World Development Vol. 32, No. 5, pp.

793–807, 2004
Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev 0305-750X/$ - see front matter
doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.01.002

Participation Rhetoric or
Community-Based Management Reality?
Influences on Willingness to Participate
in a Venezuelan Freshwater Fishery
BROOKE ANN ZANETELL
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC, USA

and

BARBARA A. KNUTH *
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Summary. — Community-based management (CBM) has progressed from the conceptual fringe to
the dialogical heart of environmental management. Despite its rhetorical popularity, limited
quantitative data exist on factors influencing local involvement. A quantitative survey of three
Venezuelan fishing villages resulted in a predictive model of willingness to participate in CBM.
Sense of community and fishery dependence were significant positive influences. High level of
concern about the current and future state of the fishery correlated with an unwillingness to
participate, indicating a defeatist attitude about perceived insurmountable problems. We explore
sense of community, defeatist attitudes, and education in CBM project formulation and
implementation.
Ó 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Key words — local knowledge, sense of community, environmental attitudes, empowerment, South
America, Venezuela

1. INTRODUCTION:
COMMUNITY-BASED MANAGEMENT
AND WILLINGNESS
TO PARTICIPATE
Community-based management (CBM) is
receiving attention as a potential mechanism
for increasing the efficacy, legitimacy, and sus-
tainability of natural resources management
(Basnet, 1992; Western & Wright, 1994). Lit-
erature on fisheries management has espoused
alternatives to top-down practices that decen-
tralize authority and enable communities most
affected by management decisions to have a
greater say in those decisions (Christie, White,
& Buhat, 1994; McCay & Jentoft, 1996). In
addition to devolving power to communities,
these alternative CBM strategies call for site-
specific analysis and management (Basnet,
793
* For their generous support and contributions, the
authors thank (a) Dr. Donald Taphorn, Director, and
the faculty and staff at the Museo de Zoolog
ıa at the
Universidad Nacional Experimental de Los Llanos Oc-
cidentales ‘‘Ezequiel Zamora’’ and Carlos Hidalgo in
Guanare, State of Portuguesa, Venezuela; (b) Dr. Alex
Flecker, Cornell University; and (c) the residents of El
Potrero, Quebrada del Mam
on, and Nueva Florida in
the State of Portuguesa, Venezuela. The J. William
Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board, the Institute of
International Education, and the Cornell University
Agricultural Experiment Station provided funding for
the research. This manuscript was greatly improved by
the thoughtful insights and suggestions provided by peer
reviewers for World Development. Final revision ac-
cepted: 8 January 2004.
794 WORLD DEVELOPMENT
1992, p. 393; Brandon, 1995, p. 143) responsive
to spatial and temporal variances in target
species characteristics, habitat qualities, socio-
political factors, and user-group cultures.
The widespread interest in CBM, however,
should be coupled with a critical evaluation of
its feasibility as a practical alternative to con-
ventional management systems. One compo-
nent of that feasibility is the subject of this
research: willingness of local community mem-
bers to participate in management of local and
regional natural resources. CBM depends on
the sustained involvement of the local people
who find themselves charged with management
of natural resources for the good of their local
community, as well as the long-term benefit of
the regional public. To date, there has been very
little critical analysis of what factors motivate
local people’s willingness and ability to partici-
pate. What analysis there is has typically
focused on factors such as the existence of local
ecological knowledge (e.g., Ruddle, 1994), the
extent of government/institutional decentral-
ization (e.g., McCay & Jentoft, 1996), and
structural prescriptions for organizing local
resource user involvement (e.g., Christie et al.,
1994). Far less attention has been focused on
local peoples’ own knowledge of policy alter-
natives or options or the relative importance of
these alternatives to other factors that influence
their participation patterns.
Because willingness to participate is a fun-
damental component of any CBM effort,
research is necessary to assess the characteris-
tics that promote individual contributions to
community oversight and environmental stew-
ardship. By testing the influence of a variety of
factors on willingness to participate in com-
munity-based fishery management in a rural
Venezuelan watershed, the research reported
here increases our understanding of how to
influence willingness to participate in CBM.
This information should help managers focus
on fostering willingness to participate in natu-
ral resource-linked communities so that stew-
ardship and local-level management will be
embraced and executed by the local people,
making the professed benefits of CBM achiev-
able. As Drijver (1991, p. 131) noted about
individual agency and nature conservation, ‘‘It
is important to know why people participate
and why they support, adjust or resist the
project. Only if this is known, can one come to
a better understanding of how and under what
conditions their participation might be intensi-
fied upon.’’
2. METHODS
(a) Study area
We measured willingness to participate in
community-based fishery management
(CBFM) in three fishing villages along the
Portuguesa River in the state of Portuguesa,
Venezuela. Originating in the Andean pied-
mont, rivers throughout the state of Portuguesa
flow downward into the vast Orinoco River
floodplains called the llanos. This transition
coincides with a marked increase in fish species
diversity, from 80 species in the piedmont
(Matthews, 1998, pp. 40–41) to over 200 species
in the llanos (Winemiller, Marrero, & Taphorn,
1996, p. 23). The two distinct physical portions
of these watersheds are linked ecologically
through the biannual migrations of numerous
fish species (Winemiller et al., 1996, pp. 16, 32).
We selected the Portuguesa River because it is
one of the few commercially important rivers in
the Orinoco basin that is not yet dammed. This
ensures that fishing practices of fishers
upstream and downstream were linked by
freely-migrating fish populations.
For generations the well-being and livelihood
of fishing communities along the Portuguesa
River has depended on exploitation of this
fishery resource (Duran, 1995, p. 22). A grow-
ing Venezuelan population and market demand
for commercial fish species has increased fishing
pressure by rural families who are augmenting
traditional artisanal fishing with commercial
harvesting (Duran, 1995, p. 1). Fishery man-
agers and researchers are concerned by the
recent decline of commercial fish species, rais-
ing questions about the sustainability of current
fishing practices and the potential loss of bio-
diversity if these trends continue (Novoa, 1986;
Winemiller et al., 1996).
A 1997 national summary on sustainable
development in Venezuela reported the growing
economic crisis and ensuing poverty currently
facing many Venezuelans including ‘‘a strong
process of concentration of wealth, increasing
traditional inequities’’ (Bohorquez, Chacin, &
Viana, 1997, p. 46). These socioeconomic trends
are combined with an increasing demand for fish
in Venezuelan markets, requiring more supply of
fish and driving prices up (Duran, 1995, p. 22).
Given these circumstances, it can come as no
surprise that rural fishers are tempted to use
illegal techniques, such as weir seines, that
promise plentiful harvests and, albeit short-
term, much needed economic reprieve.
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY? 795

