- Resource System
- Marine ecosystem
- Resource Units
- Cod
Petty Harbor is located in a town on the eastern shore of the Avalon Peninsula. The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The author examines the perception of the marine environment by fishers. He compared the fishers of Petty Harbour who remain close to shore and use traps and hand lines with fishers from St. Johns who travel further offshore and use long lines. He found that in general fishers have a selective perception of their environment and primarily focus on features that directly affect fish behavior and harvesting operations.
This case was part of the original CPR database developed in the 1980s by Edella Schlager and Shui Yan Tang at Indiana University. The original CPR report can be found under the CPR tab in the Institutional Analysis section below.
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
RESOURCE:
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
SCREENER:
Case: Petty Harbour Cod Fishery, Canada
The information regarding the following common-pool resource system was taken from empirical evidence from a field setting. Data on the system was extracted from a thesis or dissertation. Currently, there are no additional documents to cite which may provide further information about this common-pool resource.
These documents describe two resources in detail. The primary resource is the Petty Harbour Cod Fishery, situated in Petty Harbour of Canada. More generally, it is located in North America. The system's sector is that of fisheries. Relatively good information has been collected about the stakes of participants who appropriate from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery. The condition of this resource is not well understood. Complete information is available regarding the strategies used by key groups interacting with the system. There is thorough documentation of the operational rules for this resource. This is the result of a high level of confidence that the authors who recorded the features of Petty Harbour Cod Fishery have a complete knowledge of its particulars. Furthermore, the authors have provided sufficient data to formulate a structured coding process.
The Petty Harbour Cod Fishery covers no area. There are 25-50 total appropriator teams appropriating from the resource . Appropriator teams for the resource are always formally organized.
Shortall examines the perception of the marine environment by fishers. He compared the fishers of Petty Harbour who remain close to shore and use traps and handlines with fishers from St. Johns who travel further offshore and use longlines. He found that in general fishers have selective perception of their environment and primarily focus on features that directly affect fish behavior and harvesting operations. In carrying out this study Shortall presents a detailed description of the Petty Harbour fishery which is codeable, as opposed to the St. John's fishery in which he only provides a sketch.
CITATION(S):
Shortall, David (1973) "Environmental Perception in Two Local Fisheries: A Case Study from Eastern Newfoundland." Ph.D. dissertation, Memorial University of Newfoundland. (microfilm)
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
SCREENER:
Case: Petty Harbour Cod Fishery, Canada
The information regarding the following common-pool resource system was taken from empirical evidence from a field setting. Data on the system was extracted from a thesis or dissertation. Currently, there are no additional documents to cite which may provide further information about this common-pool resource.
These documents describe two resources in detail. The primary resource is the Petty Harbour Cod Fishery, situated in Petty Harbour of Canada. More generally, it is located in North America. The system's sector is that of fisheries. Relatively good information has been collected about the stakes of participants who appropriate from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery. The condition of this resource is not well understood. Complete information is available regarding the strategies used by key groups interacting with the system. There is thorough documentation of the operational rules for this resource. This is the result of a high level of confidence that the authors who recorded the features of Petty Harbour Cod Fishery have a complete knowledge of its particulars. Furthermore, the authors have provided sufficient data to formulate a structured coding process.
The Petty Harbour Cod Fishery covers no area. There are 25-50 total appropriator teams appropriating from the resource . Appropriator teams for the resource are always formally organized.
Shortall examines the perception of the marine environment by fishers. He compared the fishers of Petty Harbour who remain close to shore and use traps and handlines with fishers from St. Johns who travel further offshore and use longlines. He found that in general fishers have selective perception of their environment and primarily focus on features that directly affect fish behavior and harvesting operations. In carrying out this study Shortall presents a detailed description of the Petty Harbour fishery which is codeable, as opposed to the St. John's fishery in which he only provides a sketch.
CITATION(S):
Shortall, David (1973) "Environmental Perception in Two Local Fisheries: A Case Study from Eastern Newfoundland." Ph.D. dissertation, Memorial University of Newfoundland. (microfilm)
RESOURCE INFO:
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. It is produced biologically and is a renewable moving (fugitive) unit. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
The boundary of this resource has natural/constructed and institutional arrangements which do not limit entry. The boundaries of this resource are smaller than the location, and exist in one country and are not within any general purpose local jurisdictions. The boundaries of this resource are independent of a development project designed by non-residents.
There are distinct and stable micro-environmental or ecological zones within this resource (highly confident). The quality and/or quantity of units is regularly better in some of the zones than in others (highly confident). The variance in quality between the zones has at some point in time created conflict among appropriators (highly confident).
The study did not indicate whether or not there are natural barriers within the resource. There are strategic points within the resource where the main flow of the cod can be controlled (inferred). There is considerable, and predictable variation over space in the availability of cod within the resource (highly confident). There is considerable, and mildly predictable variation in the flow of cod within a single year (highly confident). There is considerable, but unpredictable variation in the flow of cod from year to year (inferred).
The bottom topography of Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is not indicated in the case study information.
If no rules in use were being followed, the relationship among the appropriation processes would have conflictual effects (inferred).
