Rev Fish Biol Fisheries https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-023-09806-2 REVIEWS A synthesis of women’s participation in small‑scale fisheries management: why women’s voices matter Mouna Chambon · Sara Miñarro · Santiago Alvarez Fernandez · Vincent Porcher · Victoria Reyes‑Garcia · Huran Tonalli Drouet · Patrizia Ziveri Received: 31 March 2023 / Accepted: 20 September 2023 © The Author(s) 2023 Abstract While women globally make up nearly various positive impacts at multiple scales. Most of half of the fisheries workforce, their contribution to the documented impacts were socio-cultural, sug- the sector has long been overlooked with implications gesting a gap in documenting environmental impacts for fisheries management. To assess women’s partici- stemmed from women’s participation in SSF manage- pation in small-scale fisheries (SSF) management and ment. Importantly, most impacts reported affected the related socio-cultural, environmental, and economic social-ecological system scale, suggesting that gender impacts, we conducted a systematic review of peer- inclusion may contribute to improving the manage- reviewed literature (n = 124 case studies). Women ment of SSF social-ecological systems. We conclude had no or limited participation in more than 80% of by highlighting the need to foster gender perspectives the examined case studies reporting their participa- in data collection methods used in fisheries research, tion level in SSF management. Women’s exclusion in SSF management, and in ecological research on from SSF management resulted in negative outcomes, SSF social-ecological systems. whereas their active participation was associated with Keywords Artisanal fisheries · Fisheries Supplementary Information The online version management · Gender · Inland fisheries · Ocean contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​ sustainability · Women org/​10.​1007/​s11160-​023-​09806-2. M. Chambon (*) · S. Miñarro · S. Alvarez Fernandez · V. Reyes‑Garcia V. Porcher · V. Reyes‑Garcia · P. Ziveri Department d’Antropologia Social I Cultural, Universitat Institute of Environmental Science and Technology, Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Barcelona, Bellaterra, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, (ICTA-UAB), Spain 08193 Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain e-mail: Mouna.Chambon@uab.cat H. Tonalli Drouet Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt V. Porcher 50, 1050 Brussels, Belgium Institut de Recherche Pour Le Développement (IRD) & Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche P. Ziveri Agronomique Pour Le Développement (Cirad), Department de Biologia Animal, Biologia Vegetal Unité Mixte de Recherche “Savoirs Environnement I Ecologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Sociétés”(SENS), Montpellier, France 08193 Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain V. Reyes‑Garcia · P. Ziveri Institució Catalana de Recerca I Estudis Avançats (ICREA), 08010 Barcelona, Spain Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Introduction other studies with the same approach have looked at women’s caring activities for communities and house- Despite the entrenched view that fishing is a male holds, which are also essential for the maintenance domain (Lentisco & Lee 2015), women actually make of fishing activities (dela Pena & Marte 2001; Sotto up 47% of the fisheries workforce worldwide (FAO et al. 2001). More than other activities, women’s care- 2016). Women’s contribution to small-scale fisheries work, although critical for sustaining SSF activities, (SSF), also called subsistence or artisanal fisheries, is often informal, unpaid, and overlooked (Williams is particularly important given that this sector repre- 2019). sents a key source of protein for millions of people More recently, the “gender and fisheries” (GAF) globally, especially in coastal communities (Österb- perspective has emerged as a new approach to doc- lom et al. 2020). Although women engage in different ument the importance of gender –defined as the parts of the SSF value chain, their participation in the socially constructed attributes associated with what is sector has long been invisible, ignored, and unrecog- to be a female or male in various socio-cultural con- nized (Harper et al. 2013; WSI 2020), partly due to texts- in SSF value chains (Bennett 2005; Williams narrow definitions of fishers, which exclude women’s et al. 2002). In that sense, GAF research has explored fishing activities, and partly due to gender-biased topics ranging from intersectionality in SSF to femi- sampling methods (Kleiber et al. 2015). In El Salva- nist fisheries political economy (Williams 2019). As dor, for instance, fishers are defined as people captur- it has become increasingly recognized that women ing fish in the open sea using boats and nets. Since engage in every step of the SSF value chain, GAF Salvadorian fisherwomen seldomly use a boat to fish, research has stressed the need for gender perspectives their contribution to the SSF economy remains unre- in SSF management processes (Williams 2010). ported in national fishery statistics (Gammage 2004). Fisheries management refers to the complex This definition focusing on the capture node of the and continuous process aiming at using fisher- SSF value chain also makes invisible Salvadorian ies resources sustainably through different stages, women’s work in pre- and post- production activi- from setting management plans and objectives to ties. Data collection methods in fisheries research the implementation of required actions (Berkes et al. may also lead to the under-representation of the num- 2001; FAO, 1997). Scholars distinguish three main ber of women engaging in fisheries activities. This approaches to SSF management depending on the is the case for example of survey methods targeting participation level of resource users: top-down pro- household heads, which may favour male over female cesses, defined by a distant central government with respondents (Kleiber et al. 2015). no or little participation of local communities; com- Against this background, over the last 30 years, munity-led management, or approaches in which all some scholars have strived to give visibility to wom- resource users are directly and fully participating in en’s involvement in SSF. This trend started with the natural resource management; and co-management, “women in fisheries” (WIF) approach, which focused characterized by a shared authority between the on women’s multiple contributions to the SSF sector community and the central government for manag- (Williams et al. 2002). This research field shed light ing fishery resources (Twyman 2017). While there on the various roles played by women all along the are various definitions of participation, in this study SSF value chain, from pre- to post-production. WIF we adopt the one proposed by Agarwal (2001) who studies highlighted how women take part in time- broadly defines participation as “a dynamic interac- consuming pre-production tasks such as repairing tive process in which the disadvantaged have voice nets (Browne 2002; Sotto et al. 2001) as well as in and influence in decision-making” (Pag:1624). Some direct fish capture activities, including the case of scholars have criticized such concept suggesting that fisherwomen using scoop nets and traps in Malay- participatory approaches are more likely to reinforce sia (Yahaya 2001), or boats to harvest small sardines existing social inequalities instead of shifting power (“dagaa”) in the Tanzanian side of Lake Victoria relationships (Cooke & Kothari 2001; Stone & Nyau- (Tungaraza 1986). Several scholars also documented pane 2014). Conversely, a wide range of empirical women’s involvement in post-production activities studies have documented the benefits of participation (Ahmed et al. 2001; Siason et al. 2001). Finally, some for conservation outcomes and equity (Gilmour 2016; Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Akhtaruzzaman et al. 2023). In the SSF sector, local management and governance (Galappaththi et al. communities’ participation in fisheries management 2022; Lentisco & Lee 2015). Some scholars have has increasingly been promoted by institutions (FAO also explored the impacts related to the participa- 2015) and researchers (Cohen & Steenbergen 2015; tion of women in such arenas. Yet, the few studies Jentoft 2005; Jupiter et al. 2014), gradually shifting on the topic have used a limited sample size for the the debate from a focus on the participatory approach SSF sector (Galappaththi et al. 2022; Lentisco & itself to its implementation on the ground (Berkes & Lee 2015) or did not find sufficient evidence to be Nayak 2018). extrapolated at the global level (Leisher et al. 2016, In this context, a growing body of literature has 2017). To the best of our knowledge, no studies sys- emphasized the need to increase women’s participa- tematically assessed the extent of women’s partici- tion in fisheries management both for intrinsic (i.e., pation in SSF management and related impacts at for its own sake) and instrumental motivations (i.e., a global scale and using a large sample size. This as a mean to achieve specific outcomes) which, gap is surprising, as researchers have documented in turns, influences the ways that gender equity is impacts associated to the engagement of women in assessed in practice (Lawless et al. 2021). On the one other sectors including ecological restoration (Broe- hand, achieving gender equity in SSF management ckhoven & Cliquet 2015), forestry conservation is seen as desirable for fairness and justice princi- (Agarwal 2009), and environmental management ples, to guarantee that both women and men have the (de la Torre-Castro 2019). Addressing this research same rights and opportunities (FAO 2016). On the gap is not only necessary for intrinsic reasons, from other hand, women’s participation in SSF manage- a human rights perspective, but also to favour effec- ment has also been promoted as a mean to prevent tiveness in the sustainable use of fisheries resources socio-environmental pitfalls (Kleiber et al. 2013; in line with the FAO’s SSF guidelines (2015), the Rohe et al. 2018). In particular, previous studies have Convention on Biological Diversity’s Global Biodi- documented how failing to incorporate gender con- versity Framework (target n°23) and the Sustainable siderations in SSF management may lead to an over- Development Goals Indicators framework (SDG n° all under-evaluation of the actual fishing effort and 5 and 14 in particular). catches (Mills et al. 2011), biased understandings of To address this knowledge gap, our work reviews coastal social-ecological systems (de la Torre-Castro documented impacts associated to strengthening 2019; Kleiber et al. 2015) or