The failure of the current centralized man-
agement system to maintain a sustainable fish-
ery combined with the potential impacts on
rural fishing families of either a physically-
reduced or legally-restricted fishery makes
considerations of CBFM appropriate from
both biological and sociological perspectives.
The Portuguesa River watershed provided a
context in which to test the theoretical influ-
ences of willingness to participate in CBFM.
We studied three villages along the Portu-
guesa River that were similar in population
size, distance from the river, and in their rela-
tive interaction with the nearest sizable town.
By minimizing these differences, comparisons
could be made between the villages’ uses of and
impacts on the fishery. Upstream to down-
stream, the three villages were (i) El Potrero in
the piedmont, and (ii) Quebrada del Mam
on
and (iii) Nueva Florida in the llanos.
(b) Research phases
Spanning eight months in 1998, research
occurred in both the wet and dry seasons,
eliminating seasonal biases (Chambers, Long-
hurst, & Pacey, 1979). The field work was
conducted in phases including: site selection;
direct observation and the use of Rapid Rural
Appraisal (RRA) techniques (Zanetell, 1999);
and a quantitative oral survey of village resi-
dents (Table 1). Approximately a month was
spent in each village collecting the RRA qual-
itative data (see Zanetell & Knuth, 2002) that
informed and shaped the subsequent quantita-
tive survey phase (reported here).
(c) Survey translations and pre-tests
A Venezuelan social scientist working in the
state of Portuguesa assisted with translating the
survey instrument from English to Spanish.
The Spanish version was pre-tested orally with
a group of Venezuelans who fished regularly in
the Portuguesa River but did not live in any of
the study sites. Each item was discussed in turn
with the group to clarify both item purpose/
content and word usage so that the survey
could be as understandable as possible to
watershed residents. Subjective interpretation
of survey questions and answers can be mini-
mized by using the language and terminology
most familiar to the study group (Converse &
Presser, 1986, pp. 18–19). ‘‘Furnishing the
vocabulary’’ of research participants by incor-
porating regional dialects into survey instru-
ments (Egan, Jones, Luloff, & Finley, 1994, p.
460) is particularly important where language
use by illiterate and poorly-educated rural
populations can differ greatly from that taught
in schools or spoken in nearby cities (Campbell,
Shrestha, & Stone, 1979, p. 128; personal
observation, 1998).

Table 1. Field research phases, chronology, and participants

Research activity Chronology Participantsa Affiliation at time
of research
Site selection January 1998 B.A. Zanetell and B.A. Knuthb Cornell University
Rapid Rural Appraisal February–April 1998 B.A. Zanetell and B.A. Knuth Cornell University
(RRA)
Survey preparation and March–July 1998 B.A. Zanetell and B.A. Knuth Cornell University
enumeration A. Schmitz (survey translation) UNELLEZc
Undergraduate students (survey UNELLEZ
enumeration)
Wrap-up and August 1998 B.A. Zanetell and B.A. Knuth Cornell University
presentation of
preliminary results to
in-country partners
a
All phases involved and depended on cooperation with residents of the three fishing villages where the research was
done.
b
As a graduate student, B.A. Zanetell had a Fulbright Fellowship to conduct the research in Venezuela and was in
constant consultation with B.A. Knuth, her advisor at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY, USA.
c
Throughout the research phases, B.A. Zanetell enjoyed informal sponsorship by and collaboration with the faculty,
staff, and students at the Universidad Nacional Experimental de Los Llanos Occidentales ‘‘Ezequiel Zamora’’
(UNELLEZ) in Guanare, State of Portuguesa, Venezuela.
796 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

(d) Sample-size cooperative. Response validity was high

Total households numbered 125 in El Pot-
rero, 90 in Quebrada del Mam
on, and 92 in
Nueva Florida. We calculated the sample size
for each village using the following criteria: (i)
each village had a finite population determined
by the number of households; (ii) the outcome
of the response variable––Willingness to Par-
ticipate––is binary across the villages (i.e. will-
ing or not willing); and (iii) the test for
significance is set at the 0.05 level; with (iv) a
power to detect differences of 0.15 between
villages. These criteria required a sample of 80
households in El Potrero, and 65 households in
each of Quebrada del Mam
on and Nueva
Florida.
We used a random numbers table (Ott, 1993,
p. A-23) to generate the sample for each village.
We actually surveyed 81 households in El
Potrero, 66 in Quebrada del Mam
on, and 74
in Nueva Florida. In each village, only 1–3
households refused to participate in the survey.
These refusals were handled by substituting the
declining household with the nearest house not
already selected as part of the random sample.
(e) Survey enumeration
The survey was given orally in each site by a
group of 10 young men and women from the
three villages who attended the university in the
nearby city of Guanare. Village residency and
higher education were a powerful combination.
Existing rapport between villagers and enu-
merators caused respondents to be highly
because it was difficult to mislead the assistants
who had themselves grown up along the Por-
tuguesa River. Surveys in each village were
given in a concentrated two-day effort during
June and July 1998. Survey training was done
the first morning of each site visit. A ‘‘round-
robin’’ training technique (Weinberg, 1983, pp.
343–347) taught correct voice level and pace,
probing without leading, and how to record
responses.
(f) The survey instrument: conceptual basis and
scale operationalization
A literature review and qualitative research
(Zanetell & Knuth, 2002) in the study water-
shed informed the conceptual basis and survey
instrument. We hypothesized that an individ-
ual’s willingness to participate in CBFM was
influenced by five independent variables: (i)
dependence on the fishery; (ii) perception about
the state of the fishery; (iii) level of concern
about the fishery; (iv) perceived locus of
authority over the fishery; and (v) sense of
community (Figure 1). Scales measuring the
dependent variable willingness to participate
and the independent variables comprise a sur-
vey given in the three Venezuelan fishing vil-
lages (Table 2).
(i) Dependent variable willingness to participate
Five survey questions evaluated villager
willingness to participate individually; change
fishing practices; work with other villagers;
participate with upstream residents; and par-

Locus of
Authority
Perceptions about Level of
the State of the Concern about
Fishery the Fishery

Dependence
Sense of
on the
Community
Fishery

Willingness to Participate
in Community-Based
Fishery Management

Figure 1. Flow chart depicting hypothesized relationships between the concepts theorized as influencing willingness to
participate in community-based fishery management.
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY? 797

Table 2. Survey concepts and response scales

Concept Number of items Number of points on scale Anchorsa
Willingness to Participate 6 4 4 ¼ very willing
1 ¼ not at all willing

Dependence on the Fishery 11 items total

4 7 7 ¼ everyday
4 ¼ 1 time/2 weeks
1 ¼ never
7 5 5 ¼ strong agreement
3 ¼ neutral responseb
1 ¼ strong disagreement

