Introduction

The sea is an unblemished and spotless entity with many taboos. Our forefathers believed that fishing activities are fueled by a ‘belief in divinities,’ with smaller gods serving as security for their way of life (Adjei and Bright-Sika 2019, pp. 10)

Fishing and other human interactions with the natural world have long been mediated by social and cultural norms; some of these norms are maintained by taboos (Olokor et al. 2013, 2021, 2022a, 2023, Oloko 2019; Kobina and Kofi 2009; Sarpong 2005; Saj et al. 2006). Taboos are unwritten laws based on societal values that are transmitted through socialisation; they help define who and how various groups and individuals in the community have access to fishing and fish. These also govern how people relate to the environment around them by prohibiting certain behaviours or actions because they are considered harmful or sacred (Oloko et al. 2022b; Diawuo and Issifu 2015; Barre et al. 2009; Osei 2006; Scanlan 2003). However, since taboos vary by social context, what constitutes such taboos and the consequences for breaking them differs from one cultural group to the other (Barre et al. 2009). Despite the efficacy of taboos in mediating fishing activities in the Global South, these have been given limited attention from a gender and sustainability perspective (Boamah 2015).

Taboos regulate interactions with fisheries resource and relate to access, i.e. ‘what’ can be accessed, ‘when’ or ‘who’ can access the resource, and ‘how’. Taboos can be divided into different categories. ‘What’ can be accessed relates to section taboos, taboos related to vulnerable life-history stages of targeted fish species, and habitat taboos (Colding et al. 2003; Colding and Folke 2001). ‘When’ refers to the timing of life-stages or seasons in which fishing or resource extraction can or cannot occur (Colding and Folke 2001); ‘How’ relates to the taboos that regulate the methods of resource withdrawal (Colding and Folke 2001); and ‘Who’ can access the resource is attributed to taboos based on gender or other type of social groupings (Cislaghi et al. 2018). Gender norms maintain a hierarchy of power and privilege that emphasise a gender binary and favour what is considered male or masculine over what is considered female or feminine, reinforcing a systemic inequality that undermines women’s rights and limits women’s opportunities (Cislaghi et al. 2018).

Some gender-specific taboos are beneficial to women while others relate to behaviours that are considered powerful or are referred to as ‘bad luck’ for fishing. However, various forms of traditional cultural practises, i.e. taboos, rules and regulations, customs and rituals, among other strategies, have promising potential to increase sustainable resource utilisation, conservation, ecological, environmental protection and also help to prevent women’s alienations in small-scale fisheries (Boamah 2015; Botchway and Sarpong 2015; Attuquayefio and Gyampoh 2010; Kideghesho 2008; Colding and Folke 2001; Infield 2002). Several studies have presented empirical evidence for the challenges and opportunities associated with the use of local taboos in managing and regulating natural resources, as well as in responding to ecosystem change (Attuquayefio and Gyampoh 2010; Takeuchi 2010; Usher 2000).

Taboos have the potential to enhance current management frameworks for conserving fisheries and the ecosystem by helping solve complex issues in coastal communities of the Global South (Murray and Neis 2006; Berkes et al. 2000). This idea has been an important driving force for researchers to study taboos in recent decades (Boamah 2015; Botchway and Sarpong 2015). Research in Global South countries indicates that integrating cultural values and taboos into conservation projects may be a part of normalising, recognising or even privileging parts of indigenous knowledge that have been denigrated in preference to imported Western knowledge systems in communities which have undergone modernisation. Jones et al. (2008), Rabearivony et al. (2008), Tengo et al. (2007), Lingard et al. (2003), for example, have discussed the importance of taboos and cultural norms within knowledge and strategies for conserving natural resources in forest biodiversity conservation in Madagascar. In Ghana and Nigeria, clans utilised taboos in protecting natural resources and in the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management (Mafimisebi et al. 2016; Saka et al. 2012; Akindele 2010; Kobina and Kofi 2009; Nganje 2009; Obasohan 2008; Sarfo-Mensah and Oduro 2007; Banjo et al. 2006; Saj et al. 2006; Anoliefo et al. 2003).

In other parts of Africa, taboos and social norms have been employed in wildlife protection (Kasilly and Tsingalia 2009; Kideghesho 2008; Kweka 2004; Berkes 2004; Colding and Folke 2001). In west Africa, women in the shell fisheries value chain are considered custodians of management and harvesting regulations in their catchment areas (Akintola et al 2017; Chuku et al. 2022). Some scholars have indicated that Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), also rooted in taboos, has aided in the conservation of marine protected areas (Aswani and Lauer 2006) and supported ecosystem-based management (Wondolleck and Yaffee 2017; Etiendem et al. 2011; Banjo et al. 2006; Saj et al. 2006). Other researchers have pointed out that TEK has declined in its application in managing local marine ecosystems and overexploitation in the Global South (Stoll et al. 2016; Kobina and Kofi 2009; Gyampoh et al. 2008; Sarfo-Mensah and Oduro 2007; Millar 2003).

However, research on the impact of taboos on gender roles in small-scale fisheries has been very limited (Berkes 2012; Berkes 2009; DeGeorges and Reilly 2008; Gyampoh et al. 2008; Turner and Daily 2008; Saj et al. 2006; Millar 2004; Becker and Ghimire 2003; Millar 2003; Berkes et al. 2000; Kankpeyeng 2000). Gender norms are informal ‘rules’ that control behaviours that are deemed appropriate, acceptable or desirable for women and men in each society (Boudet et al. 2013). Although in many contexts women’s roles in the fishing industry are defined by gender norms and taboos, there has been limited exploration of how gender norms and related taboos define how women engage in fisheries (Alonso-Población and Niehof 2019).