negative social impacts women’s participation in SSF management and (Weeratunge et al. 2010; Williams 2010). decision-making. The originality of our review is Facing these concerns, international agencies to provide the first global quantitative assessment (e.g., FAO 2017) and researchers (e.g., de la Torre- of women’s participation level in SSF management Castro 2019; Koralagama et al. 2017) have called and related socio-cultural, environmental, and eco- for the adoption of inclusive management pro- nomic impacts. We acknowledge the heterogene- cesses, including all resource-users, regardless of ity and diversity that exists amongst women and, their gender, and recognizing their knowledge, per- more broadly, people of diverse gender identities spectives, and needs in fisheries management (de la in consideration with intersectional aspects (Kenny Torre-Castro 2019; Nessa et al. 2020; Resurreccion & Tapu-Qiliho 2022). However, for the purpose of 2006). On the institutional front, the FAO created our review, we chose to focus on women as a group in 2017 a dedicated handbook on gender equity in of study since much of the literature on gender and SSF as an extension of the SSF Guidelines (FAO fisheries applies a binary view and tends to empha- 2015) to specifically address SSF challenges while size women’s roles within the sector as different improving gender equity in SSF management. In from men’s roles (House et al. 2023). Specifically, academia, research on the topic has significantly we ask the four following questions to the existing grown over the past decade (Galappaththi et al. peer-reviewed literature: 2022) particularly focusing on women’s tasks in SSF governance (Galappaththi et al. 2022) and bar- 1) What is the extent of women’s participation in riers and enablers for women’s participation in SSF SSF management? Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 2) What are the socio-cultural, environmental, and small-scale fisher, Thomson 1980) referring to SSF. economic impacts associated to women’s partici- We adjusted these search terms to include glean- pation -or lack thereof- in SSF management? ing activities which are often female-dominated (de 3) How does the direction of these impacts (i.e., la Torre-Castro 2019) and added key words related positive, negative) vary depending on women’s to gender and management. The search string used participation level in SSF management? was TOPIC: “small-scale fish*” OR “local fish*” OR 4) At what scale are these impacts unfolding (i.e., “traditional fish*” OR “artisanal fish*” OR “subsist- individual, community, SES (socio-ecological ence fish*” OR “glean* “AND TOPIC: “gender*” OR system))? “women* “AND TOPIC: “Management” WITHOUT TOPIC: “sex ratio”. We used asterisks to broaden the scope of the search outputs. Our search did not Methods include any geographical restriction and included both inland and marine fisheries. The search resulted Publication selection in a total of 444 entries (WoS = 241; Scopus = 203), from which we removed 141 duplicates to screen a We built on the methodological principles of the total of 303 publications (Fig. 1). systematic literature review (Haddaway et al. 2015) For a publication to be reviewed, it had to meet to synthesize the existing evidence on women’s par- four inclusion criteria: (i) use primary data, (ii) have ticipation in SSF management and related impacts an explicit SSF context, (iii) explicitly mention the in peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, and term fisheries management in the body of the arti- conference papers. To assess the literature, we per- cle (either to describe management processes and formed a topical search (in title, abstract, and key- activities in the local SSF context, or to provide fur- words) in two databases: Web of Science (WoS) ther recommendations) and (iv) include information Core Collection and Scopus. We conducted an ini- on women’s participation in at least one stage of the tial search in June 2021 and updated it in June 2022. SSF value chain (i.e., pre-production, production, To select our search terms, we drew on Smith and post-production, care-work) and/or management tasks Basurto’s (2019) review which defines specific key- and activities (e.g., monitoring, administration). We words for SSF that cover both current (e.g., artisanal chose these inclusion criteria to capture women’s par- fisher, Aburto et al. 2021) and historical terms (e.g., ticipation in SSF management in its broadest sense, Fig. 1  Flow chart present- ing the selection of docu- ments Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries recognizing the complexity, diversity and tangled half of the publications to read and code. In a sec- nature of the SSF sector (Smith and Basurto 2019). ond stage, the lead author checked the quality of data Decisions on inclusion were taken during the screen- entry and verified the uniqueness of each publication ing process which followed two stages. First, two cod- to avoid double counting those based on the same ers simultaneously screened the titles and abstracts case study. Some publications reported information considering the inclusion criteria. Second, the lead from more than one case study. In these cases, we author performed the full-text screening for all pub- collected information separately for each case study, lications that passed the first selection stage. In total, resulting in a total sample size of 124 case studies we identified 103 peer-reviewed publications detail- (Fig. 2). ing women’s participation in SSF management and For each publication, we recorded verbatim related impacts. The list of publications included and statements from selected publications referring to the justification for document’s exclusion is presented women’s participation in SSF management. We in the supplementary material (Online Resources 1 & then classified women’s participation levels in SSF 2). management. To do so, we simplified Agarwal’s typology (2001) of women’s participation in natu- Data collection and coding ral resource management by using three main level categories: excluded, limited participation, and We collected data from the selected publications and active (Online Resource 4). Then, we examined the coded information regarding women’s participation in reported impacts of women’s participation in SSF SSF management and related impacts, defined here as management by categorizing the reported impacts outcomes affecting the socio-cultural, environmen- as socio-cultural, environmental, or economic. tal, or economic dimension of individuals, commu- Within this broad division, we created 18 subcat- nities, or SES (Online Resource 3). Two coders read egories of impacts using an inductive qualitative the publications and coded the information following content analysis. To design these subcategories, a two-step process. First, each coder was allocated we read through the verbatim statement of impacts Fig. 2  Geographical location of the 124 case studies, per fisheries type. The map was built under QGIS 3.22.7, using bathymetric data from General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (gebco.net) Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries extracted from the publications and applied in vivo descriptive statistics to count the frequency distri- coding to identify emerging types. This qualita- bution of each reported impact unfolding either at tive method is useful for coding data with a strong the SES, community or individual scales and com- emphasis on literatim statements (Manning 2017). bined this analysis with quotations. In addition, we reported the direction of each impact using the same extracted verbatim state- ments and based on how the impact was framed by Results the author, either as a positive or negative impact. Finally, we differentiated between three scales Women’s participation in SSF management for each impact: the entire SES, the community -including households-, and the individual scales. Among the 124 case studies documented, 75 (60%) provided information on women’s participation in SSF management. The other case studies did not give Data analysis details specific enough to categorize women’s par- ticipation. In these cases, the authors often provided To assess the extent of women’s participation insufficient information on gendered differences in in SSF management (RQ1) and explore related relation to SSF management or did not mention wom- impacts (RQ2), we used descriptive statistics. en’s role in these processes. Furthermore, we found Specifically, we counted the frequency of each geographical variations in gender-data provided in the reported women’s participation level in SSF man- reviewed literature. While most case studies were in agement as excluded, limited participation, and Africa (n = 36), Oceania (n = 23) and Asia (n = 22), active. Likewise, we ordered the different catego- we found that only about 50% of the cases in Africa ries of impacts (i.e., socio-cultural, environmen- and Asia reported on women’s participation level in tal, and economic) by frequency count. Where SSF management. Conversely, although we recorded relevant, we illustrated quantitative results with fewer studies in Europe (n = 6), all of them provided quotes from the documents examined. To examine this information. the relation between women’s participation level Within the subsample of studies detailing wom- in SSF management and impact direction (RQ3), en’s participation level in SSF management, more we first distinguished between impacts related to than 80% of the case studies reported either women’s either the exclusion or participation (i.e., limited; limited participation or exclusion from SSF manage- active) of women in SSF management, as well as ment. In most cases, women had limited participation their direction (i.e., positive or negative). Then, in SSF management (n = 39), with the documents taking the case study as unit of analysis, we used typically signalling that women attended management the Pearson’s Chi-squared test (Pearson 1900) meetings but did not have full opportunities to speak with Yates’ continuity correction to statistically up and influence the outcome. This situation is illus- assess the relationship between women’s partici- trated by Singleton’s et al. (2019) study on SSF com- pation level and impact direction. To provide a munities in Southwest Madagascar: “Whilst women visual representation of this relationship, we used may attend meetings, few voice opinions at them, and a non − metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) few are confident that they have influence (…)” (p. 8). as a rank-based approach that spatially displays Common barriers that hampered women to actively the distance between objects in a low-dimensional participate in SSF management processes