Integrating Cultural Landscape with Coastal Commons Management

A participatory research case study in Kottivakkam Kuppam, Chennai, India

Dhanya Rajagopal, Master’s, Pratt Institute

​drajagop@pratt.edu
(848) 251-3630
101 Quincy St, Apt 4L
Brooklyn, NY 11238

Urban Placemaking and Management

Graduate Center for Planning and the Environment

Pratt Institute, Brooklyn NY

August 1, 2020
 1

Abstract 

Coastal commons that lie at the interface of land and sea, are of immense significance to
fishing communities (Dakshin Foundation, 2009), who have over centuries evolved a deep
connection to the landscape, fostering their own unique socio-cultural practices, which
oversee and manage the coastal resources. This is also a highly contested public space
where livelihood spaces lock horns with elitist views of ‘beach beautification’, subject to
privatization and unscientific development. Insufficient data on the values of fishing
landscapes beyond capital gains, exacerbates the vulnerability of these communities in
addition to weak enforcement of policies, and mismanagement of coastal commons. Cultural
landscape (CL) is an adaptation between cultural and ecological values, the quality and
function of which have been reconciled by the interrelation between humans and nature
(World Heritage Convention, 1992). Using participatory research methods, the research
documents the socio-spatial interactions and landscape values in Kottivakkam Kuppam
fishing hamlet, in the south Indian city of Chennai, Tamil Nadu. Drawing inspiration from
Ostrom’s principles of Common Pool Resources, the research recommends the
incorporation of traditional knowledge to locally manage coastal commons using the CL
framework. The paper outlines how adopting such a framework not only safeguards the
ecosystem but also encourages governments and visitors to engage with the landscape in a
responsible manner, incorporate sustainable livelihood models and spatial programming to
address the complex challenges of coastal communities in Indian cities.

Keywords​: coastal commons; cultural landscape; participatory mapping; india

 2

Introduction

Introduction: The perils of coastal communities in India

‘Commons need communities to retain their identity and integrity. Where the
community has receded, the government and private sector step in, and the
commons have either shrunk or been lost to notions of worth dictated by capital and
the markets.’ 1

For most of us, the beach represents a public place for recreation and health, but in reality it
is more than space for leisure and consumption. It is an integral ecosystem and a source of
livelihood for many. For fishers in rapidly urbanizing cities, these two are inseparable, and
are the most affected by coastal projects and policies. The rights to access basic amenities
and livelihood is a constant struggle for these communities who are often at the forefront of
environmental activism. Chennai (or Madras), evolved from a fishing hamlet,
Madrasapattinam; roughly 300 years ago2. The ​608 fishing villages in the State harvest over
half a million tonnes of marine products every year, making it the fifth-largest fish producing
state of the country.3 ​However, urbanization and weak coastal policies have exacerbated
their invisibility, and vulnerability of being evicted for government sanctioned projects.
The stretches of beachfront, which encompasses the common lands for fishing, are held by
customary land rights that have evolved over centuries, with clearly defined spatial and
cultural boundaries. Until recently “property regime and use of coastal space across the
entire coast has not been documented (especially the spatio-temporal details and patterns of
shore/beach uses and settlements).”4 To make the lifestyle and rights “visible” to the growing
city around it, the fishers in Chennai, have taken to a unique method of activism through GIS
and participatory mapping translating customary practices of coastal commons. K.
Saravanan, a resident of Urur Olcott Kuppam, currently works as a coordinator with the
Coastal Resource Center​, Chennai, and is a pioneer in this movement.

