|Variable Component Type||Governance System|
|Theme||Basic (learn about themes)|
|Projects||SESMAD, Fiji fisheries|
|Question||If the governance system was motivated by a trigger, was it a sudden disturbance, or slow and continuous change?|
|Select Options||Sudden disturbance, slow continuous change|
|Importance||This variable helps to provide context for the motivation of the governance system. It has been hypothesized that governance systems may be motivated by sudden changes or slow, cumulative changes.|
"A large sudden change refers to a development (change in conditions that characterize the system in relation to a baseline) that persisted over a relatively short period of time, possibly almost instantaneous. A slow, cumulative change refers to a change over a relatively long period of time, and whose development may be characterized by feedbacks and/or interaction of various system components causing the problem in relation to a reference condition (Gibson et al. 2000). For definition of disturbance, see for example Rykiel (1985)."
|"New Order" Indonesian Forest Governance System, 1965-1998||Sudden disturbance||The initiation of Suharto's dictatorship was the result of a rather complicated set of coups and counter-coups that shook Indonesia in 1965, however they were certainly a sudden disturbance, and not a gradual change.|
|Montreal Protocol||slow continuous change|
|ICCAT Governance System||slow continuous change||Declining catches of Eastern Atlantic Bluefin Tuna in the 1950's and early 1960's prompted interested parties to begin self-organizing to coordinate regulation of Tuna in the Atlantic Ocean.|
|Pre-Montreal Protocol Ozone Governance||slow continuous change||Policies arose as a result of increasing recognition of problems associated with ozone depletion, and their link to ozone depleting substances. There was no direct trigger, although it is unlikely that any policies would have been implemented without the growth of scientific knowledge.|
|Rhine Chemicals Convention||slow continuous change||A previous agreement, the Berne agreements and the creation of the ICPR had been triggered by a natural disaster (chemical spill) in the 1960s.|
|Rhine Action Plan||Sudden disturbance||On November 1, 1986, a heavy pollution wave now called the Sandoz Accident occurred in the course of putting out a warehouse fire in Basle, Switzerland. The warehouse contained 30,000 kg of toxic chemicals including insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides. This discharge of organophosphorous and organochlorine compounds had a high selective mortality effect on the eel Anguilla anguilla population (a fish formerly considered less sensitive to pollution). This incident was also extremely detrimental to other fish populations, macro-invertebrates, and plankton communities. In response to the Sandoz accident, the ICPR developed the Rhine Action Program.|
|GBR Marine Park Act 1975-1999||slow continuous change||Ongoing concerns about biodiversity declines motivated the creation of the marine park. The potential of oil and gas exploration around the reef also motivated the development of the park.|
|GBR Marine Park Act 2004-current||slow continuous change||Concerns about ongoing threats to biodiversity, and the threat of climate change, prompted the rezoning of the marine park.|
|"Reformasi" Indonesian Forest Governance System, 1998-2012||Sudden disturbance||This governance system originated in the overthrow of a dictator (Suharto) who himself was overthrown as a result of an economic crisis, the ensuing social mobilizations, as well as a distancing between Suharto and previously supportive oligarchs.|
|NWHI Monument Act 2006||More opportunistic then for a specific reason or change.|
|Wakatobi National Park 2008-current||slow continuous change||Slow continuous change: Concerns about over-fishing and declines in iconic species (e.g. turtles)|
|Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery Management Plan||slow continuous change||Fisheries were in decline, and Magnuson Stevens Act required fisheries to be managed by council with FMPs.|
|GMR governance system 1998-current||Sudden disturbance. Time scale of 10 or so years of degradation, which I've coded as a sudden disturbance. Increasing social conflict and ecological degradation with the development of the fishery; accelerated stock collapse in the few years leading up to the establishment of the GMR. Fishery was closed in 1992 and 1995. In 1995, fishermen staged large protests, raiding National Park offices, destroying property, and holding giant tortoises hostage (Bremmer & Perez, 2002)|
|Raja Ampat Governance System||slow continuous change||Started with landmark meeting in 2003 – adat laders from across Raja Ampat, including RA government and NGOs came together to discuss current state of marine resources - tomlol declaration – it was recognised there was a decline in resources, with outside fishermen coming in, and local people needing to paddle further to catch fish - wanted to do something about it and wanted to reclaim traditional rights over their reefs.|
|Magnuson-Stevens Act||slow continuous change|
|Macquarie Island Toothfish Fishery Management Plan||Not Applicable|
|Community E Governance System||Missing|
|Macquarie Island Nature Reserve Management Plan||Not Applicable|
