| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian "Adat" Communities | Low (1) | Adat communities had customary rules governing forest use, however these were ignored by the central government, which undermined all ability of local forest users to participate in governing forests during this period. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Large Extractive Industries in Indonesia | High (3) | Extractive industries were closely tied to the central government, and had a high level of participation in shaping policy during this period. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian "Adat" Communities | Low (1) | Although this group can now vote in elections & has some modest formal recognition of its customary laws, most of the decisions about resource use are made in distant regional & national capitals, and the level of participation, while in a sense higher than under the Suharto regime, is still low. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Large Extractive Industries in Indonesia | High (3) | Although perhaps less important than in the final years of the Suharto regime, extractive industries continued to play an important role in the process of determining how forests were governed during this period. More broadly, see Fukuoka (2013) for a description of the persistence of the old oligarchy in the reformasi regime. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Civil society organizations in Indonesia | Medium (2) | This group has played an increasing role in forest policy in Indonesia since democratization in 1998, but it is still limited. |
|---|
| Forests in Indonesia | Governance | Indonesian Local entrepreneurs | Medium (2) | This group participates extensively in environmental governance at the local/regional level, but has little power at the national level, where important decisions are still made. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Academic Researchers | Medium (2) | The management bodies rely heavily on the best available science. Researchers are constricted by the results of their research in terms of influencing governance, but if the science reflects a clear directive in governance then the power they have is great. They are incorporated in the management teams and advisory bodies and participate heavily in terms of peer-review and cooperative research projects, but do not make the decisions. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR recreational fishers | Medium (2) | No formal mandate to co-manage fishers, but representatives from recreational fisher associations participate in policy reform and regulatory change processes |
|---|
| Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica fisheries governance | Governance | Paquera-Tambor AMPR Costa Rica | High (3) | |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Depleting Substance Industrial Producers | Medium (2) | Industries maintained a strong unofficial role in the governance of ODS and since implementation of the protocol have at times encouraged rapid implementation and undertaken a variety of voluntary initiatives. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Sanctuary Recreational Users | Medium (2) | Recreational users can influence policy through stakeholder input, but the governance of this resource is rarely up for discussion. Recreational users often participate in the role of reporting sightings (commonly though a mobile phone device). |
|---|
| International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) | Governance | ICPR nations (1976-1986) | | |
|---|
| International Commission for the Protection of the Rhine (ICPR) | Governance | Rhine chemical firms | Medium (2) | No direct representation in the ICRP but lobbying activities at both the national and European levels |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR recreational fishers | High (3) | Sports fishing lobby is very active |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR recreational fishers | Medium (2) | No formal mandate to co-manage fishers, but representatives from recreational fisher associations participate in policy reform and regulatory change processes |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Low (1) | No formal legislation for co-management by commercial fishers. Some legislation specifying they must be consulted in some decisions. Some involvement by some operators, and their representative association (QSIA) in conservation and fisheries policy change. But not full representation of commercial fishers in QSIA, nor full participation of fishing operators in such decision-making arenas. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Medium (2) | No formal legislation for co-management by commercial fishers. Some legislation specifying they must be consulted in some decisions. Some involvement by some operators, and their representative association (QSIA) in conservation and fisheries policy change. But not full representation of commercial fishers in QSIA, nor full participation of fishing operators in such decision-making arenas. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Academic Researchers | Medium (2) | The management bodies rely heavily on the best available science. Researchers are constricted by the results of their research in terms of influencing governance, but if the science reflects a clear directive in governance then they can help decision makers formulate a decision. They are incorporated in the management teams and advisory bodies and participate heavily in terms of peer-review and cooperative research projects. |
|---|
| Montreal Protocol | Governance | Ozone Depleting Substance Industrial Producers | Low (1) | Industries participate in national-level processes to govern ODS, and lobby government negotiators. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Artisan Fishermen | High (3) | The PMB, which includes fishing representatives, were responsible for rule making for the GMR (conflicts meant that the fishing sector got the outcome they wanted) |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | Medium (2) | Toothfish fishers participate in rulemaking processes and have played an important role in the MSC certification process. AFMA, however, ultimately makes all decisions regarding rules for resource use; while other governmental actors are responsible for decisions for the Marine Park and Nature Reserve. They also have played an important role as part of the Coalition of Legal Toothfish operators in influencing CCAMLR regulations. |
|---|
| Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) | Governance | Galapagos Tourism Sector | High (3) | Chamber of Tourism represented on PMB and in advisory role in IMA.