State of the Fishery 3 3 3 ¼ perceived decline

2 ¼ no perceived changeb
1 ¼ no perceived decline
Level of Concern 5 5 5 ¼ strong agreement
3 ¼ neutral responseb
1 ¼ strong disagreement
Locus of Authority 3 5 5 ¼ strong agreement
3 ¼ neutral responseb
1 ¼ strong disagreement
Sense of Community 16 5 5 ¼ strong agreement
3 ¼ neutral responseb
1 ¼ strong disagreement
a
Anchors are the end- and mid-points of survey responses available and their numerical coding for statistical
analysis.
b
Responses of ‘‘don’t know’’ were included in the neutral response category.

ticipate with downstream residents to protect
the fishery. A sixth item asked respondents to
assess the willingness of other villagers in the
same village to work together to ensure a sus-
tainable fishery.
(ii) Independent variable dependence on the
fishery
Our survey assessed the practical and emo-
tional dimensions contributing to an individ-
ual’s dependence on the river and fishery.
Practically, villagers were asked about their
seasonal frequency of fishing and fish con-
sumption as well as about their reliance on the
Portuguesa River for food and income. We
measured emotional dependence on the river
and fishery by asking whether respondent
happiness depended on living near the river and
whether it mattered to respondents if they lived
near the river. Because the ability to satisfy
economic and emotional needs is related to
overall sense of well-being, villagers also ap-
praised the well-being of his/her community
and the well-being of villages upstream and
downstream as a function of their proximity to
the Portuguesa River.
(iii) Independent variable state of the fishery
To assess perceptions about the current state
of the fishery we asked villagers to compare the
current state of fish populations to ‘‘normal’’
conditions 10 years previous to the research
including changes in fish abundance, fish size,
and catch/effort. We used a 10-year recall
period because qualitative research (Zanetell &
Knuth, 2002) suggested that this is when vil-
lagers began noting changes in the river and
fishery. Scientists concur that physical and
biological changes in the Portuguesa River
began a decade previous to the research (Ag€ uin,
1997, p. 6).
(iv) Independent variable level of concern about
the fishery
We measured level of concern about the
current state of the fishery by asking villagers to
798 WORLD DEVELOPMENT
assess: the continued availability of the fishery
resource; the need for increased protection of
fish stocks; their concern for the future of the
fishery; and their desire to pass a healthy fishery
on to their children. Respondents also
appraised the current contribution to fishery
decline of fishing practices in the resident,
upstream, and downstream villages.
(v) Independent variable perceived locus of
authority over fishery
Locus of authority attempts to determine the
organizational level––ranging from individual
to community to government––that respon-
dents believe is most appropriate for making
management decisions for the fishery. This
concept is recognized as an important compo-
nent of citizen participation in natural resour-
ces management decisions and has been
included in surveys measuring public percep-
tions of the fairness of state agency decision-
making processes (Lauber, 1996, p. 88). In
this study, a watershed resident’s orientation
toward bottom-up or top-down management is
a theorized influence on his/her willingness to
participate in efforts to conserve the fisheries.
For example, if a village fisherman holds that
the government should have control over
management decisions for the fishery, then he
may not feel that CBFM is appropriate and his
willingness to participate should reflect this
conviction.
Three agree/disagree statements measured
locus of authority. An item asking respondents
whether humans have any control over the
fishery was included because the majority of the
people surveyed held strong Christian beliefs
(predominantly Catholic). A second item
assessed whether fishery management should
occur at the government or community level.
The final item asked respondents if they had
their own ideas about how to protect fish
populations in the Portuguesa River.
(vi) Independent variable sense of community
The preceding independent variables relate
directly to the declining fishery resource. The
concept of sense of community is more theo-
retical, building on recent interest of environ-
mental planners and academicians (Gardner &
Stern, 1996, pp. 130–133; Livingston, 1996;
Vitek, 1996; Zanetell, 2000) and environmental
psychologists (Walsh, Craik, & Price, 1992;
Zube, 1991) in the relationship between sense
of community and local-level participation in
natural resources management. Here we con-
sider the conceptual linkage between sense of
community and willingness to participate in
detail because of its relevance to sustainable
development practitioners, natural resources
managers, and academic researchers.
Community as a concept has both physical
and emotional aspects that are experienced by
the members of the community. As a physical
locale in which people live together, share ser-
vices, and identify as their home, community
functions as one of the most basic levels of
organization of humans in time and place. The
concept of community-based conservation
conveys a decentralization of natural resources
management to the local level. Community also
embodies the shared experiences that connect
people living in the same locale. This results in
an emotional sentiment about one’s community
and neighbors that can include feelings of
commitment and cohesion. These sentiments,
felt at both the individual and group level, are
commonly referred to in community psycho-
logy as ‘‘sense of community’’ (Sarason, 1974).
An individual’s sense of community affects
his/her willingness to participate in activities to
help or improve the community (McMillan,
1996; St. Anne, 1999, p. 69). When communi-
ties are confronted by a problem or threat, a
stronger sense of community may lead to a
‘‘greater sense of purpose and perceived con-
trol’’ that results in increased willingness to
participate in and contribute to efforts that
benefit the community (Bachrach & Zautra,
1985).
We used a modification of Buckner’s 18-item
neighborhood cohesion scale (1988) to measure
sense of community. This scale was developed
to assess the sense of cohesion and community
among residents living in the same neighbor-
hood within a larger town or city. It is recog-
nized as one of the few scales designed to
extrapolate sense of community measured at
the individual level to the group––e.g., neigh-
borhood or community––level (Puddifoot,
1995, p. 363) and appears robust across differ-
ent cultures (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995, pp.
145, 147). The small population size of each of
the three study villages makes each comparable
to a ‘‘neighborhood’’ in that residents know of
or have interactions with almost everyone
living within the physical boundary of each
village (personal observation, 1998). The results
of the qualitative research phase (Zanetell &
Knuth, 2002) suggest that residents of the
Portuguesa River watershed were most readily
able to relate to the questions posed by Buck-
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY? 799

ner’s scale as compared to other survey We removed two Buckner scale items (fel-
instruments (e.g., Chavis, Hogge, & McMillan, lowship, we vs. they) that our pre-tests and
1986, p. 29; Bollen & Hoyle, 1990, p. 497). past research (Robinson & Wilkinson, 1995)