included space. This method can be used both with qualita- cultural norms and gender stereotypes that contrib- tive and quantitative variables (Kruskal 1964). All ute to undervalue women’s opinions in meetings and statistical analyses were performed with R Statis- alter their confidence. For instance, women’s limited tical Software (v4.2.1; R Core Team 2021) using participation, as reported by Singleton et al. (2019), the vegan package (Oksanen et al. 2022). We con- was directly associated to their sense of inferiority sidered that a difference was statistically significant regarding old Malagasy men who also attended SSF when p-values were below 0.05. Finally, to assess management meetings in their communities: “In fol- the scale of the reported impacts (RQ4), we used low-up focus groups, women stated (…) their opinion Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries is not respected in the presence of ‘nahodas’ (older derived from either women’s participation (n = 121) men)” (p. 8). or exclusion (n = 69) in SSF management. We docu- Nearly a third of the examined cases with infor- mented impacts considering 18 different categories as mation on women’s participation in SSF manage- presented in Table 1. ment (n = 22) reported the exclusion of women from Most reported impacts of women’s participation in management processes. In those cases, women were SSF management were socio-cultural (n = 153). The not joining SSF management meetings, nor other most frequently reported impact was change in the related tasks or events, either owing to formal exclu- impact of management decisions on women (n = 28), sion -such as not being a member of the local SSF referring to cases where the management measures management body- or to informal social barriers. For taken had unintended social consequences on wom- example, Cele (2020) describes how female mussel en’s lives. In most reviewed cases (93%), this impact collectors in poor black communities in coastal South was associated to women’s exclusion from SSF man- Africa face formal gender barriers to access to SSF agement processes rather than their participation management activities: “(…) even when State depart- (Fig. 3). For instance, women in the Solomon Island ments such as DAFF [Department of Agriculture, were excluded from a discussion on the designation of Forestry and Fisheries], and Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife a marine closure, which had a negative social impact engage with community-based fishing organisations, on their daily life: “Women were more constrained in they do not invite women mussel harvesters to these their fishing activities because a marine closure was meetings. Such tendencies deprive women of access located where mainly women used to fish” (Rohe to pertinent harvesting information, and training, and et al. 2018, p. 155). Another very common socio- further perpetuate gender divisions in the industry” cultural impact was change in the recognition of gen- (p. 145). Entrenched gender inequalities can also dered ecological knowledge (n = 20). This impact prevent women to join these activities, even if their was predominantly associated to cases where women formal access is guaranteed. In particular, domestic participated in SSF management (limited or active duties and childcare were reported as a major con- participation). In those cases, women’s participation straint for women as SSF management meetings often in management processes allowed to express specific happen in the evening, thus overlapping with wom- gendered local knowledge that helped management en’s house chores and excluding them de facto from operations such as determining salmon stocks (Lavoie these events (Gustavsson et al. 2021; Santos 2015; et al. 2019), generating a map on fisheries resources Torell et al. 2021). (Paul et al. 2016), or assessing SES vulnerability in By contrast, only 14 case studies documented coastal communities (Tilley et al. 2021). The third women’s active participation in SSF management. most cited impact was change in the diversity of per- This is, for example, the story of the CoopeTarcoles spectives for SSF management (n = 17). Women’s R.L SSF cooperative in Costa Rica: “Slowly, Coope- participation in SSF management was associated to Tárcoles R.L has been expanding beliefs on the role new viewpoints and skills that broadened the scope of of women, promoting the fact women can and do reflection for management processes. As an illustra- play an active role and contribute on a daily basis to tion, women’s participation in leadership positions in the community’s economic, social, and cultural life. the Chile’s Biobio region led to the development of a Women have been accepted in the cooperative and co-management programme owing to their organiza- have taken active roles in the Administrative Council” tional and managerial skills (Franco-Melendez et al. (Rivera et al. 2017, p.13). 2021). Women’s level of participation in SSF manage- Typology of impacts related to women’s participation ment had a much lower number of reported envi- in SSF management ronmental (n = 21) and economic impacts (n = 16). The most common environmental impact associ- Among the 124 selected case studies, 98 (about ated to women’s participation in SSF management 80%) reported impacts related to women’s participa- was change in human pressure on local ecosystems tion in SSF management. We recorded a total of 190 (n = 13), whereas the predominant economic impact socio-cultural, environmental, and economic impacts was change in community income (n = 9). Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Table 1  Reported socio-cultural, environmental, and economic impacts related to women’s participation- or lack of – in SSF management processes Scale Category Subcategory Example Corresponding quote & reference 13 Vol:. (1234567890) Social- Socio-cultural Change in the understanding of the gender Gendered perspectives in SSF management “The study results also confirmed our hypothesis ecological dynamics within the S ­ SFa ­SESb (Comprehen- in Brazilian Amazonia highlight differences that differences between fishermen and fisher- system siveness) between fishermen and fisherwomen’s prac- women in species composition of catches were tices, hence providing a comprehensive view influenced by the types of gear used and fishing for fish stock assessments sites explored.” (Zacarkim et al. 2015, p. 415) Change in the impact of management decisions Women’s exclusion from the designation “Women were more constrained in their fish- on women process of a marine closure in the Solomon ing activities because a marine closure was (Gendered management impact) Islands has negative social consequences on located where mainly women used to fish. Our their daily lives study highlights the importance of paying attention to women’s needs and actions in the governance of the fishery.” (Rohe et al. 2018, p.155) Change in the recognition of gendered ecologi- The deep-rooted knowledge of fisherwomen “The experience and knowledge of these women cal knowledge on salmon distribution and abundance can can inform fishery managers of various aspects (Gendered ecological knowledge) guide the management of salmon fisheries in of environmental change. For example, their Alaska knowledge of change in salmon distribution and abundance over the years, can be used to triangulate data used by managers for decision making regarding the resource.” (Lavoie et al. 2019, p.336) Change in the compliance to management The engagement of women’s and men’s groups “Regardless of legislation or enforcement, the measures contribute to fostering local support and responsible management of marine resources (Compliance) acceptance to a fishery management plan in will only be achieved when fishing communi- Samoa ties themselves see it as their responsibility. Accordingly, the strategy focused on mobilizing each community through direct contact with key village groups. These included women’s groups and untitled men’s groups to ensure the widest community participation and eventual ownership of the village fisheries.” (King & Faasili 1999, p.2) Change in the diversity of perspectives for SSF Women’s participation in SSF management “Some of them [fishermen] mentioned that management leadership positions brings new views and women’s management skills when assuming a (Diverse perspectives) skills that favour the development of co- leadership position was favored: “In a short management in the Chile’s Biobio region time, she has gotten two projects that never happened before... women have another way of thinking (fisherman member #9).” (Franco- Melendez et al. 2021, p.14) Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Table 1  (continued) Scale Category Subcategory Example Corresponding quote & reference Environmental Change in the long-term use of fisheries The participation of Galician women in the “Some interviewees highlighted the particular resources (Sustainable management) management of shellfish in Spain allows to management logic of the shell fisherwomen, in sustain shellfish resources over the long term which they take a systemic view of resource Management.” (Fadigas 2017, p.565) Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Change in human pressure on local ecosystems The exclusion of Fijian fisherwomen from fish- “As many more women enter commercial mar- (Ecological pressure) eries management decisions raises concerns kets, there is a growing concern that women about the risk of increasing ecological pres- may be harvesting and selling undersized sure on coastal resources juvenile fish from these habitats, affecting the sustainability of some of the common fisher- ies.” (Thomas et al. 2021, p.7) Community Socio-cultural Change in food security (Food security) The important role of fisherwomen for provid- “This suggests that women’s involvement in ing fresh fish to their households has implica- small-scale reef fisheries, while not necessar- tions for fishery management in the Maldives ily direct, might still be important to consider especially from the point of view of island food systems and the processes that contribute to the nutritional health of communities.” (Yadav et al. 2021 p.3) Change in adaptive capacity Women’s roles in small-scale fishing communi- “In the two cases reported here, women are (Adaptive capacity) ties in Peru and Japan contribute to improve taking responsibilities and applying innova- the capacity of their community to adapt to tive activities to adapt to disturbances in the external chocks fishery system.” (Delaney et al. 2019, p.292) Change in the social attributes of the com- Women’s action through self-help groups “The empowerment of women through SHGs munity favours solidarity within small-scale fishing leads to benefit not only the individual women (Community social attributes) communities in Kerala, India and women groups, but also the family and community as a whole through collective action and solidarity.” (Jeeva & Gopal 2021, p.175) Change in the transmission of traditional The participation of native women in a Marine “Their participation [of women] in the man- knowledge Extractive agement is expected to contribute rules for (Cultural heritage) Reserve in Brazil has the potential for pre- political strengthening and income production, serving the traditional knowledge of their thus keeping the traditional knowledge and community maintaining the native population in the area.” (Di Ciommo 2007, p.65–66) Economic Change in community income Women’s participation in SSF management “(…)an aspect that is cross-sectional in these (Community income) through fishing permits in Isla Arena, Mex- arrangements is financial motivation, since ico, brings more revenue for their households having the permits is something that strength- ens the reception of economic resources by the families.” (Uc-Espadas et al. 2017, p.392) Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Table 1  (continued) Scale Category Subcategory Example Corresponding quote & reference 13 Vol:. (1234567890) Individual Socio-cultural Change in well-being Women’s engagement in the management “Several fisherwomen emphasised the feelings (Well-being) of their local fisheries resources in Chile’s of tranquillity and the security of having some- Biobio region enhances their feelings of thing of “their own” that they could nurture.” tranquillity and security (Gallardo-Fernandez & Saunders 2018, p.184) Change in capacity building Fisherwomen who are part of a union in “We learned to work together… in group; (Capacity building) Chile’s Biobio region learn new skills in the because this work was always done individu- process of managing their local fisheries ally; we learned to manage; we learned to resources find nexus networks, in which to support us to continue the struggle.” (Gallardo-Fernandez & Saunders 2018, p.184) Change in women’s empowerment Women’s participation in a Costa Rican SSF “ (…) opportunities have opened up for some (Empowerment) cooperative gives them personal confidence of the women fishing leaders to participate in activities, conferences and seminars that broaden their horizons and build their self- esteem.”(Rivera et al. 2017, p.13) Change in gender roles Women’s participation in the co-management “They [Women] also pointed out the opportunity (Gender roles) of arapaima fisheries in Brazilian Amazonia of having both genders working together, and contributes to change gender dynamics and of women being able to take part in an activity alter traditional gender roles that used to be male-dominated.” (Freitas et al. 2020, p.6) Change in women’s leisure time The transference of fishing permits from men “We found testimonies such as the following (Women’s leisure time) to women in Isla Arena, Mexico, is associ- where the woman permit holder expressed that ated with an additional workload that reduces this condition represents a load of tasks for women’s free time women, particularly because of the paperwork and trips they have to make” (Uc-Espadas et al. 2017, p.394) Economic Change in women’s income Women’s participation in the co-management “ (…) woman living in a community with ara- (Women’s income) of arapaima fisheries in Brazilian Amazonia paima co-management would leads to an increase in their fishing revenue have a mean probability of 77% of earning money from fisheries, compared to only 8% for a woman living in a community without arapaima co-management.” (Freitas et al. 2020, p.5) a Small-scale fisheries (SSF) b Social-ecological system (SES) Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Fig. 3  Number of impacts 30 per subcategory (n = 190). NUMBER OF IMPACTS The impacts displayed in 25 dark grey are associated to cases where women 20 participate in SSF manage- ment (i.e., limited or active 15 participation) whereas 10 impacts in light grey are those associated to women’s 5 exclusion cases 0 Ecological pressure Gendered management impact Food security Diverse perspectives Gender roles Comprehensiveness Gendered ecological knowledge Empowerment Women’s income Compliance Capacity building Adaptive capacity Well-being Women’s leisure time Community social attributes Community income Cultural heritage Sustainable management IMPACT SUBCATEGORY Participation Exclusion Fig. 4  Non-metric multidi- mensional scaling (NMDS) ordination plot illustrat- ing differences in impact direction among women’s level of participation in SSF management processes (i.e., excluded, limited, active). The points to the left are impacts perceived as nega- tive, the ones to the right are positive; colours indi- cate women’s participation level in SSF management, and the coloured words indicate the estimated centre of each management category in this space In this sample, 120 impacts were considered posi- et al. 2017). The NMDS analysis suggests that there tive and 70 as negative. As an example, change in is an association between women’s level of participa- women’s leisure time was both associated to positive tion in SSF management and the direction of impact impacts when leisure time increased (Paul et al. 2016) (Fig. 4). While women’s exclusion from SSF man- and negative impacts when it decreased (Uc-Espadas agement was often associated to negative impacts, Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Fig. 5  Bar chart display- 120 ing the number of reported impacts at the SES, commu- 100 nity, and individual scales (n = 190 impacts). The Number of impacts 80 impacts displayed in dark grey are associated to cases 60 where women participate in SSF management (i.e., lim- ited or active participation) 40 whereas impacts in light grey are those associated to 20 women’s exclusion cases 0 SES Community Individual Scale Total Participation Exclusion their active participation was mostly related to posi- change in the recognition of gendered ecological tive impacts. This is the case, for example, of Chilean knowledge (n = 20), change in the diversity of per- women who participated in the management of a surf spectives for SSF management (n = 17), change in clam fishery in Coquimbo Bay, resulting in benefits human pressure on local ecosystems (n = 13), and for the whole community: “The presence of women change in the understanding of the gender dynamics in the present organization has helped to reduce con- within the SSF SES (n = 12). Because these impacts flicts and provide better organization” (Aburto et al. shape SSF management outcomes, they influence 2021, p. 5). Limited participation was associated both the dynamics of the SSF SES system. For instance, to negative and positive impacts. For example, Gus- the inclusion of gendered perspectives in SSF man- tavsson et al. (2021) who analysed cases in Chile, agement in Brazilian Amazonia contributed to the France, the United Kingdom, and Tanzania, highlight improved understanding of gender differences in fish- how women’s marginalisation in SSF management ing practices, thus improving SSF management out- and governance resulted in reinforcing distributive come (Zacarkim et al. 2015). injustice. In contrast, in another study by Franco- Women’s participation in SSF management also Melendez et al. (2021) on Chilean coastal commu- affected local communities (n = 44), particularly nities, women’s participation in SSF management through change in the social attributes of the com- -though limited- led to their personal empowerment. munity (n = 12), change in adaptive capacity (n = 10), Results of a Pearson’s Chi-squared test confirmed a and change in food security (n = 10). As an illustra- statistically significant relation between women’s par- tion, Delaney et al. (2019) show that women’s par- ticipation level in SSF management and the report of ticipation in a local fishery cooperative association positive impacts (p value = 0.001). in Japan contributed to the adaptation of their house- holds and community to socio-economic uncertainty. Scale of the impacts of women’s participation in SSF Similarly, studies also documented how impacts management affected women’s personal life (n = 42) through capacity building (n = 15) or women’s empower- We found that impacts of women’s participation in ment (n = 10), to cite the most common ones. In the SSF management affected SES, local communities, latter case, we used Kabeer‘s (1999) definition of and women’s life (Fig. 5). empowerment as “a process by which those who have Most reported impacts primarily affected the been denied the ability to make strategic life choices whole SES (n = 104). As aforementioned, the most acquire such an ability” (:1), interlacing the concepts common one was change in the impact of manage- of resources (both material and immaterial), agency ment decisions on women (n = 28), followed by and achievements. Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Discussion regions. This is especially critical given that most of the reviewed cases were precisely located in Africa Our work analyses the state of academic knowledge and Asia, regions where SSF is very important. Sec- on women’s participation in SSF management and ond, our results are also limited by our data collection related socio-cultural, environmental, and economic methods, as we restricted our search to two search impacts. Unfortunately, 40% of the studies do not engines which mostly feature publications in English report on women’s participation in SSF manage- and exclude the wealth of studies and reports pro- ment. Results from the studies reporting on women’s duced by non-governmental and other organizations participation in SSF management suggest that their (Kleiber et al. 2015). Such drawbacks underline the participation is low, as most case studies report the difficulty of developing comprehensive gender assess- exclusion or limited participation of women in SSF ments in fisheries and reinforce the need for improv- management. Our results also suggest that women’s ing the collection of gender-disaggregated data. exclusion from SSF management was associated to negative outcomes whereas women’s active partici- Women’s participation in SSF management pation in those processes was associated to positive outcomes. Most of the identified outputs of women’s According to the reviewed literature, women’s partic- participation were socio-cultural, bringing to light a ipation in SSF management is low, with women hav- gap on assessing the potential environmental and eco- ing no or limited participation in more than 80% of nomic impact of women’s participation in SSF man- cases reporting women’s participation. The finding is agement. A final finding of this work is that most of consistent with the work of Rabbitt