Artisanal fishers’ perceptions of two co-existing kelp resource management regimes in northern Chile

As fisheries management evolves and includes new measures, it is imperative to evaluate co-existing regimes. In Chile, two kelp fishery management policies were implemented sequentially over the last 20 years and currently co-exist. We analysed fishers’ perceptions regarding the performance of a territorial user rights policy and a regional management plan policy operating in what were historically open access areas along the coastline of two important kelp production regions in northern Chile. Interviews with Directorates of fisher associations were used to report key dimensions of both regimes, their problems, benefits, and proposals for improvement. A survey was used to assess artisanal fishers’ perceptions of the outcomes of the two management regimes studied: satisfaction, perceived success, and compliance. Trust, environmental attitude, and participation in decision-making associated to both regimes were also assessed. The results of the interviews show that the majority of association Directorates mentioned illegal harvesting by unregistered fishers as the most important problem of the regional management plan regime and suggest that the state needs to invest in law enforcement as a key issue for improvement. The survey results showed that, in general, the territorial user rights regime is perceived to have higher levels of compliance, success, and generates more satisfaction. Lessons from the different management regimes can provide important insights for improving the implementation of management plans to generate synergies between co-existing management regimes.