A framework of commons management centered on local knowledge is a factor often

neglected by the planning authorities, for the planning and development process along the
coastline. Moreover, the customary rights prescribed in the city’s Coastal Regulation policies
lack clarity and definitions, serving as “weak entitlements in a context where even legal
rights have to be fought for.”5 Culture and identity are not just about social relationships, they
are also profoundly spatial.6 This is why the paper focuses on the socio-spatial relationship
of fishing communities with their environment, i.e how they are inscribing meaning to spaces
related to the coast through their everyday interactions. Through a variety of participatory
methods, the research captures oral histories, local landscape knowledge, aspirations and
concerns of fishers to recommend models of landscape management, livelihood models and

1
Mukul Kumar, K. Saravanan and Nityanand Jayaraman​. “Mapping the Coastal Commons,”
Economic and Political Weekly, (​ November 2014):​ 4 ​ 9(48):46-53
2
Nimi Kurian, “City of Dreams,” ​The Hindu, ​August 23, 2018,
https://www.thehindu.com/children/city-of-dreams/article24758303.ece
3
​Kunal Shankar, “Afraid and Confused, Tamil Nadu Fishermen Suffer as Lockdown Ravages Their
Livelihoods,” ​The Wire, A​ pril 18, 2020, ​https://thewire.in/rights/tamil-nadu-fishermen-lockdown
4

5
Tuhin Ghosh, “Sustainable Coastal Tourism: Problems and Management Options,” ​Journal of
Geography and Geology,​ vol. 4, no. 1, (March 2012), ​http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jgg.v4n1p163
6
Janet Stephenson, “​The Cultural Values Model: An Integrated Approach to Values in Landscapes,”
Landscape and Urban Planning​ V ​ ol. 84, (2008), ​https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2007.07.003
 3

opportunities for spatial use.

1.1 What is a Cultural Landscape

The ​World Heritage Committee​ defines cultural landscape, as the "cultural properties [that]
represent the combined works of nature and of man". They are categorized into
1. "a ​landscape​ designed and created intentionally by man"
2. an "organically evolved landscape" which may be a "​relict​ (or fossil)
landscape" or a "continuing landscape"
3. an "associative cultural landscape" which may be valued because of the
"religious, artistic or cultural associations of the natural element."7
Coastal commons fall under the “continuing landscape” owing to its evolution with present
day cities.
The term was popularized by ​Carl O. Sauer​, who defined it as follows:
"The cultural landscape is fashioned from a n ​ atural landscape​ by a cultural group. Culture is
​ gent, the natural area is the medium, the cultural landscape is the result."8
the a
The CL elements according to one model by ​Phillips (2002)​ in Fig.2. can draw parallels to
materials, immaterials and practices​. These in turn can be related to the values derived
from these elements ranging from knowledge values, ecological values, aesthetic values,
economic value and heritage value​ ​Lockwood (2006).

Fig. 2. ​Elements of Cultural Landscape Source: Phillips (2002)

7
UNESCO, World Heritage Convention, Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World
Heritage Convention (Paris, UNESCO, 1996).
8
Carl.O.Sauer, “The Morphology of Landscape,” ​University of California Publications in Geography,​ 2,
Berkeley 19–53 (1925) 33
 4

Fig. 3. ​Author, “Synthesis of Elements of Cultural Landscape drawn from different models.”9
 
1.2. Applications of Cultural Landscape Value assessment

For efficient management of fishing cultural landscape the set of guiding principles provided
by the World Heritage Committee (Table.1), can be applicable to coastal commons
management as well. For fishing commons, this is especially true​. The European Landscape
Convention prescribes that these values are of particular importance for those making
decisions that can alter these landscapes and the values. CL framework of management has
immense potential for practical use in coastal commons extracted from previous literature
and personal reflection on this subject. These include:

● Understanding people and place: What we see in the landscape is an unconscious

reflection of all the ideas, values, and beliefs that people have about how to use the
land, and what styles, building materials, or even land survey systems, make the
most sense to them.10
● Instruments to propel public awareness through collective histories documentation
● Community involvement & sustainable practice is seen as a precursor to sustainable
landscapes and is widely promoted as a cornerstone for success and just practice in
landscape planning.11
● Contribute to the continued existence of traditional forms of land use that in turn help
support biodiversity.12
● Encourages genuine, long term participatory mechanisms for decision making. Since
“regular participatory processes often exclude values beyond physical and the visual,
confirm expert-based values and legitimise dominant agendas.”13
● Defining boundaries helps create a governable object for facilitating local
management, involving leadership from the community in the long run.
● Creates opportunities for sustaining livelihood for expanding maritime economy and
identifying assets and resource networks.
● Sets guidelines and opportunities for sustainable tourism and cultural tourism.