The boundaries of the production resource do not coincide with the boundaries of the location. Rather, the location is within the boundaries of the appropriation resource (inferred). The boundaries of the production resource partially overlap the boundaries of the location, but the two boundaries are not equivalent (confident). The boundaries of the distribution resource are not identical to the boundaries of the appropriation resource, but appropriation is within the boundaries of distribution (inferred). The boundaries of the production resource and the boundaries of the distribution resource overlap paritally, but they are not equivalent (confident).
LOCATION:
The appropriation resources are situated in the cod fishery located off of the northeast coast of the Avalon Penninsula of eastern Newfoundland. Also included in the location is the town of Petty Harbour. The boundaries of the location are both natural and institutional. The boundaries of the town are institutional. The boundaries of the grounds are natural and institutional, and include Motion Bay which provides natural boundaries, in addition to open coastal areas that extend from Long Point in the west to North Head in the northeast. The appropriation resource present in this location consists of cod (coding), as well as salmon.
The system is located within one country. Within this country, the system's location is not within any general purpose local jurisdiction. A permanent population lives year round in this location (highly confident). Additionally, the most common mode of transportation in this region is -1. This location is also characterized by an economy that is stable and tied to other economic networks during the entire time period .
The latitude of this location is 48'N, and its longitude is 53'W. The elevation of this location is 0 meters (highly confident). The highest elevation is -1. The lowest elevation of this location is -1. The region's average annual rainfall is unknown. The region's average annual evapotranspiration is -2 milimeters. The distribution of rainfall and evapotranspiration per month is as follows:
January precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
February precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
March precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
April precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
May precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
June precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
July precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
August precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
September precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
October precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
November precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
December precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. It is produced biologically and is a renewable moving (fugitive) unit. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
The boundary of this resource has natural/constructed and institutional arrangements which do not limit entry. The boundaries of this resource are smaller than the location, and exist in one country and are not within any general purpose local jurisdictions. The boundaries of this resource are independent of a development project designed by non-residents.
There are distinct and stable micro-environmental or ecological zones within this resource (highly confident). The quality and/or quantity of units is regularly better in some of the zones than in others (highly confident). The variance in quality between the zones has at some point in time created conflict among appropriators (highly confident).
The study did not indicate whether or not there are natural barriers within the resource. There are strategic points within the resource where the main flow of the cod can be controlled (inferred). There is considerable, and predictable variation over space in the availability of cod within the resource (highly confident). There is considerable, and mildly predictable variation in the flow of cod within a single year (highly confident). There is considerable, but unpredictable variation in the flow of cod from year to year (inferred).
The bottom topography of Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is not indicated in the case study information.
If no rules in use were being followed, the relationship among the appropriation processes would have conflictual effects (inferred).
The boundaries of the production resource do not coincide with the boundaries of the location. Rather, the location is within the boundaries of the appropriation resource (inferred). The boundaries of the production resource partially overlap the boundaries of the location, but the two boundaries are not equivalent (confident). The boundaries of the distribution resource are not identical to the boundaries of the appropriation resource, but appropriation is within the boundaries of distribution (inferred). The boundaries of the production resource and the boundaries of the distribution resource overlap paritally, but they are not equivalent (confident).
LOCATION:
The appropriation resources are situated in the cod fishery located off of the northeast coast of the Avalon Penninsula of eastern Newfoundland. Also included in the location is the town of Petty Harbour. The boundaries of the location are both natural and institutional. The boundaries of the town are institutional. The boundaries of the grounds are natural and institutional, and include Motion Bay which provides natural boundaries, in addition to open coastal areas that extend from Long Point in the west to North Head in the northeast. The appropriation resource present in this location consists of cod (coding), as well as salmon.
The system is located within one country. Within this country, the system's location is not within any general purpose local jurisdiction. A permanent population lives year round in this location (highly confident). Additionally, the most common mode of transportation in this region is -1. This location is also characterized by an economy that is stable and tied to other economic networks during the entire time period .
The latitude of this location is 48'N, and its longitude is 53'W. The elevation of this location is 0 meters (highly confident). The highest elevation is -1. The lowest elevation of this location is -1. The region's average annual rainfall is unknown. The region's average annual evapotranspiration is -2 milimeters. The distribution of rainfall and evapotranspiration per month is as follows:
January precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
February precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
March precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
April precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
May precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
June precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
July precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
August precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
September precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
October precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
November precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
December precipitation: N/A, evapotraspiration: N/A
RESOURCE:
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
OPERATIONAL LEVEL:
TYPE OF SITUATION
The processes described in the related documents are primarily related to appropriation alone. The formal owner(s) of the resource discussed in this study is a central government. The set of individuals who have rights to withdraw from this resource is well-defined. As of the beginning of this period, the owners are not indicated as either attempting, or failing to attempt to exercise access to this resource. Since the beginning of this period, the appropriators are exercising (or attempting to exercise de facto) closed access to this resource, but "outsiders" began to appropriate at a moderate level.
