Session 4. 1.

Coastal and marine spaces today are awash in a global Blue Economy discursive and political economic agenda that envisions both expanded territorial power and intensified capitalism, often under the rubric of sustainable development at or by the sea. In practice, such oceanic capitalist dreaming routinely leads to fouled fishing grounds, obliteration of mangrove swamps, dredging of mudflats, (wet)land grabs of all kinds and a reproduction squeeze on peasant fishers and farmers, all of which combine to heighten rural inequality/precarity. Put another way, the Blue Economy, represents myriad forms of “taking” — i.e. enclosure, dispossession and theft — from coastal commons and coastal communities.

Contra such rampant taking, a variety actors adopt modes of “giving” that can and do maintain and defend coastal geographies globally. This paper explores the multiple dialectics of giving and taking at work around the estuarine commons of the Aghanashini River in southwestern India. Using archival and field data, I narrate the history of (post)colonial “development” and resistance in the estuary, in order to examine who engages in what kinds of giving/taking praxis and to what ends. I ask: What are the means and meanings of giving/taking in repeated attempts to develop an industrial shipping port within the sheltered backwaters? What does industrial aquaculture give or take? Ecotourism enterprises? Mangrove afforestation? Conservation NGO work? Peasant agroecology? Climate change? I conclude with a discussion of the unevenness and inequalities inherent in varieties of giving/taking as well as implications for both environmental policy and justice.

Community governance organizations known as khotis in the coastal and marine fisheries of Bengal have long been critical to the management and governance of these fisheries. Animated by a communitarian ethos, these collectives have developed elaborate mechanisms for regulating and stewarding resources which are able to adapt to the dynamism of the coast. Traditionally, these collectives drew upon contributions from their members for their functioning including large celebrations that continue to mark the end of the winter fishing season on the Bengal coast. These collectives, however, have not remained distant from the state. Over the last several decades, state authorities in Bengal have recognized these collectives through a variety of institutional forms, most notably that of the cooperative. This recognition has made these collectives a critical node for state support to fisheries in the state. I draw upon historically-informed ethnographic work in two fisher collectives in Bengal to trace the impact of this transition from khoti to cooperative for the functioning of community governance institutions. When and why have fishers chosen to create cooperatives and how has that influenced practices of giving within the community? To what extent has this translated into different relationships with the coastal commons?

Social discrimination, by caste, class and gender are practices of inequality that charachterise various small-scale fisher and local community institutions that govern coastal and marine commons across India. Financial and programmatic support to diverse community institutions in coastal-marine regions influence gender relations, which in turn reshapes relations with these commons.
This paper focuses on two important marine biodiversity-rich areas of southern India, that have seen successive tranches and terms of financial support for marine fisher communities, with goals of community development or biodiversity conservation. The Palk Bay and the Gulf of Mannar bear different histories of coastal-marine commons governance that predate concerns around ‘biodiversity conservation’ or ‘community development’, mostly through specialised community institutions, such as the oor panchayat, which are mostly discussed for their role in fisheries management (Bavinck, 2017). Historically, women from coastal communities have found little or no space in fisher institutions (Sundar, 2010) including these oor panchayat systems. The paper examines shifts or impacts in the gendered governance of these coastal areas, with the coming in of contemporary financial support in these regions. It asks, in what ways does structured support by the state, private trusts, research organisations and philanthropic effort shift the gendered governance of coastal-marine commons.
It also examines the role of non-state sources of support through civil society organisations and local industries, specifically fellowships for women or direct payments for services. The paper is attentive to 3 lines of analysis: a) the ways in which external actors ‘give’ and the impacts of such giving on practices related to local use and understanding of the commons, b) the institutional structures that have resulted from such forms of giving, and c) what is taken from such re-shaped commons and by whom?
The paper relies on diverse sources of secondary literature, archival documents, project reports of management authorities, NGOs as well as an analysis of grey literature. It also draws from interviews with key actors in the region, as well as reflexive analyses from the authors’ own personal practice and field engagement.

Financial support for marine and ocean commons in India can be characterised along several axes including funding from different sources (e.g. domestic and international agencies, institutional and individual donors) to different sectors (e.g. conservation, fisheries, livelihoods, gender, public works), thematic allocations (e.g. biodiversity conservation, disaster relief, coastal governance) and multiple forms of interventions (e.g. delineation of PAs, community-based monitoring, livelihood interventions, carbon financing mechanisms) through a range of conventional and emerging mechanisms. Synthesizing results from multiple forms of enquiry, this paper summarises emerging trends related to coastal and marine systems in India. A critical finding is that despite the extensiveness of the country’s coastline and the emergence of a diverse range mechanisms in recent years, the quantum of support for ocean and marine themes including the commons is still dwarfed by the support received by terrestrial ecosystems and causes. Within coastal and marine ecosystems, the support received for different causes and thematic interventions also varies widely. Although funding allocations are greatest for projects targeting coastal livelihoods and well-being, emerging themes such as climate change and contributions to specific SDGs are increasingly being reported as priorities by donors across the board. This is likely to be reflected in future funding allocations and thematic priorities. Individual donors as well corporate CSR foundations with an increased focus on nature-based solutions and climate funding are also a new feature of Indian philanthropy. Reflecting international trends, a great deal of funding support for coastal and marine systems also focuses on or encourages the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs) and provides implicit support for neoliberal climate financing mechanisms including carbon credits related to blue carbon. MPAs, especially those under strict protection, are problematic propositions in countries such as India where small-scale fishery-dependent communities lose access to ocean and coastal commons and bear the brunt of exclusionary conservation in a variety of ways. Similarly, inadequately conceptualised market-based mechanisms such as carbon financing that is misaligned with ‘blue-justice’ can result in potentially perverse outcomes that may be detrimental to the future of coastal and ocean commons. Improving donor awareness and accountability regarding perverse outcomes and unintended consequences are also critical requirements.