This may be, in part, due to the long-held perception that fishing is a masculine sector and profession. However, with increasing work highlighting the considerable participation of women in fisheries, this perception is changing (Satapornvarit et al. 2016; William et al. 2002). Globally, women worldwide participate in activities such as lagoon fishing (Walker and Robinson 2009), intertidal shrimp fishing and gleaning (Kleiber et al. 2015), reef gleaning (Weeratunge et al. 2010), shellfish gathering (Frangoudes et al. 2008), and seaweed farming (Fitriani and Stacey 2012). Women’s gleaning contributed to livelihood and food security in the Danajon Bank region of the Philippines (De la Torre-Castro et al. 2017). Women contributed 26% of the weekly catch weight and 23% of the weekly fishing effort (in time), and gleaners (mostly women) contributed 13% of the catches sold and 27% of the catches kept for household food in the Philippines (Kleiber et al. 2014).

Women in West Africa and eastern Indonesia spent at least three hours per day gleaning and harvesting fish from the ker, a female-only fish trap (Chuku et al. 2022; Fitriani and Stacey 2012). In addition to engaging in near shore fishing activities, women are particularly prevalent in the post-harvest sector, as onshore labourers, traders, buyers, financiers and pre-fishing onshore preparation (for example, securing fuel, ice, bait and recruiting crew), especially in the Global South small-scale fisheries (Weeratunge et al. 2010; Williams 2008). The gendered division of labour in the fisheries sector is established and maintained by gender norms in specific social-cultural contexts, which for women are often limiting. However, gender inequality and gender relations in the Global South have a chequered history attributed to pre-colonial, colonial and post-colonial periods, respectively. For example, in some contexts it is socially unacceptable for women to engage in harvesting activities or participate in governance of small-scale fisheries (Frangoudes et al. 2019; Siles et al. 2019). While in other contexts, such as Egypt, women fish traders are expected to seek their husband’s permission before engaging in any financial endeavours.

Given evidence for gender norms and taboos limiting mobility, livelihood opportunities and fish consumption for women (Harper et al. 2023; Oloko 2019; Siles et al. 2019), understanding the role of gender norms and taboos in fisheries is critical to improving fisherfolk livelihoods and advancing broader goals with respect to sustainable development. Initiatives aimed at improving livelihoods continue to be ‘gender blind,’ failing to account for the norms and relationships that influence how women and men in fisheries experience different opportunities and outcomes (Lawless et al. 2019). Men often have a broader range of livelihood options even with toxic or hyper masculinity risk behaviour than women fisherfolk, who are often constrained by individual risk perceptions and socially prescribed physical mobility restraints (Oloko et al. 2022a).

The prevailing global understanding is that livelihood initiatives are more likely to produce long-term and equitable results if they are designed with an understanding of the different ways male and female fisherfolk engage in and experience their livelihoods (Kleiber et al. 2015; Bene et al. 2007). Gender inequalities in individuals are supported by norms and relations that govern the various roles, responsibilities and expectations that society places on fishers and women fisherfolk. Livelihoods research across 20 primarily developing countries, revealed that women’s livelihoods are more closely dictated by traditional gender norms and relations than men’s (Boudet et al. 2013). Taboos control how gender norms and relations shape the various options for individuals to access and participate in livelihoods, as well as their ability to exercise that choice. Research on taboos related to gender roles, expectations and aspirations can provide critical guidance to ensure that livelihood initiatives and the outcomes they seek to promote are equitable and contribute to both long-term and locally perceived improvements in wellbeing.

This paper seeks to understand the role of gender taboos in sustainable and equitable small-scale fisheries management in the Global South, where fishing provides essential livelihoods and nutrition to millions of people (World Bank/FAO/WorldFish 2012). Specifically, within the area of taboos and within traditional belief systems, this paper explores how gender-specific taboos shape the activities of fisherfolk and the benefits they can derive from fisheries, through the role of taboos in regulating interactions with the marine environment. The objective was to assess the quality and scientific rigor of that evidence, identify the key themes from the literature and suggest directions for further investigation into gender and the roles that taboos play in mediating human interactions with ocean resources.

Methodology

To explore the role that taboos play in reinforcing gender roles, stereotypes and inequalities in coastal fishing communities of the Global South, a scanning and selection method was used, as outlined by Bene et al. (2015). This consisted of searches of Google Scholar, Science Direct and FAO publications for book chapters, journal articles, books and working papers using the search terms ‘Gender roles and Taboos’. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review were (Table 1): 1. language (Mostly English and peer reviewed publications were retained); 2. academic quality (documents of non-scientific quality were excluded); 3. geographical regions (focus is on Global South economies and countries); and 4. topic relevance (only publications on taboos in relation to men and women fisherfolk and small-scale fisheries).

Table 1 Assessment-inclusion and exclusion criteria
Full size table

A precise evaluation protocol involving gender roles, taboos and fisheries was applied to a pool of 300 relevant articles. No restrictions were placed on the date of publication as the key aim of the review was to assess the state of literature. From this, a list of the most significant literature was produced for detailed review, analysed and synthesised to inform the present paper. Over 100 relevant publications were identified and retained. The articles were reviewed, and the key conclusions that evolved around emergent themes were identified.

The quality and scientific rigor of the publications were evaluated using three assessment criteria (rigor, validity, and reliability—Table 2). Scores were allocated (high, moderate and low) based on these three criteria and the key conclusions that emerged from the emerging themes and literature reviewed were identified and assessed. The clusters and cross-cutting issues were listed (Table 3). This method goes beyond a basic review and synthesis of the existing literature; it also assesses the consistency and scientific quality of the literature, and its contribution to advancing current knowledge on gender taboos and inclusivity in the context of small-scale fisheries management.