(Although high profile conflicts with the fishing sector undermined much of the rule making) |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi Bajau fishers | Low (1) | Bajau are a marginalised group throughout Indonesia, and prefer to maintain their identity through abstaining from participation in offical government initatives (Majors 2008; Clifton 2013). |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi Bajau fishers | Low (1) | Bajau are a marginalised group throughout Indonesia, and prefer to maintain their identity through abstaining from participation in offical government initatives (Majors 2008; Clifton 2013). |
|---|
| Wakatobi National Park | Governance | Wakatobi Bajau fishers | Low (1) | Bajau are a marginalised group throughout Indonesia, and prefer to maintain their identity through abstaining from participation in offical government initatives (Majors 2008; Clifton 2013). |
|---|
| Community A (Fiji fisheries) | Governance | Community A | Low (1) | 24% of respondents indicate that they participate in resource use decision-making processes. |
|---|
| Community B (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community B | Medium (2) | Approximately 55% of respondents indicate that they can participate in resource use decisions. |
|---|
| Community C (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community C | Medium (2) | 52% of community members indicate that they are able to participate in decisions regarding resource use. |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Artisanal Fishers | Medium (2) | Communities heavily involved through traditional management, likely assisted/directed by NGOs, but coded as high. (full community-participation involvement for zoning: Grantham et al. 2013) |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Tourism | Low (1) | Overall, tourism wasn't involved and the tourism section of the government was established after the MPAs. Although the Misool MPA was heavily influenced by the eco-resort. |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Artisanal Fishers | High (3) | MPAs were first declared through adat/traditional declarations |
|---|
| Raja Ampat (National Act No. 32 2004) | Governance | Raja Ampat Artisanal Fishers | Medium (2) | MPAs managed by co-management so involvement of local fishers is medium through representatives - MPAs were built upon traditional sasi management |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Tourism | Medium (2) | Since tourism is one of the main economic activities on Svalbard, and the Norwegian Government has outlined the importance of developing tourism (Report No.22 2008-2009), tourism interests are taken into consideration by the managers. However, their influence is limited to consultation. |
|---|
| Central California National Marine Sanctuaries | Governance | California Groundfish Fishermen | Medium (2) | Fishermen are individually engaged in the public hearing and input steps in the regulation process, and many are part of a fishermen's association which is highly active.
"The process for controversial or complex issues takes at least three Council meetings. Proposals for management measures may come from the public, from participating management agencies, from advisory groups, or from Council members. If the Council wants to pursue these proposals, it asks for other possible solutions to the problem being addressed and then directs the Groundfish Management Team (GMT), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and/or Council staff to prepare an analysis. At the next meeting when such a proposal is on the agenda, the Council reviews the analysis and chooses a range of alternatives and possibly a preliminary preferred alternative. The analysis is then made available for public review, and the Council makes a final decision at the next meeting the item is scheduled." |
|---|
| Community F (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community F | Medium (2) | 40% of respondents indicate that they participate in rulemaking processes. |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Commercial Fishers | Medium (2) | There is no formal co-management arrangement between State, Commonwealth and industry which limits the commercial fishers' authority but, the Director of National Parks consults with the Consultative Committee about management and proposed operations in the GABMP (CW) and this Committee includes representatives from the commercial fishing sector. Commercial fishers would also have less participation in the process of how the southern right whales are governed as this commons is listed as an Endangered species and falls under both international and national protection. |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Shrimp Fishers | Low (1) | Regulations are made by a government agency – The Directorate of Fisheries (which is coded as part of the Resource Managers group). Fishermen do not have any direct ability to change the regulations. |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Commercial Fishers | Medium (2) | There is no formal co-management arrangement between State, Commonwealth and industry but, the Director of National Parks consults with the Consultative Committee about management and proposed operations in the GABMP (CW) and this Committee includes representatives from the commercial fishing sector. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Medium (2) | Commercial fishermen do not have any direct ability to change management or legislation, but do have influence through lobbying. The Queensland Seafood Industry Association (QSIA) works to promote the seafood industry and advocate for commercial fishers. There was extensive consultation during the re-zoning process. Nevertheless, there are still some misgivings among the commercial fishers about the structural adjustment package (Ledee et al 2012). |