et al. (2022) that the reported impacts unfolded at the SES scale, sug- also builds on Agarwal’s (2001) participation typol- gesting a win–win situation between gender-inclusive ogy in the context of community-based fisheries man- SSF management and outcomes at the SES scale. agement in Melanesia. Their results suggest that the Before commenting these results, we highlight equal number of women and men in fisheries commit- some caveats of our work. We are aware that our tees, although necessary, is not sufficient to ensure the review has several limitations streaming both from meaningful participation of women in community- data availability and from the data collection meth- based fisheries management. In the same vein, Law- ods. First, results from our work are limited by the less et al. (2022) found that most local organisations overall lack of data on women’s contribution to the in the Pacific Islands region aimed to increase the SSF sector, as also underscored in the literature number of women in traditionally male-dominated (Alonso-Población & Siar 2018; Kleiber, et al. 2015; arenas without addressing structural gender inequali- Williams 2010). We believe that the scarcity of gen- ties. Because this approach does not displace existing der information is not neutral but value-laden, since gender barriers, it limits the active participation of our dataset reflects authors’ interests and priorities women in SSF management and policy. Other authors who may chose or not to report on women’s participa- have also criticized this quantitative view of women’s tion in SSF management. This unavoidable authors’ participation in natural resource management as a subjectivity might also shape the type of reported form of box-ticking approach with no transforma- impacts. Therefore, our results shall be interpretated tive value (Cornwall 2003). Our results point to the with caution as they likely underestimate the total fact that fisheries management is very androcentric, number of existing impacts associated with women’s as also documented by other studies in SSF (Kleiber participation in SSF management. Such data gaps rep- et al. 2015; Williams 2010), and echoing studies in resent a severe obstacle to the development of a thor- other activity sectors such as forestry (Mwangi et al. ough gender analysis in the fisheries sector, and we 2011), agriculture (Buchy & Basaznew 2005; Huyer hope that our study may encourage researchers to pay 2016), wildlife conservation (Massey et al. 2022), more attention to gender issues and related impacts in and more generally in environmental governance sys- the future. Besides, the lack of data on women’s par- tems (Alonso-Población & Siar 2018; OECD 2021). ticipation in SSF management was not homogeneous Literature on the topic identifies common barriers to across regions, but larger in Africa and in Asia, which women’s participation in SSF management processes suggests the need to strengthen research in these two such as gender norms and stereotypes and domestic Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries responsibilities (Bradford & Katiro 2019; Galap- commercialization (Hapke 2004), or access to fisher- paththi et al. 2022; Murunga 2021; SPC 2018). Our ies resources (Harper et al. 2013; Siar 2003). findings on women’s restricted access to SSF man- Another important reported impact was change agement and decision-making processes also echo in the recognition of gendered ecological knowl- Agarwal’s work (2001) on forestry showing that even edge through a utilitarian perspective, suggest- when women can formally access community for- ing that researchers are more inclined to report this estry groups, social norms and perceptions hinder impact for instrumental purpose. This result is in line their actual participation in meetings. In the case of with Harper et al.’s (2013) review of women’s roles patriarchal societies, women’s ability to fully partici- in SSF. Examining various cases in different world pate in fisheries management is constrained owing to regions, the authors highlight the untapped value of social norms that contribute to maintain their margin- women’s marine ecological knowledge as a source alised status and perpetrate gender inequality (Ben- of information for fisheries management in data poor nett 2005; Murunga 2021). To that extent, our study countries. Likewise, House et al.’s (2023) review of adds to existing evidence suggesting that many SSF gender and participatory monitoring in community- communities in the world are characterized by patri- based fisheries management (CBFM) also highlights archal social structures (Bradford & Katiro 2019; the value of women’s knowledge for fisheries man- Lentisco & Lee 2015). These findings imply that agement by showing that it represents one of the main moving towards gender equity in SSF management instrumental motivations for researchers on CBFM to will require to address structural social constructions study gender in relation to participatory monitoring. (McDougall et al. 2021). The instrumental importance of women’s ecologi- cal knowledge is not unique to SSF, but rather reso- Typology of impacts related to women’s participation nates with other research fields. In the forestry sec- in SSF management tor for instance, Agarwal (2009) shows how women’s specific knowledge on forest plant species and their One key finding of our work is the great diversity of harvesting methods were useful for conservation out- reported socio-cultural, environmental, and economic comes in Indian and Nepalese local forests. impacts associated to women’s participation-or lack Contrasting with the variety of socio-economic of- in SSF management. These results reinforce the impacts of including women in SSF management, need to integrate a gender perspective into SSF man- we recorded fewer environmental impacts. While agement and governance by looking at women’s spe- one explanation for this finding could be that wom- cific engagement in those processes, as stressed by en’s participation in SSF management does not have previous studies (de la Torre-Castro 2019; Galappath- noticeable environmental impacts, we suggest instead thi et al. 2022; Lentisco & Lee 2015). that women’s participation in SSF management is Interestingly, we found that the most frequently mostly studied through a social lens, thus challenging reported impact- namely change in the impact of a thorough gender analysis of the whole SES. Such management decisions on women – was associated findings align with Kleiber et al. (2015), who showed to the exclusion of women from SSF management that gender and fisheries research is mostly character- and not to their participation. This finding concurs ized by social and qualitative approaches and iden- with the overall low level of women’s participation tified a data gap with regards to the environmental in SSF management assessed on the reviewed litera- dimension of women’s fisheries-related activities. ture. Moreover, this result highlights how women’s Such a gap might also reflect the common idea that exclusion from SSF management may lead to nega- women’s practices represent a low pressure on coastal tive social consequences derived from exclusionary ecosystems. Yet, existing evidence is too scarce to management, further reinforcing gender inequali- assess the actual impact of women’s fishing activities ties. In this sense, our findings dovetail with those on coastal species and habitats. Indeed, the scanned from an emerging literature documenting the diverse existing evidence goes in both directions: in some negative impacts of gender blind SSF management cases, women’s extractive activities in coastal areas policies in relation to the establishment of marine may be deleterious for local ecosystems (Gammage protected areas (Walker & Robinson 2009), fisheries 2004), while evidence from the past suggest that in Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries other cases certain fishing practices used by women et al. 2022; Lentisco & Lee 2015). This is also con- such as clam gardens can enhance ecological out- sistent with studies from other resource management comes in SES (Deur et al. 2015; Thrush 2006). Over- systems supporting that women’s participation in all, this ecological understanding appears necessary resource management leads to better outcomes for the for comprehensively assessing the health status and whole SES and for local communities (Agarwal 2009; dynamics of marine and coastal ecosystems (Kleiber Westermann et al. 2005). In particular, a body of et al. 2015). Further research is thus needed for ana- studies (Boserup 1970; Duflo 2012; Verschuur et al. lysing women’s participation in management in rela- 2021) and institutional reports (UN Women 2019) tion to the sustainable use of fisheries resources. have documented a ripple effect from improved wom- Overall, our results suggest that women’s lack of en’s income and economic development at the local participation in SSF management was associated to level. Finally, our results also suggest that women’s negative outcomes. These findings echo the litera- participation in SSF management might also lead to ture in other fields, such as the work of Buchy and positive change in women’s own lives. Such findings Basaznew (2005), showing that the absence of gen- fall into the existing body of work on environmental der considerations in agricultural policy in Ethiopia governance and development showing how women’s resulted in reinforcing women’s economic margin- participation in decision-making processes can fos- alisation. On the contrary, women’s active participa- ter their personal empowerment (de la Torre-Castro tion in SSF management activities led to positive out- 2019) or networking capacities (Arora-Jonsson 2014). comes. As highlighted by some scholars, women Overall, the literature identifies major enablers for often have recourse to informal social networks to women’s participation in SSF management such as counterbalance their restricted access to formal insti- state institutions (Alonso-Población & Siar 2018) and tutions (Agrawal 2000; Molyneux 2002; More 1990). initiatives favouring women’s capacity building and This level of interdependency has been suggested by self-organisation (Lentisco & Lee 2015; Murunga Westermann et al. (2005) as a driver for fostering col- 2021). laboration, solidarity, and conflict resolution among Altogether, our results suggest that women’s par- women’s groups, thus bringing positive outcomes ticipation in SSF management is not only necessary in natural resource management. Other studies have from an intrinsic viewpoint, but also in instrumen- also documented positive outcomes in the SSF sector tal terms since it has the potential to contribute to when gender norms and stereotypes are overcome and improving