Cultural values cannot be separated from the people who connect to and value it, neither can 
heritage sites and parks exist in isolation from and without the support of the broader 
community ​(Feary et.,al., 2014)
 
1.3. Coastal Commons and Common Pool Resource Management

Elinor ​Ostrom’s groundbreaking empirical study of Common-Pool Resources (CPR)

challenges Hardin’s “tragedy of commons” theory that would set the precedent for future
work on customary land rights.14 The research argued that “collective action” within

10
​Lizbeth Pyle, "The Cultural Landscape."​ e-WV: The West Virginia Encyclopedia​. (09 February 2011)
11
Paul Selman, ​Sustainable landscape planning: The reconnection agenda,​ (London: Routledge,
2012)
12
Council of Europe, 2000
13
Alister Scott, “Beyond the conventional: Meeting the challenges of landscape governance within the
European landscape convention,” ​Journal of Environmental Management,​ (2011) 92(10), 2754–2762,
14
​Elinor Ostrom. ​Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action​.
Cambridge [England] ; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
 5

communities dependent on shared resources, are often able to develop complex strategies
to manage their common resources “beyond the dichotomy of state control and private
property regimes, given appropriate local conditions.”15 Many of the principles of CPR, can
draw parallels to CL management. For example, both require integration into larger context
(in tiers) and people associated with the commons are the primary stakeholders and
participate in modifying rules affecting their landscape. 

 
Table.1. Author, Adapted from Ostrom’s CPR model (​ left)​ and​ Principles of
CL management prescribed by European Convention (right).

2.1. Context of Coastal Commons in Chennai, India

The Indian legal definition of commons is “Land exempt from assessment, either because it
is set aside for communal purposes or because it is uncultivable.” This is different from the
definition of “public space” which is owned by the government. The current land
management practices surrounding commons in general dates back to the British Colonial
rule when land was categorised as “Revenue and Non-revenue Land”. ​This colonial legacy
is still put to practice, leading to knotty policies, physical degradation and unscientific
development; in 2001 The Foundation for Ecological Security was set up to encourage
equitable development and conservation of land, sea and other common resources.

While forests were considered cultivable, hence classified as revenue land, the coastal area
and wetlands fell under the Non-revenue land category or ​'Wastelands'. ​In fact the general
opinion of commons in Chennai is such that, its ​Tamil​ translation - ​“poromboke”,​ is a word

15
Rongxing Guo, ​Cross-Border Resource Management (Third Edition)​,​ Chapter: 8, (Elsevier, 2018),
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-64002-4.00008-8
 6

that is often colloquially used as an insult to deem someone or something “worthless”.

Clearly, the value of so called​ 'wasted' land is invisible to many including the government.
This further emphasises the need to revive among the general public and planning
authorities, the potential of the coastal commons in the face of urbanization and changing
demand on the resources with practices and policies that acknowledge and protect its
values.

One answer lies in decentralization of coastal governance, a view endorsed by the National
Centre for Sustainable Coastal Management​. The objectives put forth by NCSCM fall under
the broad categories of human, social and cultural development of coastal communities,
which fits well with the fundamental concepts of cultural landscape principles. ​Integrated
Coastal Zone Management Plan (ICZMP), Tamil Nadu, ​outlined a resource manual with
recommendations that include

● Identifying alternative livelihood options and training to coastal communities

● Encourage ecotourism
● Capacity building for fishing communities to engage in eco-friendly techniques.16

Although the ICZM suggests “alternative livelihoods”, the example of “sustainable livelihood”
seems to be a more acceptable model for potential programs.

