Legitimacy of the Small Scale Fisheries policy in South Africa. A Research Report Presented to

Transcription

1 Legitimacy of the Small Scale Fisheries policy in South Africa A Research Report Presented to The Graduate School of Business University of Cape Town In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Business Administration Submitted by: Natasha Diest December 2015 Supervisor: Professor Ralph Hamann 1

2 Acknowledgements Firstly, I would like to thank God for His grace and infinite blessings throughout my life. I truly have so much to be thankful for. I have to extend my sincere appreciation to Professor Ralph Hamann for his incredible patience and guidance. This work is a testament to your constant commitment to assist me by providing invaluable feedback and direction. There were many times where I struggled and felt defeated. Thank you so much for the encouragement! To my MBA friends, thank you for making this journey so much fun, we have forged friendships that will last forever. To the Solution Space gang, you made this dissertation bearable, thank you for the laughs. Then to the most important people in my life, my family, thank you for your constant love, support and encouragement. Your unwavering love has given me strength. You are all securely tucked away in my heart. To my lifelong friends, thank you for the assurance that I can always count on you and keeping me sane during this two years. DEDICATION: My MBA degree is dedicated to my grandfather, who was a great believer in education and empowerment. I thank you every day for the opportunities your sacrifices has afforded me. i

3 Abstract This research report explores how people develop and form perceptions of legitimacy of public policies. Traditionally, policies are evaluated based on outcomes and whether it achieved its goal of problemsolving. However, the realm of legitimacy provides an alternative means of evaluating policies. Legitimacy is based on a perception of fairness and looks at public support for a new policy. Normative Compliance Theory states that people obey laws that they deem to be legitimate. The literature identified two components of the policy cycle that shape peoples perceptions of legitimacy. This research used these components, substantive terms and procedural aspects, as a framework to assess perceptions of fairness. Legitimacy is vital in governance as it creates a moral obligation to abide by rules. This is important to maintain effective rule and social order in society. This research is a case setting which explores the policy formulation process in the Small Scale Fisheries sector. The empirical work was exploratory and included 21 interviews with various stakeholders in the sector to explore how they developed their perceptions of this policy. The findings were assessed using the initial model. The research discovered that there was an additional element that influenced policy legitimacy. A revised model was developed based on this evidence, which shows a lack of organisational legitimacy hampers policy legitimacy. This research shows that the lack of output legitimacy undermines the policy process by influencing the way people view and interpret actions of the organisation. Therefore, an understanding of policy legitimacy is important for institutions to devise effective strategies in order to enact policies and manage tactics for implementation. ii

4 Plagiarism Declaration 1. I know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is using another s work and pretending that it is your own. 2. I attest that this research report is my own work. 3. I have used the American Psychological Association (APA) convention for citations and referencing. All contributions and quotes from work of other people have been referenced accordingly and attributed to the relevant authors. 4. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing it off as his or her own work Furthermore, by my signature is hereto, I confirm the above: Name: Natasha Diest Signature: Date: 9 December 2015 iii

5 Table of Contents Acknowledgements...i Abstract...ii Plagiarism Declaration...iii List of figures...vi List of tables...vi List of abbreviations...vii Section Introduction Purpose of the study Context of the Study...3 Research problem...3 Rationale for choice Significance of the Research Assumptions...7 Section 2 - Literature review Legitimacy Copyright What is legitimacy?...8 UCT Why is legitimacy important in governance? How do you achieve legitimacy? Fisheries in South Africa...14 Small Scale Fisheries sector...15 Collective rights & Co-management Conclusion...17 Section 3 - Methodology Research Approach & Strategy Research design Data Collection Methods Research Instruments Population & Sampling Sample Research Criteria Reliability & Validity Credibility & Dependability Data Analysis Methods Research ethics...28 iv

6 Section 4 Research findings and discussion Research findings and analysis...29 Substantive legitimacy...29 Procedural legitimacy...34 Analysis...41 Theme 1: organisational legitimacy...41 Theme 2: lack of communication...43 Theme 3: uncertainty...45 Theme 4: delays and interim measures Research discussion...48 Section 5 Research Conclusions...53 Section 6 - Future research Limitations of this study Recommendations for future research...55 Section 7 - References...56 Appendices...60 Appendix 1 Interview schedule...60 Note Copyright question structure...60 UCT Appendix v

7 List of figures Figure 1 A model which provides details of the inputs for evaluation basis of policy legitimacy...18 Figure 2 - The revised model which adds an additional element to the inputs of policy legitimacy...52 List of tables Table 1- List of participants...24 Table 2 - Presentation of findings...29 Table 3 - Summary of findings...30 Table 4 - Summary of findings...34 vi

8 List of abbreviations DAFF Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries DTI Department of Trade and Industry FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation (United Nations) FRAP - Fishing Rights Allocation Process ITQ - Individual Transferable Quotas IUU Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported fishing MCM Marine and Coastal Management MLRA Marine Living Resources Act of 1998 NEDLAC National Economic Development and Labour Council NGO Non-governmental Organisation NTT National Task Team PLAAS Institute for Poverty, Land and Agrarian Studies SACFC South African Commercial Fishermen Co-operative SAIIA Copyright South African Institute of International Affairs UCT SSF Small Scale Fishing WCRL West Coast Rock Lobster vii

9 Section Introduction Purpose of the study The primary aim of this paper is to explore how stakeholders develop perceptions of legitimacy of public policies. The concept of legitimacy is important in governance as Scharpf (as cited by Skogstad, 2003) stated that there will be serious consequences for effective policy-making if legitimacy problems halt the implementation of new policies. Legitimacy is viewed as important for compliance as it is a belief that one should abide by a law or rule because it is deemed to be just or appropriate (Tyler, 2006). Normative compliance theory suggests that people obey laws that they perceive to be legitimate. A key element in this perception of legitimacy is that there is fairness built into the procedures used to develop and execute the laws and regulations (Kuperan & Sutinen, 1998). The factors that influence perceptions of fairness in public policy have been identified as substantive terms and procedural aspects of the policy cycle. Both these conditions must exist in policy development in order for a law to be deemed fair and thus legitimate. Once a regulation has attained legitimacy status, a moral obligation develops so adherence to the rules becomes binding on one s Copyright conscience (Wallner, 2008). UCT The idea of policy legitimacy is important as it allows an authority to gain political support for a new regulation or reform (Smoke, 1994). A policy can fail if it does not achieve this legitimacy status because it conflicts with the norms and standards of the majority of citizens (Skogstad, 2003). Legitimacy also provides an alternative means for people to evaluate a policy, as usually the success of failure of a policy is judged by the outcomes after it has been implemented (Wallner, 2008). Furthermore, legitimacy is vital as all societies are faced with the problems of social control and how to convince citizens to comply with rules. Generally, there are three reasons for people to abide by rules and these are defined as coercion, self-interest or legitimacy. Coercion is control based on the fear of punishment by rule enforcers because of asymmetry of capacity or imbalance of power. Self-interest is when people adhere to rules because they see it working in their own interest based on different incentives. Legitimacy is when people view a rule as legitimate and thus feel it must be obeyed due to feelings of accountability or obligation (Hurd, 1999). Alexander George (1980) in his seminal work on policy legitimacy stated that the legitimacy of a policy is about gaining political support for it. He elaborated by stating that when creating a new policy, it passes through a political process which enforces various restrictions on the proposed new legislation. These constraints are imposed by public opinion, parliament, the media and civil society or influential Page 1

10 interest groups. Therefore to overcome these limitations and enable implementation of the policy, the authority must follow a procedure of consultation to achieve a considerable degree of national consensus on the policy. He viewed national accord as paramount for the legitimacy of policies, especially in democracies. The bedrock of a democracy is the principle of democratic control, which dictates that ultimately the people control a nation s policies. The current literature mentions policy content and procedural aspects as a means to develop perceptions of legitimacy. This research looks at managing social control and gaining public agreement for policies through this realm of legitimacy. I have used the literature as a framework for assessment and looked at whether there are other contributing factors which influence this perception of legitimacy. A deeper understanding of how to effectively develop policies is of vital importance in governance. A government or organisation cannot impose a new policy or regulation without it securing legitimacy status. Therefore forging this understanding will assist in conceiving policies that garner public support in order to expedite its acceptance and implementation. This work explores how people form their perceptions so authorities can understand how to develop support for a policy. In practical terms, policy legitimacy provides an important benefit as it leads to successful implementation and a greater degree of compliance. This concept is important in governance to maintain effective rule and social order. The research report commences with this introduction which provides conceptual information and researching setting. The next section is a literature review which focuses on the concept of legitimacy, policy legitimacy and the South African fishing industry with a review of the Small Scale sector. This is followed by the methodology section which details the research technique, the research design, sampling strategy, data collection and data analysis methods. In conclusion, the findings and analysis presents the details of what has emerged from this research, together with a part discussing limitations and recommendations for future research. Page 2

11 1.2 Context of the Study The setting of the research will be the South African fishing industry with a particular focus on the small-scale fishing sector. A new policy has been developed and implementation is imminent. This research will explore the policy development process to determine the perceptions of legitimacy which surround this policy and how they were formed. Currently, the South African fishing industry is structured into three classifications: commercial, recreational and subsistence. These categories still exclude small-scale fishers who fish as a livelihood, not only for personal and household consumption. In many instances, these fishers felt they had a historical right to access fish stocks and continued fishing in protest against the current legislation which they considered exclusionary. This unregulated fishing led to an overexploitation of near-shore resources and severely compromised the sustainability of coastal fishing stocks. In an attempt to address this problem of small-scale fishing, the government adopted a Small Scale Fisheries policy in June However, it cannot be implemented until an amendment to the MLRA has been passed by government. This policy attempts to close the gap in the current fisheries governance system by granting commercial fishing rights to coastal communities. The policy means historic fishermen will be entitled to sell their catch for profitable gain. The primary feature of the new regulation is that access will not be granted to individuals, Copyright but rather allocated as collective rights to fishing communities UCT (Benkenstein, 2013). Research problem How do people develop their perceptions of the legitimacy of rules that bind them? Rationale for choice There are a few key characteristics and selection rationale that highlight why the Small Scale Fisheries policy is a good selection for assessing policy legitimacy. In South Africa, there is a history of illegal protest fishing relating to dispossession under Apartheid laws which were considered illegitimate. In addition, regulation of the fishing industry post-apartheid, has unsuccessfully attempted to formalize the informal sector of fishing and this faced resistance from communities. Furthermore, transformation of the fishing sector since 1994 has not granted traditional fishers an opportunity to commercialise their access rights. This has led to widespread discontent amongst communities and increased levels of illegal fishing. There is, therefore, is an urgent need to prevent overfishing and address sustainability for socio-economic reasons and inter-generational equity. Furthermore, high levels of poverty, illiteracy and unemployment in coastal communities create pressure on fishing activities as there are few alternative sources of income, and thus a clear need for a policy with substantial legitimacy. This will ensure normative compliance as small-scale fishing Page 3

12 incorporates a large numbers of fishers who are widely dispersed across the country thus making regulation and coercive power difficult. There have been attempts by the post-apartheid government to regulate the industry based on key Constitutional principles of equity redistribution, participatory decision-making and co-ownership of resources. This principles are enshrined in this policy, yet, despite these ideologies, there are signs that users are dissatisfied with both the policy process and the content of the policy. Another key aspect to consider is that globally, small scale fishing policies have been poorly managed which has resulted in a failure to curtail overfishing or manage conflict. This is due to insufficient considerations being given to increased poverty or advances in technology which changes motivations and incentives of fishers (Berkes, Pomeray, Mahon, & McConney, 2001). With the new fisheries management policy about to be implemented, it presents an opportunity to assess how perceptions of legitimacy are developed. Legitimacy is important as when an institution has come to be regarded as legitimate, it sets new standards and norms (through its policies) to judge behaviour (Jentoft, Mccay, & Wilson, 1998). So legitimacy is vital as a key driver to determine whether people will abide by these new regulations. Hauck (2008) stated that for governance to be legitimate, people have Copyright to recognize the authority. If there is no legitimacy, then rules cannot UCT be enforced and this results in evasion and resistance to law. The practical implication of legitimacy for the successful implementation of the small-scale policy is important to address many social issues. Non-compliance with policy regulations may result in protest fishing and this has serious implications for sustainability. Jentoft (2000) states that when fishers are dissatisfied with a regulatory policy, they have two options to show their unhappiness. Therefore, when fishers perceive a policy to not be in their best interests, they will express their frustration by Exit which is defined as defiant behaviour and purposefully disobeying the management system through illegal fishing or Voice where discontent is expressed publicly through various forums like media, collective organisations or court action. In light of this, adherence to the new rules will be important for compliance as Hauck & Kroese (2006) observed that obeying new laws is an important component of sustainability of fish stocks. They note that illegal, unreported or unregulated (IUU) fishing leads to a declining resource, reduced returns for compliant fishers, erodes socio-economic opportunities and destabilises food security. Depletion of fish stocks will threaten the very communities that this policy seeks to help as Hauck (2008) states that an overexploitation of resources causes a social, as well as an environmental crisis, because the livelihoods of communities dependent on fishing will be threatened due to dwindling stocks. Page 4

13 1.3 Significance of the Research Legitimacy as a need for the state is a very familiar idea and there is extensive work on this concept. In nondemocratic states, the rules are deemed to be legitimate as there is little need to distinguish between the state and its rules. In a democracy, the president and parliament are elected by the nation so it bestows a prima facie legitimacy to its policies. However, for a myriad of reasons, a government s new regulations may not have widespread support, so developing an understanding of policy legitimacy is vital (Smoke, 1994). This will assist in promoting new legislative initiatives. The subsequent exploration of the theory has identified two aspects which contribute to a policy s legitimacy, and I would like to discover if this list is exhaustive or whether there are other contributing factors. By adding to this body of literature, I hope to contribute to how an authority can effectively manage their strategies for policy development. In practical terms, legitimacy of public policies is vital as George (1980) asserted that the more the legitimacy of a policy is questioned, the more the authority is obliged to divert limited resources and time to defending the policy and its decisions. Therefore, if authorities can garner an understanding of how policies achieve legitimacy, it will assist in devising effective strategies to enact policies. In addition, legitimacy is significant as it is indicative of public trust and support (Meyer, 1999). By investigating the policy s legitimacy, we can determine whether the public perceives it as fair and proper and how these opinions were formed. These aspects are important for policy development and implementation as well as for general governance as it leads people to feel obligated to voluntarily obey the rules of the policy. Furthermore, by interrogating the views and opinions of stakeholders of this policy, it will lead to an understanding of the set of beliefs as well as the social system. By forming this understanding, it allows us to determine how appropriate and reasonable a policy is under these circumstances (Tyler, 2006). In a South African setting, this research will be significant as due to our past political dispensation and the historic methods of distributing resource rights, there has been an entrenched problem of exclusion of black individuals from accessing natural resources for commercial gain. Major obstacles to industry entry include limited access to funds and equipment, however, the new Constitution of 1996 promised fair access to natural resources, access to information and involvement in management and decisions of government. In fisheries, this goal was achieved by the promulgation of the Marine Living Resources Act of 1998, which promised to uplift the impoverished coastal communities by granting improved access to marine resources (Hauck & Sowman, 2001). Therefore, should this proposed Small Scale Fisheries Policy be successfully implemented, it will achieve a government goal which was set over Page 5