|Community D Governance System||Missing|
|Community A Governance System||Not Applicable|
|Community B Governance System||Not Applicable|
|Community C Governance System||Missing|
|Seaflower MPA Act 2005||Sudden disturbance||In this case it might not have been environmental but social trigger: declaration of the Seaflower as a Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO.|
|Community F Governance System||Missing|
|Community G Governance System||Missing|
|Community H Governance System||Missing|
|Svalbard Environmental Protection Act||Not Applicable|
|Galapagos Governance System 1998-current||Sudden disturbance||Long history of exploitation. But in the 20th century, industrial tuna fishing boats and long liners began to exploit the area in large numbers. Plus in the 1990s, lucrative markets for sea cucumbers and illegal shark fins fueled explosive growth in fishing with sobering environmental consequences.|
|Macquarie Island Marine Park Management Plan||Not Applicable|
|GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Plan of Management 2000 - 2005 and Management Plan 2005 - 2012||slow continuous change||The Park was declared for: the preservation of the area in its natural condition; and the encouragement and regulation of the appropriate use, appreciation and enjoyment of the area by the public.|
|Joint Sanctuary Management Governance System||slow continuous change||Pollution, industrial commercial development, waste dumping, and especially oil spills in the 1960s and 70s heightened the public's concern for coasts and oceans (Chandler and Gillelan, 2005). The US Congress responded by allocating federal funds for states to develop coastal zone management plans, water pollution, and ocean dumping policies. President Johnson's Science Advisory Committee recommended a marine wilderness preservation system in 1966. In 1967, Congressional bipartisan bills were introduced to study the feasibility of creating national marine protected areas. Bills were introduced specifically to prohibit drilling, especially in California after the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill. Jacques Cousteau's 1971 testimony to the Senate Subcommittee on Oceanography is thought to have contributed significantly to federal funding for the sanctuaries.The House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee introduced the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) in 1971 and in 1972 President Nixon signed the act into law. The three California sanctuaries were designated primarily to exclude oil drilling, and were chosen according to their ecologically critical habitats. The Gulf of the Farallones NMS was proposed during a public workshop in Mill Valley, California in 1978 and the following years consisted of issue papers, regional and state hearings, and draft regulations until it was designated. Cordell Bank NMS was introduced by the non-profit organization Cordell Expeditions in 1981 who wanted to explore the Bank (CBNMS FMP, 2008). After deemed eligible by NOAA, public comment and research contributed to its designation 8 years later. The State of California first nominated the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary in 1977 and after a number of site analyses and meetings and public hearings, the Sanctuary was established congressionally by the Oceans Act of 1992 (MBNMS FMP, 2008).|
|Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan||Not Applicable|
|Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan||Not Applicable|
|Cenderwasih governance system||Central Indonesian governement|
|Self.organized rules and norms for SCUBA diving||slow continuous change||Conflict between local fishers and SCUBA divers in the area.|
|Marine Areas for Responsible Fishing (AMPRs) Costa Rica||slow continuous change||To include small-scale fisheries into national marine and coastal development processes|
|The Falkland Islands Government (FIG) Fisheries Department’s Falklands Interim Conservation and Management Zone (FICZ)||Sudden disturbance||The Falkland Islands Government gained momentum after the war of 1982. Around this time, trawlers from Spain, Poland, and the Soviet Union began to exploit squid stocks and there was significant worry that foreign vessels would overfish the resources, and the new local body would not gain anything in the process. However, governance was mostly a way to claim the waters for the UK. They called in the "conservation zone" because the term "EEZ" was not politically available, but by calling it the conservation zone they claimed authority over it. After the war, fishing squid in the region almost reached maximum, where overfished populations were expected by 1986. As such, the Falkland Islands convinced the UK to set up the conservation zones in 1986.|
|Indonesian Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture|
|Sasi in Tomolol, Misool|