Activity Managing Entity

Coastal Zone Regulation Dept. of Environment

Tourism/ Development Dept. of Tourism + private players

Emergency reconstruction Chennai Public works Department

Fisheries management Dept. of Fisheries

Disaster Management State Disaster Management authorities

&
District management plans

Urban Planning Urban Local Body- Corporation of

Chennai

Domestic Sewage, pollution Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board

Environmental Protection Union Ministry of Environment and the

(Regulates) Forests
Table.2. Author, “​Government institutions involved in managing different aspect of coastal
areas in Chennai”

2.2. Coastal Commons as Contested Space

Chennai’s population density is 26,903 people per sq.km. and the city has 176 kms of
coastline.17 Needless to say, the beaches are one of the most frequented public spaces,

16

17
 7

accessible to most groups and are highly contested. It is mainly a space for recreation and
tourism, in turn served by the beach vendors and inhabited by the fishers. During the
semi-structured interview, environmental activist Nityanand Jayaraman explains the
conflicts arising on the use of the coastal commons:

“The term commons is a very misleading term. It in fact doesn’t imply that it is for
common use, there is always a graded access to it, dictated by class and caste.
Usually those with the upper hand get what they want and others have to fight for the
same space.”

Clearly, conflicts between local and external interests in the use of coastal commons plays
out in a way that favors unscientific development over socio-cultural or ecological values
associated with the place. The fundamental issue here is that one temporary group’s
aesthetic values of the landscape differ from and take precedence over fisher’s landscape
values. Therefore, a possible application of the CL framework could help assess conflicting
user group values to make informed decisions. in similar circumstances.

2.3 Coastal Commons Governance in the Indian Context

Fishing communities in India are not homogenous, as they belong to different castes and
religions. They are classified as “Most Backward Class” by the Indian legal system.18
Although customs and practices vary from region to region, the structure of self-governance
is a core aspect of these evolved territorial laws, referred to as “customary management” or
“sea tenure” in fisheries management.

The village lands are collectively held under the ur panchayat jurisdiction (the village level
local body), under the oversight of the Village Panchayat. Other coastal lands, officially
registered as ​Poromboke (waste lands), are part of their unofficial sphere of influence. This
semi-autonomous form of self governance enables decision making more context specific,
since every fishing community has its own unique composition.

“This system of self-governance evolves from the interactions of primary societal

processes...that gradually, and voluntarily, evolve into rules and structuralized codes
of conduct, achieving organizational shape in the process.” 19

It is interesting to note that, unlike Forest commons, the discussion and policies on coastal
commons was not always about contested land; it was more about the sea being a
contested resource, giving another dimension of complexity around loosely defined
customary laws in official planning practices:

“Owing to the livelihoods of the fishing community being closely connected with the
sea and previous conflicts over resources being centred around oceanic resources,
these communities did not see land as an important asset.20

18
​A.K. B
​ iswas​ and A. Subba R​ ao, 
19
​Maarten ​Bavinck​, and​ V.Vivekanandan,​ “Conservation, Conflict and the Governance of Fisher
Wellbeing: Analysis of the Establishment of the Gulf of Mannar National Park and Biosphere
Reserve.”​ Environmental Management,​ 47, pp.593-602. 2011
20
Sudarshan Rodriguez, “Claims for Survival: Coastal Land Rights of Fishing Communities,” ​Dakshin
Foundation,​ (Bangalore, 2010), p 42
 8

The strong non-governmental entities and unions play an active role in securing benefits and
representing fishers across the state and national levels. These fishing cooperatives, welfare
societies and unions already have established relationships with the state Fisheries
Department.

Fig.2.6. List of fishers stewardship and governance organization

Therefore, for efficient coastal landscape planning, it is critical to include “the views of all
concerned groups or stakeholders in decision-making processes, entailing shared power
and responsibility between government and the public, in order to achieve consensus
decision making.”21 This is also implied by the European Landscape Convention.

3. Methodology

The data used in this mixed method, participatory action research (PAR) are derived from a 7 day
fieldwork and participatory process with fisherfolk in Kottivakkam Kuppam, Chennai in the State of
Tamil Nadu. This included, semi-structured practitioners interviews, transect walk, visioning and
photovoice with children, social Mapping and oral history narrative with men and women in the
community.

