Case 2-4 Clarification of functions in the resource management organisation: decision-making and implementation of activities

CLPA, clarification of functions, decision making and implementation of activities, COGEPAS, collège, resource management committee

Several issues have been identified in the operation of the CLPAs’ fisheries resource management activities, as follows: (1) lack of funds for its activities, (2) activities depend on the capacity and leadership of the head of the control post of the Directorate of Fisheries, who is the secretary general of the CLPA, and (3) the organisation does not have an operational unit. This case study focuses on question (3), and identifies cases in which the issues were addressed.

In Senegal, the CLPA is a decision-making body, but its position as an implementing body is unclear. To function as an implementing body for fisheries resource management activities, there is a need to clarify the CLPA’s scope of responsibilities for implementation.

COGEPAS ensured that concrete management measures were discussed in depth by the fishers in the trade groups (colleges), problems were identified and that solutions to these problems were proposed by the fisher’s trade groups. These proposals were then discussed and decided upon by the whole CLPA. To create this discussion flow, COGEPAS conducted awareness-raising activities using both online and in-person conferences, and organised technical training sessions.

UOnce a decision was made by the CLPA as a whole, a number of fisheries resource management committees were established within the CLPA to conductive the respective management activities. The committees were organised by target species and fishing method and consisted mainly of representatives of the fishing trade groups targeted by fisheries resource management, as well as other members. Numerous fisheries resource management committees were formed, with the work divided between them under each action plan, and each committee took on one action plan. 

Decisions taken by the CLPA were shared with the departmental (provincial) and regional Fisheries Directorates and other CLPAs in the area. The CLPA was at the centre of activities for the extended management of octopus resources in the department of Mbour, and its members participated in meetings as representatives of fisheries stakeholders, expressed their opinions and took part in decision-making. These decisions were then brought back to share with inhabitants and put into practice.

The establishment of a fisheries resource management committee that acts as an implementing entity for each action plan within the CLPA as a decision-making body, and a system whereby committee members take the lead in specific fisheries resource management activities by allocating roles, serves as a model for implementing fisheries resource management activities in the CLPA.

Chapter 2　Establishing and strengthening the resource management implementation system

2.1 Establishing and strengthening resource management organisations

Institutions that intend to introduce fisheries resources co-management or those in charge of such co-management shall gather fisheries stakeholders and residents of the target communities, and explain the challenges in fisheries resource management and how to address them. Then, the purpose, necessity, and role of the resource management organisation shall be explained, and the resource management organisation shall be formed or restructured in a participatory manner. If necessary, both a decision-making body and a subordinate body to implement the resource management activities shall be formed.

What kind of resource management system should be established to implement fishery resources co-management in Senegal and neighbouring countries? This case study will be helpful in considering a resource management organisation’s functions to both make decisions and implement an action plan, and how these functions should be divided in the organisation.