EVENTS MARKING THE BEGINNING ACTION SITUATION
It is estimated that the operational level coded on this form ended in 0. The estimated duration of the patterns that are described in this form is 26 to 50 years. Throughout the duration there was change made primarily by an external authority in operational, collective, or consititutional rules. There was no change in resource size or structure. There was no new technology introduced to the system over the duration of the patterns coded on this form. There was no information included in the study to indicate whether or not there was a substantial external change in the value of the units appropriated. The quantity of units available did not have documentation regarding changes due to the appropriation patterns of other appropriators' withdrawals from the same production or distribution resource. There were no new groups starting to withdraw units from the appropriation resource. There was no recorded change to one or more variables internal to the operational level. The variables that changed were -2. The author begins the description of this case at this point in history. The author begins at this point in history because 4.
CONDITIONS AT THE BEGINNING AND END OF PERIOD COVERED BY THIS FORM*
For biological resources at the beginning of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available was not included in the case information. For biological resources at the end of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available was a moderate shortage (inferred). For physical resources at the beginning of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the quantity of units needed, given the usual patterns of use for these units was not included in the case information. For physical resources at the end of the period the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the quantity of units needed, given the usual patterns of use for these units, was a moderate shortage (inferred).
The following includes the available statistics on the use of this resource at the beginning of the time period, followed by the end of the time period:
Tons of fish harvested per year at the end of the period: 1273 (confident)
It is not indicated whether or not the units were sexually mature at this size or age at the beginning of this period. It is not indicated whether or not the units were sexually mature at this size or age at the end of this period.
*In fisheries and other biological systems, this is the maximum sustainable number of units. In irrigation, this refers to the optimal water requirements of the crops in the established fields served by this system.
At the beginning of the period, the units were predominantly sold in external markets.
At the end of the period, the units were predominantly sold in external markets.
As of the beginning of the period, the quality of the units being withdrawn from the resource was high (educated guess). As of the end of the period, the quality of the units being withdrawn from the resource was passable (educated guess). At the beginning of the period of the study, there was no information provided regarding whether or not there are problems of pollution in this or other resources, due to the way units are being appropriated. At the end of the period of the study, there was no information provided in the case study regarding whether or not there are problems of pollution in this or other resources due to the way units are appropriated. As of the beginning of the period, the extent of technical externalities resulting from the appropriation activities of participants from this resource was relatively high (educated guess). As of the end of the period, the extent of technical externalities resulting from the appropriation activities of participants from this resource was quite low (inferred). At the beginning of this study, the interference between the appropriation technology for this resource and the appropriation processes for other resources in this location was not recorded in the case information. At the end of this study, the interference between the appropriation technology for this resource and the appropriation processes for other resources in this location was not recorded in the case information. At the beginning of this study, holding all inputs constant there was no information included in the study regarding whether or not rent dissipation occurred with fewer appropriator teams and/or equipment. At the end of this study, holding all inputs constant there was no information included in the study regarding whether or not rent dissipation occurred with fewer appropriator teams and/or equipment. At the beginning of this period the appropriators shared low levels of mutual trust (e.g. oral promises rarely used) (ambiguous). At the end of the period the appropriators shared moderate to high levels of mutual trust (e.g. oral promises given high credence) (inferred). ## Unknown markup: Start ##By the end of this period no change had occurred in the property rights regime related to the appropriation resource (highly confident). At the end of this period the owners were exercising, or attempting to exercise, de jure and effective closed access to this resource (inferred). At the end of the period the appropriators were exercising, or attempting to exercise, de facto closed access to this resource (confident).
INFORMATION LEVELS
There is no information in the study to indicate the availability of maps or charts of the appropration resource for use by the appropriators. Maps and/or charts of the production and distribution resources are not documented as being available, or unavailable in this case study. The appropriators of this resource can be seen by each other while withdrawing and delivering units (educated guess). No documentation was included in the study regarding whether or not the appropriators of this resource are in radio communication with each other while appropriating from the resource. There was no information provided to indicate whether or not there are actions being taken, by appropriators or officials, to generate information about the condition of the resource. There are always records of the withdrawals from this resource kept in a systematic way (inferred). There was no information in the study about whether or not there are records of the physical factors which directly affected the resource kept in a systematic way. There was no information in the study about whether or not there are records of the appropriators' contributions to monitoring of the resource kept in a systematic way. Records are kept in a language accessible to most of the appropriators (inferred). The keepers of these records are officials at some level (inferred). The case study did not indicate whether or not these records are available for inspection by appropriators. The study did not indicate whether or not there are arenas being used for the exchange of information about conditions of the resource. The appropriators have an intimate knowledge of the characteristics of this resource (highly confident).
POTENTIAL ACTIONS AND LEVELS OF CONTROL
The quality or quantity of the units available to the appropriators are adversely affected by the strategies of prior appropriators (inferred). This study did not include information on whether or not there are problems of pollution resulting from activities of others who are not appropriators of this resource or inhabitants of this location (e.g. acid rain, sewage disposal). The number of markets in which this resource is sold was not included in the case study. The study does not indicate whether or not there was an insurance mechanism available to the appropriators related to variability of income from the resource.
PATTERNS OF INTERACTION
Differences between subgroups relating to gender identification does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to ethnic identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to clan identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to racial identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to religious identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to languages spoken does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to general cultural views of the resource system and its use does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to any problems that affect communication are not included in the case study.