14 nineteen years ago. This is important for our democracy as public policies are a tangible manifestation of conscious decisions by governments on behalf of its citizens (Wallner, 2008, p. 424) Another contentious point is that the Small Scales Fisheries Policy has been plagued with confusion, opposition and concern from inception. Initially, the Equality Court made a ruling that forced the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries to publish a policy in the Government Gazette by 31 July The objective of the ruling was to address the plight of historical fishers in coastal communities who have traditionally depended on the sea for a livelihood. The draft policy was eventually published on 3 September This immediately raised concerns amongst commercial fishing about the implications and the practicalities of the policy and its ramifications for broader industry (Edwards, 2010). Therefore, due to this furore that has surrounded the policy, if we can determine its legitimacy status, it will establish the levels of support that exist as legitimacy of a public policy can affect an authority s ability to maintain civic stability (Wallner, 2008). Furthermore, Collier (2010) recognizes that government is the most efficient vehicle to drive the equitable distribution of resources and the most sensible place to lodge rights to natural assets. He states that all natural assets are likely to be plundered unless defended by social agreement. Therefore, government s success is important to achieve goals of effective governance while addressing sustainability. So as government is identified as the custodian of resources, it is their responsibility to distribute them in a manner which achieves social, as well as economic goals, and this research hopes to assist government to identify measures to drive a successful policy. Another aim of this research is to contribute to the understanding of how community-based fishing systems can be employed successfully to positively impact society. The research will look at legitimacy through the perception of fairness by evaluating the design of the policy. This is paramount as should this policy be successfully implemented, South African fisheries management can rebuild institutions that are adaptive and develop regulations that also aim at generating opportunities through a process of social creation. This information sharing and expression of values leads to a revival of culture through building communities (Jentoft et al., 1998). Page 6

15 1.4 Assumptions There are various assumptions that are made in this research. Adams et al (2007) state that the researcher must ensure that the assumptions are sensible. Furthermore, one has to evaluate how realistic the assumptions are to determine the validity of the research. Firstly, I assumed that all material and information gathered during my research was accurate, honest and factual. The steps I took to enhance my confidence in participants responses was to firstly secure their willingness to participate. This guaranteed that they were willing to contribute and offer information. In addition, I provided an unconditional offer of anonymity which mitigates the risk of participants falsifying information for fear of retribution from others. The offer of anonymity was accompanied by an assurance to participants that they could withdraw from the research at any stage. This ensured a feeling of safety to disclose information. Lastly, I used a method of iterative questioning which helped me to probe further when I discovered inconsistencies in the information provided. This was a particularly useful technique when I detected contradictions in answers as it helped me to discern the truth. I also used a method of prolonged engagement which encourages the researcher to build a rapport with participants to ensure they feel comfortable during the interview. This included informal discussions with participants and other people within communities. This served a dual purpose as it allowed me to establish whether views of participants were shared by their communities. An additional step taken to ensure consistency was an extensive review of secondary data sources such as academic journals, media publications and government notices. This meant that any discrepancies in personal accounts of the current situation could be identified. In addition, I corroborated the points discussed in interviews with existing literature, press releases and verified information with other participants to determine facts. Page 7

16 Section 2 - Literature review 2.1 Legitimacy What is legitimacy? Legitimacy is a concept which applies to voluntary compliance due to the recognition of authority. A formal definition of legitimacy is a psychological property of an authority or institution that leads people to believe it is appropriate, proper or fair. Legitimacy is a belief that rules or decisions created by these establishments are valid and should be obeyed (Tyler, 2006). Peters (as cited in Wallner, 2008, p. 423) also views legitimacy as a largely psychological concept and asserts that it is dependent on the majority s recognition of the suitability of the authority to rule or govern. Kratochwil (2006) defines legitimacy as when the public finds rules or policies binding based on the acceptance of authority of the decision-maker. In classical social theory, Dahl (1998) states that legitimacy involves a confidence that an authority s power to make rules for others is acceptable and appropriate. The acceptance of these rules or policies will then rest on a feeling of obligation to abide by laws and accept policies as authoritative. This view is reiterated by Tyler (2006) who states that authorities must convince role-players that they deserve to rule and make decisions that influence their lives. This notion can be defined as cultivating a belief in legitimacy. Legitimacy can also be dissected into two components which consists of an empirical part which is defined as public trust and support, and an additional aspect which addresses justifiability according to norms, morals and tradition (Meyer, 1999). Therefore, it becomes evident that legitimacy is based on personal views and perceptions. Hurd (1999) elaborates on the importance of understanding legitimacy as a subjective issue between the audience and authority. He states that legitimacy is defined by perceptions and these shape the behavior of people because it becomes internalised and helps to label how interests are viewed. These definitions suggest that people recognize the legitimacy of rules and regard them as binding when they recognize the authority of the institution that formulates the rules or policies. Organizational legitimacy Suchman (1995) defines organizational legitimacy as generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions (p 574). The concept of legitimacy is complex and Suchman elaborated on organizational legitimacy by identifying three distinct types: pragmatic, moral and cognitive legitimacy. Pragmatic legitimacy is when an audience gauges their self-interest while scrutinizing and evaluating the authority s actions. It is basically a type of exchange where support is given based on an expectation of deriving some benefit or value in return. Alternatively, moral Page 8

17 legitimacy is support based on a judgement about whether an action is the right thing. This decision of morality is usually shaped by the belief that an action is for broad social welfare. Cognitive legitimacy is when there is a plausible explanation for the existence of an authority and its actions and support can be justified rationally. However, all three types of legitimacy as defined by Suchman rest on a general definition that overall perceptions of institutions actions are considered to be desirable, just or correct within a socially constructed system of norms, values or beliefs. This definition shows an overlap as it demonstrates that support for an organization and its decisions is also subject to perceptions of legitimacy. The definition of legitimacy as bestowing power according to Kelman and Hamilton (as cited by Tyler, 2006, p. 377), is called authorisation and it dictates that the duty to obey orders supercedes personal values or morality and allows authorities to define behavior. Therefore, in essence legitimacy is about rules which exist to influence behavior and ought to be obeyed (Hurd, 1999, p. 379). Types of legitimacy Further inspection reveals that there are two principal types of legitimacy input and output. Input legitimacy can be defined as the procedures or processes followed when developing a rule or regulation. Output legitimacy is an assessment based on actual results or judgements of competence (Kratochwil, 2006). Therefore as defined, input legitimacy is about participation and adds a social aspect as it allows people access to the policy process and provides an opportunity to contribute and provide feedback. It is about enhanced participation through deliberation. In contrast, output legitimacy is built on problem-solving in the interests of society while focusing on utility, efficacy and function (Abels, 2007). This notion of legitimacy on the input side can be expanded by looking at the mechanisms that translate the will of the people into political decisions and whether these decisions are regarded as democratic or good (Boedeltje & Cornips, 2004, p. 4). This concept of inclusion is defined as democratic input and is derived from the free will of people to authorize decision-makers, debate issues and expect responsiveness as well as holding authorities accountable. These are the tenets that lead to input legitimacy (Meyer, 1999). On the contrary, output legitimacy is about assessing the authority s performance in practical terms based on the utilitarian issues (Meyer, 1999). Simplifying this concept, output legitimacy can be explained according to Scharpf (as cited by Boedeltje & Cornips 2004) as judgement to the extent that the authority is effective and achieves basic functions. This is confirmed by Skogstad (2003) who states that output legitimacy is based on results. Page 9

18 This understanding of output legitimacy can be expanded, as a model of social control that focuses on demonstrating competence in managing social problems thereby encouraging public support and assistance for the authority due to the proof of capabilities (Tyler, 2006). This is the achievement of legitimacy based on performance an ability to competently achieve goals. Having this understanding of legitimacy and its various forms lends itself to conceptualizing why legitimacy is fundamental to issues of authority, power and influence Why is legitimacy important in governance? It is difficult for an authority to govern or influence an audience based solely on use of power. Power is viewed as the capacity to impact others observation of gains or losses by using a threat of punitive measures or promising a reward for desired conduct. The use of power as a deterrent and a means of influence is inefficient and expensive as it requires vast resources to monitor others with only modest results. In addition, in this system, more resources are necessary as a promise of incentive for preferred behavior. Due to this ineffective method of influence over others, it is important that authorities gain an additional means of control. Legitimacy is important as it is essential in certain circumstances to influence others so that they perceive the decisions taken to be impartial or fitting and thus ought to be observed. This psychological construct of legitimacy leads to voluntary compliance borne out of a sense of obligation rather than a fear of threats or an anticipation of reward. The rules and regulations will be obeyed willingly if stakeholders recognize the legitimacy and the policy is framed as just and proper. Legitimacy leads to self-control; it is not dependent on external control (Tyler, 2006). The notion of legitimacy also ties in with Scott s three pillars of institutions (as cited by Jentoft 2004) who states the pillars as regulative, normative and cognitive. Regulative pillar applies to rules and conventions which speak to a coercive kind of power. By acting in accordance with the normative principle, an additional form of influence also exists which makes governance easier as there is a willingness to comply and cooperate. Breaking rules is considered unethical as they are morally binding. Honesty becomes a cherished social value and fear of community alienation or retribution from God acts as a powerful incentive to obey rules. This idea of self-regulating due to ethics means that the law is recognised as legitimate and thus binding on one s conscience. The third pillar, cognitive, applies to communication and understanding of rules as a determinant of compliance. In addition, legitimacy is an important predictor of success as it assesses the performance of an institution during a policy process and allows an alternative method to determine support. Usually policies or rules are evaluated after implementation and then outcomes are judged based on efficiency, efficacy and performance. However, the concept of legitimacy recognises that policies may achieve its Page 10

19 objectives, yet still fail to attain legitimacy. This failure has long-term effects on public perception of the authority s ability to govern (Wallner, 2008). A form of legitimacy also exists that can be helpful in situations where central institutions or authorities are lacking. This style of legitimacy works through extension; as a coherent system used in a different arena will be substituted in the new circumstance. This process will be used as it was deemed to be effective and thus it is extended and the legitimacy and support is accepted. This is helpful in situations where laws are lacking so as to provide order (Kratochwil, 2006). Legitimacy is also about loyalty and goodwill thus can reduce friction if an institution imposes regulations which are contradictory to what people need or want (Tyler, 2006). This view that legitimacy avoids conflict is further demonstrated by Kratochwil (2006) when he states that legitimacy goes beyond stating preferences, rather, it is about explicit acceptance. Therefore legitimacy does not depend on a coincidence of personal preferences, but on establishing a rule or policy that is incumbent upon all. This implies that even if there are conflicting views, the winners as well as the losers will comply equally. Wallner (2008) confirms this when she states gaining legitimacy and voluntary agreement leads to increased efficacy during periods of insufficiency, crisis or conflict. Being Copyright legitimate is important to the success of institutions or authorities UCT as it allows the authority to gain voluntary assent from people due to a sense of obligation. Legitimacy is not an issue where all parties agree or a game of coordination exists, as this leads to self-enforcement of rules. However, when no consensus can be reached, legitimacy is important as it rests on rules that are binding on all so people are compelled to obey the regulations (Kratochwil, 2006). In addition, classic social theories note consensus is important in society as all members benefit from social stability. Political strength arises from a widespread belief that authorities and institutions are legitimate (Tyler, 2006). Another way in which legitimacy enhances governance is in control of resources under conditions of scarcity when chaos can prevail. When the authorities call on values of people to attain the desired behavior, it allows a more efficient deployment of assets for the benefit of all, as resources are not needed to ensure public order (Tyler, 2006) How do you achieve legitimacy? Widmer (2009) distinguishes between the two forms of legitimacy. He states that output legitimacy is achieved by making decisions which serves the common interest of people and ensures state activities achieve high performance. Input legitimacy is achieved when political decisions are made in a democratic or representative way and reflects the preferences of the people. He also notes that input and output legitimacy are interdependent. Page 11

20 Furthermore, output legitimacy is about an evaluation of efficacy, efficiency and performance of institutions (Wallner, 2008). Output legitimacy is a means of evaluating competency based on performance and can be attained by delivering solutions through public policies that achieve maximum utility for the general society (Abels, 2007). Policy legitimacy While output legitimacy can be achieved through competence in governance, policy legitimacy is related to the input side. This adds another dimension to evaluate policies besides the traditional means of assessing policies based on efficacy and performance subsequent to its implementation (Wallner, 2008). Input legitimacy is built on deliberation which is based on an egalitarian model that includes mass participation and unrestricted discourse which infuses different expertise and diverse knowledge (Abels, 2007). This form of participation leads to a perception of policy legitimacy based on fairness created by the substantive elements of the policy and the procedural steps taken by authorities during the policy cycle (Wallner, 2008). Hurd (1999) confirms this view that peoples perception of legitimacy of a policy is formed by the substance Copyright of the rule and the procedure by which it was formed. This perception UCT is then internalised and affects motivations and behaviour as it defines how people see interests or morality. Wallner (2008) elaborates on how to achieve policy legitimacy through the perception of fairness. The substantive terms state that the policy content should align with the dominant views and attitudes of stakeholders as well as the broader community. Furthermore, in procedural terms, features of policy development such as an incubation period, the emotive appeal and the process of stakeholder engagement shape the perception of legitimacy of the policy and the authority promoting it. The substantive terms relate to the material of the policy and dictate that the goals and outcomes must be considered reasonable and fair and support the general sentiments of the community. Added to this requirement, is the democratic principle of popular control which elevates the expectations of society to a right of public participation. This ensures that policies are congruent with the common values of society and popular attitudes. This aspect tries to ensure that the policy strategies are aligned with the dominant views of the constituency (Wallner, 2008). ideas and implementation The importance of the substantive terms for achieving policy legitimacy is reiterated by George (1980) who states that in policy-making, it is important to balance the competing demands of interest groups. He elaborated by defining a policy s terms as having two components normative component which addresses the moral aspect and the cognitive basis which establishes feasibility and desirability. The Page 12