Table 3. Items included in Buckner’s Neighborhood Cohesion Scale adapted to measure sense of community in Ven-
Buckner’s original items
Overall, I am very attracted to living
in this neighborhood
I feel like I belong to this
neighborhood
I visit with my neighbors in their
homes
The friendships and associations
I have with other people in my
neighborhood mean a lot to me
Given the opportunity, I would like
to move out of this neighborhood
If the people in this neighborhood
were planning something I’d
think of it as something ‘‘we’’
were doing rather than ‘‘they’’
were doinga
If I need advice about something
I could go to someone in my
neighborhood
I think I agree with most people in
my neighborhood about what is
important in life
I believe my neighbors would help
me in an emergency
I feel loyal to the people in my
neighborhood
I borrow things from and exchange
favors with my neighbors
I would be willing to work together
with others on something to
improve my neighborhood
I plan to remain a resident of this
neighborhood for a number of
years
I like to think of myself as similar to
the people who live in this
neighborhood
I rarely have neighbors over to my
house to visit
a
A feeling of fellowship runs deep
between me and other people in
this neighborhood
I regularly stop and talk with people
in my neighborhood
Living in this neighborhood gives
me a sense of community
a
Item 6 and item 16 from Buckner’s scale were not used in the final study scale of sense of community. Response
alternatives for all items are (5) strongly agree, (4) agree, (3) neither agree or disagree, (2) disagree, and (1) strongly
disagree. Item 5 and 15 are reverse coded because they are negative statements.
ezuelan fishing villages
Items adapted to this study
Overall, you like living in this village
You feel like you belong to this
village
You visit with your neighbors in
their homes
The friendships and associations
you have with other people in your
village mean a lot to you
Given the opportunity, you would
like to move out of this village
If you needed advice about some-
thing you could go to someone in
your village
You think you agree with most
people in your village about what is
important in life
You believe your neighbors would
help you in an emergency
You feel loyal to the people in your
village
You borrow things and exchange
favors with your neighbors
You would be willing to work
together with others on something
to improve your village
You plan to remain a resident of
this village for a number of years
You like to think of yourself as
similar to the people who live in
your village
You rarely have neighbors over to
your house to visit
You regularly stop and talk with
people in your village
Living in this village gives you a
sense of community
Spanish translation
En general, le gusta vivir en este
caserio
Se siente que pertenece a este caserio
Usted visita a sus vecinos en sus
casas
La amistad y las relaciones con la
gente significa mucho para usted
Le gustar
ıa mudarse fuera de este
caserio
Si usted necesita consejo sobre algo,
podr
ıa pedirlo a alguien de su case-
rio
Usted cree que est
a de acuerdo con
la gente de su caserio sobre lo que es
importante en la vida
Usted cree que sus vecinos le ayu-
dar
ıan en una emergenc
ıa
Usted se siente fiel a la gente en su
caserio
Usted pide prestadas cosas e inter-
cambia favores con sus vecinos
Usted estar
ıa dispuesto a participar
junto con otros en algo para mejo-
rar su caserio
Usted planea quedarse en este case-
rio por algunos a~ nos
Usted cree que comparte gustos y
opiniones con la gente del caserio
Casi nunca sus vecinos lo visitan a
usted
Con frecuencia usted se para y habla
con gente en su caserio
Viviendo en este caserio le da a
usted un sentido de comunidad
800 WORLD DEVELOPMENT
indicated as inappropriate in this research
context. Our final modified Buckner scale
measured residents’ sense of community in the
three villages (Table 3).
(g) Statistical analysis
We analyzed survey data using an SPSS 1999
statistical software package for social science
research with the objective to develop a pre-
dictive model illustrating the influence that
different variables (e.g., Dependence on the
Fishery, Sense of Community, etc.) have on the
dependent variable Willingness to Participate.
To prevent error in the recording of responses
during survey enumeration, the verbal de-
scriptors of response categories and their
numerical scores on the written survey were in
the same order for all questions with the same
response categories (DeVellis, 1991, p. 81). This
required changing the direction of scoring for
some scales and their associated items during
data entry. In accordance with the conceptual
framework, scores were recoded so that high
scores were assigned to the response categories
corresponding to a greater hypothetical influ-
ence of the item measured on willingness to
participate.
The influence of the site variable was mea-
sured using chi-square (v2 ) tests and one way
analysis of variance (ANOVA). v2 tests on
dichotomous socioeconomic variables deter-
mined whether the observed differences
between the three villages were empirically
significant. Ordinal socioeconomic variables
were compared to the variable Site and the
dependent variable Willingness to Participate
using one-way ANOVAs to detect significant
differences and thus potential explanatory
power in the predictive model. Significant dif-
ferences (or lack thereof) detected by one-way
ANOVAs justified the inclusion in or exclusion
from the final predictive model of these socio-
economic variables. One-way ANOVAs
between scale items and the Site variable
determined whether to include Site in the final
predictive model of willingness to participate.
Reliability and validity tests were done on the
survey data from all villages together rather
than separately, increasing generalizability of
the results from site-specific to the watershed
scale. The reliability of the scales was tested by
calculating Cronbach’s alpha and examining
interitem correlations within scales. Factor
analysis was used to test scale validity and
clarify item inclusion. It was expected that scale
items would load heavily on the same factor.
Hypothesized scales in the items loading on
different factors were regrouped to produce
scales consistent with factor loading results.
Varying combinations of the resulting factors
were tested by general linear univariate regres-
sion to develop a significant predictive model of
willingness to participate. Path analysis was
used to explain the model and test the fit of the
conceptual design to the resulting predictive
model.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
(a) Predictive model
General linear univariate regressions on
various combinations of the six factors and the
Site variable resulted in two competing predic-
tive models of willingness to participate in
CBFM, one with Dependence on the Fishery
driving the model when Site was excluded and
vice versa. In both models, the effects of other
factors on Willingness to Participate are simi-
lar. ANOVAs and v2 tests suggest that Depen-
dence on the Fishery is linked so closely with
Site that each variable can replace the effects of
the other in the predictive model. In other
management contexts with different spatial
arrangements of natural resources, a pattern
between site and resource dependence may not
exist. Therefore, Dependence on the Fishery
is considered rather than Site in the interpre-
tation of the willingness to participate predic-
tive model.
A path diagram illustrates the resultant pre-
dictive model (Figure 2). The Willingness to
Participate factor was the dependent response
variable and the other five factors were the
independent variables. The results confirm that
all of the theoretical influences are significant
predictors of willingness to participate in com-
munity-based fishery management in the Por-
tuguesa River watershed. The direction and
amount of influence, however, were not in
accord with the positive relationships predicted
for each concept.
Dependence on the Fishery was the main
effect driving the predictive model of the
influences on the dependent variable Willing-
ness to Participate. Sense of Community not
only had a positive main effect on Willingness
to Participate, but also interacted significantly
with the remaining hypothetical influences.
This suggests that the influence of Sense of
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY?
Dependence on
the Fishery
+.133
Sense of
Community
+.169 -.109
State of the Current
Fishery Watershed
Concern
Figure 2. A path diagram illustrates the predictive model of theoretical influences on willingness to participate. Note:
Bold arrows indicate significant main effects. Narrow arrows indicate significant interaction effects. Numbers are the beta
coefficients from the linear equation for the model.
Community may be highly linked and related
to the strength and behavior of the other
influences on Willingness to Participate.
Of the significant interactive factors, only
State of the Fishery had a positive interactive
effect, whereas Future Concern for the Fishery
and Current Watershed Concern had negative
interactive effects on Sense of Community and
its main effect on Willingness to Participate.
Future Concern for Fishery also had a negative
main effect on the model. One possible expla-
nation for these negative relationships is the
presence of a defeatist attitude. For low levels
of concern––both for the watershed and for the
future––willingness to participate increases
rapidly as sense of community increases. At
high levels of concern, however, the rate of
respondent willingness to participate tapers off.
This suggests that once a threshold level of
concern is reached, the problems seem insur-
mountable and villagers do not believe they can
effectively do anything to alleviate the fishery
decline.
(b) Site comparisons
v2 tests show that occupation influences the
socioeconomic differences between sites, and
one-way ANOVAs indicate Site should be
considered in the path analysis. v2 tests indicate
that occupation (v2 ¼ 0:000, df ¼ 2), boat/
canoe ownership (v2 ¼ 0:000, df ¼ 4), and
respondent gender (v2 ¼ 0:000, df ¼ 2) differ
significantly between the three sites. This
reflects an upstream to downstream transition
801
+.194
Willingness to
Participate
-.177 -.182
Future
Concern
for Fishery
from an agricultural to a fishing economy in the
Portuguesa River watershed and an increase in
female respondents in fishing households where
adult males (fishermen) were less likely to be
found in their homes at the time of the survey
than agricultural laborers. A one-way ANOVA
showed no significant difference between gender
and items measuring Willingness to Participate;
therefore, gender was not included in the pre-
dictive model.
ANOVA results show that respondent age
(F ¼ 2:598, p ¼ 0:077), years of formal educa-
tion (F ¼ 1:695, p ¼ 0:186), and household size
(F ¼ 1:512, p ¼ 0:223) do not differ signifi-
cantly between sites. Length of residence
(F ¼ 12:968, p ¼ 0:000) and standard of living
(F ¼ 13:576, p ¼ 0:000) differ significantly,
possibly due to site occupational differences.
Whereas length of residence has been identified
as a contributor to community attachment
(Theodori & Luloff, 2000, p. 408), our ANOVA
results show that sense of community items do
not differ significantly in response to length of
residence.
One-way ANOVAs show that overall there is
a significant difference between villages for
scale items from all of the concept areas except
state of the fishery suggesting that the univari-
ate regression used to develop the willingness to
participate predictive model should include the
Site variable. As noted in the prior section on
the predictive model, the Dependence on the
Fishery variable, rather than Site, was used in
the predictive model because of the substitut-
ability of these two variables.
802 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