The general manner in which appropriators related to one another during this study is a relatively positive, reciprocal manner -- the presumption was made that long-term relationships are involved and positive actions are undertaken without a specific expectation of return (educated guess).
POSITIONS AND PARTICIPANTS
At the end of the period studied the position of non-appropriator (individuals prevented from using the resource) did not exist (inferred). At the beginning of the period there was a general estimate of some undocumented number appropriators. There was a general estimate of 101-200 appropriators at the end of the period (confident). A general estimate of the number of participants in the team appropriation process was not included in the case study, at the beginning of the period. A general estimate of the number of participants in the team appropriation process was 51-100, at the end of the period (inferred). The "official" position of monitor (apart from the willingness of all appropriators to monitor) is not described in detail in this case study.
The case study did not include information regarding whether or not the appropriators monitor the appropriation activities of each other apart from the monitoring of any "official" guards.
NUMBER AND RELATIONSHIPS AMONG SUBGROUPS
There will be 2 subgroup form(s) completed in relation to this operational level form. The ID number(s) of the subgroup(s) coded are as follows: 103.1 - 104.1 - -2 - -2
Subgroups 103.1 and 104.1 differ in legal rights to appropriate units and in withdrawal rates from the resource.
Subgroups 103.1 and 104.1 do not differ in exposure to variations in supply, in levels of dependency on the units withdrawn from this resource, and in the way they use the appropriation units.
EVALUATION OF RESULTS
The study did not indicate whether or not there are appropriators who were consistently disadvantaged in this period. The study did not indicate whether or not the relatively worst off appropriators have or have not been cut out of their benefits from this resource or substantially harmed.
AUTHOR'S EVALUATION AND CAUSAL ASSUMPTIONS
In this coding form the author does not focus on the readers' concept of results and the evaluation of results.
The author discusses withdrawals per unit of effort based on -1
SUBGROUP:
Participants:
This appropriation group are the men who fish using traps. The criteria for who is a member is well defined (highly confident). . This group ended with a membership of 54 (inferred).
The following statements characterize the composition of this subgroup's population with respect to variables that may affect the capacity to communicate effectively:
Gender identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). There is no difference in composition with regard to languages spoken (highly confident). The language spoken by most members of the subgroup is English.
The appropriation process is organized as a team process consisting of 18 groups.
Legal Rights:
Members of this subgroup have de jure rights of access (inferred). The right to withdraw is held by this subgroup de jure (inferred). Rights to participate in management of this resource is held de jure (inferred). Exclusion from use of the entire resource is exercised de facto (inferred). Members of this subgroup have de jure rights to decide who can be excluded from particular zones within the resource. (highly confident).
Stakes and Resources:
The length of time this subgroup has regularly appropriated from this resource is 51 through 75 years (educated guess). Around 91%-100% of members reside in or adjacent to this resource (educated guess). Most people in this subgroup are very dependent (i.e. most of the family income) on this resource (inferred). Around 91%-100% of this subgroup work a substantial amount of time in activities not associated with appropriation from this resource (educated guess). Capital is owned by 91%-100% of this subgroup (confident).
Potential Actions and Levels of Control:
Considering that there are multiple subgroups using this resource, most of the appropriators withdraw units after all other subgroups have withdrawn (i.e. tailenders) (inferred). A noticeable impact on the balance of the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available in this resource would occur in a drastic reduction of this subgroup's appropriation activities (inferred). Keeping in mind the physically available levels of withdrawal that are possible from this resource, the following shows the extent to which rules concerning different aspects of withdrawal constrain appropriation: technological rules moderately constrain (educated guess), time limit rules cause unknown contraints, quantity rules cause unknown contraints, marginal units, or units obtained by increasing levels of appropriation, cause unknown contraints.
Technology:
Strategies Adopted:
During this time period members have not invested resources, such as their own labor, in maintaining or improving the structure of the appropriation resource (educated guess). Investment into constructing or improving production or distribution works for maintaining or improving their resource has not been made by members (educated guess). Members do not have access to an alternative source of supply (educated guess).
Subgroup Results:
This subgroup appropriates 26%-50% of its total appropriated units at the end of this period (educated guess).
SUBGROUP:
Participants:
This appropriation group are the men who fish using handlines The criteria for who is a member is well defined (highly confident). . This group ended with a membership of 104 (confident).
The following statements characterize the composition of this subgroup's population with respect to variables that may affect the capacity to communicate effectively:
Gender identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). There is no difference in composition with regard to languages spoken (highly confident). The language spoken by most members of the subgroup is English.
The appropriation process is organized as a team process consisting of 52 groups.
Legal Rights:
Members of this subgroup have de jure rights of access (inferred). The right to withdraw is held by this subgroup de jure (inferred). Rights to participate in management of this resource is held de facto (inferred). Exclusion from use of the entire resource is exercised de facto (inferred). Members of this subgroup have de facto rights to decide who can be excluded from particular zones within the resource. (inferred).