Table 2 Criteria used to assess the quality of the research at the article level
Full size table
Table 3 List of articles used in the scoping by clusters and cross-cutting issues. Full References are provided in the reference list
Full size table

Results

The evaluation of over 100 articles on the topic of gender taboos and small-scale fisheries management across various contexts in the Global South highlighted the roles and utility of gender taboos in sustainable and equitable management of small-scale fisheries and livelihoods. Approximately 75% of the studies were assessed as being of high quality, demonstrating adherence to the principles of rigor, validity and reliability, whereas 18% of studies were assessed as being of medium quality. The remaining 7% were assessed as being of low quality, showing significant deficiencies in adherence to the principles of rigor, validity and reliability.

Traditional ecological knowledge and taboos

A substantial body of literature aims to document the role of TEK and taboos in small-scale fisheries (e.g. Adjei and Bright-Sika 2019; Botchway and Sarpong 2015; Sarpong 2005; Masalu et al.. 2010; Kobina and Kofi 2009; Saj et al. 2006; Colding et al. 2003). The cluster of literature selected is relatively large, made up of articles published essentially in agriculture, nutrition, conservation ecology, indigenous knowledge and traditional knowledge journals (e.g. Journal of Agriculture and Environment, West African Journal of Applied Ecology, Journal of Research in Peace, Gender and Development). Most of these studies were assessed as being of high quality, demonstrating adherence to the principles of rigor, validity and reliability, and showing strong consistency (Table 3, cluster 1.). Most of these studies (75%) have been conducted in West Africa.

The overall message that emerges from this literature is consistent and supports the well-established evidence that taboos and TEK have played significant roles in the management of marine resources by creating behaviours, based on environmental ethics, that regulate gendered interactions of fisherfolk with the natural world. In some cases, penalties of sickness and even death are imposed on breaking taboos within traditional knowledge and belief systems (Diawuo and Issifu 2015; Arhin 2008; Cinner 2007; Shastri et al. 2002). However, more research is needed to understand the role of taboos in sustainable and equitable small-scale fisheries management among men and women in the Global South.

Conservation and management taboos

The second cluster consists of articles documenting and assessing the potential role of taboos and traditional belief systems in regulating gendered small-scale fisheries conservation. The large cluster of articles and reports retained in this part of the assessment is somewhat more heterogeneous and larger in number than that for TEK and gender taboos discussed below. It includes literature reviews and several individual analyses that often combine local small-scale fisheries case studies with gendered conservation methodology. Because of the nature of the issues considered, a substantial number of these articles have been published in journals of applied ecology, ecology and society, applied pan-African studies, and international journals of biodiversity and conservation.

The assessment shows that the quality of the body of evidence is relatively high (Table 3 cluster 2), essentially due to the rigor that usually characterises this type of research. There are many findings under the cluster that stress that social taboos are highly adaptive from an ecological perspective and contribute to the biodiversity conservation of small-scale fisheries from Global South countries (Wondolleck and Yaffee 2017; Mafimisebi et al. 2016; Stoll et al. 2016; Shilabukha 2015; Jimoh et al. 2012; Saka et al. 2012; Etiendem et al. 2011; Akindele 2010; Tsingalia et al. 2009; Kobina and Kofi 2009; Obasohan 2008; Gyampoh et al. 2008; Cinner and Aswani 2007; Sarfo-Mensah and Oduro 2007; Saj et al. 2006; Colding and Folke 2001).

This second cluster also explores the relationship between the multi-dimensional perspectives of management and conservation taboos on gender roles in Global South countries: do management taboos limit equality and accessibility of fisheries resources, and to whom (Mafimisebi et al. 2016; Saka et al. 2012; Akindele 2010; Tsingalia et al. 2009; Kideghesho 2008; Obasohan 2008, Kweka 2004). Evidence has been assembled predominantly from statistics from fisheries in countries of the Global South (Masalu et al. 2010). This body of work has recognised that coastal resources in the context of small-scale fisheries can be successfully conserved by a wealth of traditional knowledge and management taboos that allow communities to live sustainably. On the one hand, while most of the articles emphasise the importance of sustainable natural resource management as the foundation of successful community-based fishing management in the Global South, they also note that sustainable management is frequently overlooked due to economic and development imperatives (Saka et al. 2012; Masalu et al. 2010; Nganje 2009; Anoliefo et al. 2003; Holden 2000).

Gender taboos in relation to fisheries

The third cluster of articles looks more specifically at the effects of gender roles, women’s taboos, stereotypes and inequalities in coastal fishing communities of developing countries (Harper et al. 2023 Frangoudes et al. 2019; Siles et al. 2019; Harper et al. 2017, 2013; Satapornvarit et al. 2016; Berkes 2012; Attuquayefio and Gyampoh 2010; Negi 2010; Weeratunge et al. 2010; Williams 2008; William et al. 2002; Berkes et al. 2000). Gender taboos represent shared expectations or informal rules that described how people should act based on their gender, while women’s taboos govern the physiological characteristics, responsibilities and activities of women in fisheries. Gender stereotypes and cultural taboos in small-scale fisheries are deeply rooted in traditional beliefs of fisherfolk. Gender stereotypes prevail due to the absence or lack of recognition of multiple identities of women, based on the intersection of gender with other forms of social differentiation.