(c) Reliability and justification for data
aggregation
To determine if data from each site should be
analyzed separately or aggregated, Cronbach’s
alpha was calculated for the three sites sepa-
rately and the data set as a whole for each of
the six scales (Table 4). Similar Cronbach’s
alpha values for the aggregated data set and for
the sites separately justify aggregation of the
data set to develop a predictive model of will-
ingness to participate at the watershed level.
For the aggregated data set, a low Cronbach’s
alpha for the locus of authority and for the
level of concern scale prompted reconsideration
of the items theorized to comprise these scales.
To increase reliability, an item from each scale
was removed that had been understood poorly
by respondents during survey enumeration
(personal observation, 1998). Interitem corre-
lations within scales further confirmed the
reliability of the six scales. A matrix showing
these correlations was not included because of
the large number of items (40).
(d) Validity
We performed a factor analysis on all items
included in the scales to assess their validity and
further confirm that items correspond appro-
priately to the theorized components of will-
ingness to participate (DeVellis, 1991, p. 107).
Oblimin rotation (Kim & Mueller, 1978, pp.
57–59) was used on factor loadings because of
the likelihood of correlations between scales
measuring the hypothetical influences on will-
ingness to participate. Missing values were
excluded listwise from the factor analysis. It
was expected that item loadings for each scale
would cluster together on distinct factors. Four
of the proposed scales were retained as factors
including: (1) Willingness to Participate, (2)
Dependence on the Fishery, (3) State of the
fishery, and (4) Sense of Community (Tables 5
and 6).
Items from the level of concern scale and the
locus of authority scale loaded onto two dis-
tinct factors, reflecting a separation between
items relating to current watershed concern and
items relating to future concern for the fishery
(Table 7). The level of concern scale and the
locus of authority scale were converted to two
new factors: (1) Current Watershed Concern
and (2) Future Concern for the Fishery (Table
7).
Cronbach’s alpha was calculated for the final
six factors produced by the factor analysis
(Table 4). The final Cronbach’s alpha values of
all the scales were sufficiently reliable for the
purposes of this research (Spector, 1992, p. 32).
The values for Dependence on the Fishery,
Sense of Community, Willingness to Partici-
pate, and Current Watershed Concern demon-
strate very strong scale reliability (Carmines &
Zeller, 1979, p. 51). The results of the reliability
and validity tests indicate that the six factors

Table 4. Cronbach’s alpha values for (1) concept scales before and after item removal from level of concern and locus
of authority scalesa and (2) final concept scales after factor analysis regrouping
Scale El Potrero Quebrada Nueva Aggregated data set Final concept
del Mam
on Florida scales after
Before item After item
factor analysis
removal removal
regrouping
Willingness to 0.8686 0.8244 0.8376 0.8686 – 0.869
Participate
Dependence on the 0.7791 0.8068 0.8032 0.8978 – 0.898
Fishery
State of the Fishery 0.6726 0.4798 0.6594 0.5758 – 0.576
Level of Concern 0.6961 0.6460 0.7067 0.5572 0.6903 –
Locus of Authority 0.5246 0.4349 0.5993 0.1307 0.5305 –
Sense of Community 0.7995 0.7841 0.9076 0.8952 – 0.895
Current Watershed – – – – – 0.761
Concern
Future Concern for – – – – – 0.640
Fishery
a
Cronbach’s alpha values for each site were calculated after the removal of items from the Level of Concern and
Locus of Authority scales.
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY? 803