Stakes and Resources:
The length of time this subgroup has regularly appropriated from this resource is 51 through 75 years (educated guess). Around 91%-100% of members reside in or adjacent to this resource (educated guess). Most people in this subgroup are very dependent (i.e. most of the family income) on this resource (inferred). Around 91%-100% of this subgroup work a substantial amount of time in activities not associated with appropriation from this resource (educated guess). Capital is owned by 91%-100% of this subgroup (confident).
Potential Actions and Levels of Control:
Considering that there are multiple subgroups using this resource, most of the appropriators withdraw units after one or more other subgroups have withdrawn (educated guess). A noticeable impact on the balance of the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available in this resource would occur in a drastic reduction of this subgroup's appropriation activities (inferred). Keeping in mind the physically available levels of withdrawal that are possible from this resource, the following shows the extent to which rules concerning different aspects of withdrawal constrain appropriation: technological rules heavily constrain (inferred), time limit rules cause unknown contraints, quantity rules cause unknown contraints, marginal units, or units obtained by increasing levels of appropriation, cause unknown contraints.
Technology:
Strategies Adopted:
During this time period members have not invested resources, such as their own labor, in maintaining or improving the structure of the appropriation resource (educated guess). Investment into constructing or improving production or distribution works for maintaining or improving their resource has not been made by members (educated guess). Members do not have access to an alternative source of supply (educated guess).
Subgroup Results:
This subgroup appropriates 51%-75% of its total appropriated units at the end of this period (educated guess).
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
OPERATIONAL LEVEL:
TYPE OF SITUATION
The processes described in the related documents are primarily related to appropriation alone. The formal owner(s) of the resource discussed in this study is a central government. The set of individuals who have rights to withdraw from this resource is well-defined. As of the beginning of this period, the owners are not indicated as either attempting, or failing to attempt to exercise access to this resource. Since the beginning of this period, the appropriators are exercising (or attempting to exercise de facto) closed access to this resource, but "outsiders" began to appropriate at a moderate level.
EVENTS MARKING THE BEGINNING ACTION SITUATION
It is estimated that the operational level coded on this form ended in 0. The estimated duration of the patterns that are described in this form is 26 to 50 years. Throughout the duration there was change made primarily by an external authority in operational, collective, or consititutional rules. There was no change in resource size or structure. There was no new technology introduced to the system over the duration of the patterns coded on this form. There was no information included in the study to indicate whether or not there was a substantial external change in the value of the units appropriated. The quantity of units available did not have documentation regarding changes due to the appropriation patterns of other appropriators' withdrawals from the same production or distribution resource. There were no new groups starting to withdraw units from the appropriation resource. There was no recorded change to one or more variables internal to the operational level. The variables that changed were -2. The author begins the description of this case at this point in history. The author begins at this point in history because 4.
CONDITIONS AT THE BEGINNING AND END OF PERIOD COVERED BY THIS FORM*
For biological resources at the beginning of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available was not included in the case information. For biological resources at the end of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available was a moderate shortage (inferred). For physical resources at the beginning of this period, the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the quantity of units needed, given the usual patterns of use for these units was not included in the case information. For physical resources at the end of the period the balance between the quantity of units withdrawn and the quantity of units needed, given the usual patterns of use for these units, was a moderate shortage (inferred).
The following includes the available statistics on the use of this resource at the beginning of the time period, followed by the end of the time period:
Tons of fish harvested per year at the end of the period: 1273 (confident)
It is not indicated whether or not the units were sexually mature at this size or age at the beginning of this period. It is not indicated whether or not the units were sexually mature at this size or age at the end of this period.
*In fisheries and other biological systems, this is the maximum sustainable number of units. In irrigation, this refers to the optimal water requirements of the crops in the established fields served by this system.
At the beginning of the period, the units were predominantly sold in external markets.
At the end of the period, the units were predominantly sold in external markets.
As of the beginning of the period, the quality of the units being withdrawn from the resource was high (educated guess). As of the end of the period, the quality of the units being withdrawn from the resource was passable (educated guess). At the beginning of the period of the study, there was no information provided regarding whether or not there are problems of pollution in this or other resources, due to the way units are being appropriated. At the end of the period of the study, there was no information provided in the case study regarding whether or not there are problems of pollution in this or other resources due to the way units are appropriated. As of the beginning of the period, the extent of technical externalities resulting from the appropriation activities of participants from this resource was relatively high (educated guess). As of the end of the period, the extent of technical externalities resulting from the appropriation activities of participants from this resource was quite low (inferred). At the beginning of this study, the interference between the appropriation technology for this resource and the appropriation processes for other resources in this location was not recorded in the case information. At the end of this study, the interference between the appropriation technology for this resource and the appropriation processes for other resources in this location was not recorded in the case information. At the beginning of this study, holding all inputs constant there was no information included in the study regarding whether or not rent dissipation occurred with fewer appropriator teams and/or equipment. At the end of this study, holding all inputs constant there was no information included in the study regarding whether or not rent dissipation occurred with fewer appropriator teams and/or equipment. At the beginning of this period the appropriators shared low levels of mutual trust (e.g. oral promises rarely used) (ambiguous). At the end of the period the appropriators shared moderate to high levels of mutual trust (e.g. oral promises given high credence) (inferred). ## Unknown markup: Start ##By the end of this period no change had occurred in the property rights regime related to the appropriation resource (highly confident). At the end of this period the owners were exercising, or attempting to exercise, de jure and effective closed access to this resource (inferred). At the end of the period the appropriators were exercising, or attempting to exercise, de facto closed access to this resource (confident).