In terms of the type of research conducted, the cluster is once again remarkably homogeneous. Most of the documents contain literature reviews and articles from journals of research in peace, gender and development, and fish and fisheries journals. The papers in this cluster do not score as highly as those in the previous clusters due to the difficulty of evaluating the positive and negative effects of gender and women’s taboos on the management of small-scale fisheries in the Global South at the same time.

Another part of the explanation is that there is social discomfort in talking about these issues, which might make research in this area difficult. When assessed against the principles of rigor, validity and reliability, the body of evidence for these analyses was found to be moderate, owing to the presence of good analyses mixed in with lower quality studies (Table 3, cross-cutting 3). The assessment reveals a scarcity of disaggregated data and analyses that could accommodate comprehensive gender analysis in small-scale fisheries governance. The lack of sex-disaggregated data and gender analysis on the role of women in the fishing sector, as well as the narrow definition of ‘fishing’ in general, automatically excludes women from the narrative. Instead, most of the studies concentrate on women in industrial fisheries, their roles and constraints (e.g. Frangoudes et al. 2019; Siles et al. 2019; Tindall and Holvoet 2008). Only the papers on gender taboos that did use more specific gender terms were selected.

Discussion

The role of local taboos in the management and conservation of marine fisheries resources

In comparison with the literature cluster on gender taboos in relation to fisheries, we judged the cluster on conservation and management taboos with some relevance to gender to be of good scientific quality, demonstrating a higher degree of rigor, validity and reliability. We utilised the concept of traditional management systems in assessing the efficacy attributed to taboos in small-scale fisheries governance. This section first provides the context of religion, spirituality and sacred spaces in relation to taboos, and examines the literature on taboos linked to small-scale fisheries management in general, and those linked to diet, fishing equipment, fishing activity, sacred fishing areas and ceremonies in particular. This intends to provide the wider canvas within which gender-specific taboos related to small-scale fisheries will be contextualised.

Taboos, religion and spirituality

Fisheries are complex socio-ecological systems with numerous stakeholders and conflicting interests (Ostrom 2007). Thus, understanding fishers and their social and cultural environment is a key component of managing fisheries (Salas and Gaertner 2004). There is increasing evidence that informal institutions and social-cultural dimensions, such as taboos, spirituality and religion can be particularly helpful for promoting marine conservation (Peterson et al. 2010; McShane and Wells 2004). Taboos have their roots in cultural norms that can be enforced without the need for formal institutional intervention (Posner and Rasmusen 1999). They can assist conservation efforts in situations where cultural norms and community behaviours align with management goals. For example, Ghana’s coastal communities consider the ocean and marine species to be a significant part of their identity and culture. Many fishing communities throughout Ghana also recognise Tuesday to be the day of the sea god and therefore do not fish, which indirectly promotes the sustainability of the resources (Armah et al. 1998). Examination of the socio-cultural context and perspectives is rooted in observations that these traditional institutions and practises are coordinated and implemented by traditional governing systems.

The influence of taboos, religion and spirituality in shaping human attitudes, perceptions and behaviour is evident in many fishing situations but is sometimes overlooked by management. This interdisciplinary body of scholarship emphasises the important roles that cultural taboos play at numerous levels in a variety of social and environmental contexts. For example, Cox et al. (2014) conducted a case-study meta-analysis that identified numerous ways in which taboos, religion and spirituality interact with key socio-ecological system and governance variables, such as user restrictions, cultural appropriation, social monitoring and social capital.

Fishers integrate religion and spirituality into their daily livelihood in a variety of ways, including prayers, omens, cleaning rites (such as blood sacrifices) and charms. Prayers can be addressed either to God or an intermediary in the spiritual realm. Chickens and other animals, such as goats and cows, are used in blood sacrifices. After the animal is killed, its blood is splattered on the boat, fishing equipment and fishers themselves (Shalli 2017). Humans were also allegedly used as sacrifices in the past, although there is little evidence to support this assertion (Shalli 2017). According to Shalli (2017), this was an explanation provided for mysterious drownings or disappearances off the coast of Tanzania. He further explained that if a member of a fishing team died or went missing while fishing, then it could be perceived that this was because the boat owner had met with a witch doctor to designate them as a sacrifice to the spirits in exchange for increased profits. Such rumours and assertions, on their own, could have the potential to trigger tensions or conflicts in fishing communities (Shalli 2017).

Religion can also have unintended (or unintentional) consequences due to its underlying influence on culture and society. This is especially true in regions where world religions are spreading in line with economic development and modernisation. For example, Shalli (2017) discovered that the rise of Christian membership and Islam messages in northern Tanzania improved conservation goals, such as boosting local development and encouraging more sustainable natural resources. Along with these trends, studies additionally recognised the multidimensional role of religion in reconciling the value-driven but often divergent objectives of conservation and development through its ethics and cultural impacts on resources (Narayanan 2013). However, little attention has been devoted to the specific linkages between religion and fisheries management. Only a few published studies examine religious components in fisheries management contexts more directly (e.g. Cinner and Aswani 2007; Paolisso 2002). Religion was found to be an essential factor related to specific community or management outcomes in some of these studies (Mina et al. 2016; Gurney et al. 2015).

The interface of religion and spirituality with ssf management and conservation

One widely acknowledged role of religious practises in this context is to assist in managing the inherent personal hazards and stress connected with fishing, which is one of the world’s most dangerous occupations (Perez-Labajos 2008). For instance, such preventative measures (e.g. boat blessings and other prayers, using rosemary and holy water to eliminate an evil spirit) are rituals that can be performed to cope with bad situations. However, several studies have revealed that bay or lagoon fishers rely significantly less on religion than more exposed and risky offshore fishers (Deb 2018).