21 normative aspect of substantive terms ensures that a country s policy is rooted in the country s political values and norms. The cognitive aspect looks at how feasible the policy is as the citizens of the country must believe that the authority has the ability to implement the proposed policy. In terms of procedural requirements, policy incubation is a period where an idea is developed, reshaped, adapted to political needs and communicated to stakeholders. The dual purpose of this is to ensure that the concept of policy reform is secure in the minds of political players and secondly, it allows time to educate community members and the public about the value embedded in the proposed approach. Rushing a policy s time horizon is not an efficient strategy to garner support as it does not allow sufficient time to develop broad and meaningful consensus. An incubation period is also important for establishing and developing the empirical content of a policy while promoting the policy agenda.the second element in terms of procedures is emotive appeal; this refers to building support around the future strategy and stimulating stakeholder and public backing by using language or discourse that shapes an agenda. By communicating in a manner that positively resonates with society, it increases the legitimacy of the policy and the current authorities. Another element to assess legitimacy is by looking at the process of stakeholder and public engagement during the policy development and implementation process. How an authority crafts and accomplishes its plan shapes acceptance of the political agenda. Again the democratic principle of popular control includes an expectation of meaningful participation even though it may slow down the policy cycle (Wallner, 2008). In addition to these factors, Tyler (2006) acknowledges rationality as an additional idea of procedural justice as it ensures objectivity and reflects factual deduction in decisions which can be judged as fair or just. Sarcinelli (as cited by Meyer 1999, p. 620) reinforces the importance of procedural steps by stating that the approval of governance depends on a continual process of public reasoning and scrutiny which is realised through political communication. Political communication thus contributes to input legitimacy because it helps citizens impact decisions of policies and increases accountability. If these aspects are lacking, it results in a democratic deficit (Meyer, 1999). Furthermore, in order to contribute towards policy legitimacy, George (1980) states the procedures of the policy-making must be transparent and avoid undue secrecy. These two factors of alignment of policy content to public needs and the adherence to procedural terms ensure the public perceive the policy process as fair which encourages the recognition of legitimacy (input). The added advantage of this form of legitimacy is that if legitimacy of an institution already exists, when evaluating other outcomes or policies, there is a bias to viewing these decisions or regulations as legitimate or fair too (Tyler, 2006). A government that engages in a significant manner with the public for its policies can expect to achieve overall legitimacy of its authority due to meaningful Page 13

22 engagement. This is due to a cultivation of mutual trust which sustains successful collaboration between public and government representatives (Wallner, 2008). Legitimacy characteristics in governance have also been acknowledged by Chuenpagdee & Jentoft (2007) as they noted that what precedes the implementation of polices is as important as how it is implemented as these preliminary steps can determine success. They argue that how ideas are conceived and who is involved in the initial participation all affect stakeholder perceptions and support. In practical terms, Jentoft (2004) states that when regulations enjoy normative legitimacy, people will avoid breaking the rules as it is considered unethical, so the new policy becomes morally binding and the cherished social value of honesty prevails. This moral influence and social obligation is a high ranking contributor for legitimacy and compliance (Kuperan & Sutinen, 1998). 2.2 Fisheries in South Africa Due to South Africa s political history, the distribution of natural resources has resulted in a legacy of inequality. In 1994, 0.75% of the country s total allowable catch of fishing resources and 7% of the 2700 registered fishing vessels were held by black citizens. The majority of the economic power within the industry was controlled by white large-scale businesses. However, with the dawn of democracy, the new Constitution Copyright of 1996 promised equal access to natural resources, UCT access to information and public participation in governance. In the fishing industry, the Marine Living Resources Act (MLRA) of 1998 was enacted to uplift impoverished coastal communities, broaden access to resources and redistribute fishing rights to include previously marginalized groups (Hauck & Sowman, 2001). The transformation of the fishing industry has had to balance economic efficiency, political stability, fairness and sustainability of fishing stocks while embracing many trials. By 2006, the participation of black individuals in the industry increased to 62% and there was meaningful representation across all sectors (Branch & Clark, 2006). However, with the new political dispensation, the impetus for reform in the industry was socio-politically motivated, not focused on environmental or economic factors, therefore, the main objective was to eradicate the institutionalized discrimination against black individuals. Since 1994, despite the reform in the industry, through internal transformation and allocation of new rights to black individuals, the process had excluded many historic fishers. The marginalization of these fishers denied their access to resources, therefore, in spite of the reform, addressing these concerns remained a challenge (van Sittert, Branch, Hauck, & Sowman, 2006). Page 14

23 Small Scale Fisheries sector In 2005, a diverse group consisting of researchers, community organisations, lawyers and artisanal (traditional) fishers took legal action against the government of South Africa. The class action was based on the claim that the allocation system of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQ) was unfair to smallscale fishermen as it threatened their right to practise their livelihoods. This legal fight resulted in an Equality Court ruling that forced Marine & Coastal Management (MCM) to devise a Small Scale Fisheries policy. The ruling was made in 2006 and the court further stated that as a temporary measure during the policy development, the government should award small scale fishers access rights called interim relief. The new policy was adopted by cabinet in 2014 subject to amendments to the MLRA (1998) and addresses the problems and concerns of small-scale fishers. The new policy represents a significant legal shift for small-scale fishers as it recognises their right to fish and addresses issues of livelihoods and food security of these communities (Isaacs, 2015). NEPAD s Partnership for Africa s Fisheries has identified that the advantage of small scale fishing lies not in wealth redistribution but in addressing the welfare function. It states that small-scale fisheries contribution, particularly in a developing-country setting, lies in the sector s ability to address unemployment and supporting livelihoods through food security and providing additional sources of income Copyright (Benkenstein, 2014). UCT The South African government is aligning its goals to this framework of regional governance institutions and has incorporated these findings into new legislation. Thus, the stated objectives of the South African Small Scale Fisheries Policy is to provide equitable access to fish by small-scale fishing communities, grant multi-species rights, transformation of past fisheries system, address poverty alleviation, socio-economic development and food security (Department of Agriculture Foresty & Fisheries, 2015). Nevertheless, an important aspect to consider is that due to changes in technology, small scale fishing has undergone significant changes in recent years; so, the ability of this sector to overexploit resources should not be underestimated (Benkenstein, 2014). Guided by this knowledge, administration of the new sector needs to be seriously contemplated in order to ensure compliance with regulations and guarantee a sustainable fishing resource. The introduction of the co-management system addresses the management of this sector and its stated objective is that government and communities share the responsibility and authority of managing the country s marine resources (Department of Agriculture Foresty & Fisheries, 2015). Page 15

24 It is worth noting that the social engineering and disruption of traditional practices that occurred during the Apartheid era, eroded customary law and traditional systems of governance (Hauck & Sowman, 2001, p. 174). Therefore a fresh and innovative new system needs to be implemented. Co-management is this attempt at a new system of participatory governance which includes active involvement by fishers and has been endorsed by international NGOs to combat illegal fishing (Benkenstein, 2014). Collective rights & Co-management An aspect of the policy that has caused considerable division and debate is the proposed method of cooperatives. This vehicle means fishing rights will be awarded to the communities as a collective. There will be shared ownership and shared beneficiation. While the cooperative model has been a bone of contention amongst stakeholders of this policy, the idea is based on a theory of community building. Jentoft (2000b) states that fisheries management should not damage the social structure or threaten the social fabric of communities by causing disintegration and division. He further advocates that fisheries management should adopt structures that strengthen and reinstate solidarity and cultural qualities within communities by encouraging cooperation, building networks and improving trust. He maintains that the ITQ management systems weaken Copyright social bonds, traditional values and the general sense of social UCT responsibility. Therefore Jentoft supports collective rights as a way to support community integration and equal opportunities. Furthermore, he asserts that this method of allocating rights works in conjunction with co-management principles, and will build the overall health and vitality of communities which ensures the viability and sustainability of natural resources. The Small Scale policy intends to introduce this new form of governance as the fisheries management system. Communities will form committees that will help government to manage strategies, maintain catch statistics data and implement monitoring methods used to govern fishing (Department of Agriculture Foresty & Fisheries, 2015). This participatory governance encourages communities to work together with government so it increases sharing of responsibility and sense of ownership. Co-management is a model implemented in the 1990s which shifts the importance from government to a management method which includes all stakeholders in decision-making. It is a way to merge government s concern for sustainability and community s need for participation and self-governance (Hauck & Sowman, 2001). This paradigm shift has filtered into South African governance and is defined as decentralised fisheries management from national level to local institutions thereby promoting user rights with a way to integrate biological, social and human dimensions (Isaacs, 2012, p.1). Page 16

25 Therefore the principles enshrined in this policy are based on sound values which are consistent with the objectives of recognising human rights. Furthermore, Jentoft (2000) stated co-management policies will be successful if it includes democratic participation of users in decision-making. He posits that this communication leads to improved legitimacy which increases compliance. If these principles are employed, it will result in a policy which is designed based on shared knowledge. This overview provides the context in which legitimacy will be assessed with regard to the Small Scale Fisheries policy. 2.3 Conclusion The primary objective of this review was to establish how people develop perceptions of legitimacy of regulations and public policy. The literature defined legitimacy as a psychological construct and explained the influence on behaviour and how it shapes acceptance of authority. As discussed above, legitimacy is divided into two principal types input and output. Output is about competence while input is based on perception of fairness. Fairness has 2 components which comprise of the substantive terms and procedural aspects of the policy process. It becomes evident that by engaging in meaningful communication as well as careful consideration of policy content, authorities can gain support for regulations. Copyright This participatory form of governance encourages adherence UCT to laws as it builds on an ethical obligation to comply. This form of power is important when coercion or punitive measures are not effective in regulating behaviour. Legitimacy is about self-enforcing actions and this authority is imperative in the South African fishing industry context where regulation is problematic due to wide dispersion of users and limited resources for monitoring and control. Increasing normative compliance will address other important aspects like overfishing and creating a sustainable resource. In the case setting of the Small Scale Fisheries policy, the conceptual understanding of legitimacy lays the foundation towards understanding our history and its influence on property rights and thus the context that legitimacy will be assessed. This policy is a typical case of comprehensive reform to change the landscape of fishing which marks a period of uncertainty amongst stakeholders. Naturally during this time, people will question whether the new policy is acceptable, appropriate or justifiable and allows assessment of the legitimacy of the transformation (Wallner, 2008). This assessment of views is vital as if stakeholders perceive the content of the policy as reasonable and the policy development process as appropriate, they will accept the legitimacy of the policy as well as the political actors responsible for devising and implementing the rules (Wallner, 2008). Page 17

26 The model below (figure 1) establishes the basis for the evaluation of legitimacy and an understanding of how it is developed. Recognition of legitimacy is vital as it will lead to enhanced compliance and facilitates successful implementation of new policies. In this case, increased compliance will decrease illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing and increase support for fisheries management. This will in turn address socio-economic issues such as unrest in communities, poverty alleviation and sustainability through compliance Figure 1 A model which provides details of the inputs for evaluation basis of policy legitimacy I will therefore assess this policy based on the 2 components identified in the literature review to ascertain the perception of fairness and ultimately its legitimacy 1. Policy content and objectives 2. Procedural steps of policy development The success of this policy depends on the public s support for the new legislation. According to Wallner (2008), there are areas governed by the state that cannot function autonomously as the policies or reforms are highly dependent on the consent of stakeholders. Therefore, government s actions will be constrained by the influence of the public. Fisheries in South Africa is a prime example of this sphere of politics, as policies cannot be implemented without the tacit or explicit agreement and support of the fishers, communities, companies and civil society. Through this study, I will try to analyse how process and controversy influence perceptions of legitimacy. This is significant as it draws attention to how governments need to consider the manner in which new polices are implemented as it impacts on legitimacy, this in turn affects peoples attitudes and behaviour towards the proposed new regulations. Page 18

27 Section 3 - Methodology 3.1 Research Approach & Strategy My research strategy was a qualitative methodology and the approach was inductive. This method is suitable as it is interactive, adaptive and flexible which is paramount when working with people of varying views and trying to foster a deeper understanding of the issues. This view is highlighted by R. Kumar when describing qualitative research as following an unstructured, flexible and open approach to enquiry which aims to describe rather than measure, believes in in-depth understanding and explores perceptions and feelings (Kumar, 2011, p. 394). Qualitative research also allows the use of current knowledge to extend and refine ideas in order to develop new knowledge (Gioia, Corley, & Hamilton, 2012). The particular qualitative approach adopted will be a phenomenology as this technique focuses on personal knowledge and subjectivity while gathering detailed information from an individual perspective. It highlights different insights into motivations and actions towards a particular event (Lester, 1999). This method is applicable as I was interested in ascertaining perceptions and views about the new fisheries policy from a diverse range of people. While quantitative research is interested in the statistical relationship variables, qualitative research adopts the approach of process theory which views the world and environment in terms of people, situations, events and the processes that connect these (Maxwell, 2013, p. 29). Thus, I gathered empirical data to establish opinions and perceptions. These views in turn shape behavior which has implications for resource management systems. 3.2 Research design The inductive nature of the research means that the concepts reviewed, literature read and contributions from interview participants, was constantly assessed to gauge progress and review the information gathered. Qualitative research design does not start from a fixed point or progress through a sequence of phases, however, it entails interconnection and collaboration amongst different components of the process design. It also necessitates frequent evaluation of one s design and how it is influenced by the context. It requires constant assessment, adjustments and changes (Maxwell, 2013) My research design used was a phenomenology which entails observing and exploring peoples consciousness. Welman and Kruger (as cited by Groenewald, 2004) stated that this design is about understanding the social and psychological experiences of people from their own perspectives. Therefore, in this paper, I have described the views and opinions of people through their realities and how they perceive the policy arena. Page 19

28 I have used a holistic approach to research design. This involves the philosophy that there are a multitude of factors that interact and in order to gain a deeper understanding, one needs to look at a situation in its totality (Kumar, 2011). Therefore, with this in mind, I considered the phenomenon from every aspect including but not limited to the socio-economic circumstances of the communities, history, political environment, government organisations and community dynamics. According to Smith & Osborne (as cited by Gill 2014) this aspect of phenomenological analysis is a thorough exploration of participants explanations of their personal and social worlds. This assists to discover the significant meaning a particular experience or event holds for the individual. The inductive nature of the qualitative research dictated that the design did not follow a strict system of order, this is highlighted by Maxwell (2013) when he describes the nature of qualitative research design: the activities of collecting and analysing data, developing and modifying theory, elaborating or refocusing the research questions, and identifying and addressing validity threats are usually all going on more or less simultaneously, each influencing all of the others (p.2). Therefore, the empirical findings of this phenomenological research will act to form inductive logic to either generate new theory or demonstrate that existing theories can be combined to form a new understanding Copyright of a particular phenomenon (Osteraker, 2002) UCT Data Collection Methods I have used multiple methods of data collection to gain a broad understanding of the subject matter. This use of data source triangulation incorporated using various sources like journals, books and previous case studies of Small Scale Fishing to understand the theory. Interviews uncovered the perceptions of legitimacy surrounding the phenomenon and the process of how it developed. Using these multiple sources of data as a method of triangulation recognises that in qualitative research there are many views which exist and there is a need to be exposed to varied opinions in order to address the issue of quality through plausibility, credibility, confirmability and dependability of findings (M. Q. Patton, 2002). Furthermore, interviews and personal contact assisted my discovery as an intense focus required the understanding of the social world as there is recognition that processes, ideas or rules are largely socially constructed. Studying the social construction process (i.e. legitimacy) recommended that a focus on how people develop their constructs and understanding their experience is important. This in-depth understanding helped to develop concepts which inform theory building and theory testing which generates work that is useful, original and has foresight (Gioia et al., 2012). The concept in qualitative research that exists for this is called social constructivism which acknowledges that views are Page 20