INFORMATION LEVELS
There is no information in the study to indicate the availability of maps or charts of the appropration resource for use by the appropriators. Maps and/or charts of the production and distribution resources are not documented as being available, or unavailable in this case study. The appropriators of this resource can be seen by each other while withdrawing and delivering units (educated guess). No documentation was included in the study regarding whether or not the appropriators of this resource are in radio communication with each other while appropriating from the resource. There was no information provided to indicate whether or not there are actions being taken, by appropriators or officials, to generate information about the condition of the resource. There are always records of the withdrawals from this resource kept in a systematic way (inferred). There was no information in the study about whether or not there are records of the physical factors which directly affected the resource kept in a systematic way. There was no information in the study about whether or not there are records of the appropriators' contributions to monitoring of the resource kept in a systematic way. Records are kept in a language accessible to most of the appropriators (inferred). The keepers of these records are officials at some level (inferred). The case study did not indicate whether or not these records are available for inspection by appropriators. The study did not indicate whether or not there are arenas being used for the exchange of information about conditions of the resource. The appropriators have an intimate knowledge of the characteristics of this resource (highly confident).
POTENTIAL ACTIONS AND LEVELS OF CONTROL
The quality or quantity of the units available to the appropriators are adversely affected by the strategies of prior appropriators (inferred). This study did not include information on whether or not there are problems of pollution resulting from activities of others who are not appropriators of this resource or inhabitants of this location (e.g. acid rain, sewage disposal). The number of markets in which this resource is sold was not included in the case study. The study does not indicate whether or not there was an insurance mechanism available to the appropriators related to variability of income from the resource.
PATTERNS OF INTERACTION
Differences between subgroups relating to gender identification does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to ethnic identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to clan identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to racial identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to religious identification are not included in the case study. Differences between subgroups relating to languages spoken does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to general cultural views of the resource system and its use does not exist (highly confident). Differences between subgroups relating to any problems that affect communication are not included in the case study.
The general manner in which appropriators related to one another during this study is a relatively positive, reciprocal manner -- the presumption was made that long-term relationships are involved and positive actions are undertaken without a specific expectation of return (educated guess).
POSITIONS AND PARTICIPANTS
At the end of the period studied the position of non-appropriator (individuals prevented from using the resource) did not exist (inferred). At the beginning of the period there was a general estimate of some undocumented number appropriators. There was a general estimate of 101-200 appropriators at the end of the period (confident). A general estimate of the number of participants in the team appropriation process was not included in the case study, at the beginning of the period. A general estimate of the number of participants in the team appropriation process was 51-100, at the end of the period (inferred). The "official" position of monitor (apart from the willingness of all appropriators to monitor) is not described in detail in this case study.
The case study did not include information regarding whether or not the appropriators monitor the appropriation activities of each other apart from the monitoring of any "official" guards.
NUMBER AND RELATIONSHIPS AMONG SUBGROUPS
There will be 2 subgroup form(s) completed in relation to this operational level form. The ID number(s) of the subgroup(s) coded are as follows: 103.1 - 104.1 - -2 - -2
Subgroups 103.1 and 104.1 differ in legal rights to appropriate units and in withdrawal rates from the resource.
Subgroups 103.1 and 104.1 do not differ in exposure to variations in supply, in levels of dependency on the units withdrawn from this resource, and in the way they use the appropriation units.
EVALUATION OF RESULTS
The study did not indicate whether or not there are appropriators who were consistently disadvantaged in this period. The study did not indicate whether or not the relatively worst off appropriators have or have not been cut out of their benefits from this resource or substantially harmed.
AUTHOR'S EVALUATION AND CAUSAL ASSUMPTIONS
In this coding form the author does not focus on the readers' concept of results and the evaluation of results.
The author discusses withdrawals per unit of effort based on -1
SUBGROUP:
Participants:
This appropriation group are the men who fish using traps. The criteria for who is a member is well defined (highly confident). . This group ended with a membership of 54 (inferred).
The following statements characterize the composition of this subgroup's population with respect to variables that may affect the capacity to communicate effectively:
Gender identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). There is no difference in composition with regard to languages spoken (highly confident). The language spoken by most members of the subgroup is English.
The appropriation process is organized as a team process consisting of 18 groups.
Legal Rights:
Members of this subgroup have de jure rights of access (inferred). The right to withdraw is held by this subgroup de jure (inferred). Rights to participate in management of this resource is held de jure (inferred). Exclusion from use of the entire resource is exercised de facto (inferred). Members of this subgroup have de jure rights to decide who can be excluded from particular zones within the resource. (highly confident).
Stakes and Resources:
The length of time this subgroup has regularly appropriated from this resource is 51 through 75 years (educated guess). Around 91%-100% of members reside in or adjacent to this resource (educated guess). Most people in this subgroup are very dependent (i.e. most of the family income) on this resource (inferred). Around 91%-100% of this subgroup work a substantial amount of time in activities not associated with appropriation from this resource (educated guess). Capital is owned by 91%-100% of this subgroup (confident).