Table 5. Factor analysis of willingness to participate, dependence on fishery, and state of the fishery scalesa
Item Rotated factor loadings
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6
Willingness to Participate
Personal participation 2.587E)02 0.606 )8.34E)02 )0.104 0.130 )0.295
Change fishing practices 7.363E)02 0.646 6.078E)02 )8.76E)02 5.533E)02 )0.119
Willingness to work in group 3.535E)02 0.710 3.572E)02 )0.140 3.991E)02 )0.125
Estimated village 0.120 0.589 )0.125 )8.40E)02 )0.134 )0.161
participation
Work with villages upstream 9.314E)02 0.817 )4.47E)02 6.951E)02 0.111 6.374E)03
Work with villages )1.14E)03 0.785 )4.98E)02 )0.106 2.586E)02 2.840E)02
downstream
Dependence on Fishery
Frequency eat fish dry season 1.819E)02 7.551E)02 )1.046E)03 )0.654 )6.826E)03 )5.148E)02
Frequency eat fish wet season 3.878E)03 5.595E)02 2.669E)02 )0.763 )2.673E)02 4.015E)02
Frequency fishing dry season 5.017E)02 8.072E)02 )1.948E)02 )0.679 4.187E)02 )0.100
Frequency fishing wet season 9.335E)02 7.600E)02 )8.361E)02 )0.735 3.695E)02 6.153E)03
Part of happiness 9.834E)02 )0.266 4.828E)03 )0.606 )7.785E)03 )9.143E)02
Important to live near river 4.677E)02 )0.135 6.983E)02 )0.528 )0.136 )0.161
Ability to provide food 4.541E)02 )7.728E)02 1.351E)02 )0.873 )4.216E)02 4.454E)02
Ability to make money 6.009E)02 0.137 5.802E)02 )0.767 5.645E)02 8.829E)02
Well-being of Village 1.944E)02 0.112 7.147E)02 )0.708 )3.780E)03 3.912E)02
Well-being sites upstream 1.382E)02 0.290 1.665E)02 )0.474 0.170 0.126
Well-being sites downstream 3.955E)02 5.656E)02 5.608E)02 )0.411 0.349 )0.161
State of the Fishery
Fish abundance )0.145 )4.56E)02 7.857E)04 4.893E)02 0.635 )0.104
Average fish size 2.336E)02 0.151 0.137 0.103 0.671 0.167
Catch/effort 4.926E)03 8.755E)02 3.505E)02 )3.60E)02 0.763 8.971E)02
a
Boldface values indicate items loading most heavily on each factor. Willingness to Participate Scale, Dependence on
the Fishery Scale, and State of the Fishery Scale were converted into Willingness to Participate, Dependence on the
Fishery, and State of the Fishery Factors, respectively.

are suitable for univariate regression to develop
a predictive model of willingness to participate.
4. CONCLUSIONS
The recent popularity and widespread initi-
ation of CBM efforts are outpacing research on
the efficacy of such programs and the criteria
necessary for CBM application. Our research
on the factors influencing willingness to par-
ticipate has highlighted both the inroads and
the barriers to involving local users in natural
resources management. Dependence on the
Fishery and Sense of Community are signifi-
cant influences that would likely require long-
term outreach and intervention to change. In
the short term, Perception of the State of the
Fishery, Future Concern for the Fishery, and
Current Watershed Concern are factors that
are more likely to respond to intervention
efforts. In particular, a detected tendency
toward a defeatist attitude in villagers highly
concerned by their perceptions of fishery
decline could be alleviated by adult education
and outreach. Our research suggests that will-
ingness to participate and thus CBM could be
enhanced by extension efforts that raise villager
awareness of science and policy options for
recovering and sustaining a healthy Portuguesa
River fishery. For fishery managers, these
results have practical implications on how to
increase the participation of local users in
community-based management efforts.
(a) Defeatist attitude
Our results suggest that villagers who are
highly concerned about the fishery may feel
discouraged by what seem to be insurmount-
able problems. This suggests a defeatist atti-
tude. Research on environmental behavior
804 WORLD DEVELOPMENT

Table 6. Factor analysis of sense of community scalea

Item Rotated factor loadings
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6
Sense of Community
Like living in village 0.509 )0.214 )0.313 3.274E)03 0.238 )0.258
Feel belong to village 0.648 )0.194 )0.179 )7.044E)03 0.227 )0.282
Visit neighbors’ homes 0.607 )3.106-02 )3.112E)02 )4.276E)02 1.460E)02 )6.273E)02
Village friendships impor- 0.606 2.234E)02 0.115 )5.260E)02 9.790E)02 )3.481E)02
tant
Would not like to move 0.332 )0.124 )0.116 )0.391 3.909E)02 0.106
Advice available in village 0.591 0.213 0.142 )0.108 )3.391E)02 5.210E)02
Agree on what is important 0.673 0.187 3.669E)02 )2.843E)02 )9.074E)02 0.210
Help available in emergency 0.656 8.664E)03 )7.948E)02 )0.136 )6.726E)02 1.091E)02
Feel loyal to other villagers 0.787 0.110 0.136 6.046E)02 )5.886E)02 4.149E)02
Borrow and exchange favors 0.640 0.142 6.356E)02 )8.691E)02 )0.146 0.177
Willing to work together 0.471 0.347 0.110 2.373E)02 )0.186 )0.166
Plan to stay in village 0.700 )3.855E)02 )0.116 1.413E)02 5.867E)02 )0.128
Feel similar to other villagers 0.765 5.901E)02 7.503E)02 )0.145 1.752E)02 0.170
Villagers visit your house )6.220E)02 7.958E)02 )6.115E)02 )0.401 )0.113 )1.170E)02
Talk regularly with others 0.588 )0.100 1.178E)02 )4.550E)02 8.854E)04 )7.145E)02
Have sense of community 0.711 4.785E)02 7.623E)02 4.140E)02 )0.148 )5.703E)02
a
Boldface values indicate items loading most heavily on each factor. Sense of Community Scale was converted into
Sense of Community Factor.

Table 7. Factor analysis of level of concern and locus of authority scalesa

Item Rotated factor loadings
Factor 1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Factor 4 Factor 5 Factor 6
Level of Concern
Want increased protection of the )4.39E)02 0.394 1.92E)02 )3.97E)02 1.61E)02 )0.595
fisheryb
Worry for future fish Populationsb 4.02E)02 0.250 0.104 5.43E)02 )2.67E)02 )0.673
Want fish for future Generationsb 0.178 7.80E)02 1.95E)02 )0.154 )0.182 )0.484
Village fishing causing Declinec )4.94E)02 2.22E)02 0.786 )1.10E)02 )5.03E)02 0.129
Upstream fishing causing Declinec 5.26E)02 )0.119 0.870 )1.94E)02 9.75E)02 )7.15E)02
Downstream fishing causing Declinec 5.61E)02 )0.134 0.845 0.111 0.139 )0.156
Locus of Authority
Village should have Controlc 8.25E)02 )7.05E)02 0.399 )0.246 6.39E)02 )0.307
Individual input for Managementb )2.58E)02 0.140 0.116 )0.282 )2.60E)02 )0.385
a
Boldface values indicate items loading most heavily on each factor.
b
These items converted to a factor called Future Concern for the Fishery.
c
These items converted to a factor called Current Watershed Concern.