29 subjective and there are several perspectives or insights that can be expressed so there is no established way to determine a truth beyond dispute (Adams et al., 2007). Any holes or ambiguities which emerged in the data were clarified by contacting participants to ask for further details and elaboration. The nature of this method of inquiry dictated that it is integrative, interactive and synergistic processes (Patton, 2002, p. 437) therefore the stages of data gathering and analysing tended to overlap Research Instruments The data collection technique employed to gather primary source information was semi-structured interviews in conjunction with observational notes. This method allowed me to fully engage with respondents and explore the views, ideas and perceptions of the participants, thereby gaining valuable insight into the topic. This form of qualitative research was deemed appropriate as it allows exploration of social relations, and describes reality as experienced by the respondents (Adams, Khan, Raeside, & White, 2007, p. 26). Furthermore, this conversational interview method permitted thorough flexibility to follow data in any direction that appeared to be appropriate based on observation or what arose in that particular setting (Patton, 2002). This primary source of data collection was applicable in the context as we were interested in different views and perceptions and the resulting behaviour. The nature of the information needed dictated that qualitative data was suitable as it allowed the researcher to understand in-depth motivations for people s behaviour and feelings (Adams, Khan, Raeside, & White, 2007, p. 111). Sanders (as cited by Gill 2014) states that in a phenomenology interviews are the centrepiece of research and reveals the nomematic relationship which explains the participants conscious experience and how they perceived the event. This allows rich information collection based on personal experience. Advantages of using interviews: Information collected can be rich, comprehensive and full which can used to discover an immense assortment of issues (Kumar, 2011). Gain in-depth understanding of the motivations for peoples behaviour or feelings (Adams et al., 2007) It is a cheap and effective method of gathering information (Adams et al., 2007) Disadvantages that the researcher needs to take cognisance of: Interviews expose a diversity of issues, however, it may not reveal the magnitude of the variety of opinion. In addition, interviews could lack direction if not sufficiently guided by interview questions (Kumar, 2011). Page 21

30 It is time consuming and sample sizes are relatively small so the representativeness of the data may be questioned. (Adams et al., 2007) The interview schedule / guide allows one to gather rich and relevant answers, however it is important for the researcher to manage subjectivities, as well as, to follow a strict protocol which will ease both participants into the process and encourage the interviewee s ability to answer (Leary, 2010). This phenomenological approach allows one to bring to the fore, experiences and perceptions of individuals from their own perspectives through the interview process (Lester, 1999). In order to ensure that unique views were explored and there was an environment of free-flowing conversation, the initial interview guide was carefully considered. The questions were formed so that it was not leading and there was no use of pre-existing terms. (Gioia et al., 2012) The interview schedule (see Appendix 1) was structured according to the two components of legitimacy policy content and procedural terms. Questions were intended to ascertain if policy content is aligned with the needs of communities. In terms of the procedures, questions were designed to establish levels of participations and communication. The secondary source of data was gathered from academic journals, the internet, books and reports prior to my empirical work. These sources were reviewed and consulted subsequent to interviews as a means to assess outcomes and evidence. 3.3 Population & Sampling The population of possible candidates to be included in my research included all traditional fishermen as well as stakeholders involved in fisheries and fisheries management. For interview purposes and to gain a varied view, I chose a diverse group of stakeholders which included resource users, resource managers (government), civil society and independent development associations. This approach attempted to reflect an extensive range of information and opinions. The first group of participants in this research was a sample of policy informants. This was to gain an understanding of the level of public participation and delve into the process and knowledge that informed the policy. Government, civil society and NGOs were selected to determine alignment of content with public sentiment and consideration of procedural aspects. Dexter (as cited by Beamer, 2002) describes this method of targeting people directly involved in the political process of policy development as elite interviews. Elite interviews presents a reliable way to produce valid data which investigates complex issues about policies while exploring the beliefs and views of political actors (Beamer, 2002). As legitimacy and thus the success of a public policy is largely determined by the public who are affected by the regulations, the interviews also focused on the resource users and their views. This was to distil their thoughts and opinions. Page 22

31 3.3.1 Sample I identified participants from different spheres of Small Scale Fisheries to gain a holistic view of the circumstances as opinions and perceptions may differ. This method of choosing participants is called non-probability sampling (purposive sampling or purposeful selection). This entails deliberate sampling based on the presence of some characteristic within a population. This research exhibits a case of maximum variation where a wide range of interests exist thereby justifying the sampling method to reflect this diversity (M. Q. Patton, 2002) (Maxwell, 2013). This method of purposive sampling is logical as it allows the researcher to choose participants that are information-rich and gain detailed knowledge about matters of vital importance (M. Patton, 1990). For the first round of research, which targeted the elite interview process, participants who were directly involved in the policy development were deliberately identified for inclusion. As the architects of the policy, they could provide information about strategy and what motivated and informed the content of the new policy. It also allows one to gain insight into rationale for choices. The sample included: A government official Researchers Fishery experts Civil society - various organisations For the second round of research, I selected 12 fishermen from various communities in the Western Cape. This included participants in urban areas as well as coastal towns to ascertain different dynamics. The sampling was done using the snowball sampling method, the approach ensures locating information-rich key informants or critical cases (M. Patton, 1990, p. 176). This entails asking for referrals from multiple sources, then as the recommendations pour in, the sample size grows hence snowballing. The list may initially diverge then some names may be repeated numerous times which implies special importance (M. Patton, 1990). The recommendations from knowledgeable people in the industry provided a base for selection. I compiled a list and randomly selected names so that data gathering was not biased towards one particular viewpoint. Interviews were then scheduled according to availability. This random selection was an attempt to mitigate partiality and to ensure a diverse group. In an attempt to supplement the information gathered, I chatted informally to members of the community after the formal interview process was concluded. This was to ascertain the degree of harmony present within communities and if I could identify any diversity of views which deserved further exploration. This sampling method served to probe from various parties whether participants feel their views and needs are addressed in the policy as this contributes to public confidence in rules (Wallner, 2008). Page 23

32 Table 1- List of participants Category Participants Capacity Civil Society Masifundise SACLA Fishery expert Independent consultant Fisheries expert University of Cape Town A B C D Senior official Senior official Consultant Senior researcher / policy architect Fisheries expert PLAAS E Policy architect / community activist / researcher Government Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF) F Senior official G Senior official NGO SA Institute for International Affairs Policy informants - SAUFF opposes the policy H Community representative Policy informants Coastal Links supports the policy I Organisation representative Small-scale fishermen Various areas - Ocean View, Kalk Bay, Hout Bay, Langebaan, Laaiplek, Vredenburg and St Helena Bay J-U 12 representatives Page 24

33 3.4 Research Criteria Reliability & Validity Qualitative research by its very nature requires an inquiry method that necessitates thorough involvement in the phenomenon being studied. A reality-oriented perspective on research entails using the concepts that exist in the mainstream science to design inform, analyse and judge one s research. This method of research brings into question issues surrounding validity, reliability and objectivity. So the researcher needs to acknowledge that their values and preconceptions may influence the data gathering process. However awareness of these perceived ideas is paramount so that steps can be implemented to mitigate these biases. In an attempt to address the issues of reliability and validity, I adopted the practice of maintaining meticulous field notes. This highlighted the empirical findings by providing careful descriptions and analysis which supported accuracy (M. Q. Patton, 2002). According to Maxwell (2013), validity in qualitative studies does not imply that there is one objective truth, rather that you have considered the possibilities of people falsifying their views in interviews or that the researcher has ignored data which does not fit their interpretation or ignoring alternative ways of interpreting information. These factors have been considered and I assert that falsifying views was not a plausible option as participants views are clear and well documented through either their research papers Copyright or organisation affiliations. I also guaranteed anonymity UCT so participants felt secure that confidences would not be breached. In addition, this is a topic that many people feel passionately about so they are relatively vocal when expressing opinions through their chosen mediums. When discerning the truth, I used iterative questioning which explored any discrepancies. With regard to the researcher ignoring data or not considering alternate theories, this hazard was diminished as I explored a full spectrum of literature prior to commencing my empirical research. Furthermore, Maxwell (2013) continued to identify two threats to the validity of investigation, i.e. researcher bias and reactivity. qualitative Researcher bias implies the subjectivity of the researcher, however, this was deemed to not be a credible risk as I held no preconceived ideas or views on the subject matter. In addition, the policy has not been implemented so there can be no assessment based on outcomes. Reactivity denotes the influence of the interviewer on the respondents. Due to increased awareness of this risk, I ensured that I followed a strict protocol when approaching potential participants and during the entire interview process. This process assisted in managing my influence over participants but also allowed one to understand the influence and use it productively. O Leary (2010) states that validity is the concern about truth value. In this instance, to address this issue, I will compare findings to existing research about legitimacy and Small Scale Fisheries to evaluate the strength of the conclusions. Thus by addressing these features, I aimed to increase the validity of results for this research. Page 25

34 3.4.2 Credibility & Dependability Credibility is the assertion that given what we know about how the research was carried out, we can judge it to be very true (Adams et al., 2007, p. 114). As mentioned earlier, to affirm the credibility of this research, I adopted the method of data source triangulation which questions whether the research discovered is likely to be true under various circumstances (Adams et al., 2007). In addition, triangulation of data sources and analytical perspectives increases the accuracy and credibility of conclusions (M. Q. Patton, 2002) so the researcher can present a holistic depiction of the situation. O Leary (2010) states that dependability accepts that reliability in social studies may not always be possible but that the researcher will pay attention to using systematic methods and accounts for subjectivities that may creep in. Thus I addressed this issue by using a standard format for questions so that there was uniformity when probing for answers and to ensure all identified topics were covered in each interview. In addition, subjectivities were constantly assessed and managed so that it did not negatively impact on the research report, thus addressing the aspect of dependability for this study. 3.5 Data Analysis Methods Qualitative research generates vast amounts of information with no prescribed format or structure for analysis Copyright so I will use the grounded theory approach. It recommends UCT a plan for examination and interpretation of information generated by the interviews. It is an iterative process involving the following steps detailed by Adams (2007): 1. Familiarisation, understanding and categorisation of the data 2. Conceptualising important notions that are identified as relevant 3. Cataloguing of the themes that are emerging from interview data (coding) 4. Linking all themes are combined to produce a more holistic theory and linking existing theories to results This iterative process can be visually represented as follows: Gather and familiarisation of data Link data to existing theories Conceptualise the ideas in a big picture Code information Page 26

35 The analytic options available are memos, categorising or connecting strategies. The method of analysis used was the categorisation strategy, known as thematic coding. It involves identifying similarities and using these common features as criteria to define the various groupings. This method helps break the data into themes which facilitates the comparison of data within one category and assists the development of broader theoretical notions (Maxwell, 2013). This technique was deemed to appropriate as it assisted in sorting data and ascertaining themes around recognition of legitimacy, related behaviour and implications for governance of resource management. As mentioned earlier, the data investigation was conducted simultaneously with the process of conducting the interviews. This technique of transcribing and reading interviews in conjunction with conducting interviews is suggested by Maxwell (2013) as it helps track progress by analysing data during research. This identifies emerging themes and ties in the Grounded Theory approach of in-depth review of findings. To add precision and objectivity to the research, I incorporated the Gioia Methodology for inductive studies. Prior to commencing my empirical work, I developed a preliminary data structure (refer to figure 1) which was a diagrammatic representation of the literature. This aimed at identifying how one can use the literature as a framework to assess the dynamic phenomenon of policy development and the resulting perceptions of legitimacy. Then I used this supplementary means of analysis, the Gioia method, to add qualitative rigor to the research by demonstrating a clear link between data gathered, themes identified and new concepts developed. This was achieved by presenting a data structure, which is a graphical representation of information and shows a static image of a dynamic phenomenon. Subsequent to the empirical work, and in order to derive the data structure, analysis was further broken down into 2 stages. 1 st -order analysis assumed the participants were knowledgeable agents who were able to articulate their opinions, intentions and actions clearly. During this stage, only the informants terms or codes were used to create themes which distilled their embedded views. Issues identified by the participants during this stage were grouped together into four themes, i.e. organisational legitimacy, lack of communication, uncertainty and lastly, delays and interim measures. Various issues were identified under each theme. During the next stage, the researcher became the knowledgeable agent and 2 nd -order analysis began. Themes and codes identified by the researcher were used and research enters the theoretical realm. This helped to determine whether the emerging themes eloquently describe or explain the observations. Page 27

36 Next the 2 nd -order themes were organised into aggregate dimensions. At this stage, I used the themes first identified and compared it to existing literature to ascertain whether what was observed during my research matched existing work. Three themes matched up to the preliminary model, however the fourth theme did not fit. Therefore, this tandem reporting formed the basis for the development of the data structure which is presented as figure 2. This is a departure point for Grounded Theory (Gioia et al., 2012). Grounded Theory has uncovered great new insights and can also be useful when developing new ideas or concepts (Adams et al., 2007). By clearly conveying the participants views in data gathering, analysis and reporting, it creates an opportunity for discovery of new concepts as opposed to confirming existing ones (Gioia et al., 2012). 3.6 Research ethics The online ethics clearance form was completed and submitted to UCT s Ethics Committee for approval. Informed consent was obtained by explaining the purpose of the research when asking for participation via or telephonically. The second step was obtaining express consent from participants Copyright prior to the interview by presenting a form which stated UCT that the terms of confidentiality and guaranteed anonymity. Furthermore, as a researcher I strived towards maintaining objectivity and professionalism by a constant awareness of bias or leading questions. Page 28

37 Section 4 Research findings and discussion The literature presented about policy legitimacy will form the platform to evaluate and explore the factors that influence the legitimacy of the Small Scale Fisheries policy. By focusing on substantive terms and procedural aspects of the policy, I will determine how process influences peoples perceptions of the policy. The participants in this research were asked to discuss their views and opinions on issues about the policy content and public engagement system. This explored the realm of legitimacy and tried to ascertain whether consensus amongst stakeholders exists. Legitimacy is a means of evaluating policy efficacy prior to implementation and is indicative of public support. These findings provide some insight into how the policy is perceived by societal actors and what formed these perceptions. 4.1 Research findings and analysis The results are presented in the table and the findings are discussed further in the section below. Table 2 - Presentation of findings Legitimacy type Core elements Evidence from the case Substantive is the policy content aligned with the dominant attitudes of: Users Other Stakeholders / Public No Yes Copyright Incubation period UCT 10 years - Extensive period Emotive Appeals Positive Participation - Procedural Comprehensive Stakeholder engagement Communication - ineffective Rational decision-making Yes Substantive legitimacy The core objectives of this policy are the recognition of traditional fishers rights of access, ensuring food security and establishing sustainable livelihoods. In addition, these objectives will address poverty alleviation and local economic development issues within communities and this adds a human rights dimension to the policy. The policy was conceived as a result of class action brought against government by communities, civil society and researchers. The lawsuit called for the recognition of small scale fishers traditional rights to access marine resources and practice their livelihoods. The argument was based on the idea that the ITQ system was inconsistent with traditional fishing practices and community living as it eroded their customary practices. The group won the case and the Equality Court instructed government to amend laws to incorporate this sector. Page 29