Potential Actions and Levels of Control:
Considering that there are multiple subgroups using this resource, most of the appropriators withdraw units after all other subgroups have withdrawn (i.e. tailenders) (inferred). A noticeable impact on the balance of the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available in this resource would occur in a drastic reduction of this subgroup's appropriation activities (inferred). Keeping in mind the physically available levels of withdrawal that are possible from this resource, the following shows the extent to which rules concerning different aspects of withdrawal constrain appropriation: technological rules moderately constrain (educated guess), time limit rules cause unknown contraints, quantity rules cause unknown contraints, marginal units, or units obtained by increasing levels of appropriation, cause unknown contraints.
Technology:
Strategies Adopted:
During this time period members have not invested resources, such as their own labor, in maintaining or improving the structure of the appropriation resource (educated guess). Investment into constructing or improving production or distribution works for maintaining or improving their resource has not been made by members (educated guess). Members do not have access to an alternative source of supply (educated guess).
Subgroup Results:
This subgroup appropriates 26%-50% of its total appropriated units at the end of this period (educated guess).
SUBGROUP:
Participants:
This appropriation group are the men who fish using handlines The criteria for who is a member is well defined (highly confident). . This group ended with a membership of 104 (confident).
The following statements characterize the composition of this subgroup's population with respect to variables that may affect the capacity to communicate effectively:
Gender identification causes no difference in composition (highly confident). There is no difference in composition with regard to languages spoken (highly confident). The language spoken by most members of the subgroup is English.
The appropriation process is organized as a team process consisting of 52 groups.
Legal Rights:
Members of this subgroup have de jure rights of access (inferred). The right to withdraw is held by this subgroup de jure (inferred). Rights to participate in management of this resource is held de facto (inferred). Exclusion from use of the entire resource is exercised de facto (inferred). Members of this subgroup have de facto rights to decide who can be excluded from particular zones within the resource. (inferred).
Stakes and Resources:
The length of time this subgroup has regularly appropriated from this resource is 51 through 75 years (educated guess). Around 91%-100% of members reside in or adjacent to this resource (educated guess). Most people in this subgroup are very dependent (i.e. most of the family income) on this resource (inferred). Around 91%-100% of this subgroup work a substantial amount of time in activities not associated with appropriation from this resource (educated guess). Capital is owned by 91%-100% of this subgroup (confident).
Potential Actions and Levels of Control:
Considering that there are multiple subgroups using this resource, most of the appropriators withdraw units after one or more other subgroups have withdrawn (educated guess). A noticeable impact on the balance of the quantity of units withdrawn and the number of units available in this resource would occur in a drastic reduction of this subgroup's appropriation activities (inferred). Keeping in mind the physically available levels of withdrawal that are possible from this resource, the following shows the extent to which rules concerning different aspects of withdrawal constrain appropriation: technological rules heavily constrain (inferred), time limit rules cause unknown contraints, quantity rules cause unknown contraints, marginal units, or units obtained by increasing levels of appropriation, cause unknown contraints.
Technology:
Strategies Adopted:
During this time period members have not invested resources, such as their own labor, in maintaining or improving the structure of the appropriation resource (educated guess). Investment into constructing or improving production or distribution works for maintaining or improving their resource has not been made by members (educated guess). Members do not have access to an alternative source of supply (educated guess).
Subgroup Results:
This subgroup appropriates 51%-75% of its total appropriated units at the end of this period (educated guess).
RESOURCE:
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
OPERATIONAL RULES:
Concerning national collective choice relating to the resource, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by national collective choice mechanism. Concerning regional collective choice, the author provides a few detailed references to operational level rules as devised by regional collective choice mechanism which have been coded below..
With regard to local collective choice, a level of government or organization of appropriators exists at the location and the author provides a few detailed references about operational level rules as devised by collective choice mechanisms which have been coded below.
Boundary Rules
The following rules define the requirements that must be met before individuals are eligible to harvest or withdraw units from the appropriation resource.
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a country. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a major subdivision of a country. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship or residence of a local community. This rule is enforced at the local and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring an appropriator to be of a certain gender. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring use of a particular technology. This rule is enforced at the local and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring registration on an eligibility list. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring the obtaining of access right through a lottery. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
Authority and Scope Rules
The default conditions for both authority and scope rules do not apply.
The following paragraphs include information on rules of 1 cycle(s).
Authority Rules:
There is a rule requiring withdrawal at specific locations or spots, based on periodic lottery. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
There is a rule forbidding withdrawal whenever and wherever desired, based on periodic lottery. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
There is a rule requiring withdrawal units of a certain minimum size, set annually/periodically by an external public official. This rule is enforced at the regional level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
The authority and scope rules may or may not assign substantially unequal privileges to certain subgroups, this information was not included in the study.
Scope Rules:
Information Rules
There exists a rule requiring recording of the number of units withdrawn. This rule is enforced at the regional level(s).
This information was recorded by a private enterprise.