SSF management strategies at the SES the enabling conditions are met for women to effec- scale, while providing benefits to local communi- tively participate in resource management and deci- ties. These results imply the need to overcome gen- sion-making (de la Torre-Castro 2019; Galappaththi der barriers “to ensure that women are given both a et al. 2022; Lentisco & Lee 2015). This suggests that clear voice and decision-making power” (Westerman encouraging women’s meaningful participation in et al. 2005, p. 13). In this sense, our findings support SSF management is needed for driving positive social the recent call made by scholars for a blue justice that outcomes. integrates gender in SSF governance (Engen et al. 2021; TBTI 2018). The concept of blue justice pro- Scale of the impacts of women’s participation in SSF poses a shift from an economic-oriented perspective management in ocean governance, the blue economy, to the recog- nition of social justice within those debates (Benett A striking result of our study is the multiscale nature et al. 2021). Our article builds on this work and high- of the reported impacts, ranging from the whole SES lights the need for a new coastal management and to the individual level. Importantly, we found that a ocean governance model that fully includes women in great proportion of the reported impacts unfolded at decision-making processes. the SES scale with potential for win–win situations in SSF management. This finding aligns with previous The way forward reviews in the SSF literature suggesting that women’s participation in SSF management has knock on effects Given the highly gendered nature of SSF (Gallois in the governance system of the SES (Galappaththi & Duda 2016; Koralagama et al. 2017), there is a Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries need to consider gender dimensions in its manage- for Units of Excellence funded by the Spanish Ministry of ment (Harper et al. 2013; Kleiber et al. 2015). In this Science, Innovation and Universities (CEX2019-000940-M; MDM-2015-055) and from the Laboratories for the Analysis of article, we assessed women’s participation in SSF Social-Ecological Systems in a Globalized world (LASEG) and management and related socio-cultural, environmen- for the Marine and Environmental Biogeosciences Research tal, and economic impacts based on existing peer- (MERS), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and Generalitat reviewed academic literature. Taken together, our de Catalunya (2017-SGR-775; 2017 SGR-1588), and the Euro- pean Research Council (BIGSEA project, Grant Agreement No findings support a better integration of gender per- 682602). This publication also contributes to the Local Indi- spectives into (1) data collection methods in fisheries cators of Climate Change Impacts (LICCI) Project, which is research (2) SSF management and decision-making, funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under grant and (3) ecological research on SSF SES. agreement No 771056-LICCI-ERC-2017-COG. First, we need to address the paucity of gender data Author contributions M.C., P.Z. and V.R.G. conceptual- in fisheries research to improve our understanding of ized the research questions and review design. M.C. conducted SSF and design thorough management. One major limi- the literature search and selection, as well as data extraction tation we faced in this review was the lack of gender- and analysis with the support of HTD and SAF. M.C. was the main responsible for writing the manuscript. VP contributed to disaggregated data which constrained our assessment of data visualization through a global map of studies distribution. women’s participation in SSF management, especially V.R.G., P.Z. and S.M. gave advices on the review conceptual in regions where SSF plays a significant role for food design and provided regular feedbacks and comments to the security such as Africa and Asia (FAO 2020; Mills different versions of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript. et al. 2011). Broadly speaking, gender myopia in SSF might result in a general underestimation of the number Funding Open Access Funding provided by Universi- of fishers, fishing effort, fishing management activities, tat Autonoma de Barcelona. This work was supported by the and therefore in a biased understanding of ecosystem ICTA-UAB “María de Maeztu” Programme for Units of Excel- lence funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation health (Kleiber et al. 2013; Williams 2010). Second, we and Universities (CEX2019-000940-M; MDM-2015–055) and found that women’s participation in SSF management from the Laboratories for the Analysis of Social-Ecological was low, yet their active engagement produced multi- Systems in a Globalized world (LASEG) and for the Marine ple positive outcomes. We argue that women’s active and Environmental Biogeosciences Research (MERS), Uni- versitat Autònoma de Barcelona and Generalitat de Catalunya participation in SSF management and decision-making (2017-SGR-775; 2017 SGR-1588), and the European Research processes appears desirable for achieving gender equity Council (BIGSEA project, Grant Agreement No 682602). This in SSF and improving SSF management. Our findings publication also contributed to the Local Indicators of Cli- align with the recent call for inclusive management mate Change Impacts (LICCI) Project, which is funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under grant agreement No in SSF, which encourages the participation of actors 771056-LICCI-ERC-2017-COG. with diverse identities in management processes (de la Torre-Castro 2019; Nessa et al. 2020; Resurreccion Data availability The data that support the findings of this 2006). For instance, women’s participation in monitor- study will shortly be openly available in Figshare reposi- tory. The data are now available oneline: Chambon, Mouna; ing has been recommended as a way to improve data Minarro, Sara; Alvarez-Fernandez, Santiago; Porcher, Vincent; collection, while facilitating women’s access to deci- Reyes-García, Victoria; Tonalli Drouet, huran; et al. (2023). sion-making processes (House et al. 2023). Finally, our Data for the Synthesis of Women’s Participation in Small-Scale results identified a knowledge gap on the environmental Fisheries Management: Why Women’s Voices Matter. figshare. Dataset. https://​doi.​org/​10.​6084/​m9.​figsh​are.​24213​234v1. aspects related to women’s participation in SSF man- agement. This reflects that gender perspectives in fish- Declarations eries research remain concerned by social issues and are poorly mainstreamed into environmental studies Competing interests The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. on fisheries (Kleiber et al. 2015). It is essential to fos- ter gender knowledge in environmental research on SSF to provide a comprehensive and meaningful analysis of Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Com- mons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits the role of women in SSF management. use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the financial original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Crea- support from the ICTA-UAB “María de Maeztu” Programme tive Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries images or other third party material in this article are included Boserup E (1970) Woman’s role in economic development. in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated George Allenand Unwin, London otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not Bradford K, Katikiro RE (2019) Fighting the tides: A review included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your of gender and fisheries in Tanzania. Fish Res 216:79– intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds 88. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​fishr​es.​2019.​04.​003 the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly Broeckhoven N, Cliquet A (2015) Gender and ecological res- from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit toration: time to connect the dots. Restor Ecol 23:729– http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. 736. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​rec.​12270 Browne PB (2002) Women do fish: a case study on gender and the fishing industry in Sierra Leone. P.169–174. In: Williams MJ, Chao NH, Choo PS, Matics K, Nandee- References sha MC, Shariff M, Siason I, Tech E and Wong JMC (eds) Global symposium on women in fisheries. sixth asian fisheries forum. Kaohsiung, p. 209. Aburto JA, Stotz W, Cundill G, Tapia C (2021) Toward under- Buchy M, Basaznew F (2005) Gender-blind organization standing the long-term persistence of a local govern- deliver gender-biaised services: the case of Awasa ance system among artisanal fishers in Chile. Ecol Soc Bureau of agriculture in Southern Ethiopia. Gender, 26:260305. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5751/​es-​12479-​260305 Technol Dev 9:2. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​09718​52405​ Agarwal B (2001) Participatory exclusions, community for- 00900​204 estry, and gender: an analysis for south asia and a con- Cele N (2020) Are you a fisher or mussel collector?: examin- ceptual framework. World Dev 29(10):1623–1648. ing gendered identity markers in the small-scale fish- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​S0305-​750X(01)​00066-3 ing industry. Agenda 34(1):141–150. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ Agarwal B (2009) Gender and forest conservation: the impact 1080/​10130​950.​2020.​17211​95 of women’s participation in community forest govern- Cohen PJ, Steenbergen DJ (2015) Social dimensions of local ance. Ecol Econ 68:2785–2799. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ fisheries co-management in the coral triangle. Environ ecole​con.​2009.​04.​025 Conserv 42:278–288. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1017/​S0376​ Agrawal B (2000) Conceptualising environmental collective 89291​40004​23 action: why gender matters. Camb J Econ 24:283–310 Cooke W, and Kothari U (2001) Participation: the new tyr- Ahmed KK, Rahman S and Chowdhury MAK (2001) Role anny?. Zed Books. of tribal women in reservoir fisheries, Bangladesh. Cornwall A (2003) Whose voices? Whose choices? Refec- In: Williams MJ, Nandeesha MC, Corral VP, Tech E, tions on gender and participatory development. World Choo PS (eds) International symposium on women in Dev 31(8):1325–1342. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​s0305-​ Asian Fisheries, p. 156. 750x(03)​00086-x Akhtaruzzaman K, Islam KJ, Mahfuzul Haque ABM (2023) de la Torre-Castro M (2019) Inclusive management through Community-based natural resource management: an gender consideration in small-scale fisheries: the why effective tool to reduce poverty and inequality? J Dev and the how. Front Mar Sci 6:156. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ Eff. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​19439​342.​2023.​21732​72 3389/​fmars.​2019.​00156 Alonso-Población E, Siar SV (2018) Women’s participation dela Pena L and Marte CL (2001) The plight of older women in and leadership in fisherfolk organizations and collec- a fishing village: The women fish traders of Bugtong Bato, tive action in fisheries: a review of evidence on ena- Aklan, Central Philippines. In: Williams MJ, Nandeesha blers, drivers and barriers. FAO Fisheries and Aquacul- MC, Corral VP, Tech E, Choo PS (eds) International Sym- ture Circular, No. 1159. FAO, Rome posium on Women in Asian Fisheries. p. 156. Arora-Jonson S (2014) Forty years of gender research and Delaney AE, Schreiber MA, Alfaro-Shigueto J (2019) Innova- environmental policy: where do we stand? Women’s tive and traditional actions. Maritime Stud 18:287–295. Stud Int Forum 47:295–308. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40152-​019-​00150-5 wsif.​2014.​02.​009 Deur D, Dick A, Recalma-Clutesi K et al (2015) Bennett E (2005) Gender, fisheries and development. Mar Kwakwaka’wakw “clam gardens.” Hum Ecol 43:201– Policy 29:451–459. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​marpol.​ 212. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s10745-​015-​9743-3 2004.​07.​003 Di Ciommo RC (2007) Gender, tourism, and participatory Bennett NJ, Blythe J, White CS, Campero C (2021) Blue appraisals at the corumbau marine extractive reserve, growth and blue justice: Ten risks and solutions for the Brazil. Hum Ecol Rev 14(1):56–67. http://​www.​jstor.​ ocean economy. Mar Policy 125:104387. https://​doi.​ org/​stable/​24707​643 org/​10.​1016/j.​marpol.​2020.​104387 Duflo E (2012) Women empowerment and economic develop- Berkes F, Nayak PK (2018) Role of communities in fisher- ment. J Econ Lit 50:1051–1079. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1257/​ ies management: “one would first need to imagine it.” jel.​50.4.​1051 Maritime Stud 17:241–251. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ Engen S, Hausner VG, Gurney G, Broderstad EG, Keller R, s40152-​018-​0120-x Lundberg AK, Ancin Murguzur FJ, Salminen E, Ray- Berkes F, Mahon R, McConney P, Pollnac R, Pomeroy R mond CM, Falk-Andersoon J, Fauchald P (2021) Blue (2001) Managing small-scale fisheries-alternative justice: a survey for eliciting perceptions of environ- directions and methods. International Development mental justice among coastal planners’ and small-scale Research Centre, Ottawa Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries fishers in Northern-Norway. PLOS One 16:251467. justice in small-scale fisheries governance. Mar Policy https://​doi.​org/​10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​02514​67 133:104743 Fadigas AB (2017) Vulnerability factors of shellfisherwomen Haddaway N, Woodcock P, Macura B, Collins, (2015) Mak- in the face of oil spill events: an analysis of the Prestige ing literature reviews more reliable through applica- case. Int J Disast Risk Reduct 24:560–567. https://​doi.​ tion of lessons from systematic reviews. Conserv Biol org/​10.​1016/j.​ijdrr.​2017.​07.​010 29:1596–1605. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​cobi.​12541 FAO (2020) The state of world fisheries and aquaculture 2020. Hapke HM, Ayyankeril D (2004) Gender, the work-life Sustainability in action, Rome. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4060/​ course, and livelihood strategies in a South Indian fish ca922​9en market. Gend Place Cult 11:229–256. https://​doi.​org/​ FAO (2015) Voluntary guidelines for securing sustainable 10.​1080/​09663​69042​00021​8473 small-scale fisheries: in the context of food security and Harper S, Zeller D, Hauzer M, Pauly D, Sumaila UR (2013) poverty eradication. Available online at: http://​www.​fao.​ Women and fisheries: contribution to food security and org/3/​ai435​6en.​pdf local economies. Mar Policy 39:56–63. https://​doi.​org/​ FAO (2016) Promoting gender equality and women’s empow- 10.​1016/j.​marpol.​2012.​10.​018 erment in fisheries and aquaculture. Available online: House J, Kleiber D, Steenbergen DJ et al (2023) Participa- http://​ w ww.​ fao.​ o rg/​ d ocum​ e nts/​ c ard/​ e n/c/​ 5 2d14​ d 49-​ tory monitoring in community-based fisheries man- b862-​4855-​a622-​bf308​5b846​11/ agement through a gender lens. Ambio 52:300–318. FAO (2017) Towards gender-equitable small-scale fisheries https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s13280-​022-​01783-3 governance and development—A handbook. In support Huyer S (2016) Closing the gender gap in agriculture. Gend of the implementation of the voluntary guidelines for Technol Dev 20(2):105–116. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​ securing sustainable small-scale fisheries in the context 09718​52416​643872 of food security and poverty eradication, by Nilanjana Jeeva JC, Gopal N (2021) A participatory assessment of Biswas. Rome. entrepreneurial skills among women in small-scale Food and agriculture organization (FAO) (1997) Fishery fisheries. FISH Technol 58(3):171–176. https://​doi.​org/​ resources division and fishery policy and planning divi- 10.​3389/​fmars.​2020.​6179 sion. Fisheries management. FAO Technical Guide- Jentoft, (2005) Fisheries co-management as empowerment. lines for Responsible Fisheries. No. 4. Rome, 82p. Mar Policy 29:1–7. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​marpol.​ Franco-Meléndez M, Tam J, van Putten I, Cubillos LA 2004.​01.​003 (2021) Integrating human and ecological dimensions: Jupiter SD, Cohen PJ, Weeks R, Tawake A, Govan H (2014) the importance of stakeholders’ perceptions and partic- Locally-managed marine areas: multiple objectives and ipation on the performance of fisheries co-management diverse strategies. Pac Conserv Biol 20:165–179. https://​ in Chile. PLoS ONE 16(8):e0254727. https://​doi.​org/​ doi.​org/​10.​1071/​PC140​165 10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​02547​27 Kabeer (1999). Resources, Agency, Achievements: Reflections Freitas CT, Espírito-Santo HM, Campos-Silva JV, Peres on the Measurement of Women’s Empowerment. Devel- CA, Lopes PF (2020) Resource co-management as opment and Change, 30, 435:464. Institute of Social a step towards gender equity in fisheries. Ecol Econ Studies 1999. Published by Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 176:106709. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ecole​con.​2020.​ 108 Cowley Rd, Oxford. 106709 Kenny and Tapu-Qiliho (2022) Exploring the access to, and Galappaththi M, Armitage D, Collins AM (2022) Women’s experiences of people of diverse sexual orientation and/ experiences in influencing and shaping small-scale or gender identity engaged in fisheries: A scoping study. fisheries governance. Fish Fish 23:1099–1120. https://​ ACIAR, Canberra doi.​org/​10.​1111/​faf.​12672 King M, Faasili U (1999) Community-based management Gallardo-Fernández GL, Saunders F (2018) “Before we of subsistence fisheries in Samoa. Fish Manag Ecol asked for permission, now we only give notice”: 6(2):133–144. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1046/j.​1365-​2400.​1999.​ women’s entrance into artisanal fisheries in Chile. 00136.x Maritime Stud 17:177–188. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ Kleiber D, Harris LM, Vincent ACJ (2013) Improving fisher- s40152-​018-​0110-z ies estimates by including women’s catch in the Central Gallois S, Duda R (2016) Beyond productivity: The socio- Philippines. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 71(5):656–664. https://​ cultural role of fishing among the Baka of southeastern doi.​org/​10.​1139/​cjfas-​2013-​0177 Cameroon. Revue D’ethnoécol 10(10):2818. https://​ Kleiber D, Harris L, Vincent A (2015) Gender and small-scale doi.​org/​10.​4000/​ethno​ecolo​gie.​2818 fisheries: a case for counting women and beyond. Fish Gammage S (2004) The tattered net of statistics. In: Gender Fish 16(4):547–562. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​faf.​12075 Agenda – Women in Fisheries: a Collection of Arti- Koralagama D, Gupta J, Pouw N (2017) Inclusive development cles from SAMUDRA Report Kumar In: KG (ed) Inter- from a gender perspective in small scale fisheries. Curr national Collective in Support of Fishworkers (ICSF), Opin Environ Sustain 24:1–6. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ India, pp. 36–40. cosust.​2016.​09.​002 Gilmour D (2016) Forty years of community-based forestry: Kruskal JB (1964) Nonmetric multidimensional scaling: a a review of its extent and effectiveness FAO forestry numerical method. Psychometrika 29:115–129 paper 176. FAO-United Nations, Rome, Italy Lavoie A, Lee J, Sparks K, Hoseth G, Wise S (2019) Engaging Gustavsson M, Frangoudes K, Lindström L, Ávarez with women’s knowledge in bristol bay fisheries through MC, de la Torre CM (2021) Gender and blue Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries oral history and participatory ethnography. Fisheries E, Wagner H, Barbour M, Bedward M, Bolker B, Bor- 44:331–337 card D, Carvalho G, Chirico M, De Caceres M, Durand Lawless S, Cohen PJ, Mangubhai S, Kleiber D, Morrison TH S, Evangelista H, FitzJohn R, Friendly M, Furneaux (2021) Gender equality is diluted in commitments made B, Hannigan G, Hill M, Lahti L, McGlinn D, Ouellette to small-scale fisheries. World Dev 140:105348 M, Ribeiro Cunha E, Smith T, Stier A, Ter Braak C & Lawless S, Cohen PJ, McDougall C, Mangubhai S, Song AM, Weedon J(2022)_vegan: Community Ecology Package_. Morrison TH (2022) Tinker, tailor or transform: Gender R package version 2.6–4, . Change 72:102434. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​gloen​vcha.​ Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development 2021.​102434 (OECD) (2021) Gender and the environment: building Leisher C, Temsah G, Booker F, Day M, Samberg LH, Prosnitz evidence and policies to achieve the SDGs. OECD Pub- DM, Agarwal B, Matthews E, Roe D, Russell D, Sunder- lishing, Paris. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1787/​3d32c​a39-​en land TC, Wilkie DS (2016) Does the gender composition Österblom H, Wabnitz CCC, Tladi D et al (2020) Towards of forest and fishery management groups affect resource ocean equity. World Resources Institute. Available online governance and conservation outcomes? a systematic at www.oceanpanel.org/how-distribute-benefits-ocean- map. Environ Evid 5:1–10 equitably, Washington, DC Leisher C, Booker F, Agarwal B, Day M, Matthews E, Pros- Paul SAL, Wilson AMW, Cachimo R, Riddell MA (2016) nitz DM, Roe D, Russell D, Samberg LH, Sunderland Piloting participatory smartphone mapping of intertidal TC, Temsah G, and Wilkie DS (2017) A preliminary the- fishing grounds and resources in northern Mozambique: ory of change detailing how women’s participation can opportunities and future directions. Ocean Coast Manag improve the management of local forests and fisheries. 