38 Evaluating the current policy against the objectives that the lawsuit wished to achieve, one observes that there is complete alignment of the stated points. The policy in its present form meets these aims and provides for the recognition of previously marginalized groups. Furthermore, by international standards, the policy is regarded as progressive as it abides by the United Nations FAO Guidelines on SSF. In line with these guidelines, the policy seeks to promote solidarity by nurturing an environment that stimulates collaboration and cohesion within communities. All these objectives were ones petitioned for by the public in This is summarized in the table below. Table 3 - Summary of findings Citizens law suit - Civil action objectives: 2005 Abolishment of ITQ system Recognise traditional fishers' right to access marine resources Policy objectives Introduce alternative to ITQ system Collective rights. Address food security and poverty alleviation Recognise traditional fishers' right to access marine resources Policy users' current objectives Introduce the ITQ system Address wealth creation through commercialisation of sector Recognition of right to practice Recognition of sustainable Establish sustainable livelihoods livelihoods livelihoods Recognise traditional fishing and Recognise traditional fishing and encourage local economic Capacity building through customary practices development through greater government support and funding collective bargaining power However, this research highlighted the schism between stakeholders about the policy terms. The conundrum is that the division that now exists centres around the system of resource allocation. Many users are calling for rights to be distributed to individuals and not to communities in the form of collective allocations. Infighting, distrust and lack of unity are cited as reasons for collective rights not being viable in communities. During the interview process, Participant H claimed this policy violated constitutional rights of freedom of association and further stated that government was enforcing socialist ideals onto communities. When speaking directly to fishers, their concerns were loss of control and past experiences of exploitation. The fishers noted that when working in groups, no meetings are held, and therefore no consensus is reached on public matters but instead personal agendas are promoted. In fact, Participant T articulated these sentiments by stating, that it was difficult to function in groups as there are always proactive and lazy members so it is challenging to manage dynamics. He also added that this system would encourage piggybacking as fishers would have to share their expertise while people with no history of involvement would claim the right to be fishermen. These views were largely Page 30

39 expressed in urban areas where there is conflict between small scale fishers and fishers within the same communities who hold limited commercial individual rights. Participant E who was instrumental in the initial petition for small-scale fishing rights added the following insight about the policy. She stated that the class action originated from her research which was fundamentally opposed the ITQ system for artisanal (small scale) fishers as it noted that this method eroded customary practices. The lawsuit was initiated as a need to secure economic and social justice for fishing communities because the legislation at the time provided for transformation, but did not acknowledge the livelihoods or food security needs of the coastal societies. To help understand this shift in views, one must look at the current situation of small scale fishing as this was a recurring theme in interviews. As a temporary measure, the court instructed DAFF to grant fishers access rights while the policy was being developed. This system is called interim relief and awarded rights to individuals within these communities. The solution was meant to be transitory but currently, it is in its 10 th year. This system changed the landscape and entrenched a commercial and individual approach to small scale fishing and to a large degree accounts for the change in attitude of policy users over the years. This observation was reinforced by both Participant A and E. Participant E remarked that public sentiments have shifted and the challenge is to strengthen those local levels of community. She stated Interim relief is contrary to the small scale policy objectives. Participant A shared this view and stated interim relief was a disaster, even though we fought for it and we wanted it. Now fishers are calling for individual rights to remain and the quantum allocated to be increased. Another issue raised by participants opposed to the allocation method was a previous case of collective allocation during the 1990s. This is the frame of reference that fishers use when contemplating a cooperative structure. The entity was called South African Commercial Fishing Cooperative (SACFC) and it was awarded lucrative fishing rights. Many communities were members of the organization, however, very few people derived benefits. Participant B asserted that some people received R1, 500 annually from allocations worth millions of rands. Therefore, the concern raised by many who oppose collective rights is that the same exploitation of fishers will happen and that this marginalization of their rights will be perpetuated. However, I noted that not all participants are opposed to the policy content and despite this opposition being the more universal view amongst users, there are fishers who favour the communal approach. Fishers organizations support collective rights, Participant I reiterated this by stating that a communal manner is a revival of traditional means. Page 31

40 From an individual fisher s perspective, Participant N, from the Kalk Bay area, noted that fishing is erratic and as there is no consistency in earnings, this policy will offer a good solution to fishers. He articulated that he has difficulties accessing finance or collateral because he has no formal recognition for his job. He explained that he had educational aspirations for his children and dreams for his family to move out of the township as violence and gangsterism are rife. He stated that although he saves, he cannot secure funding or subsidies for housing. His view was that a community structure that formalized employment and provided income stability would benefit fishers if managed correctly. In addition, Participant K, stated that he welcomed the policy as it gave fishers recognition and ensured that South Africa Small Scale fishing legislation was structured in a similar fashion to other countries. He reinforced that he did not oppose the cooperative model because he was desperate to see the policy implemented. He stated that he sees social decay in the community and he has hopes for development and more formal income (not daily wages). He noted the SACFC example but expressed a hope that people had learnt lessons from the past. He discussed an initiative that already existed within his community called St Helena Bay Fishing Community Forum which secured 65 (interim relief) permits for the community and how they used income for upgrading facilities and employing people excluded from the rights process. He stated with the little income that we got we managed to create something beyond Copyright just earning for ourselves. UCT It was interesting to note that all participants agreed to the policy in principle, but the rift is about the allocation method. Furthermore, Participant I supports the policy because he believes it is a way to address economic exclusion which happened under Apartheid. He stated that his organization viewed the policy as a way to redress previous dispossession. Then there was an opposing view from Participant L which suggested the policy should implement complete restitution in order to adequately address previous dispossession. Given that the impetus for this policy was court action initiated by fishermen and civil society and that the policy now encompasses all the stated objectives that were petitioned for, it is surprising that the policy objectives and aims are not aligned with the needs and desires of the users or fishermen. The fundamental change is the shift in attitudes of the communities. Their demands now echo a sentiment that calls for the implementation of an ITQ system which is a more commercial approach. When discussing this change, Participant D stated I think there s been a lot of raised expectations. The rift between the policy objectives and communities desires is quite evident and there is a sense of taking the crumbs despite the policy being a call from communities to recognize their traditional rights. Page 32

41 When addressing these issues with officials, Participant F acknowledged the change in the policy arena and circumstances that now prevail in the communities. He stated that this policy is necessary to bring about change and it is a progressive step in fisheries management. He also noted that this policy was beyond the scope of the MLRA as it needs a multi-government department approach. With regard to the disjuncture of views, he contends that fishers have freedom of choice when it comes to allocations as they can opt for individual rights or community rights. He added that subsidies for fishing was a global taboo but the current situation which prevails in small scale fishing has changed this in South Africa. MCM with the assistance of various other departments (e.g. DTI) will offer fishing communities support and capacity building to assist with running their operations. He clarified that if fishers opt for individual rights, they have this option available in the commercial arena. However, this option excludes government support as they would have to operate competitively and administer commercially viable businesses. He further elaborated about the community approach and explained that due to limited natural resources, this approach allowed the government to accommodate the numbers. Also, the rationale for this collective choice, is that government cannot offer assistance to individuals but they are able to promote economic development in communities through this initiative with the assistance of different government institutions. Furthermore, Copyright when discussing the previous example of a cooperative UCT mentioned by other participants, Participant F noted that he was aware of the South African Commercial Fishing Cooperative (SACFC) debacle but the current circumstances for Small Scale are different. He elaborated by stating that government will implement a cooperative constitution which will clearly guide the manner in which the entity will be managed. He stated that the SACFC was not a cooperative but a public company which included community members. In this instance, different criteria would apply as cooperatives would be governed by a constitution. Therefore, a fair assessment would be that during the initial stages, the policy content and objectives met the needs of the public. However, the attitudes of stakeholders have subsequently altered and ancillary issues have caused the policy climate to change. Calls for an ITQ system is tantamount to commercial rights and this is not the intent of the policy. Furthermore lack of cohesion within communities has compounded the intricacies of the policy. Therefore, despite the policy being progressive and associated to international best practices, the policy content seems to be misaligned to the attitudes and desires of the public. This is a failure of one of the components of policy legitimacy. Page 33

42 Procedural legitimacy Table 4 - Summary of findings Incubation period Emotive appeals Stakeholder Engagement - Consultation Stakeholder Engagement - Communication Rationality FAILURE SUCCESSFUL SUCCESSFUL FAILURE SUCCESSFUL The participation in policy formulation was The problem was framed positively when addressing public and stakeholders. The organisation took positive steps to demonstrate their willingness to work together. Even though the impetus for the policy was the court action, people were not vilified as they extensive. The authorities took steps to include all parties in the consultation processes. This policy was a step towards participatory governance. The policy went to two forums for public feedback. Local knowledge has been incorporated into policy content. In addition, authorities are This element of engagement was ineffective. Stakeholders had no clarity on important aspects of the policy like resource allocations, implementation time frames and quantum of resources allocated to this sector. There was a sense of confusion and Copyright were included in working with fishers to uncertainty UCT amongst initial formulation develop systems for stakeholders and pertinent when National Task utilisation when policy information was not Team was formed. is implemented. disseminated to parties. It has been a 10- year incubation period. This has been extensive and has contributed to negative sentiment towards the authority. People have a general impatience for the policy to be implemented. In addition, the delay in implementation has created the impression that there is no plan or capacity to progress. There were mixed feelings about the rationality of the policy. However, the general consensus was that it was sensible given that the policy had to be formulated because it was a court ruling. Therefore, participants felt given the constraints, decisions were rational. Incubation period Usually an incubation period provides all parties time to contemplate various aspects of the proposed reform. As this policy was a call from the public, the authority did not need time to nurture support for the alteration. There was no need to convince various groups of the value of the new ideas. However, this policy has still had a 10-year incubation period and is poised for implementation in The unanimous decision amongst role players is that there has been enough time to familiarize themselves with transformations and encourage debate amongst policy subjects. In fact, there seems to be an impatience for the policy to be implemented. Participant U stated this policy is long overdue. This view was shared by Participant A as he stated Yes, it s too late already to begin to implement it, implementation should have started already so I can t tell you how we are itching to see that the processes actually materialise in communities Interestingly, while rapidly imposing a new policy is generally seen as a contributor to negative perceptions, this extensive incubation period of the Small Scale policy has produced the same negative reactions. The 10-year time horizon has contributed to frustration and uncertainty amongst stakeholders Page 34

43 and is actually a contributor to the problems experienced with the policy. The view that the extended time became a negative aspect was substantiated by a fishery expert and policy architect, Participant D as he confirmed the situation has become more complex since we thought of it in 2006/7. In addition, the prolonged period seems to have created an impression amongst policy users that the authority has no notion of how to implement the policy. The general sentiment is that the delay is due to lack of a plan to move forward. This prolonged incubation period represents a failure of one of the elements of legitimacy. Emotive appeals By evaluating the process, it seems the government framed the policy in a positive light. After the court ruled in favour of the public, the initial symbolic step taken by DAFF to demonstrate their commitment to formulating the policy was the establishment of a National Task Team. This indicated a willingness to commit to the process. The team consisted of researchers, government officials, civil society and community representatives. As symbolism, this can be seen as constructive because it did not vilify the societal actors that started the court action but rather included them in the early phase of policy development. Furthermore, all participants agreed the policy would be beneficial to communities based on their understanding of the policy content and positive way information was framed. Participant O stated: the policy itself is a good thing but not the way they did it. Participant R stated this policy will help because there is a lot of sufferation (suffering) in our communities. So this confirms the positive view of the policy. The positive emotive appeal experience in this process is a successful element of legitimacy. Stakeholder engagement For the purposes of this research, I have split engagement into 2 separate components as it emerged that there were different dynamics involved during this process. 1. Participation and consultation The consensus amongst participants was that there was a comprehensive participation process. There was a Task Team which consisted of a diverse group of stakeholders appointed to develop the policy. The policy then went to NEDLAC for further debate. NEDLAC plays a significant role in South Africa to develop effective public policies through increased participation in decision-making and social equity. NEDLAC is a forum to enable dialogue which is crucial to the sustainable development of South Africa (Nedlac, 2015). The participation at NEDLAC was a voluntary step by government to Page 35

44 encourage public participation. The policy then went to Parliament for perusal by the Fisheries Portfolio Committee for further public debate and comment. This view is articulated by Participant D who noted I think it s probably the most participatory policy development process that South Africa s ever seen, just because of the court case hanging over it and the way it was set up through the National Task Team, Technical Team and all the people that were involved in it and all the workshops that Masifundise, specifically at the time, ran in parallel, to feedback ideas and bring them backwards and forwards into this interactive process of developing the bits and pieces of the policy. When exploring the use of diverse views in policy, Participant H disagreed with consultation processes as he said the government still needed to find a method to include local knowledge in policies as scientists think the information from fishers is anecdotal. He elaborated by saying In our country, the scientists view our people as ignorant and the people see the scientists as arrogant. Somewhere between ignorance and arrogance, we have to build a bridge. The status quo has to change However, Participant E disagreed with this view and stated that this policy was a call for social justice and although it was an ideological process, the content of policy was community driven. She also noted that in Copyright terms of including diverse views and traditional knowledge, UCT there was conscious input and this resulted in the multi-species approach (i.e. basket) which accommodated seasonality and location of species. In addition, Participant I agreed that there was use of traditional knowledge in the policy development as there was recognition of different methods of fishing in various areas. He also asserted that the basket which is the multi-species approach was directly attributable to fishers input of seasonality of fishing. Furthermore, in terms of participatory governance, there has been a resource management tool developed to assist with fisheries management of the Small Scale fishery sector. It is called Abalobi and it was developed in conjunction with researchers, government and fishers. Participant D stated Fishers own this, they called it Abalobi, and Abalobi is Xhosa for small-scale fisher. He elaborated by stating that the app 1 was not developed in his office but was designed from the bottom up so it already fits the needs of fishers. He explained there has been a huge uptake and we are constantly reconfiguring this based on feedback received from fishers. This catch management tool has been developed in order to be ready for the implementation of the policy. The website and all information is available on the 1 This is an application which can be managed on your smartphone or on your desktop computer that records and disseminates information. Page 36

