IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i20p8621-d430690.html

Taboos/Norms and Modern Science, and Possible Integration for Sustainable Management of the Flyingfish Resource of Orchid Island, Taiwan

Author

Listed:
  • Shui-Kai Chang

    (Graduate Institute of Marine Affairs, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung 80424, Taiwan)

Abstract

Coastal management without scientific data or modern techniques has been implemented successfully by many coastal communities, and traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), which is regarded as a culturally framed belief system, has played an important role in the successful cases. TEK of flyingfish culture in the Orchid Island was proved to have a theoretical basis and advantages in managing the flyingfish resource. However, modernization, introduction of modern techniques (motorized boats), development of tourism, and numerous other factors have caused TEK to change or disappear, and integration of TEK with the modern science of environmental management may be a solution to sustain the marine resource. TEK constitutes numerous taboos and norms (T&N). This study, for the first time, itemized the T&N of the flyingfish culture by category, with plausible motives explained by the respondents through in-depth interviews of tribespeople in 2014 and 2015, and identified the T&N with ecological conservation implications. The study also implemented a sampling scheme to provide the first records of fishery composition, flyingfish catch amount (about 260,000–280,000 fish per year), and the catch rate for the island. Finally, this study discussed three interrelated approaches for sustainable management of the flyingfish resource, including integration of TEK with science-based monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS), and research.

Suggested Citation

  • Shui-Kai Chang, 2020. "Taboos/Norms and Modern Science, and Possible Integration for Sustainable Management of the Flyingfish Resource of Orchid Island, Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-17, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8621-:d:430690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8621/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/20/8621/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chang, Shui-Kai & Liu, Kun-Yu & Song, Yann-Huei, 2010. "Distant water fisheries development and vessel monitoring system implementation in Taiwan--History and driving forces," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 541-548, May.
    2. Mellado, Tiscar & Brochier, Timothée & Timor, Julien & Vitancurt, Javier, 2014. "Use of local knowledge in marine protected area management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 390-396.
    3. Klooster, Daniel, 2000. "Institutional Choice, Community, and Struggle: A Case Study of Forest Co-Management in Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-20, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bidhan Kanti Das, 2019. "Denial of Rights Continues: How Legislation for ‘Democratic Decentralisation’ of Forest Governance was Subverted in the Implementation Process of the Forest Rights Act in India," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 31(4), pages 957-983, September.
    2. Grimley, Matthew & Chan, Gabriel, 2023. "“Cooperative is an oxymoron!”: A polycentric energy transition perspective on distributed energy deployment in the Upper Midwestern United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    3. Erin C. Pischke & M. Azahara Mesa-Jurado & Amarella Eastmond & Jesse Abrams & Kathleen E. Halvorsen, 2018. "Community perceptions of socioecological stressors and risk-reducing strategies in Tabasco, Mexico," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(4), pages 441-451, December.
    4. Long, Hexing & de Jong, Wil & Yiwen, Zhang & Liu, Jinlong, 2021. "Institutional choices between private management and user group management during forest devolution: A case study of forest allocation in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    5. Sirak Robele Gari & Alice Newton & John D. Icely & Maria Mar Delgado-Serrano, 2017. "An Analysis of the Global Applicability of Ostrom’s Design Principles to Diagnose the Functionality of Common-Pool Resource Institutions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    6. Hari Dulal & Gernot Brodnig & Kalim Shah, 2011. "Capital assets and institutional constraints to implementation of greenhouse gas mitigation options in agriculture," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 1-23, January.
    7. McAllister, Ryan R.J. & Smajgl, Alex & Asafu-Adjaye, John, 2007. "Forest logging and institutional thresholds in developing south-east Asian economies: A conceptual model," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1079-1089, May.
    8. Tim Wise & Eliza Waters, "undated". "Community Control in a Global Economy: Lessons from Mexico's Economic Integration Process," GDAE Working Papers 01-03, GDAE, Tufts University.
    9. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/7q6sh3g50e9b088rr3ms9s3j8a is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Husain, Zakir & Bhattacharya, Rabindra N., 2004. "Common pool resources and contextual factors: Evolution of a fishermen's cooperative in Calcutta," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3-4), pages 201-217, October.
    11. Luo, Yaping & Wu, Jianxian & Xu, Ying, 2022. "Can self-governance tackle the water commons? — Causal evidence of the effect of rural water pollution treatment on farmers' health in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    12. Antinori, Camille M. & Rausser, Gordon C., 2010. "The Mexican Common Property Forestry Sector," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt8qh479p8, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    13. Nielsen, Martin Reinhardt & Treue, Thorsten, 2012. "Hunting for the Benefits of Joint Forest Management in the Eastern Afromontane Biodiversity Hotspot: Effects on Bushmeat Hunters and Wildlife in the Udzungwa Mountains," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 1224-1239.
    14. Perez-Cirera, Vanessa & Lovett, Jon C., 2006. "Power distribution, the external environment and common property forest governance: A local user groups model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 341-352, September.
    15. Johnson, Craig & Forsyth, Timothy, 2002. "In the Eyes of the State: Negotiating a "Rights-Based Approach" to Forest Conservation in Thailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1591-1605, September.
    16. Clement, Floriane & Ishaq, Saba & Samad, Madar & Acharya, N. Sreedhar & Radha, A. Venkata & Haileslassie, A. & Blummel, M. & Dey, A. & Khan, M. A. & Shindey, D. N. & Mit, R., 2010. "Improving water productivity, reducing poverty and enhancing equity in mixed crop-livestock systems in the Indo-Gangetic Basin: CPWF project report 68," IWMI Research Reports H043549, International Water Management Institute.
    17. Antinori, Camille & Bray, David Barton, 2005. "Community forest enterprises as entrepreneurial Firms: Economic and institutional perspectives from Mexico," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    18. Reynolds, Travis W., 2012. "Institutional Determinants of Success Among Forestry-Based Carbon Sequestration Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 542-554.
    19. Di Cintio, Antonio & Santamaria, Sara Mohamed & Ortega, Miquel & Niccolini, Federico & Bulleri, Fabio, 2026. "Heterogeneity of artisanal fishers’ perception of marine protected areas. The case of the Tuscan Archipelago (Mediterranean Sea)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 241(C).
    20. Floriane Clement, 2010. "Analysing decentralised natural resource governance: proposition for a “politicised” institutional analysis and development framework," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 43(2), pages 129-156, June.
    21. Bonye, Samuel Ziem & Yiridomoh, Gordon Yenglier & Nsiah, Vivian, 2023. "Multi-stakeholder actors in resource management in Ghana: Dynamics of community-state collaboration in resource use management of the Mole National Park, Larabanga," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:20:p:8621-:d:430690. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.