Site Context
Kottivakkam Kuppam in Chennai,Tamil Nadu is located in CRZ II area and falls under the jurisdiction
of Chennai Metropolitan Authority. The fishing community is occupying 5.4 ha area for housing,
fishing and for other purposes. There are 409 households with a total population of 1507*(as of
2018).. The NCSCM prepared a case study of Kottivakkam Kuppam as part of the documentation of

21
Michael Jones, “The European landscape convention and the question of public participation.”
Landscape Research,​ 32 (5), 613–633, 2007
 9

micro-planning guidelines in coastal villages.

Fig.1. ​Google Maps. 2019. Accessed, February 2019. “Chennai, India, with Kottivakkam
neighborhood”.
 10

Participatory action research (PAR) works on the fundamental idea that the participants are the
experts of the place and have the knowledge required to inform decision making and the goals of the
community. The result of the participatory process is the symbiotic cooperation between the two
knowledge worlds that are responsible for preserving different values of the landscape.22 PAR,
consists of 3 phases 1) Active Experimentation 2) Analysing Outcomes 3) Actions based on
Outcomes, these phases were carried out into the process, reflection and recommendations sections.
23

Introduction and Collective Visioning

Since the children who showed up to the workshop were between 6-12, I asked them to
draw or write “How do you envision Kottivakkam Kuppam in ten years”. This was useful to
inform the needs of the community from the perspective of the children and recurring themes
were used as follow up questions.

22
​(Stefanio Ragazino et. al, 2017)
23
(Greenwood et.al., 2013).
 11

Transect walk
It is a systematic walk along a defined path across the community area together with the
local people to explore by observing, asking, listening and producing a transect diagram.

Photovoice ​is a qualitative method used in community based participatory research, that
involves the use of photography, and stories about their photographs, to identify, represent,
and enhance their community through a specific photographic technique​.24 I used this tool on
site to ensure that the observations about areas for improvement were not solely from my
point of view. Generally in the evaluation of cultural landscapes and environment, children
are seen more as receivers of knowledge rather than being able to express their own
knowledge and perception.25 They were one of my key informants in this process and the
interactions helped me understand different perspectives of young children on their
environment and lifestyle, as well as hidden spaces of play.

Fig.5. A​uthor​. Map of amenities and vital spaces used by the community within 500 metres
from Kottivakkam Kuppam, Chennai, India
The neighborhood schools, ​Nellai Nadar Matric Hr Sec School and Government Primary
School, also act as emergency housing. Here higher education prospects are not easily
available/affordable for many children.

24
​ mpowerment through photo novella: portraits of participation.​ Health Educ Q.
​Wang C, Burris MAE
1994 Summer; 21(2):171-86.
25
(Puolamaki,2017).
 12

PAR Methods Information Gathered Justification for Use

Participatory Mapping CL Values,​ socio-spatial Maps are also instruments for

+ prompts production of space, local advocacy, identifying tangible and
knowledge. intangible values & relationships.

Location Specific Memories,

History, concerns of livelihood.

Participatory Visioning Aspirations, children’s Drawings, writings describing

perspective of public spaces. visions & needs

Transect Walk Children’s CL Values, Mapping with guided walks gives

Invisible/informal places of more insight into user perspectives
value, Infrastructure Gaps of the hidden spaces, areas for
existing infrastructure improvement, and potential uses.

PhotoVoice Take pictures of places that you Assumptions about place can be
think can improve. reduced by putting use of space in
charge or evaluating

Semi structured Challenges in participatory Multidisciplinary view point of

practitioners interview process, best practices, role of practitioners.
designers, Contextual issues

Table 2: Summary of information gathered from different methods.

Fig.3. Source: Author, “Community workshop and visioning session with children in
Kottivakkam Kuppam.
 13

4. Findings and Analysis

Results from Children’s visioning session

A high degree of environmental concern was expressed by many children, the need for
public toilets and stories of open defecation surfaces, while some others suggested the need
for spaces of recreation, art, learning and amenities. They narrated stories of care for their
environment and the natural resources.