45 internet yet people do not know about the existence of this tool. I accessed the website and explored the new management tool. (See Appendix 2 for information about the website). The signs show that for this policy development there has been a paradigm shift and there is more authentic participation in policy decisions and information. However, Participant H opposed the view of an inclusive process as he felt the consultation in communities was steamrolled so that they can get closer to their goalpost. This view was shared by Participant O as he stated that the consultations were information sessions and not consultation. This explained that there is a sense of the process being merely token participation. Participant O stated he felt that people had to dance to the pipes of government. However when discussing the participation process with Participant F, he contested this opinion by stating We have been praised for being open and transparent in our process. He reiterated that the policy went to NEDLAC which was a voluntary step to add credibility and additional public comment to the policy. A fishermen, Participant K agreed with this sentiment by adding there s been enough public consultation, it s repetitive, now we want to start tasting the pudding. Furthermore, with regard to the consultation process, there were concerns raised from fishermen that organisations involved in the policy development are not actual fishers and their views have been misrepresented. Participant T stated that there s misrepresentation and no real input from the ground. However, when this was explored further, it emerged that their views (individual rights) had not been included in the policy and this caused a feeling of being marginalised. The additional probing revealed that despite this feeling, there had been extensive attendance at public meetings (i.e. roadshows) by these participants. Therefore, one must discern about participation and feelings that views are being disregarded. When addressing the issue of participation with officials, Participant F stated: This directorate has an open-door policy and we have listened to everybody but whether we have incorporated their suggestions or recommendations. That s another issue. We have to consider does that benefit the sector as a whole and how it impacts the other sectors. This view was reinforced by Participant I, as he affirmed that it has been the most inclusive process with approximately 130 meetings and consultation sessions with public. He stated that even people who were opposed to the policy had been included in the consultation process. Participant G confirmed this view by stating Yes, the people whose final views weren t reflected, well the people whose views weren t reflected in the final policy are always going to feel like their views weren t considered but the fact is, I think that people were listened to, various viewpoints and a final policy was decided on. Page 37

46 Certainly some views were very unpopular but that doesn t mean they didn t have an opportunity to air those things. Therefore, in procedural terms, the consultation process has been comprehensive and successfully fulfils this element of legitimacy. 2. Communication Although the consultation has been a success, the other element of stakeholder engagement has not been as effective. The communication from the authorities has been ineffective and is the primary reason for the confusion that prevails with stakeholders. The general consensus is that there is a lack of consistent communication which informs and updates stakeholders and proposed users of the policy. There is uncertainty about the resource allocations, roll out plan and time frames. When discussing the policy, all participants expressed concern about how the implementation process would be rolled out. There was a lack of faith in the ability of the authority to implement this policy. Participant K noted that he supports the policy but there is nothing that tells us that when this thing is implemented Copyright in June next year, this will be the TAC for small scale. UCT He also noted that the authorities had to find better ways to communicate with communities. He suggested sms notifications or using social media such as a dedicated Facebook page. These views highlight the damage that lack of meaningful communication or direct updates can have on the perception of a policy. Participant O stated that DAFF sends different messages to different communities. Also Masifundise and Coastal Links do not communicate any messages to the communities. During the research process, all participants expressed concern about what would be in the basket, i.e. the resources allocated to this sector, the quantum designated for small scale fishing and how the identification of fishers would happen. The lack of information was translated into a perception that government had no plan to proceed. However, when discussing the practical aspects of the policy, it emerged that over the past 18 months, there has been more momentum in this department. It was established that the resource allocation system has been finalized and species in different areas identified. Fishers will be responsible for identifying which species are indigenous to their coasts. The identification process will be 3-phase identification, verification and registration and this has also been devised and finalized. Lastly, with regard to resource quantum, it was being finalized. Therefore, in fact, although there have no updates or information distributed about future plans, the authorities have been addressing the implementation plans. Page 38

47 Also noted, there is also no widely held knowledge about the Abalobi system so there is no concept about the steps authorities are actually taking towards the successful implementation. There was acknowledgment from the authorities that there have been problems with communication. Authentic representation was also identified as challenging. Participant H expressed a view that certain organizations exploited the situation because literacy levels in their constituencies were low. Officials recognized that there were problems with organizations disseminating information. Thus, there is a need for direct engagement and Participant F asserted that we are trying new ways to communicate directly with our stakeholders The policy formulation was an inclusive process and very successful, however, communication is viewed differently so the stakeholder engagement has produced mixed results and limited success. Rational decision-making The aspect of rationality produced mixed results. The responses ranged from not wanting any laws to regulate fishing to the policy being the most sensible policy in fisheries. More as an anecdotal response, Participant P mentioned she wished for the olden days when there were no rights needed to fish. Despite the varying views, the main sentiment was that the policy was reasonable. Motivation for viewing Copyright the policy as reasonable was that it was a practical way to balance UCT the limited natural resources while addressing the needs of the communities. Participant D expressed his view that as result of the past dispensation, current situation of fishing and the top-down fisheries framework, there is a need for change and shift in models. He articulated that We have to think about a radical, radically new approach that at the same time allows for local norms, local practices to be boosted and to be here they need basically to legitimise the system based on something we have on the ground that does maybe hold legitimacy. So, the policies are reasonable, policies are radical, yes but again, we ve got nothing to lose. Participant E confirmed the rationality of the policy as she stated that the principles upon which it was based were reasonable. The fact that it addresses human rights and economic issues also adds to it. Participant G reiterated this view and acknowledged that the policy dealt with complex issues but asserted that the actual policy tenets were reasonable as it managed the various issues well. In a sense, one might then say it s unreasonable because it s going to be so much more difficult to implement. If we just had a handful of individual rights that we can allocate and we can tell the rest of the people, find other jobs or subsistence fishing for you that s a simple system but it s not a just system. So, it s unreasonable in terms of it s complicated but it s reasonable in terms of social justice Page 39

48 From fishers perspective, the policy is reasonable and can work if the pertinent issues of lack of community cohesion, absence of community leadership and viability of allocations are addressed. This view was enforced by Participant K who stated that the policy is reasonable because it builds goodwill by trying to rectify the current situation. However, a fishery expert opposed this view, Participant C stated that it would be difficult to take this policy to any kind of conclusion as there is simply a lack of resources and the identified number of 30, 000 fishers does not exist. Furthermore, he stated that this policy was conceptualized from a political point of view but it was actually a fisheries management problem. He further noted that issues like compliance capacity and biomass have to be considered because small scale fisheries cannot be used as a social welfare tool. He also stated that the cooperative method was fundamentally flawed because communities lacked the skills to manage the economic vehicle effectively as administratively, it was cumbersome. Also the costs of managing a cooperative would increase due to statutory requirements. These were his concerns as a fisheries management expert based on years of experience within this field. These valid points underpin issues which adds to the complexity of the policy. The reasons for the current policy is an attempt to balance sustainability and social justice issues. As there is no alternative and this policy has to be implemented, this seems the most plausible manner given the constraints on the natural resources. This policy is an attempt at finding a workable solution as all participants acknowledged that it would only work if the allocations were viable. However, Participant I noted there is a danger that the implementation will be a one size fits all plan. In an enquiry to one of the senior researchers at DAFF, I enquired about the state of the resources. Her response was that she supports the policy and its concept. Her concerns revolved around the implementation as she confirmed that the inshore resources (which are accessible to small-scale fishers) were not in a healthy state. She noted that the challenge would be where to find the resources to allocate to this sector. She also noted that there may be a contention from small-scale fishers about the quantum as their demands may exceed the supply ( correspondence, dated 12 November 2015). Subsequent to this correspondence, the department met with stakeholders on 25 November 2015 to discuss allocations. This was an open forum where all stakeholders were called to offer input. There were people from the small-scale as well as commercial sector present. The sentiment from small scale fishers was that they were dissatisfied with the proposed allocations, in particular the West Coast Rock Lobster (WCRL) sector. For this sector, the apportionment announced by the authorities was 40% of the total allowable catch (TAC) to Small Scale Fishing sector, 4% to recreational fishers and 56% to commercial offshore and commercial nearshore. The Small Scale Sector have now called for 100% of Page 40

49 the West Coast Rock Lobster to be allocated to their sector and the commercial sector to be abolished. The challenge is that a compromise now needs to be established. It is widely acknowledged that the policy has to balance many complex issues like sustainability, social issues, community pressures and commercial considerations, therefore, it is difficult to find a solution to appease all parties. The policy is however, based on sound scientific data and comprehensive information gathered from all stakeholders so one can deduce the policy decisions were made sensibly. A further measure taken by the authorities to add accuracy and precision to the process, is a socioeconomic assessment study. This is a directive from the Presidency that all policies need to complete prior to implementation, therefore decisions made in terms of this policy have been interrogated thoroughly. The majority of participants stated their agreement that the policy was reasonable but mentioned concerns about allocation quantum and viability. Currently, there is no consensus and a final decision on this is outstanding. However, an accurate assessment can only be made after implementation to see if this management system is feasible and works effectively. Analysis As part Copyright of the thematic analysis process, the responses from participants UCT were thoroughly reviewed and coded. From these codes, similar ideas were grouped together to create themes in order to present core concepts to comprehensively evaluate and discuss legitimacy. This overview allowed an assessment of how the process of policy development influenced perceptions of legitimacy of this policy. Theme 1: organisational legitimacy During the interviews, participants constantly mentioned a concern about the ability of government to effectively implement this new policy. Issues that were highlighted were incompetence of authority, constant change of leadership, inadequate processes and Marine and Coastal Management (MCM) capacity issues. The central view expressed by participants was immense scepticism in the department s ability to handle the implementation of this policy. This feeling stemmed from previous instances of failed processes. The most recent example and one which was foremost in the minds of participants was the 2013 process. This was the Fishing Rights Allocation Process (FRAP) which took place in 2013 and awarded rights in eight sectors. The decisions were challenged in the High Court by South African Commercial Linefish Association (SACLA). Subsequently, the court set aside all decisions made during this process and granted fishermen exemption rights which allowed all fishermen to continue fishing pending a decision under review (Adendorf, 2014) (van Dalen, 2014). The entire process was considered flawed and this process seemed to have negatively impacted the credibility of the institution. Page 41

50 This view was reinforced by Participant O, who was particularly vocal in expressing his disdain for the authorities. He stated that the authorities were incompetent and discussed the failure of the 2013 allocation process, hence he questioned the ability of MCM to implement the Small Scale Fisheries policy. He said that was a flop and they did not even rectify that mistake yet so how can they do this. Participant R commented DAFF did not do its work in Participant B noted they are creating expectations that cannot be fulfilled. Participant T reiterated this sentiment by stating I have no faith in their system. Participant H echoed these views as he questioned how a new policy could be implemented when the department is in a complete disarray due to the botched 2013 FRAP process. Furthermore, he questioned how can the department focus on development issues when they are failing at their primary mandate of fisheries management. These comments display the intensity of the feelings of disillusionment. The disappointment of the previous process has served to demoralise stakeholders as they question the chances of a successful implementation due to previous fiascos. When investigating the process mentioned, it was established that the process was guided by a policy for each sector involved. Edwards (2014) wrote that despite the concern about limited time for consultation and public comment on material issues, the policies were implemented nonetheless. Subsequently, the entire process was questioned and legal action was instituted against the government. He noted that the key issues of controversy were: the consultation/policy/application invitation period, the announcement/publishing of decisions, how operations could proceed pending outcome of appeals and the merits of the decisions taken. This lack of faith is compounded by the capacity problems and continuous change of leadership within the institution. The former Minister of Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Ms Tina Joemat-Pietersen ordered two forensic probes into the 2013 process. Some of the matters highlighted by one of the reports, the Basadi Report, were instances of political interference, no duly appointed head of MCM for 4 years, a fisheries branch operating on skeleton staff and tardy political decisions ( Small-scale fishing rights, 2015). This absence of confidence in the institution has evolved into suspicion and distrust. Participant U questioned the motives of the authority and stated that she senses that this is a politically driven agenda and that the department is pushing a socialist plan to manage the people. The prevailing resentment from the constituents towards the authorities results in positive steps being interpreted negatively. Consultation to update stakeholders is regarded as steamrolling or window dressing or ticking boxes as they feel the processes are not authentic or meaningful. Page 42

51 When discussing these issues with Participant F, he acknowledged that there was a problem within their department. He stated there has been no head of their branch for a few years. He elaborated by stating that there is no Deputy Director General (DDG) as there have been many people acting in this capacity for short periods. Furthermore, the second most senior position within the department, the Chief Directorate of Marine Resource Management has also been vacant for a considerable time. He stated that these were two crucial positions in the organisation and he said without these very high profile posts to give direction on what we are doing, the department has lost traction. He also explained that the Small Scale Fishing Directorate has had several changes in its leadership which hampers advancement. This highlights that one of the fundamental failures of this policy s legitimacy seems to lie with the legitimacy failure of the organisation that is formulating the policy and responsible for its implementation. The societal actors question the organisation s ability to effectively manage the policy process which also causes stakeholders to undermine its authority. Theme 2: lack of communication Despite an extensive consultation and participation process during the policy development phase subsequently, there has been a lack of communication from authorities to provide updates or progress reports to stakeholders. A protracted time period has elapsed since the policy formulation was completed but there has no consistent engagement with stakeholders to keep them informed. This lack of communication from the government has resulted in many misconceptions within the communities. These are highly sensitive matters and people are passionate about issues yet despite these ideas being unfounded, people hold onto their notions with firm resolve. Some misguided ideas that were mentioned during interviews were forced non-participation of women in fishing activities, discrimination against women by civil society organisations, mandatory funding for vessel acquisition. Participant P stated that Coastal Links does not like women. She also said the government stopped women from going to sea. When probed further about these issues, there was no substance to her claims and she could not justify why she believed it. Another misconception discovered was around funding. Participant U stated The Department of Economic Development must give people the infrastructure. Participant J said the department is going to give us R350, 000 for a new boat. In light of this, another responsibility of the institution (MCM) will be to inform communities in order to dispel myths. Another issue identified was that people within the same community do not share the same information. Both Participant P and Q stated that no community organisation existed in the Hout Bay area to apply for rights and participate in the Small Scale Fisheries sector. However Participant O confirmed that Page 43

