IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v33y2015i6p1484-1500.html

Politics of visibility: competing for legitimacy in North Carolina fisheries governance

Author

Listed:
  • Candace K May

Abstract

In the collaborative natural resource governance literature, stakeholder participation is most often treated as instrumental to the normative legitimacy and, thus, effectiveness of the environmental state. This study adds a perspective of stakeholder legitimacy as the outcome of competition among groups with differential power operating under the influence of powerful systemic forces. Stakeholders with differential capacities engage in a politics of visibility to determine what is and is not made transparent. What remains invisible is the result of privileged accounts, supported by broader societal values regarding economic development. The research for this paper stems from ethnographic field work of a campaign by conservation and recreational fishing interests to ban the use of commercial gill nets in North Carolina. Conservation and recreational fishing interests gained a greater degree of legitimacy in fishery decision-making processes by utilizing a politics of visibility that reinforced destructive patterns of environmental rights and resource use.

Suggested Citation

  • Candace K May, 2015. "Politics of visibility: competing for legitimacy in North Carolina fisheries governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(6), pages 1484-1500, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:33:y:2015:i:6:p:1484-1500
    DOI: 10.1177/0263774X15614180
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0263774X15614180
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0263774X15614180?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tomas M. Koontz & Elizabeth Moore Johnson, 2004. "One size does not fit all: Matching breadth of stakeholder participation to watershed group accomplishments," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 37(2), pages 185-204, June.
    2. Stone, Clarence N., 1980. "Systemic Power in Community Decision Making: A Restatement of Stratification Theory," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 978-990, December.
    3. Martin Nie, 2008. "The underappreciated role of regulatory enforcement in natural resource conservation," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(2), pages 139-164, June.
    4. William D. Leach & Neil W. Pelkey & Paul A. Sabatier, 2002. "Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(4), pages 645-670.
    5. Ribot, Jesse C. & Agrawal, Arun & Larson, Anne M., 2006. "Recentralizing While Decentralizing: How National Governments Reappropriate Forest Resources," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1864-1886, November.
    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. Manuel Fischer & Philip Leifeld, 2015. "Policy forums: Why do they exist and what are they used for?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 363-382, September.
    2. Julia Brown, 2014. "Evaluating Participatory Initiatives in South Africa," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(2), pages 21582440145, April.
    3. Arts, Bas, 2014. "Assessing forest governance from a ‘Triple G’ perspective: Government, governance, governmentality⁎⁎This article belongs to the Special Issue: Assessing Forest Governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 17-22.
    4. Yung, Esther H.K. & Sun, Yi, 2020. "Power relationships and coalitions in urban renewal and heritage conservation: The Nga Tsin Wai Village in Hong Kong," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    5. Kahsay, Goytom Abraha & Medhin, Haileselassie, 2020. "Leader turnover and forest management outcomes: Micro-level evidence from Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Pandit, Ram & Bevilacqua, Eddie, 2011. "Forest users and environmental impacts of community forestry in the hills of Nepal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 345-352, June.
    7. Caillault, Sébastien & Marie, Maxime, 2023. "Is a village level always relevant to describe land cover changes? Analysing the landscape to understand socio-environmental changes in western Burkina Faso," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    8. Ahmed M. Youssef & Bosy A. El‑Haddad & Hariklia D. Skilodimou & George D. Bathrellos & Narges Kariminejad & Hamid Reza Pourghasemi, 2026. "Effective emergency planning strategies for enhancing flood response," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 122(1), pages 1-36, January.
    9. Prakash Kashwan, 2016. "Integrating power in institutional analysis: A micro-foundation perspective," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(1), pages 5-26, January.
    10. Cisneros, Elías & Kis-Katos, Krisztina, 2024. "Unintended environmental consequences of anti-corruption strategies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    11. Mark Lubell & Adam Douglas Henry & Mike McCoy, 2010. "Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(2), pages 287-300, April.
    12. Septimiu-Rare? SZABO, 2013. "Decentralisation In The Context Of Multi-Level Governance: Study Case - Romania," Proceedings of Administration and Public Management International Conference, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 9(1), pages 92-103, June.
    13. Meinzen-Dick, Ruth Suseela & di Gregorio, Monica & Dohrn, Stephan, 2008. "Decentralization, Pro-Poor Land Policies, and Democratic Governance," CAPRi Working Papers 44353, CGIAR, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    14. Mark Sandford, 2020. "Conceptualising ‘generative power’: Evidence from the city-regions of England," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(10), pages 2098-2114, August.
    15. Nieto-Romero, M. & Parra, C. & Bock, B., 2021. "Re-building historical commons: How formal institutions affect participation in community forests in Galicia, Spain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    16. Angelingis Makatta & Lupala ZJ & Faustin Maganga & Amos Majule, 2018. "Forest Governance at Village Level with Potential for REDD+ in Participatory Forest Management, Tanzania," International Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources, Juniper Publishers Inc., vol. 8(2), pages 40-51, - January.
    17. Paudel, Jayash, 2018. "Community-Managed Forests, Household Fuelwood Use and Food Consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-73.
    18. Aijaz Ali & Farhad Analoui, 2023. "Decentralisation by military regimes and challenges to citizen participation: an empirical reflection from Pakistan," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-10, December.
    19. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/5405 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Nguyen KimDung & Simon R. Bush & Arthur P. J. Mol, 2016. "The Vietnamese State and Administrative Co-Management of Nature Reserves," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-19, March.
    21. Axel Marx, 2008. "Limits to non‐state market regulation: A qualitative comparative analysis of the international sport footwear industry and the Fair Labor Association," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(2), pages 253-273, June.

    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:sae:envirc:v:33:y:2015:i:6:p:1484-1500. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.