperation • Coordination • Information collection & exchange • Capacity Building (GFETW)

• Right Now: 49 member countries, 6 Observers,

NGO access in development

Big Diverse Data – Essential for dealing effectively with savvy pirate fishers MCS Information &Intl Databases

Equasis (Merchant Shipping Database)

RFMO FV Lists

National Databases

Port State Inspections

Prosecution Databases

Black, White & Gray Lists

Regional and sub-regional FV databases

Authorized and Unauthorized FV lists

Lloyds Shipping Register

Novel Technology Platforms– Enablers of Adaptive Governance?

Rapid technology development unintended consequences

A Global Framework for Action on IUU Networked in unexpected ways through individuals and organisations

(shadow networks operating in the spaces between established governance institutions)

• UN convention on the law of the seas (UNCLOS) 1974

• UN Fish Stocks Agreement (part of UNCLOS) 2001

• International Plan of Action to combat IUU (IPOA-IUU), 2001

• IMCS Network (2002)

• High Seas task force (2003-2006)

• Port State Measures Agreement (2010)

• Global Ocean Commission (2013)

• Chatham house IUU Initiative

• Stop Illegal Fising – UK Govt Initiative

• Interpol Fisheries Crime Unit under the Environmental Crimes Division (2013)

The potential of informal governance networks to generate impact

Interpol and IUU

Some more thinking on the potential of global networks

• Global networks improve capacity to coordinate through mobilization of diverse capacities

• Emerge in specific contexts often to solve specific challenges

• Different degrees of social organization (changeable over time and not necessarily a linear progression)

• Each network faces different sets of challenges i.e. Legitimacy, funding etc.

• But...It is clear that global networks are emerging to address global challenges (although not all networks are benign of course, think about the IUU case)

A conclusion of sorts– Bringing it together Core Argument: If formal international institutions are too fragmented or slow to address rapid and non-linear dynamics, global networks may contribute to increasing the adaptive capacity of global governance of “tipping points”

Networks offer an elegant descriptor for some of the emerging governance dynamics that are occurring at the global scale.

• Four features of global networks (evident from IUU IMCS case study) :

• Information processing and early warnings • Multi-level and multi-network responses • Ability to develop and maintain diverse response capacity • Balancing legitimacy and efficiency goals

Can be difficult to analyze and study as they are constantly shifting and are quite ephemeral, although can be a very rewarding area of study.

Questions for Discussion – Select and Rotate

1. In fisheries, or in another area of ‘governance of ecosystems’ with which you are familiar, how might technology impact governance challenges that seem intractable?

2. Consider the emergence of global scale environmental crime, how might this alter our ability to govern ecosystems i.e. increasing the speed of feedbacks or masking signals from ecosystems into institutions, is this really a problem?

3. Do non-state actors and informal networks really matter, are we overstating the case? Will nation-states remain paramount for determining the future of ecosystems?

4. Related to the previous question: For what environmental governance challenges might networks be ill suited? What are the disadvantages of relying on emergence of networks to address challenges at the global scale?