suggests that this defeatist attitude may be
related to the presence or absence of ‘‘empow-
erment factors’’ in the user group ‘‘which give
people the sense that they have the power and
skill to act in ways that will resolve environ-
mental issues’’ (Byers, 1996, p. 86). User group
empowerment is related to having options, or
being aware of options, to current environ-
mentally-damaging practices. These options
may be technological or social; for example, the
substitution of new fishing techniques or the
formation of new policies that enable local
users to harvest the resource more sustainably.
People may know that a practice has negative environ-
mental consequences, and also hold values that would
lead them to change their behavior, all else being
equal. But they may have no options, alternatives,
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY?
or opportunities. . . Lack of options can act as a bar-
rier to behavioral change (Byers, 1996, pp. 36–37).
In the Portuguesa River watershed, indica-
tions of a defeatist attitude may reflect a per-
ceived lack of options for individuals to
contribute to fishery restoration and prevent its
further decline.
A fishery professional could combat this
defeatist attitude by raising ecological under-
standing and assisting villagers to learn prac-
tical ways to contribute to fishery restoration.
This could be done through environmental
education and communication programs that
aim to increase ecological knowledge and
understanding while teaching actual skills that
empower villagers to fish more responsibly and
sustainably. Hungerford and Volk (1990) noted
that knowledge of ecology alone ‘‘does not, in
itself, produce [sound] environmental behav-
ior.’’ This is clearly the case in the Portuguesa
River watershed where local users have an
intimate familiarity with the physical, climato-
logical, and ecological factors influencing fish
behavior and activity, yet continue to fish in
ways that contribute to fishery decline. Hung-
erford and Volk (1990) concluded that ‘‘the
ultimate aim of education is shaping human
behavior.’’ Therefore, fishery managers would
be wise to incorporate locally-based education
and communication programs into their man-
agement agendas because ‘‘fisheries manage-
ment is not management of fish but of
fishermen’’ (McCay, 1980, p. 36).
(b) Sense of community
Our results suggest that sense of community
does have a significant influence on user group
willingness to participate in CBM. This sup-
ports the observation of Jentoft and Sandersen
(1996, p. 302) that alternative approaches to
fisheries management were more effective in
villages where ‘‘community spirit’’ was strong.
The tendency to consider fishing communi-
ties as homogeneous social units despite evi-
dence of ‘‘a complex array of vested interests’’
(Davis & Bailey, 1996, p. 260) suggests that it
may not be wise to presuppose that residents of
the same locality have shared feelings of com-
mitment to that place and to each other.
Research indicates that social, economic, gen-
der, and ethnic differences within a community
significantly affect individual values, concerns,
and priorities (Thomas-Slayter, Esser, &
Shields, 1993; Welbourn, 1991). These differ-
805
ences can, in some circumstances, contribute to
conflict and disagreement.
Therefore, even as our results draw more
attention to the important role of sense of
community in enabling CBM, this field of study
would also benefit from further knowledge
about how to foment community cohesion and
commitment, particularly where conflict and
tensions exist. Progress on how to enhance sense
of community and its empowering effects is
being made in literature on civil society (Eberly,
1994), social capital (Putnam, 1995), and col-
laboration (Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000).
Further research on sense of community is
important both to learn more about its influ-
ence on natural resources management and to
learn more about how to develop community
spirit in situations where its absence is a limi-
tation to the fruition of CBM.
Conducting such an inquiry and analysis represents
the substantive strength of social research and, conse-
quently, is the basis for the meaningful contribution
that social research can make to the development of
alternative fisheries management strategies (Davis &
Bailey, 1996, p. 263).
Such research will contribute to our under-
standing of how to preserve biological diversity
along with cultural diversity and rural tradi-
tions which are at the heart of participation in
community-based management (Kleymeyer,
1996).
Our results also suggest that further research
is needed on assessing local users’ perceptions
of locus of authority over fishery management.
Our locus of authority scale failed to produce
significant results, yet the literature supported
its inclusion as a hypothetical influence on
willingness to participate. This suggests that
further research is needed on developing mea-
sures of locus of authority. Our scale focused
on who could and should have power and
authority over the fishery. Assessments of locus
of authority may need to give more attention to
villagers’ current perceptions of who does have
power and authority over the fishery.
(c) CBM and fisheries management: the
importance of local involvement
The research presented here is not meant to
be an evaluation of the professed merits of
community-based management, but rather a
deeper exploration of the basic foundation
upon which CBM depends––sustained
806 WORLD DEVELOPMENT
involvement of the local people. Through con-
sideration of a declining fishery in a rural
Venezuelan watershed, an attempt was made to
further highlight what contributes to and
motivates willingness to participate in commu-
nity-based fishery management.
The resulting predictive model served to
underscore the importance of sense of com-
munity by illustrating its interaction with the
other influences on willingness to participate in
CBFM. The results of this research enable
those involved with any process that decen-
tralizes management to take a more pro-active
role engendering partnerships and shared goals.
CBM should not be treated as a transition of
power, but rather as a collaborative process
between user groups and managers for foster-
ing stewardship values and an enduring com-
mitment to sustaining natural resources.
Natural resources managers can increase the
REFERENCES
Ag€
uin, C. (1997). Area de manejo integral de recursos
naturales renovables R
ıo Portuguesa. Report to
Ministry of the Environment and Renewable Natu-
ral Resources (MARNR). Division of the Autono-
mous Service of Wildlife (PROFAUNA), Guanare,
State of Portuguesa, Venezuela.
Bachrach, K. M., & Zautra, A. J. (1985). Coping with a
community stressor: the threat of a hazardous waste
facility. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 26(2),
127–141.
Basnet, K. (1992). Conservation practices in Nepal: past
and present. Ambio, 21(6), 390–393.
Bohorquez, H. C., Chacin, B. O., & Viana, M. C. (1997).
National report of the implementation of the action
plan for sustainable development (Agenda 21), Ven-
ezuela. Ministry of the Environment and Renewable
Natural Resources (MARNR). London: The New
Economics Foundation.
Bollen, K. A., & Hoyle, R. H. (1990). Perceived
cohesion: a conceptual and empirical examination.
Social Forces, 69(2), 479–504.
Brandon, K. (1995). People, parks, forests or fields: a
realistic view of tropical forest conservation. Land
Use Policy, 12(2), 137–144.
Buckner, J. C. (1988). The development of an instrument
to measure neighborhood cohesion. American Jour-
nal of Community Psychology, 16(6), 771–791.
Byers, B. A. (1996). Understanding and influencing
behaviors in conservation and natural resources
management. African Biodiversity Series, No. 4.
Biodiversity Support Program, Washington, DC.
Campbell, J. G., Shrestha, R., & Stone, L. (1979). The
use and misuse of social science research in Nepal.
Research Centre for Nepal and Asian Studies,
Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu.
possibility for appropriate and effective CBM
by ensuring that the components necessary for
its success––such as willingness to participate
and sense of community––are present and well-
developed. For these abstract concepts to
become more concrete they need to be studied
and monitored regularly. This research shows
that from conception through maturation of a
CBM project, simple statistical methods––e.g.,
quantitative surveys and predictive models––
can be adapted to this purpose that (i) measure,
(ii) inform outreach that engenders, and (iii)
monitor the presence of variables influencing
willingness to participate. Although species
decline in the Portuguesa River watershed is
alarming, extinction is preventable and fishery
restoration is possible, particularly if local
fishing families participate in conservation
efforts, making the professed benefits of CBFM
achievable.
Carmines, E. G., & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and
validity assessment. London: Sage Publications.
Chambers, R., Longhurst, R., & Pacey, A. (1979).
Seasonal dimensions to rural poverty: analysis and
practical implications. Brighton, England: Institute of
Development Studies at the University of Sussex.
Chavis, D. M., Hogge, J. H., & McMillan, D. W. (1986).
Sense of community through Brunswick’s lens: a first
look. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 24–40.
Christie, P., White, A. T., & Buhat, D. (1994). Com-
munity-based coral reef management on San Salva-
dor Island, the Philippines. Society and Natural
Resources, 7, 103–117.
Converse, J. M., & Presser, S. (1986). Survey Questions:
handcrafting the standardized survey. London: Sage
Publications.
Davis, A., & Bailey, C. (1996). Common in custom,
uncommon in advantage: common property, local
elites, and alternative approaches to fisheries man-
agement. Society and Natural Resources, 5, 111–113.
DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: theory and
applications. London: Sage Publications.
Drijver, C. A. (1991). People’s participation in environ-
mental projects in developing countries. Landscape
and Urban Planning, 20, 129–139.
Duran, F. O. (1995). La pesca commercial en el R
ıo
Portuguesa: evaluaci
on y situaci
on actual. Final
report to the Ministry of the Environment and
Renewable Natural Resources (MARNR). Division
of the Autonomous Service of Wildlife (PROFA-
UNA), Guanare, State of Portuguesa, Venezuela.
Eberly, D. E. (Ed.). (1994). Building a community of
citizens. London: University Press of America.
Egan, A. F., Jones, S. B., Luloff, A. E., & Finley, J. C.
(1994). The value of using multiple methods: an
 PARTICIPATION RHETORIC OR CBM REALITY?
illustration using survey, focus group, and Delphi
techniques. Society and Natural Resources, 8, 457–
465.
Gardner, G. T., & Stern, P. C. (1996). Community
management of the commons. In G. T. Gardner & P.
C. Stern (Eds.), Environmental problems and human
behavior (pp. 125–151). Boston, MA: Allyn and
Bacon.
Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing
learner behavior through environmental education.
Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–21.
Jentoft, S., & Sandersen, H. T. (1996). Cooperatives in
fisheries management: the case of St. Vincent and the
Grenadines. Society and Natural Resources, 9, 295–
305.
Kim, J. O., & Mueller, C. W. (1978). Introduction to
factor analysis: What it is and how to do it. London:
Sage Publications.
Kleymeyer, C. D. (1996). Cultural traditions and com-
munity-based conservation. Grassroots Development,
20(1), 27–35.
Lauber, T. B. (1996). Moose on the loose: fairness and
decision-making in the Adirondacks. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca,
NY.
Livingston, J. A. (1996). Other selves. In W. Vitek & W.
Jackson (Eds.), Rooted in the land (pp. 132–139).
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Matthews, W. J. (1998). Patterns in freshwater fish
ecology. New York: International Thomson Publish-
ing.
McCay, B. J. (1980). A fishermen’s co-operative, ltd.:
indigenous resource management in a complex soci-
ety. Anthropological Quarterly, 53(1), 29–38.
McCay, B. J., & Jentoft, S. (1996). From the bottom up:
participatory issues in fishery management. Society
and Natural Resources, 9, 237–250.
McMillan, D. W. (1996). Sense of Community. Journal
of Community Psychology, 24(4), 315–325.
Novoa, D. (1986). Una revisi
on de la situaci