52 there are 97 interim relief permit holders in the community and they have formed a cooperative to participate in small scale fishing applications. This research highlighted that there seems to be a persistent misconception regarding the goals of this policy. Some participants had no real understanding that the policy was aimed at recognising their traditional rights to fish or exercise customary practices. They viewed the policy as bestowing broader access rights, means to secure finance and a vehicle for wealth creation. Participant J stated I also have dreams to drive a fancy car and for my children to go to private school. Therefore, these misconceptions have to be addressed with better and more effective communication from the authorities 2. Also, policy users were uncertain about how the implementation of the policy will work. People mentioned meetings about the interim relief but complained there were no updates on the status of the policy. Participant S mentioned There s never answers for us to bring back to our people. Furthermore, Participant C expressed concerns about a lack of guidance for communities to administer the cooperatives in a prescribed manner. However, during my research, I discovered that government has in fact devised a constitution to direct how the collective action vehicles need to be managed. This information Copyright has not been effectively circulated and people do not know UCT that the collective vehicles will not have a loose arrangement but will have to abide by rules in order to guide the management of their collective vehicles. There seems to be a general confusion about how the system will work. Participant F acknowledged that the department had not done a satisfactory job in communicating with stakeholders. He also noted there were people with agendas disseminating information to communities which impedes users understanding of processes. He confirmed that there was a need to find more innovative ways to communicate directly with stakeholders. He stated that for the past 18 months the department had set about dispelling myths. In addition, the development of the Abalobi catch-management system is not widely-held public knowledge. This would add credibility to the implementation plan as people would interpret it as an innovative step towards the realisation of the policy, however, there have been no announcements about the development. This issue has been identified as one of the major challenges during this policy development process. The lack of communication has undermined the process, caused confusion and allowed fallacies to circulate in communities. 2 Organisation, authority, institution and department are used interchangeably to refer to the Marine and Coastal Management division of the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries as it is the body / organisation responsible for the policy. Page 44

53 Theme 3: uncertainty This theme effectively stemmed from the lack of communication but highlighted important issues about the concern over the practicalities of the implementation. Questions were uncovered about the proverbial basket of fish, how the fisher identification process would work and the quantum of natural resources assigned to this sector. The predominant concern from the participants was the fish allocated to their communities. Participant J stated what s going to be in our basket. Participant R repeated this concern we need to know about our basket. This unease was due to the viability of the allocations. Also, participants noted they were not sure how people within communities would operate alongside the cooperative as there was already growing animosity between the two segments. Within communities, there was a limited commercial sector and these local fishermen had individual commercial rights. Participants expressed uncertainty about whether they would be required to work alongside each other. This raised animosity because the individual rights and collective rights caused very different dynamics. Participant F recognized that there was great uncertainty surrounding the policy. The commercial, smallscale and recreational sectors all received different information and this caused disagreement. However, he noted that the commercial sector was not opposed to the actual policy but the dissent was due to the mixed signals. He stated that a lot of time was spent engaging this year to get rid of the myths. He continued by stating that he engaged with other stakeholders as well because there was uncertainty about long-tern planning horizons; which is not good for business. Uncertainty is not good for anyone This view was confirmed by Participant D who confirmed that There is more momentum now than I ve seen in a while and we did lots of damage control (this year). Another bone of contention was how the interim relief arrangement would transform into the practical implementation of the policy. The majority of participants interpreted the lack of updates and communication from the authorities as a sign that they had not formulated a plan. Participants cannot envisage how the current system of interim relief will translate into a workable policy. Participant O asserted that I doubt the Small Scale Fishing policy will be implemented. Participant U said the department is still busy considering the policy. Participant R stated they do not have a plan for implementation. Participant K mentioned that he had mixed emotions about the implementation. He said the department has a nice plan with DTI and a multi-government approach but there is no clear vision from other departments. They all work in isolation. In fact during research, it was uncovered that the organisation had given due consideration to the implementation. However, a consultancy had initially been appointed to develop a plan and had Page 45

54 stipulated unrealistic time frames. These schedules were not met and this further caused the process to lose credibility. Nevertheless, since the new leadership had been appointed in this directorate, the implementation planning was making steady progress and was being handled internally now. When addressing concerns about the practicalities of implementation, Participant F stated that a major issue about interim relief is that there is no legal framework so it is this loose arrangement with fishers which makes accountability and imposing sanctions very difficult. He elaborated that when you start on a premise of loose arrangements, you have very little control as a department and very little in terms of incentivising to instil good fishing practices. He noted that in order to address exploitation of fishers and formalise the sector, there will be a move away from this flexible structure and a legal entity will be formed for these cooperatives. The constitution will be prescribed so there will be laws which will guide everybody in terms of roles and they will be trained up accordingly. There will be no individual rights so there is will be an understanding of working together and the onus is on the fisher to uphold the responsibilities. Many uncertainties identified in this theme could be effectively addressed by a better, more efficient means of disseminating information. Despite the progress of the authorities in recent months, there are many gaps in information that exist amongst all stakeholders. This leads to a lack of support for the policy Copyright and introduces disagreement amongst role players. UCT Theme 4: delays and interim measures While the extensive period allowed the role players to present a policy which is grounded in sound principles, guided by international strategies and incorporate extensive consultation, it has also acted as a double-edged sword. The actual implementation has been delayed and a temporary measure applied to appease users during the policy development phase. However, this has caused irreparable damage and permanently altered the policy environment. The interim relief measures were meant to be a solution for approximately 2 years yet has persisted for 10 years. This has transformed users attitudes towards fishing. It has instilled a more commercial approach to fishing and entrenched a desire for individual rights. This is also a source of community conflict and has contributed to the lack of cohesion which could cause the failure of collective rights. Therefore, this prolonged period and temporary solution has undermined the initial policy and caused the users of the policy to change their desires from their initial requests to government in There is now a distinct call for individual rights and this idea is resonating amongst the majority of fishermen. Goals of communities have shifted and aspirations have changed. The spirit of the policy was to recognise traditional fishers rights to access the resource for food security and livelihoods, however, there is now a call to use this sector as a mechanism for wealth creation. The research highlighted that peoples expectations have also altered significantly as they view Small Scale Fishing policy as a way Page 46

55 to build capacity and secure funding. Participants in Hout Bay stated that Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) provided vessels to the community but vessels were too small to go into the deep ocean so they need bigger vessels. Participant J stated that the government is going to give us R350, 000 for boats. When addressing the issue of a prolonged period and how it had changed the situation, Participant F explained So the complexity of the situation and redrafting of laws and regulations to accommodate small-scale fishers took time because the bureaucratic process is long and extensive. Also the cornerstone of implementation is sustainability as it has wider implications for commercial sector as well because it can cause the fishing sector to crash and burn. So it s complex because we have to address these opposing views and meet sustainability criteria and meet human rights violations and address inequality in fisheries and redress in terms of economic development and looking at food security. We had to look at all of that and come up with a policy that won t undermine the resources. This view was substantiated by Participant E as she explained that the delay in implementing this policy was due to the complexity of the situation and she noted that this policy employs a transdisciplinary approach which sees an interaction between the natural system, social system, economic system and government. In addition, the policy architects acknowledged that the interim measures caused the landscape to change. As people felt their rights were violated, many continued to fish. This has added pressure to the sustainability of the resources therefore causing many inshore resources to be below pristine levels. The interim relief measure and delay in implementation of this policy has led to high levels of illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing. Participant F acknowledged this problem as he noted the interim relief was a loose arrangement which could not be properly regulated. Participant C noted the severity of the problem caused by this loose arrangement. He said the interim relief has an allocation of approximately 11 ton but they fish an additional 90 ton. He stated that the authorities close the fishing for a period of time only to reopen it again but this does not address the problem of overfishing. When discussing the issue of normative compliance and peer accountability with fisherfolk, the rationale for overfishing was a sense of entitlement to the resources. There was a sense urgency about sustainability and they understood their role as custodians but they felt their rights to access superseded any conservation needs. Fishermen expressed the notion that resources were in its glory and a need for a recovery plan to rebuild the stocks by reducing the allocations. However, most participants justified the illegal fishing as an act borne out of desperation and used very emotive language when Page 47

56 discussing it to justify the actions. Participant P stated that children poach because their fathers died at sea. This has highlighted that due to the shift towards individual rights, opportunities for collective action and collective rights were eroded and a more commercial view has been entrenched. This has intensified the challenges that face the authorities when implementing the new policy. There is extensive work needed to educate and inform users about what policy aims to do and what the limitations of the policy entail. 4.2 Research discussion When assessing the perceptions of legitimacy, I used the framework presented in the literature review and summarised as Figure 1. The general sentiment discovered during this research is that the Small Scale Fisheries policy has not achieved legitimacy status as there is no consensus amongst stakeholders. This disagreement has translated into a lack of support for the policy. By evaluating the policy using this model, I will explore what factors influenced these perceptions. Substantive terms In substantive terms, Wallner (2008) states that content of the policy s goals must be fair and reasonable and support Copyright the general views of society. UCT As the desire for broader access rights was the impetus for the Small Scale policy, the current objectives of the policy meet these needs and recognise the human rights of fishers. Furthermore, it establishes the rights of previously marginalised individuals, targets poverty alleviation and food security. This is an alignment with the initial goals of the court action. In essence, the policy meets the objective of translating the will of the people into political decisions as stated by Boedeltje and Cornips (2004) who assert that this fulfils the requirement of input legitimacy by incorporating democratic input. When looking at the individual components of substantive terms as defined by George (1980), we can further assess the policy content. According to this author, the normative component of the policy content must address the moral aspect and be grounded in the country s political values. Examining the broader agenda of the policy as stated in the Government Gazette, it states that recognition and formalisation of this sector is guided by the Constitution which promises equality and redressing discrimination under previous exclusionary laws and policy (Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries, 2012). This is associated to the government s aim of transformation and equality therefore, the policy fulfils this normative component. Then inspecting the second component, the cognitive basis, we scrutinise the feasibility and the citizens belief in the authority s ability to implement the policy. Page 48

57 It was established in the findings section, that many participants questioned whether government (Marine and Coastal Management - MCM) had capacity in terms of resources and human capital to effectively roll out the implementation. Furthermore, some people including fishery experts are questioning the practicality of the policy as their view is there is simply not enough resources to accommodate this sector. Therefore, this component is not completely fulfilled. There is an important disparity currently brewing in the policy arena. Government has effectively delivered on its mandate provided by the Equality Court and aligned its policy to the international guiding principles as prescribed by the FAO, therefore by global standards the policy is deemed progressive. However, policy users are discontent with the current form and there is a widespread call for termination of the collective allocation model in favour of individual rights. This contradicts the initial sentiment and desires of the society when they initiated legal action in Procedural aspects According to Wallner (2008), the procedural aspects are incubation period, emotive appeals and stakeholder engagement. Incubation period serves to develop the idea and adapt it to political needs and communicate with stakeholders. While this period can provide a benefit during policy development, in this case it actually imposed a restriction as it delayed the implementation and allowed temporary measures to be used. This undermined the process as it embedded different values in the policy users which resulted in the emergence of changed desires. In addition, the theory states that rapidly implementing a new policy diminishes public support, however, this research suggests that extended incubation time has the same adverse effect on legitimacy. It demoralises the public and questions the organisation s ability to effectively implement the new policy. The delay is seen as tantamount to an admission of inadequacy or inability to roll out the new regulations. In terms of emotive appeals, the authorities did an effective job of building support with stakeholders by including policy users, community representatives and civil society during the initial drafting of the policy. The symbolic step of forming a National Task Team positively resonated with the public. This step of forming the task team also addressed the element of stakeholder engagement which employs the principle of democratic control. This principle states that citizens have an expectation of meaningful participation so that popular ideas are reflected in policies. Through the extensive process of consultation, there was consideration of varied views and enhanced involvement of the broader public. Tyler (2006) recognises that policies must be rational so decisions must rest on factual deduction to be deemed fair. The consensus was that this policy was sensible given that there were constraints that had to be considered. Page 49

58 The requirement of a transparent process as stated by George (1980) has also been met as the policy was available for public comment in two forums NEDLAC and Parliamentary Fisheries Portfolio Committee. In addition, the method chosen as a management tool for this policy, co-management, is a participatory method of governance. It calls for use of embedded, local knowledge and sharing control of resources. This intensifies the tenet of input legitimacy that calls for public participation as it takes it a step further by including communities not only in the policy formulation but also in the fisheries management system. Therefore, while the policy has an elevated level of participation, meets the requests and initial demands of citizens and abides by international guidelines, there is a general lack of support by users. Those individuals who support the policy express scepticism about whether the policy is plausible and will ever be brought to fruition. The four themes identified in this research, attempts to underpin why there is dissent surrounding the policy. These themes emerged by grouping similar responses from participants and a general idea emerged in each instance. The four themes point to a lack of organisational legitimacy which undermines the policy despite its sound principles. This is summarised by Wallner (2008, p.423) who states public policies are inextricably linked to the society s confidence in the fairness and suitability of the authority. The majority of participants stated that due to the failed 2013 process of allocating rights, they doubt that the institution (MCM) has the capacity or ability to effectively roll out this new policy. This is a perception of incompetence and inefficiency. This previous failure has influenced peoples views, and as Wallner (2008) observes, if a policy fails, the governing authority sacrifices support of stakeholders and public which undermines its future authority to govern. Revised model Looking at this case shows that the policy has not achieved legitimacy status as it does not have widespread support. To ascertain the factors that contribute to this, I looked at what could be effectively explained by the model (Figure 1). To understand the shift in desires of policy users it is important to understand the environment in which the policy was developed. The traditional rights of access for fishers was to recognise that people along the coast use fishing resources as a source of food and livelihoods. However, over many years, the fishing industry has become lucrative with valuable export markets developed in Asia and Europe for high-value species like lobster, tuna and hake. Therefore in this case setting, the misalignment of policy content and desires of users has nothing to do with the actual policy process. It is as a result of users desires to commercialise the sector. Globally Page 50

59 small-scale fishing is aimed at recognising traditional access rights, so the policy is achieving its goals in terms of its mandate. The authorities have stated it is not the intent of the policy to issue individual rights and commercial rights are available to all people who express an interest. However, there is no government support and operators must trade under the same competitive circumstances that other businesses currently operate. However, there is global recognition that artisanal fishers are vulnerable and need assistance in building markets, therefore the policy does in fact make provision for enhancing marketing capacity. This follows the principles of the FAO that recommend strengthening small-scale bargaining power along the value-chain so it reduces their vulnerability and can resolve conflicts (FAO, 2014). It seems evident that disagreement about policy content is not related to the policy process but rather the changing commercial climate and users identifying rewarding opportunities. Therefore, it seems despite the policy s progressive intent, its legitimacy is hampered by a different factor organization legitimacy. The issue of organisational legitimacy emerged during the analysis process when the themes were revealed. The three themes, Uncertainty, Lack of communication and Delays and Interim measures relate to the procedural aspect of the policy process and explain the processes which contributed to lack of policy legitimacy. However, the first and most prominent theme which was Organisational Legitimacy Copyright is not included in the current model. This highlighted an additional UCT factor that impacted this policy s legitimacy. Due to the organization / institution, Marine and Coastal Management (MCM), being regarded as inefficient, incompetent and delivering suboptimal results, the users do not recognize the legitimacy of the organization. The main issues which adversely affected the legitimacy of MCM were stressed in Theme 1 Organisational Legitimacy. As noted by Dahl (1998), legitimacy rests on confidence that an authority s power to make rules is acceptable. MCM has not achieved this confidence due to issues highlighted in the forensic report. The Basadi report stated issues of political interference, no duly appointed head of MCM for 4 years, a fisheries branch operating on skeleton staff and tardy political decisions. So these key problems affect the ability of the organisation to deliver effective solutions and contributes to the organisation s lack of legitimacy. As output legitimacy is achieved by an assessment of actual results and judgment of competency. This research highlighted that due to the perception of incompetence and a lack of trust in the institution, it affected the ways procedures were interpreted. This effect is highlighted in the findings section, where positive steps are interpreted negatively. Examples of this adverse effect are, consultation being interpreted as lacking authenticity, delay in implementation misconstrued as an inability to roll out a plan and lack of communication (i.e. updates) understood as the institution having no direction. Page 51