Fish are perceived to be provided by God or various spirits, and this provision is tied to the fisher’s spiritual position. As such, fishers can expend significant effort seeking favour from God or the spirit world, including rituals and sacrifices, to catch more fish. One unintended consequence of this more fatalistic perspective is that it diminishes human agency and authority in fisheries management, potentially leading to conflicts and noncompliance with government rules (Alonso et al. 2016; Brown 2008). These opinions and perceptions further impact how fishers respond to catch losses, for instance, through spiritual rites and sacrifices to placate the gods rather than following guidelines from scientists or managers (Kraan 2009). This could be a source of dispute between fishers and the fishery management framework. For example, in the Chesapeake Bay, managers clashed with crab fishers who claimed that God already oversees the fisheries and that managers’ belief that they can impact crab population levels is heretical (Brown 2008; Paolisso 2002).

Studies on small-scale fishers in the Caribbean and East Africa also indicated objections to catch and free access restrictions (Shalli 2017). Fisheries management that is based on science but is not guided by the cultural context and viewpoints of stakeholders may clash with deeply held religious beliefs. On the other hand, studies on two primarily Christian (Catholic and Protestant) fishing communities in Mexico discovered that, while fishers believed that God created fish, they also assumed that humans should have concern for conservation and that God wants fishers to adhere to fishery laws (Acton 2012). Thus, religion has the capacity to foster attitudes of respect and responsibility towards governance in general, as well as the resource itself. Understanding these factors is crucial for developing more successful co-management strategies that respect and integrate local cultures and communities (Lowe et al. 2019).

Having a grasp of how fishers employ religion to manage and cope with modifications and unpredictability can help managers build more effective adaptation methods in the face of global climate change and declining fisheries (Cheung 2019; Savo et al. 2017; Pauly and Zeller 2016; Sumaila et al. 2011). How fishers adapt to these declines is determined by their beliefs about why fish occur (Kraan 2009). Perceiving God or spirits as controlling variations in fish populations or capture may cause fishers to rely on religious responses over science-based techniques (Firth 1966), potentially limiting their capacity to invest in other adaptive methods. Although religion is sometimes considered a hindrance in fisheries management, it can also be viewed as an ally or advantage as education levels expand, possibly reducing or discrediting the influence of religion and taboos in fishing systems (Katikiro et al. 2015). It can have a normative ethical role in defining how fishers perceive and interact with one another, with governmental authorities, and with the natural resources they harvest (Acton 2012). Furthermore, developing connections and collaborations between fisheries managers and local religious leaders and institutions could lead to increased fishing awareness and education, as well as helpful instruments for conflict mediation and resolution (Kraan 2009). Cinner et al. (2018) argue that all the aforementioned variables contribute to increased resilience and adaptive ability in small-scale fishing systems.

Further study is needed to better understand and investigate the role of religion and spirituality in global fisheries management. Simultaneously, examining how religion operates and the influence it exerts on natural resource systems is challenging. Defining and evaluating religious identity and influence accurately is a complicated and nuanced process (Bruce 2018; Fink and Bader 2017). Finally, religion and spirituality tend to be viewed as confidential and sensitive topics, and fishers are sometimes reticent or embarrassed to discuss them publicly (Poggie et al. 1976). In fishing communities, tensions and hybridisation between folk faiths and world religions such as Islam and Christianity are equally complicated and difficult to resolve (Alonso et al. 2016). Despite these significant complications, considering the multiple ways religion can impact fisher’s views and behaviours, and its potential roles in fisheries management, is too vital to overlook.

Sacred sites

Another area of study is traditional sacred locations, in terms of taboos associated with them and their relationship with species (Holmes et al. 2017; Kideghesho 2009). These locations include a variety of freshwater and marine habitats with significance to biodiversity conservation and habitat protection in the Global South. Sacred sites are generally associated with spirits and ancestors, and they have come to be treasured as the site of past tragedies or strange phenomena or as the consequence of spiritual insights delivered to elders in their dreams (Bhagwat and Rutte 2006). Sacred locations, because of the taboos that surround them, can function as refuges for over-exploited fisheries and biodiversity in general (Mgumia and Oba 2003; Colding and Folke 2001). They also function as critical fish breeding areas (Deb 2018). For example, Gupta et al. (2016) identify numerous instances of fish species that are preserved in temple pools due to their connection with gods and goddesses in India. Shalli (2017) emphasised that, while these taboos are normally in place for religious reasons, they can also provide accidental conservation benefits, particularly when they pertain to threatened species. The rules and taboos are upheld because of beliefs in divine surveillance and retribution (Shalli 2017).

Taboos and small-scale fisheries management

Hardin (1968) states that resources that are not owned by individuals are referred to as common property and are often exploited. He argues that in situations in which a resource is considered common property, there is no incentive for people to take responsibility for its sustainability. This promotes resource overexploitation and degradation. According to Bailey and Zerner (1992), who hold similar views, the decline of traditional maritime resource management results in the loss of traditional wisdom and a viable remedy for the ‘tragedy of the commons.’ Therein is the tragedy because everyone is seeking one’s own best interest in a society that has an unrealistic belief in freedom of the commons that brings ruin to all (Hardin 1968). This debate has resulted in the emergence of a distinct perspective that acknowledges the importance of traditional communal marine ownership, disproving Hardin's claim that the sea is ‘free for all,’ which is not universally applicable (Ruddle and Akimichi 1984).