|New Zealand Quota Management System||slow continuous change||Until 1983, New Zealand fisheries were governed by the much-amended Fisheries Act of 1908 (Mace et al., 2014). This management framework had, by the early 1980s, led to low stock sizes in some key inshore fisheries and modest overcapacity of the inshore fishing fleet (Connor, 2001). A new Fisheries Act was introduced in 1983 and substantially amended in 1986 to provide for a system of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs) in inshore commercial fisheries and to solidify the system of ‘enterprise allocations’ previously put in place for deepwater fisheries (Clark and Duncan,1986; Clark et al., 1988). When nations started to acquire jurisdiction over their own EEZs with The Law of the Sea, was clear that needed to come up with a system to manage. Political shift in the 80s that went from a hands on. Then in 1984 there was a significant political change that turned much more free market and open economy. The QMS was very much on that path being that it was rights based and so was set with the new political philosophy. It was a palatable choice and the time when it was introduced. Species continually slowly added to the QMS.|
|California Department of Fish and Wildlife Market Squid Fishery Management Plan||slow continuous change||The squid market was an open-access fishery before 1998. However, in 1983, AB 513 allowed the Commission to specify the days and times when squid could be taken. No squid could be taken with a roundhaul net in Monterey between noon on Friday and midnight on Sunday, and any weekday between noon and midnight. Then in 1997, SB 364 established a moratorium on new squid vessels. A permit was needed to use roundhaul, and a permit was needed to attract squid by light from a vessel. A commercial squid light boat owner permit was given a fee. These limitations were effective in 1998. The squid fishery, while historically dates back to the 1860s, only became a high profile fishery in the 1980s and 1990s when global market demand rapidly increased, as did participation in the fishery. Finally, in 2004 a Restricted Access Program was created that became effective April 1, 2005.|
|Caeté-Taperaçú Extractive Reserve (RESEX) in Brazil||slow continuous change|
Basic:A basic variable describes essential and basic background information for a component.
Biophysical:Biophysical variables describe just that: important biophysical properties, largely of environmental commons, that are not captured by a more specific theme.
Causation:A variable with this theme describes issues of causality, which is a complex subject. Most basically this theme is associated with variables that describe different types of causation and different types of causes of environmental problems.
Context:contextual variable relates the component with which it associated to the social and/or ecological setting of a particular interaction and/or case.
Ecosystem services:Variables associated with this theme describe factors that affect or describe the provision of important ecosystem services by a natural resource.
Enforcement:Enforcement involves several different processes, including monitoring for violations of rules, sanctioning violators, and conflict resolution mechanisms involved in this process. Variables that relate to any of these processes should be attached to this theme.
External:Variables with this theme relate a component to processes external to the case with which the component is associated.
Heterogeneity:Variables with this theme describe important ways in which the member of an actor group differ from each other.
Incentives: This theme is associated with variables that are not directly related to institutions and rules, but which still play a role in affecting the incentives that commons users have to ameliorate or exacerbate the commons they use.
Institutional-biophysical linkage:This is a sub-theme of the institutions theme, and describes those variables that ask about the relationship between a set of institutions and a biophysical aspect of a commons.
Institutions:Variables with this theme describe the social institutions (rules, property rights) that are used to organize and direct human behavior. It does not include monitoring and enforcement of these institutions, as these are associated with the Enforcement theme.
Knowledge and uncertainty:Variables with this theme describe levels of knowledge that actor groups have regarding a commons, as well as factors that affect how much uncertainty there is in the status and dynamics of that commons.
Leadership:Leaders play an important role in commons management, most traditionally by providing for public goods needed to organize commons users. But there are other possible roles, and variables associated with this theme can relate to any role that a leader might play in an interaction.
Outcomes:This theme is attached to variables that deal with any outcomes that are produced by the actions of relevant actors in an interaction.
Resource renewability:Variables associated with this theme deal with the ability of a natural resource to be highly productive and renewable.
Social capital:Social capital captures the processes that enable the members of an actor group to work effectively together. Variables associated with this theme describe factors that affect or in some way express the level of social capital among members of a group.
Spatial:Variables associated with the Spatial theme describe important spatial patterns or dynamics, such as the spatial heterogeneity of a commons, or whether or not a user group resides within a particular commons.
Technology:This theme is attached to variables that consider the role that technology and infrastructure have in affecting commons outcomes.