Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grant (DDRIG): Institutional Legitimacy and the Halibut Fishery in Greenland

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Small-scale fisheries are widespread socio-ecological systems that are especially threatened in the Arctic. In Greenland, small-scale fishers outnumber large-scale fishers by over 8:1. While small-scale fisheries are culturally, economically, and socially indispensable, they may be difficult to govern and access. The perceived legitimacy of institutions that regulate access to fisheries are poorly understood, even though they have significant impacts on fisheries globally. This research investigates an Arctic halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) fishery and how stakeholders’ attitudes are informed by 1) key historical, social, and spatial factors that affect fisheries access, and 2) perceived institutional legitimacy. The results of such research have critical implications for comparable fisheries in Alaska and elsewhere in the Arctic.This research employs the “Q” method, developed to systematically and reproducibly evaluate participant perspectives on issues with competing viewpoints. Using Q, the investigator will identify and evaluate key variables in how fishers and other stakeholders perceive the legitimacy of institutional arrangements governing fisheries. The work will also evaluate the extent to which perceived institutional legitimacy converges across and within stakeholder groups, including policymakers, scientists, regulatory agencies, resource managers, and fishers from different communities. The investigator hypothesizes that perceived institutional legitimacy is affected by study participants’ experience and awareness of socio-historical variables, such as previous regulatory arrangements, and by their location relative to unregulated fisheries. Use of Q will be complemented with ethnographic interviews and workshops; statistical analyses will follow data collection.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.