Traditional marine tenure can be very efficient in resource governance (Adhuri 2002). However, it is complex because it integrates both the internal and external socio-cultural dynamism of a community. Taboos can be used as a mechanism to achieve these social-ecological dynamism and traditional fisheries management objectives. For example, in the case of sea turtles in Ghana, increased management has led to better conservation of sea turtles because community elders punish offenders who catch these species (Darkwa and Smardon 2010; Armah et al. 1998). A set of taboos which gives reverence to Nana Fosu, the God of the lagoon, has also helped the fishers understood the need for mangrove restoration which protect the nurseries for fish (Diawuo and Issifu 2015; Woodrum 2010). The system of rituals, laws and beliefs known as sasi which dictate temporal restrictions on the use of a certain resource or territory was also utilised in resource management in Maluku Central in Indonesia (Adhuri 2002). According to Kissya (1995), ‘sasi can be defined as the prohibition on the harvesting of certain natural resources in an effort to protect the quality and population of that biological natural resource (animal or plant)’. It has evolved from protection of communal resources to a formalised, regulated regime of agro-ecological control of theft and resources governance (Von Benda-Beckmann et al. 1995).

This paper identified five categories of local taboos relating to cultural norms, beliefs linked to fisheries resource management: 1. dietary taboos; 2. fishing equipment taboos; 3. fishing activity taboos; 4. fishing area restrictions; 5. ceremonial taboos.

Dietary and management taboos

The literature indicates that the rationale for dietary restrictions on fish species has been mostly based on their physical appearance, toxicity and religious beliefs. For instance, Murray and Catfish eels were not consumed by fisherfolk, especially women, in some Global South countries because they were perceived to result in circumcision wounds taking longer to heal (Shalli 2017). Octopus, shrimp and porcupine fish were also not consumed by women because of a fear of developing acne, skin rashes and asthma, which was thought to possibly result in death (Shalli 2017).

Thus, food taboos relating to fish appear to have been imposed disproportionately on women, pointing to the gendered nature of these taboos. Moreover, these taboos can have negative impacts on women’s access to nutritious food. These restrictions, for various reasons, may have an impact on fish stocks by controlling the utilisation of specific species within a defined area. Dietary restrictions have the management effect that fish species that are not being caught by some fishers because they are banned from consuming them and continue to be protected until they are caught by individuals who are free to eat them (Olomola 1993). Dietary restrictions on fish species operate in the same manner as modern rules by establishing restrictions on threatened species. Many of the tabooed species, such as species of groupers and manta rays, are classified as nearly endangered by the IUCN (Froese and Pauly 2010; Colding and Folke 1997). However, widespread poverty in coastal communities, as well as the decline in wild fish species in the marine environment because of damaging fishing practises, may increase the chance of increased capture of tabooed species (Cinner 2005).

Fishing equipment taboos

The following common restrictions were reported to be associated with fishing equipment in the literature: when fishing with a new vessel, the initial catch must be given freely as a sacrifice; fishing vessels and gear must be free of impurities; and women must not touch basket traps and nets during fabrication (Shalli 2017). If fishers do not follow these rules, it was perceived that they may not acquire a good harvest and may become sick or even die (Shalli 2017). As in the case of dietary taboos, taboos in relation to fishing equipment are also gendered with women not permitted to touch specific fishing gear. This prohibition is often linked to impurities attributed to women’s bodies (Shalli 2017). Thus, these taboos can have the effect of preventing women from having access to specific fishing equipment. However, many of these prohibitions can unintentionally reduce fishing pressure in the area since taboo fishing equipment is not supposed to be used in fishing until it has been sanctified by rituals. As such, it has been argued they provide a function similar to the certification and licencing of fishing boats in the present era (Shalli 2017). The licencing system regulates the operations of each fishery by imposing limits on the number of fishers, the size of the vessels to be used, the methods of fishing and the types of fish to be fished. These traditional approaches minimise harvest levels, restore fish stocks and boost productivity (Stone 1997). However, despite this result, there is a risk that fish stocks will not be restored if the duration of the restriction and the intensity of fishing pressure are not correlated with when the broken taboo is restored and observed again (Shalli 2017). Bacho (2004) argues that fear of sanctions, particularly penalties imposed by divine supernatural beings or ancestral spirits, urges humans to obey the taboo.

Fishing activity taboos

When fishing taboos are adhered to effectively, fisheries resources and habitats can be preserved. This is because fishers can delay their fishing trips on those restricted days and return home for fear of not catching anything or encountering spirits perceived as wicked. For example, if the first catch by a fisher gets lost in the water or an empty-handed person is met on the way while fishing, it is considered a bad omen, and it is believed that nothing will be caught (Shalli 2017). Taboo related to fishing activities has been observed in Madagascar: fishers do not go fishing while drunk, dreading severe punishment (death) from sea spirits who dislike drunken fishers because they are considered impure (Cinner 2007). Fishing in the deep sea at night with a lamp and on sacred coral reefs without performing rituals is perceived as having the potential to cause a loss of direction and attract ancestral spirits living on those reefs, which in turn may lead to tragedy for the fishers onboard (Shalli 2017). According to Kraan (2009), if dolphins are caught as bycatch by fishers in Ghana, they must be appropriately buried in a marked cemetery on the beach. The religious practise of releasing captive animals has also impacted fisheries biodiversity and conservation (Severinghaus and Chi 1999). These ritual or prayer animal releases are practised in Eastern faiths such as Buddhism and Taoism and have accompanied the global development of these faiths (Severinghaus and Chi 1999; Shiu and Stokes 2008). They include a diverse range of species, including fish and other aquatic creatures such as bullfrogs, and could be a major avenue for the spread of invasive species (Severinghaus and Chi 1999; Agoramoorthy and Hsu 2007). Fish used in ritual releases are non-native, captive-bred species (Severinghaus and Chi 1999), and they are known to be released specifically as a substitute for deaths caused by fishing (Shiu and Stokes 2008).