Children’s Visioning Drawings: How do you envision Kotiivakkam Kuppam in 10 years

Amenities we want for our Comments and Findings

community

Swimming Pool Interestingly, the reason why many kids wanted a swimming
pool despite being near a beach was more out of health
concerns. As described by one of the kids, the problem of
open defecation and grey water run-off, due to poor sanitation
facilities, runs off into the sea.

Playground for younger kids Opportunity to develop a vacant area in the Kuppam into a
play area for kids. Larger spaces are occupied mostly by older
boys.

Free Community Wifi Potential for learning, and bridging digital divide

Carrom shed and games for Recreational and context specific sports that are essential for
Kottivakkam Boys the local identity.

Clean toilets, Garbage overflow, Men, women and children all mentioned issues of sanitation
open drain to sea and waste disposal as an issue to be addressed.

Story books A resident of the Kuppam told me that there is no public

library in Kottivakkam.
 14

Greenery and garden
The landscape used to be filled with casuarina trees and thorn
shrubs. The children definitely want to have a shaded, green
space, however gardens are not a popular suggestion for
many adults as they say it takes up space for future housing
needs and also maintenance issues.

Saving drinking water
Protecting Turtles
SIgnage for marking ecologically
sensitive areas
Water is highly valuable for communities that are not provided
with infrastructure such as drainage and water supply. This is
a reality children here grow up with and is evident in their
drawings and writings. Olive ridleys are endangered species
that visit these beaches. The children are aware of this
special use of their beaches and want to keep it clean and
protect it.

Decorate and paint the community Art can be an effective tool to bring people together and
hall create something that the community can call their own and
here lies an opportunity to create a mural in the most active
space used by the fisherfolk.

Computer skill training Adolescent boys expressed a need for skill training and sports
facilities. They said, “We will still continue to venture into the
sea on the weekends, but with a stable income.”
Table 3 : Results from Children’s visioning session.

It is clear from the visioning session, that the poor infrastructure and sanitary
conditions that the corporation has ignored time and again, in turn leads to
discussions on lack of space for recreation out of concerns for hygiene. The
interactions with the community indicated their close relationship to the coastal
landscape and concerns associated with the poor quality of the environment owing to
improper waste disposal, plastic use and tendency to explore new places of play.

Findings from interview session with Fishermen

Terms such as “development” and “infrastructure” according to the government

essentially means “buildings” and real estate. Very rarely does it imply civic spaces
and amenities or open areas. For future practice it is necessary to create a shared
vocabulary, justification of interventions and creating long term systemic processes
that look at the discipline of “design” as integrating communication, information and
process design and not just spatial design and planning. This was introduced as a
discussion topic with fishermen. For most residents development meant improving
their livelihood, fish catch and protecting farmers. The comparison of past and
present landscape was also a part of the discussion. A few young men I spoke to,
expressed an interest in learning technology skills and sports facilities.

Women group discussion Men Group discussion

Saline water problems Second Community Hall for other users

 15

Accessible Ration shop Recreation and educational facilities for

children

Clean Toilets Computer skills

Another community space , shaded area Sign boards to indicate turtle breeding spots

Bigger Market facility Improve fish catch

and incentives during the off season.

Cold storage areas Funds for constructing temples, which is a

community project that gives a lot of pride &
showcases the collective strength of their
village. This is a common feature in many
such communities.

Low cost Sanitary products A well equipped library with a printing facility.

Table 4 : Results from interactions with men and women in the kuppam.

Among adults, the spatial and community needs were based largely on their
occupation such as storage facilities and access to supplies such as medicine and
food. Many Coastal fishing villages such as Kottivakkam Kuppam still lack essential
facilities for their fishing profession such as petrol and diesel bunk, ice-plants, cold
storage building, `marketing and action hall, multipurpose cyclone shelter,
communication and networking units, net drying area and net mending area. (ISE
Manual).

