Fisheries co-management and legal pluralism: How an analytical problem becomes an institutional one

This paper addresses two issues pertaining to legal pluralism in capture fisheries, particularly with regard to the South. First there is the problem of analysis. If legal pluralism is a common phenomenon, how is it to be discerned and understood? Secondly, there is the matter of institutional design: given the pervasiveness of legal pluralism, which management institutions are better suited to represent and resolve inter-legal system differences? The authors argue the case of co-management. Drawing on examples and insights from a comparative research project in South Asia, four basic types of legal pluralism and co-management are distinguished. The authors conclude that co-management is a process that brings legal systems, and their constituent organizations and groups, together within a single framework. For fisher organizations, which frequently have distinct legal perspectives, co-management is an essential path to legitimacy. For the state, other legal systems are a resource that management can draw upon.