134:79–92. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​oceco​aman.​2016.​ Lentisco A, Lee R (2015) A review of women’s access to fish 09.​018 in small-scale fisheries. FAO, London Pearson K (1900) X. On the criterion that a given system of Manning J (2017) In vivo coding. In: Matthes J, Davis CS and deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated Potter RF (eds) The international encyclopedia of com- system of variables is such that it can be reasonably sup- munication research methods DOI: https://​doi.​org/​10.​ posed to have arisen from random sampling. Lond Edinb 1002/​97811​18901​731.​iecrm​0270 Dublin Philos Mag J Sci 50(302):157–175. https://​doi.​ Massey LM, Camerden PM, Gaos AR, Liles MJ, Seminoff AJ, org/​10.​1080/​14786​44000​94638​97 Ahern AL (2022) Challenging gender inequity in wildlife R Core Team (2021) R: A language and environment for statis- conservation: a women’s group leading sea turtle conser- tical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, vation efforts in El Salvador. Local Environ 27(1):1–15. Vienna, Austria. URL https://​www.R-​proje​ct.​org/. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​13549​839.​2021.​19979​62 Rabbitt et al (2022) Testing a model to assess women’s inclu- Mcdougall C, Badstue L, Mulema A, Fischer G, Najar D, sion and participation in community-based resource Pyburn R, Elias M, Joshi D, Vos A (2021) Toward management in Solomon islands. Maritime Stud 21:465– structural change: Gender transformative approaches. 483. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40152-​022-​00282-1 In: Pyburn R, van Eerdewjk A (eds) Advancing gender Resurreccion BP (2006) Rules, roles and rights: gender, par- equality through agricultural and environmental research: ticipation and community fisheries management in past, present and future. IFPRI, Washington, DC. Cambodia’s Tonle Sap region. Int J Water Resour Dev Mills DJ, Westlund L, de Graaf G, Kura Y, Willman R & Kelle- 22(3):433–447 her K (2011) Under-reported and undervalued: small- Rivera VS, Cordero PM, Rojas D, O’Riordan B (2017) Institu- scale fisheries in the developing world. In: Pomeroy RS, tions and collective action in a Costa Rican small-scale Andrew NL (eds) Small-scale fisheries management: fishery cooperative: the case of CoopeTárcoles R.L. frameworks and approaches for the developing world. Maritime Stud 16:1–19. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​07900​ Wallingford: CABI, pp. 1–15. DOI: https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 62050​04829​49 1079/​97818​45936​075.​0001 Rohe J, Schlüter A, Ferse S (2018) A gender lens on wom- Molyneux M (2002) Gender and the silence of social capital: en’s harvesting activities and interactions with local lessons from Latin America. Dev Chang 33(2):167–188 marine governance in a South Pacific fishing commu- More G (1990) Structural determinants of men’s and women’s nity. Maritime Stud 17:106. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ networks. Am Sociol Rev 55:726–735 s40152-​018-​0106-8 Murunga M (2021) Towards a better understanding of gen- Santos AN (2015) Fisheries as a way of life: gendered liveli- dered power in small scale fisheries of the Western hoods, identities and perspectives of artisanal fisheries in Indian Ocean. Glob Environ Chang 67:102242. https://​ eastern Brazil. Mar Policy Elsevier 62:279–288. https://​ doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​gloen​vcha.​2021.​102242 doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​marpol.​2015.​09.​007 Mwangi E, Meinzen-Dick RS, Sun Y (2011) Gender and sus- Secretariat of the Pacific Community. (2018). Gender and tainable forest management in East Africa and Latin fsheries in Vanuatu. Summary of key issues. Noumea, America. Ecol Soc 16(1):17. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5751/​ New Caledonia: Pacifc Community (SPC). ES-​03873-​160117 Siar SV (2003) Knowledge, gender, and resources in small- Nessa N et al (2020) Conference series: earth and environmen- scale fishing: the case of honda bay, palawan. Philipp tal. Science 564:012073 Environ Manag 31(5):569–580. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ Oksanen J, Simpson G, Blanchet F, Kindt R, Legendre P, s00267-​002-​2872-7 Minchin P, O’Hara R, Solymos P, Steven M, Szoecs Vol.: (0123456789) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Siason IM (2001) Women in fisheries in the Philippines. In: United Nation Women (UN Women) (2019) World survey on Williams MJ, Nandeesha MC, Corral VP, Tech E, & the role of women in development: Report of the Secre- Choo PS (eds) International symposium on women in tary-General (2019): Why addressing women’s income Asian fisheries. p, 156. and time poverty matters for sustainable development. p. Singleton R, Allison E, Gough C, Kamat V, leBillon P, Robson 142. Available at: https://​www.​unwom​en.​org/​en/​digit​al-​ L, Sumaila U (2019) Conservation, contraception and libra​r y/​publi​catio​ns/​2019/​06/​world-​survey-​on-​the-​role-​ controversy: supporting human rights to enable sustain- of-​women-​in-​devel​opment-​2019 able fisheries in Madagascar. Global Environ Change Verschuur C. Guérin I and Hillenkamp I (2021) Social repro- Hum Policy Dimens 59:101946 duction, solidarity economy, feminisms and democracy: Smith H, Basurto X (2019) Defining small-scale fisheries and Latin America and India. Post-Print hal-03551987, HAL. examining the role of science in shaping perceptions of doi: https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-​030-​71531-1 who and what counts: a systematic review. Front Mar Sci Walker BLE, Robinson M (2009) Economic development, marine 6:236. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fmars.​2019.​00236 protected areas and gendered access to fishing resources Sotto FB, Laron C, Lim M and Heeger T (2001) Women’s par- in a Polynesian Lagoon. Gend Place Cult 16(4):467–484. ticipation in sapyaw (haul seine) fishery on the eastern https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09663​69090​30039​83 coast of Barangay Sillon, Bantayan Island, Cebu, Philip- Weeratunge N, Snyder KA, Sze CP (2010) Gleaner, fisher, pines. In: Williams MJ, Nandeesha MC, Corral VP, Tech trader, processor: understanding gendered employment in E, Choo PS (eds) International Symposium on Women in fisheries and aquaculture: gendered employment in fish- Asian Fisheries. P, 156. eries. Fish Fish 11:405–420. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​ Stone MT (2014) Rethinking community in community- 1467-​2979.​2010.​00368.x based natural resource management. Commun Dev Westermann O, Ashby J, Pretty J (2005) Gender and social 45(1):17–31 capital: the importance of gender differences for the Thomas A, Mangubhai S, Fox M, Meo S, Miller K, Naisilisili W, maturity and effectiveness of natural resource manage- Veitayaki J, Waqairatu S (2021) Why they must be counted: ment groups. World Dev 33:1783–1799. https://​doi.​org/​ significant contributions of Fijian women fishers to food 10.​1016/j.​world​dev.​2005.​04.​018 security and livelihoods. Ocean Coast Manag 205:105571. Williams MJ (2010) Gender dimensions in fisheries manage- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​oceco​aman.​2021.​105571 ment. In: Grafton RQ, Hilborn R, Squires D, Tait M, Thomson D (1980) Conflict within the fishing industry. Williams MJ (eds) Handbook of marine fisheries con- ICLARM Newslett 3:3–4 servation and management. Oxford University Press, Thrush C (2006) T’ekilaw and wuxwuthin: or, how we got the Oxford, pp 72–96 northwest coast’s" wilderness" so wrong. BC Stud Brit Williams MJ (2019) Expanding the horizons: connect- Columbian Quart 152:105–110 ing gender and fisheries to the political economy. Tilley A, Burgos A, Duarte A et al (2021) Contribution of Marit Stud 18:399–407. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ women’s fisheries substantial, but overlooked, in timor- s40152-​019-​00149-y leste. Ambio 50:113–124. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ Williams MJ, Williams SB, Choo, PS (2002) From women in s13280-​020-​01335-7 fisheries to gender and fisheries In: Williams MJ, Chao Too big to ignore (TBTI) (2018) Blue justice: small-scale NH, Choo PS, Matics K, Nandeesha MC, Shariff M, Sia- fisheries are too important to fail! 2018, Available at: son I, Tech E and Wong JMC (eds) Global symposium 〈https://​tbtig​lobal.​net/​blue-​justi​ce-​small-​scale-​fishe​ries-​ on women in fisheries. sixth asian fisheries forum. Kaoh- are-​too-​impor​tant-​tofail/〉 Accessed 6 Nov 2021 siung. pp. 209. Torell E, Manyungwa-Pasani C, Bilecki D, Gumulira I, Women in the Seafood Industry organisation (WSI) (2020, 8) Yiwombe G (2021) Assessing and advancing gender Let’s acknowledge invisible, ignored and unrecognised equity in lake malawi’s small-scale fisheries sector. Sus- (IIU) Women in the seafood industry. jacksonville, FL. tainability 13(23):13001. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​su132​ Retrieved from https://​women​insea​food.​org/​wp-​conte​nt/​ 313001 uploa​ds/​2020/​03/​8th-​March-​2020-​IUU-​and-​IIU.​pd Tungaraza FD (1986) The role of women in Tanzania fishing Yadav S, Fisam A, Dacks R, Madin JS, Mawyer A (2021) societies the case of Mbweni Village-Dar Es Salaam. Shifting fish consumption preferences can impact coral University of Dar-es-salaam, Kiswahilli reef resilience in the Maldives: a case study. Mar Pol- Twyman C (2017) Community-based natural resource man- icy 134:104773. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​marpol.​2021.​ agement. in international encyclopedia of geography: 104773 people, the earth, environment and technology In: Rich- Yahaya J (2001) Women in small-scale fisheries in Malaysia. ardson D, Castree N, Goodchild MF, Kobayashi A, Liu In: Williams MJ, Nandeesha MC, Corral VP, Tech E, W and Marston RA (eds). DOI: https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​ Choo PS (eds) International Symposium on Women in 97811​18786​352.​wbieg​0630 Asian Fisheries. p. 156. Uc-Espadas M, Molina-Rosales D, Vázquez-García V, Pérez- Zacarkim CE, Piana PA, Baumgartner G et al (2015) The Jiménez JC and Gurri-García F (2017) Fishing permits panorama of artisanal fisheries of the Araguaia River, and gender relations in Isla Arena, Campeche. Agri- Brazil. Fish Sci 81:409–416. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​ cultura, sociedad y desarrollo, 14(3), 383–404. Recuper- s12562-​015-​0853-z ado en 15 de septiembre de 2022, de http://​www.​scielo.​ org.​mx/​scielo.​php?​script=​sci_​artte​xt&​pid=​S1870-​54722​ 01700​03003​83&​lng=​es&​tlng=​en. Vol:. (1234567890) 13 Rev Fish Biol Fisheries Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Vol.: (0123456789) 13