on actual de
las pesquerias multispecificas del R
ıo Orinoco y una
propuesta del ordenamiento pesquero. Memoria
Sociedad de Ciencias Naturales La Salle, 66(125–
126), 167–191.
Ott, R. L. (1993). An introduction to statistical methods
and data analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub-
lishing Company.
Puddifoot, J. E. (1995). Dimensions of community
identity. Journal of Community and Applied Social
Psychology, 5, 357–370.
Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling alone: America’s declin-
ing social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65–78.
Robinson, D., & Wilkinson, D. (1995). Sense of com-
munity in a remote mining town: validating a
neighborhood cohesion scale. American Journal of
Community Psychology, 23(1), 137–148.
Ruddle, K. (1994). Local knowledge in the future
management of inshore tropical marine resources
807
and environments. Nature and Resources, 30(1), 28–
37.
Sarason, S. B. (1974). The psychological sense of com-
munity psychology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Spector, P. E. (1992). Summated rating scale construc-
tion. London: Sage Publications.
St. Anne, S. (1999). Synergizing participation: are you
able to enable?. In S. A. White (Ed.), The art of
facilitating participation (pp. 68–79). London: Sage
Publications.
Theodori, G. L., & Luloff, A. E. (2000). Urbanization
and community attachment in rural areas. Society
and Natural Resources, 13(5), 399–420.
Thomas-Slayter, B., Esser, A. L., & Shields, M. D.
(1993). Herramientos para el an
alisis de g
enero: una
gu
ıa a los m
etodos de trabajo de campo para
incorporar el enfoque de g
enero dentro del manejo
sostenible de recursos. International Development
Program, Clark University, MA.
Vitek, W. (1996). Rediscovering the landscape. In W.
Vitek & W. Jackson (Eds.), Rooted in the land (pp. 1–
7). New Haven: Yale University Press.
Walsh, W. B., Craik, K. H., & Price, R. H. (Eds.).
(1992). Person-environment psychology: Models and
perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Asso-
ciates, Inc.
Weinberg, E. (1983). Data collection: planning and
management. In P. H. Rossi, J. D. Wright, & A. B.
Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of survey research (pp.
329–358). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Welbourn, A. (1991). The analysis of difference. Rapid
Rural Appraisal Notes, 14, 14–23.
Western, D., & Wright, R. M. (Eds.). (1994). Natural
connections: Perspectives in community-based conser-
vation. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Winemiller, K., Marrero, C., & Taphorn, D. (1996).
Perturbaciones causadas por el hombre a las pob-
laciones de peces de los llanos y del piedemonte
Andino de Venezuela. Biollania, 12, 13–48.
Wondolleck, J. M., & Yaffee, S. L. (2000). Making
collaboration work: Lessons from innovation in natu-
ral resource management. Washington, DC: Island
Press.
Zanetell, B. A. (1999). An exploration into a Venezuelan
fishery: using Rapid Rural Appraisal to take a deeper
look at a natural connection. Association of Women
in Science, 28(2), 13–18.
Zanetell, B. A. (2000). Place-based environmental sus-
tainability: a shift in environmental concerns. The
Current: Public Policy Journal of the Cornell Institute
for Public Affairs, 5, 41–49.
Zanetell, B. A., & Knuth, B. A. (2002). Knowledge
partnerships: Rapid Rural Appraisal’s role in cata-
lyzing community-based management in Venezuela.
Society and Natural Resources, 15(9), 805–825.
Zube, E. H. (1991). Environmental psychology, global
issues, and local landscape research. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 11, 321–334.