Other traditional management methods, such as size limits and gear restrictions, have also been utilised in taboo areas to ensure sustainable fishing. For example, unregulated fishing events on the Sumilon Island Reserve in the Philippines, which included explosives and nets, have been suspended because they are destructive to habitats and limit fish sustainability (Russ and Alcala 1998). In Vanuatu in the Pacific, marine areas employed taboo as regulatory measures; these included closures, bans on night spear fishing, size restrictions on sea cucumber and mangrove crabs, bans on clam harvests, and breaking corals while gleaning (Bartlett et al. 2009; Johannes 1998). Village-level perceptions of sustainability and fishing limits were also utilised in Muluk in Papua New Guinea by elders by employing marine closures for better fish sustainability (Russ 2002).

Sacred fishing area taboos

The literature points to sacred fishing grounds established along reefs, sandbanks and intertidal zones. It was perceived that breaking taboos related to sacred sites could result in a poor harvest, accidents, sickness and even death (Shalli 2017). Sacred sites were traditionally protected to avoid retribution from deities and to appease ancestors. This has beneficial management implications for coastal and marine environments, including nurseries and breeding sites for fish. It implies that ocean resources of sacred areas are respected and often conserved. For example, in Nigeria, sacred fishing grounds are only used for sacrifices, with the belief that once the offerings are completed, the deities will release enormous amounts of fish from such grounds to other sites where fishers will be allowed to harvest (Jimoh et al. 2012).

Ceremonial taboos

The findings from the literature also indicate the existence of societal prohibitions connected with local taboos against working on religious and ceremonial holidays in Tanzania (Shalli 2017). During any of the ceremonies, all residents of a certain community are required to participate and are prohibited from engaging in other activities, including fishing, for the duration of the ceremony (Shalli 2017). Violators, according to Shalli (2017), may be perceived to experience evil spirit punishment (such as disease) or be ostracised from the community. Other days that are socially restricted for fishing are daytime fasting periods (Ramadhan) and when a resident of a community dies. Similar restrictions have been reported in Nigerian fishing communities, where people do not fish on yam festival days and during a one-week festival in honour of their late hero (Olomola 1993). These restrictions can contribute indirectly to the conservation of coastal and marine resources. Although only for brief periods of time, the limited days cannot be considered negligible because coastal resources, particularly fish resources, remain free of human intrusions. Temporal restrictions are equivalent to seasonal closures in modern settings (Gulland 1977), which are usually implemented to control fishing effort, increase spawning potential by protecting adults during the spawning season, and protect juveniles from depletion during recruitment periods. However, Foale et al. (2011) have criticised traditional restrictions that are not based on knowledge of a species’ population recovery rate. They observed that for a traditional closure to be a successful fisheries management tool, the duration of the closure and the extent of fishing pressure at reopening should be controlled primarily by the species’ population recovery rates, rather than by societal calendars and traditions.

Taboos and gendered access to small-scale fisheries livelihoods

‘Gender inequality is significantly embedded in the fabric of the nation that it has become stubborn to eliminate’ (Ozoemena 2018:pp19).

The increased recognition of the role of taboos in the management of fisheries resources and governance has enhanced a more harmonious relationship between local people and their environment, according to Veitayaki (2004). However, Foale et al. (2011) suggest that traditional management systems and taboos should be designed to manage relationships between social groups with a greater focus on gender perspectives for efficient fisheries sustainability. The literature cluster on gender taboos in relation to fisheries was characterised by relatively consistent conclusions and homogenous findings. It was used in assessing the contribution of gender roles, challenges and taboos in small-scale fisheries governance. Although the quality of the literature cluster on gender taboos is moderate, it provides an important contribution to understanding gender inequalities in small-scale fisheries; this applies to men as well as women but originates from relationships with women’s perceived productive roles.

Indigenous local groups have historically used marine living resources for economic, social, medical and cultural interests (Elegbede et al. 2023a, b; Oloko et al. 2023; Fakoya et al. 2022; Malorgio et al. 2017; Warne 2014). Fishing served as a link between people and their sociocultural capital, values and customs. However, there is often a gendered division of labour in small-scale fisheries because it has been traditionally associated with men capturing fish (Hauzer et al. 2013; Zhao et al. 2013). According to Bennett (2005), women play a significant role in pre- and post-harvest activities, especially in fish trading and processing. For example, women finance fisheries in West Africa (Bennett 2005); female wholesale buyers are predominant in Madura, Indonesia (Niehof 2007); Fanti women fisherfolk in coastal Ghana engage in a range of productive fisheries activities, such as processing and trading activities (Overa 2002); and women in Langa Lagoon in the Pacific Islands produce shell money and jewellery, while engaging is small trade and gardening activities (Sulu et al. 2015).

However, most of these activities are unacknowledged or undercounted as employment in management plans and fisheries statistics (FAO 2006; Williams et al. 2005). As in the case of Peru, fishery development plans mostly support management initiatives that focus on men when implementing management decisions (Harper et al. 2013). Women’s plight is associated with discriminatory processes, which are exacerbated by cultural taboos, traditional beliefs, laws and norms governing their human–sea interaction, which in turn position them at the lowest end of fish value chains (FAO 2006; Porter 2006).