60 The figure presented below as Figure 2, diagrammatically represents the theory that organisational legitimacy contributes to policy legitimacy. The model incorporates the impact of organisational legitimacy as a factor that influences the procedural aspects of policy legitimacy. Figure 2 - The revised model which adds an additional element to the inputs of policy legitimacy This model demonstrates that the lack of confidence in the organisation impacts on the steps taken by the institution Copyright responsible for the policy formulation. This suggests that UCT it is irrelevant what action the organisation takes, there is an inherent doubt in their ability so the policy will be questioned. The organisational legitimacy impacts the way procedures are viewed and interpreted. Page 52

61 Section 5 Research Conclusions This research aimed to identify how people form perceptions of legitimacy and used the Small Scale Fisheries policy development as a case study. Legitimacy is considered important in governance as it provides an additional form of influence. Coercion as a means to control behavior is ineffective as it is costly and produces limited results. Legitimacy influences peoples behavior as it leads to voluntary compliance and self-control. The concept of policy legitimacy has not been extensively researched, however, it is important in governance when an institution needs to implement legislative initiatives. By understanding the policy development process, it allows an organisation to develop effective strategies. The existing literature was reviewed and formed the basis to develop the preliminary model presented in Figure 1. This model was based on work by George (1980), Tyler (2006) and Wallner (2008). This literature provided a framework to assess how people develop their perceptions of policy legitimacy and judge its fairness. The key elements that influence perceptions of fairness are the substantive terms and procedural aspects of the policy cycle. How laws and regulations are developed determines whether it will achieve legitimacy status. Once a policy is deemed legitimate, a moral obligation develops and people willingly defer to these rules. The exploratory research entailed conducting 21 interviews with various stakeholders within the smallscale sector. This provided great detail and insight into the policy formulation process. The empirical work uncovered that policy content was not aligned to the desires of the users. However, this was not a failure of policy process but rather due to changing desires of the users. In fact, the intent of the policy and its substance is aligned to international guidelines and addresses the concerns raised by protestors during the 2005 court action. However, despite the policy s progressive content, there is a lack of consensus amongst stakeholders. Furthermore, when evaluating the procedural aspects, the extended incubation period and temporary solutions offered undermined the policy development. The interim relief system introduced individual rights and changed the landscape of small-scale fishing. In terms of emotive appeals, the symbolic steps of including a diverse group to formulate the policy employed a positive framing technique. The stakeholder engagement process was complex as the participation was extensive but communication and dissemination of information was not ideal. Finally the policy is considered rational as it is a result of research, use of local knowledge and considers the constraints which exist in this policy arena. The findings confirmed earlier work, which asserted that the steps in the policy cycle determine perceptions of legitimacy. However, the existing literature does not fully account for the lack of legitimacy observed Page 53

62 in this case. This case revealed that the preliminary model was not sufficient to explain the perceptions of policy legitimacy of the Small Scale Fisheries policy. The research highlighted that besides the two components identified in the literature, the legitimacy of the organisation influences policy legitimacy. This suggests that any authority will have limited success with reform or new regulations if the organisation driving the policy is not regarded as competent or legitimate. This suggests that no matter what strategy is deployed, it will not be effective or appropriate because the support is undermined from the beginning. When an organisation lacks output legitimacy due to inefficiency, suboptimal performance or a lack of effectiveness, it impacts on how subsequent policies are perceived. The revised model explains this influence of organisational legitimacy on the procedural aspects of the policy cycle. The lack of organisational legitimacy undermines the ability of the organisation to devise and conceptualise a policy that will satisfy the needs of the public. Any steps taken by the organisation are misinterpreted or misconstrued as negative. I argue that despite the progressive policy and employing a comprehensive participatory procedure, the policy does not achieve legitimacy due to the influence of the lack of organisational legitimacy. Page 54

63 Section 6 - Future research 6.1 Limitations of this study In terms of the broader issue of legitimacy, a limitation of this study is that it was conducted with a focus on only one government institution. These results are in respect of one policy development process so the issue of generalisability to all other institutions cannot be inferred without similar studies showing comparable results and building on this case. This issue of generalisability is an issue in qualitative studies as information is particularly detailed, rich and widespread but it covers a smaller number of people. However, when dealing with qualitative data, an alternative term is transferability, this is the degree to which two different contexts are similar, thus findings are transferable if the situations are similar. (M. Q. Patton, 2002). By assessing situations to determine similarity, the approach will assist in determining whether the data can be extrapolated, which addresses transferability, and states that one has gone beyond the constraints of the information gathered and considered other uses for the findings (M. Q. Patton, 2002). One can extrapolate the findings if there is careful reflection of data constraints and consideration of where the findings can be applied given the various settings. For this case study of Small Scale Fishing policy legitimacy, the sample was limited to the Western Cape, therefore, it may not be indicative of the views of all fishing communities in South Africa. We cannot Copyright deduce that all these opinions are broadly held or widely applicable UCT as fishing is widely dispersed along the coastline Northern Cape, Western Cape, Eastern Cape and Kwazulu-Natal. Only a small sample from fishing communities along the coast was selected so although the information gathered was robust, the sample size was limited. Each region has its own traditions and indigenous practices so these findings cannot be generalised unless confirmed by similar studies in those regions. 6.2 Recommendations for future research This research focused on how legitimacy of a policy can predict its success based on the support from the stakeholders and public. The research identified that besides the two components of policy development, an additional contributor to policy legitimacy is organizational legitimacy of the institution implementing the new policy. If an authority that is responsible for the implementation of a new policy or reform is perceived to be incompetent or untrustworthy, then the lack of legitimacy status undermines the success and support of the policy. Future research can explore whether these results are confirmed in subsequent studies using different institutions. Evaluating a policy s legitimacy using this revised model can establish if organisational legitimacy adds credence to an institution s ability to govern and implement future policies. For the case study, the same study can be conducted in different regions to access perceptions of legitimacy in different areas. Page 55

64 Section 7 - References Abels, G. (2007). Citizen involvement in public policy-making: Does it improve democratic legitimacy and accountability? The case of pta. Interdisciplinary Information Sciences, 13(1), doi: /iis Adams, J., Khan, H. T., Raeside, R., & White, D. (2007). Research methods for graduate business and social science students. London, UK: Sage. Adendorf, L. (2014, May 15). Joemat-Pettersson sets aside 2013 fishing rights allocation - DAFF. Politicsweb. Retrieved from fishing-rights-al Barriball, K., & While, A. (1994). Collecting data using semi-structured interviews: A discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19, Beamer, G. (2002). Elite interviews and state politics research. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 2(1), doi: / Benkenstein, A. (2013, November 20). Policy reform of SA s small scale fisheries sector: An upstream battle. South African Institute for International Affairs: Opinion & Analysis. Retrieved from Benkenstein, A. (2014). Development, sustainability and social justice: The elusive balancing act of African fisheries governance. (SAIIA Policy Note 3). Governance of Africa s Resources Programme, South African Institute for International Affairs. Retrieved from Berkes, F., Pomeray, R., Mahon, R., & McConney, P. (2001). Managing small-scale fisheries: Alternative directions and methods. Ottawa, Canada: International Development Research Centre. Boedeltje, M., & Cornips, J. (2004). Input and output legitimacy in interactive governance. (No. NIG2-01). NIG Annual Work Conference, Rotterdam. Netherlands Institute for Government. Retrieved from Branch, G. M., & Clark, B. M. (2006). Fish stocks and their management: The changing face of fisheries in South Africa. Marine Policy, 30(1), doi: /j.marpol Chuenpagdee, R., & Jentoft, S. (2007). Step zero for fisheries co-management: What precedes implementation. Marine Policy, 31(6), doi: /j.marpol Collier, P. (2010). The plundered planet. Oxford, UK: Oxford City Press. Dahl, R. (1998). On democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale Univerity Press. Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries. (2012). Policy for the Small Scale Fisheries sector in South Africa. Government Gazette Department of Agriculture Foresty & Fisheries. (2015). Marine Living Resources Act (Act No. 18 of Page 56

65 1998): Proposed regulations relating to small-scale fishing. (Government Notice No. R. 184, 6 March). Retrieved from Edwards, P. (2010). Small scale fisheries policy. Dawson, Edwards & Associates (Maritime & Commerical Lawyers). Retrieved from Edwards, P. (2014). FRAP The weighting game. Dawson, Edwards & Associates (Maritime & Commerical Lawyers). Retrieved from FAO. (2014). Selected issues in fisheries and aquaculture - Part 2. Report by Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, Rome Italy. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0250e/i0250e02.pdf George, A. (1980). Domestic constriants on regime change in US policy: The need for policy legitimacy. In A. George, O. Holsti, & R. Silverson (Eds.), Change in the international system. Boulder Co: Westview Press. Gill, M. J. (2014). The possibilities of phenomenology for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), doi: / Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2012). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), doi: / Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), Hauck, M. (2008). Rethinking small-scale fisheries compliance. Marine Policy, 32(4), doi: /j.marpol Hauck, M., & Sowman, M. (2001). Coastal and fisheries co-management in South Africa: An overview and analysis. Marine Policy, 25(3), Hurd, I. (1999). Legitimacy and authority in international politics. International Organization, 53(2), doi: / Isaacs, M. (2012). Recent progress in understanding small-scale fisheries in Southern Africa. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4(3), doi: /j.cosust Isaacs, M. (2015). Multi-stakeholder process of co-designing small-scale fisheries policy in South Africa. Regional Environmental Change, 15(7), doi: /s Jentoft, S. (2000a). Legitimacy and disappointment in fisheries management. Marine Policy, 24(2), Jentoft, S. (2000b). The community: A missing link of fisheries management. Marine Policy, 24(1), Jentoft, S. (2004). Institutions in fisheries: What they are, what they do, and how they change. Marine Policy, 28(2), doi: /s x(03)00085-x Page 57

66 Jentoft, S., McCay, B. J., & Wilson, D. C. (1998). Social theory and fisheries co-management. Marine Policy, 22(4), doi: /s x(97) Kratochwil, F. (2006). On legitimacy. International Relations, 20(3), doi: / Kumar, R. (2011). Research methodolgy: A step-by-step guide for beginners (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage. Kuperan, K., & Sutinen, J. (1998). Blue water crime: Deterrance, legitimacy and compliance in fisheries. Law & Society Review, 32(2), Leary, Z. O. (2010). The essential guide to doing your research project (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage. Lester, S. (1999). An introduction to phenomenological research. Stan Lester Developments. Retrieved from Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage. Meyer, C. (1999). Political legitimacy and the invisibility of politics: Exploring the European Union s communication deficit. Journal of Common Market Studies, 37(4), doi: / Nedlac. (2015). National economic development and labour council. Retrieved from Copyright UCT Osteraker, M. (2002). Phenomenography as a research method in management research. (Unpublished paper) Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration in Vasa, Finland. Retrieved from Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. doi: /nur Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). London, UK: Sage. Skogstad, G. (2003). Legitimacy and/or policy effectiveness?: network governance and GMO regulation in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 10(3), doi: / Small-scale fishing rights: The nightmare that is the impossible dream. (2015, April). Fishing Industry News, Smoke, R. (1994). On the importance of policy legitimacy. Political Psychology, 15(1), Retrieved from Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), doi: /amr Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, doi: /annurev.psych van Dalen, P. (2014, April 24). High Court grants indefinite exemption to fishermen. Politicsweb. Page 58

67 Retrieved from van Sittert, L., Branch, G. M., Hauck, M., & Sowman, M. (2006). Benchmarking the first decade of post-apartheid fisheries reform in South Africa. Marine Policy, 30(1), doi: /j.marpol Wallner, J. (2008). Legitimacy and public policy: Seeing beyond effctiveness, efficiancy, and performance. Policy Studies Journal, 36(3), Widmer, T. (2009). The contribution of evidence-based policy to the output-oriented legitimacy of the state. Evidence and Policy, 5(4), doi: / x Page 59

68 Appendices Appendix 1 Interview schedule Note question structure The semi-structured interviews provide a framework for questions but are adaptable to varied samples. This recognises that changing the way questions are framed is not integral as words could hold different meanings to respondents. In this method, validity and reliability depend on being able to adjust questions so as to convey similarity in meaning to facilitate comparability. This method allows the researcher to ask for clarification or probe if a point of interest is identified (Barriball & While, 1994). This schedule forms the basis of the interviews and clarifies the objectives of the interviews questions will be reframed when necessary Aim Aspect of the theory Question Broad question to ascertain participants views of individual experience Determine perception of fairness Goal: ascertain whether the policy content is aligned to the needs and attitudes of the stakeholders and broader public General perception What are your thoughts and views of the Small Scale Fisheries policy Copyright Substantive terms UCT Do you think the new policy will improve the circumstances of the fishing communities? Do you think the policy addresses the needs of the communities? Do you feel that the co-operative is the best vehicle for rights allocation in the Small Scale Fisheries sector? Do you feel the cooperative method will instil values of sharing and community cohesion? Do you feel that the communities have the skills and capabilities to administer and deal with legal and administrative requirements of a legal entity (i.e. Co-operative)? What are your views on the current system of interim relief? Do you feel this system has affected people s views on small scale fishing and rights allocation? Do you feel that the system of collective allocations will encourage the normative compliance aspect (through promoting accountability to peers) Do you feel that the policy will lead to local development and build communities through better bargaining power? Page 60

69 Goal: 1)ascertain whether there has been sufficient time for officials to engage with the reform and support it.2) Ascertain if there has been sufficient time to educate the public Goal: Determine whether there has been positive emotive appeals to public to stimulate stakeholder support (positive framing of problems) Procedural Incubation period Emotive appeals Do you feel there been sufficient time to consider all aspects of the policy? Has government communicated how the policy will be beneficial to stakeholders or community Do you feel government has given due consideration to the effects of implementation Do you understand the reason for the new policy? Do you feel the policy is a good solution to the problems experienced in fishing communities? Do you feel the policy will help fishermen along the coast? Goal: Determine the level of engagement with stakeholders. Has it been meaningful and has local knowledge been included in policy content Do you feel that there has been enough public consultation Do you feel everybody's views have been adequately considered Copyright Does the policy UCT include a variety of views and Stakeholder engagement diverse knowledge? Is there an element of local, embedded or traditional knowledge enshrined in the policy? Goal: Determine Rational decision-making Do you feel the policy is reasonable? whether decisions are objective and reflects factual reasoning. Do you feel the policy is sensible? Page 61

70 Appendix 2 Website address: Page 62