|---|
| Macquarie Island Marine Park | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | Medium (2) | Toothfish fishers do not hold authority to create rules to limit seabird interactions and bycatch. However, they do participate in rulemaking processes, and have made important contributions to the design of seabird bycatch mitigation measures. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | Medium (2) | Toothfish fishers at HIMI cannot make their own rules, but do participate in the AFMA and CCAMLR rule-making processes about seabird bycatch mitigation measures. Industry representatives go to CCAMLR and are also part of SouthMAC (the Subantarctic Fisheries Management Advisory Committee; the advisory committee for the fishery) and SARAG (the Subantarctic Resource Assessment Group; the scientific assessment group for the fishery). Based on advice from SARAG, SouthMAC recommends catch rules to AFMA. Industry representatives are also part of CAMLR Consultative Forum (CCF), which provides input on all aspects of CCAMLR. |
|---|
| Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve | Governance | Australian Toothfish Fishers | Medium (2) | AFMA ultimately sets the rules for toothfish fishing, in line with CCAMLR conservation measures, but the fishing industry is highly involved in the rule-making process through scientific and advisory consultative forums (SARAG and SouthMAC). |
|---|
| Great Australian Bight Marine Park (GABMP) (Commonwealth Waters) | Governance | GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Commercial Fishers | Medium (2) | There is no formal co-management arrangement between State, Commonwealth and industry which limits the commercial fishers' authority but the Director of National Parks consults with the Consultative Committee about management and proposed operations in the GABMP (CW) and this Committee includes representatives from the commercial fishing sector. |
|---|
| Svalbard Nature Reserves | Governance | Svalbard Tourism | Medium (2) | Since tourism is one of the main economic activities on Svalbard, and the Norwegian Government has outlined the importance of developing tourism (Report No.22 2008-2009), tourism interests are taken into consideration by the managers. However, their influence is limited to consultation. |
|---|
| Community D (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community D | Medium (2) | 63% of community members indicate that they can participate in decisions regarding resource use. |
|---|
| Community E (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community E | Medium (2) | 61% of respondents indicate that they can participate in rulemaking processes. |
|---|
| Community G (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community G | Medium (2) | 54% of respondents indicate that they are able to participate in rulemaking processes. |
|---|
| Community H (Fiji Fisheries) | Governance | Community H | Medium (2) | 61% of respondents indicate that they participate in rulemaking processes. |
|---|
| Great Barrier Reef Marine Park | Governance | GBR commercial fishers | Low (1) | Fishers are involved in rule-making over fisheries but not really over how corals themselves are governed, other than through protected areas. |
|---|
| Seaflower MPA | Governance | Seaflower artisanal fishers | High (3) | Artisanal fishers were involved in the MPA rule making process from the beginning |
|---|
| Seaflower MPA | Governance | Seaflower artisanal fishers | High (3) | Artisanal fishers were involved in the MPA rule making process from the beginning. |
|---|
| Cenderwasih National Park | Governance | Cenderwasih fishers | Low (1) | MPA was designated by central government. WWF did try to engage local communities in zoning in 2008. |
|---|
| Cenderwasih National Park | Governance | Cenderwasih fishers | Low (1) | MPA was designated by central government. WWF did try to engage local communities in 2008. |
|---|
| Falkland Islands squid | Governance | Patagonian Squid Trawlers | Medium (2) | FIFCA statement: We work with our members to ensure that industry views are put before relevant bodies in areas of interest to the industry, participate in a number of committees and jointly fund and provide resources for the advancement of knowledge regarding the fishery, including its biological, operational, environmental and economic aspects. |
|---|
| New Zealand squid | Governance | New Zealand Arrow Squid Fishers | Medium (2) | Consulted with for formal governing. Can go to court (and frequently do) if disagreements. Decisions (informal rules) made by and within Deepwater Group are high level of participation. |
|---|
| California squid | Governance | California market squid fishermen | Medium (2) | Fishermen are formally and informally consulted with. Fishermen are on advisory councils, and also formally participate through public hearings. |
|---|
| Pond aquaculture on Lombok, Indonesia | Governance | Lombok aquaculture farmers | Not Applicable | |
|---|
| Pond aquaculture on Lombok, Indonesia | Governance | Lombok aquaculture farmers | | |
|---|
| Caete-Teperacu Extractive Reserve (RESEX) in Braganca, Brazil | Governance | Association of Users in the Caete-Teperacu RESEX (ASSUREMACATA) in Brazil | High (3) | |
|---|
| Gili Trawangan Coastal Tourism | Governance | SCUBA diving businesses on Gili Trawangan | High (3) | |
|---|
| Gili Trawangan Coastal Tourism | Governance | Gili Indah Dive Association (GIDA) | High (3) | |
|---|
| Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica fisheries governance | Governance | Isla Caballo AMPR Costa Rica | Low (1) | |
|---|
| Gulf of Nicoya, Costa Rica fisheries governance | Governance | Palito-Montero AMPR Costa Rica | Medium (2) | |
|---|