Given that fisheries are sometimes referred to as a last-resort occupation (Onyango and Jentoft 2011), women’s comparatively low participation in fish value chains contributes to gender inequities in terms of income and often entrenches women in poverty (Weeratunge et al. 2010; FAO 2008; Ellis 2001). Gender inequality in small-scale fisheries is a component of the broader systematic marginalisation of poor working women, especially in small-scale fisheries (Lawless et al. 2021; Ogden 2017; Frocklin et al. 2013). According to Branch and Kleiber (2015), this inequality not only undermines their contribution to food security but also undervalues their role in sustainable marine resource management and sustainability. This has exacerbated unequal economic power relations within patriarchy, thereby further perpetuating gender hierarchies and discrimination in the small-scale fisheries sector (Fröcklin et al. 2018). Such gender injustices in fisheries have been experienced globally, especially in countries of the Global South. For example, in Ghana, governing structures influence men’s control and accessibility in the fish processing and trading industry (Britwum 2009).

Other forms of gendered inequalities linked to gender taboos have further reduced women’s access to fishing resources. Menstruation taboos are widespread in other areas of women’s lives besides fisheries in many countries of the Global South. For example, in Talensi, Ghana, traditional taboos prevent menstruating women from accessing sacred groves (Barre et al. 2009). In Tanzania, menstruating women’s body fluids are thought to be extremely polluted and contaminating (Masalu et al. 2010). Similarly within a fisheries context, traditional leaders in Nigeria perceive that women would have their menses at sea if they go fishing, which occurrence is considered an abomination as the sea goddess despises menstrual blood (Oloko et al. 2021). Other studies on fishing societies point to social factors such as culture, religion and values that explain this belief (Overa 2011; Walker 2002).

Moreover, in some coastal communities in Nigeria and Tanzania, fishing is prohibited for women fisherfolk who are breastfeeding a child under the age of 3 months and not perceived to be cleansed after sexual intercourse (Oloko et al. 2021; Shalli 2017). People in these communities believe that a woman who has just given birth to a baby needs to be fully cleansed for 90 days to prevent the mother or the infant dying prematurely (Oloko et al. 2021). In Mali, many women traders are members of the fish traders’ association, but they are also marginalised by restrictive cultural taboos and social settings, such as inequalities in fish trade, governance structure and unequal fish accessibility (Onyango and Jentoft 2011; Béné et al. 2009; Geheb et al. 2008). According to Onyango and Jentoft (2011), these cultural taboos seem to be the norm in many Global South countries. Women are also denied equality of access to and consumption of healthy and nutritious marine resources, and the benefits therein. For example, in the Pacific region, Sulu et al. (2015) observe that some traditional belief systems prevent women from harvesting and consuming certain marine species, such as sharks, rays, giant clams and crocodiles. Pregnant fisherwomen in Nigeria’s Ishan, Afemai and Isoko divisions are prohibited from consuming marine and freshwater snails to avoid causing unnecessary salivation in newborns (Oloko et al. 2022b). Fishers are likewise forbidden from consuming snails in areas such as the Urhobo and Ika divisions of Nigeria because it is believed that eating them reduces a man’s strength during fishing and wars (Ekwochi et al. 2016; Meyer-Rochow 2009). In Papua New Guinea, fishers who intend to go shark fishing must not only refrain from sexual activity for a while but also fast, pray and drink a huge amount of saltwater (Oloko et al. 2022b). It is also strictly prohibited in Papua New Guinea for fishers to consume fish species such as flatfish and stingrays before going fishing (Meyer-Rochow 2009). In Tanzania, pregnant fisherwomen are denied eating groupers for fear of delivering babies with large mouths who may not cry at birth (Shalli 2017). Fishers are subject to fewer food taboos than women, suggesting that in communities where taboos are upheld, men have far more access to healthy food. Gender-specific food taboos such as these can lead to gender-differentiated nutrition and health outcomes, yet this has received limited attention in the gender and fisheries literature and associated studies (Oloko et al. 2022b; Chakona and Shackleton 2019).

Since success in fishing, to a certain extent, is based on chance, social expectations, perceptions, fortune and luck play a vital role. Cultural, socio-economic and political factors have all influenced women’s involvement in fish marketing (Overa 2011), in contrast to fishing. However, studies by Torell et al. (2019), Overa (2002) indicate that, aside from the traditional beliefs associated with the taboo on fishing activities, the exhausting and laborious nature of fishing discourages women from actively participating. Conversely, male participation in fishing has been hindered by few taboos and traditional practises. While fewer taboos might contribute to their dominance in both artisanal and coastal fishing ventures across the Global South, the predominance of men has generally been associated with, and could be exaggerated and/or justified by, the physical demand and risk of fishing. Thus, the role of taboos in reinforcing gender roles, stereotypes and inequalities in coastal fishing communities in the Global South has been less articulated or researched. The literature cluster on gender taboos in relation to fisheries reveals the need for further research on this topic to understand women’s access to marine resources and ways to enhance equal access.

Conclusion

The literature reviewed here highlights that, overall, taboos which are considered as traditional conservation practises are prevalent in many parts of the world, particularly in the Global South, and are sometimes utilised as a tool in community-based marine resource management. They have long been employed to ensure social order in many fishing communities. However, while traditional beliefs are important for fisheries sustainability, they can often be constraining for women. Taboos, as discussed here, have a strong influence on fishing activities in many contexts, such as when and who gets to go to sea, and in notions of physical fortification necessary for the activity of fishing, which involves rituals that must be performed before embarking on fishing. These taboos act to regulate social segregation and control women, rather than reduce fishing pressure, which broadly may be viewed as a positive management outcome, especially where stocks are overexploited. Traditional knowledge and belief systems can play an important role in contemporary governance systems, making valuable contributions towards sustainable fisheries; however, understanding the role that taboos play in mediating human interactions with ocean resources, especially those limiting women’s access to such resources, is necessary for advancing gender equity in small-scale fisheries.