Payoff Rules
The following percentages indicate the percentages assigned to individual positions. If more than one percentage is listed per position, the individual percentages refer to the different arrangements existing within the operational rules.
Aggregation Rules
Overall Questions About Rules Configuration
The general framework of the rules-in-use has governed the activities of this subgroup for 26 to 50 years.
OPERATIONAL RULES:
Concerning national collective choice relating to the resource, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by national collective choice mechanism. Concerning regional collective choice, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by regional collective choice mechanisms, however a regional level of government does exist.
With regard to local collective choice, a level of government or organization of appropriators exists at the location but the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by collective choice mechanisms.
Boundary Rules
The following rules define the requirements that must be met before individuals are eligible to harvest or withdraw units from the appropriation resource.
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a country. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a major subdivision of a country. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship or residence of a local community. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring use of a particular technology. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
Authority and Scope Rules
The default conditions for both authority and scope rules do not apply.
The following paragraphs include information on rules of 1 cycle(s).
Authority Rules:
There is a rule requiring withdrawal at specific locations or spots, based on unspecific criteria. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
There is a rule forbidding withdrawal whenever and wherever desired, based on unspecific criteria. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
The authority and scope rules may or may not assign substantially unequal privileges to certain subgroups, this information was not included in the study.
Scope Rules:
Information Rules
Payoff Rules
The following percentages indicate the percentages assigned to individual positions. If more than one percentage is listed per position, the individual percentages refer to the different arrangements existing within the operational rules.
Aggregation Rules
Overall Questions About Rules Configuration
The resource appropriated from Petty Harbour Cod Fishery is cod. The resource includes Motion Bay and the coastal areas extending from the Bay, in the west to Long Point and in the northeast to North Head, extending out away from the coast to 50 fathoms.
OPERATIONAL RULES:
Concerning national collective choice relating to the resource, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by national collective choice mechanism. Concerning regional collective choice, the author provides a few detailed references to operational level rules as devised by regional collective choice mechanism which have been coded below..
With regard to local collective choice, a level of government or organization of appropriators exists at the location and the author provides a few detailed references about operational level rules as devised by collective choice mechanisms which have been coded below.
Boundary Rules
The following rules define the requirements that must be met before individuals are eligible to harvest or withdraw units from the appropriation resource.
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a country. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a major subdivision of a country. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship or residence of a local community. This rule is enforced at the local and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring an appropriator to be of a certain gender. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring use of a particular technology. This rule is enforced at the local and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring registration on an eligibility list. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring the obtaining of access right through a lottery. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s).
Authority and Scope Rules
The default conditions for both authority and scope rules do not apply.
The following paragraphs include information on rules of 1 cycle(s).
Authority Rules:
There is a rule requiring withdrawal at specific locations or spots, based on periodic lottery. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
There is a rule forbidding withdrawal whenever and wherever desired, based on periodic lottery. This rule is enforced at the regional, local, and rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
There is a rule requiring withdrawal units of a certain minimum size, set annually/periodically by an external public official. This rule is enforced at the regional level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
The authority and scope rules may or may not assign substantially unequal privileges to certain subgroups, this information was not included in the study.
Scope Rules:
Information Rules
There exists a rule requiring recording of the number of units withdrawn. This rule is enforced at the regional level(s).
This information was recorded by a private enterprise.
Payoff Rules
The following percentages indicate the percentages assigned to individual positions. If more than one percentage is listed per position, the individual percentages refer to the different arrangements existing within the operational rules.
Aggregation Rules
Overall Questions About Rules Configuration
The general framework of the rules-in-use has governed the activities of this subgroup for 26 to 50 years.
OPERATIONAL RULES:
Concerning national collective choice relating to the resource, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by national collective choice mechanism. Concerning regional collective choice, the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by regional collective choice mechanisms, however a regional level of government does exist.
With regard to local collective choice, a level of government or organization of appropriators exists at the location but the author provides NO information about operational level rules as devised by collective choice mechanisms.
Boundary Rules
The following rules define the requirements that must be met before individuals are eligible to harvest or withdraw units from the appropriation resource.
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a country. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship of a major subdivision of a country. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring citizenship or residence of a local community. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
A rule exists requiring use of a particular technology. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s).
Authority and Scope Rules
The default conditions for both authority and scope rules do not apply.
The following paragraphs include information on rules of 1 cycle(s).
Authority Rules:
There is a rule requiring withdrawal at specific locations or spots, based on unspecific criteria. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
There is a rule forbidding withdrawal whenever and wherever desired, based on unspecific criteria. This rule is enforced at the rules-in-use level(s), and is part of the most restrictive, regularly adopted/used set of rules.
The authority and scope rules may or may not assign substantially unequal privileges to certain subgroups, this information was not included in the study.
Scope Rules:
Information Rules
Payoff Rules
The following percentages indicate the percentages assigned to individual positions. If more than one percentage is listed per position, the individual percentages refer to the different arrangements existing within the operational rules.
Aggregation Rules
Overall Questions About Rules Configuration
Schlager E, University of Arizona.
Brady U, Arizona State University.
. 1973. Environmental Perception in Two Local Fisheries: A Case Study from Eastern Newfoundland. Memorial University of Newfoundland. PhD