Fig 4.2. Images and discussions from the session with fishermen in Kottivakkam Kuppam.
 16

6. Mapping the Fishing Cultural landscapes

The map is meant to be a social map and not a scientific map that attempts to record the
many uses of coastal commons appropriated by the fishing community at Kottivakkam
Kuppam. The categories mapped indicate ​Livelihood, Infrastructure, Recreational,
Religious/Sacred, Ecologically valuable spaces and ​opportunity sites to improve upon
based on the photovoice.

Fig 6.1 Mapping the cultural landscape of recreational and communal importance such as the
community hall, Kabaddi ground and Mandapam for celebration. The map also indicates sacred
areas and village boundaries marked by sacred idols.
 17

Fig 6.2. Mapping areas used for livelihood purposes such as boat parking, net mending, drying as well
as natural landscapes, and opportunity sites requiring better maintenance, clean up and utilization of
vacant areas for communal activities and needs.

6.1. Public Spaces and Recreational Activities

A village elder mentioned three important public spaces in the hamlet. 1. The community hall
2.The Kabbadi/Football ground 2. and 3. The mandapam - a raised platform for events.
The community hall is the most active space apart from the football ground. This used to be
a gym with minimal equipment. Later it was used as a tuition center for the community, but
was discontinued. Currently it is a recreational space for men to relax and “socialize” after a
hard day's work. The exterior of the shed is where the net repair, drying and community
meetings take place. One of the participants of the workshop said, “People use this space
here for playing cards and passing time but if someone comes here to teach the kids
everyone will leave the room and clean it up.” This calls for stronger networks with external
actors whose involvement and resources can be streamlined for long term. There is no
functioning library in the whole of Kottivakkam neighborhood.

The only existing play area is a football/​kabaddi ​ground funded by the common resource
pool and built by the fishermen, also used for festivals. Clearly, there is a need for another
indoor and outdoor space that can be simultaneously used by different user groups.

As documented by the photovoice, there are many unused, unkempt spots in the kuppam
that are filled with trash, building materials and rubble, firewood pieces and stagnant open
drains that are a public health and safety hazard. There is no playground in the Kuppam but
the kids go to a ground 15 minutes away from their home or play in a currently unused
private plot of land behind the kuppam, with an open well. Many of these areas are marked
as opportunity sites that can be utilized by the community. Contrary to the assumption that
the effects of tsunami would decrease real estate values in seaside properties, Kottivakkam
and its neighboring beaches have become a prime real estate destination in the recent past.
Recreation parts of the same stretch of beach a few meters away from the kuppam consists
of residential and commercial buildings. It is an active public space for many of the
neighboring residents as well as tourists enjoy the relatively less crowded beaches
compared to the besant nagar and marina. Here active design and therapeutic recreation is
a popular feature that is accessible to all for free. The beach, promenade, benches and the
commercial spaces facilitate a variety of activities like jogging, swimming, cycling,
photoshoots, people watching, dog-walking, relaxation and services that cater to these
populations such as street vendors (selling ice creams, fresh mango pickles, cotton candy
and roasted peanuts.), merry-go-rounds, balloon shooting and similar activities for kids and
adults. Although many of these vendors are from different surrounding neighborhoods, some
residents of the kuppam also engage in these services. One of the transect walkers was a
10 year old boy who I also spotted selling cut mangoes made in his home.
 18

Fig.5.11. One of the places discovered from transect walk was an

abandoned private property behind the Kuppam where children often play.

Fig.5.12. These images shot during transect walks and photovoice sessions
depict places that can be utilized or need better maintenance.

6.3. Fragile Ecosystem Management through traditional practices

 19

Fishing as an occupation, is largely dependent on chance, and not just skill. This makes
rituals, practices and religious events important to their lifestyle.26 The general notion being:
“If you protect the sea, she will protect you.” This ecological-spiritual relationship is imprinted
in residents of all ages. Some of the customary practices documented in the study area
include:

Mourning and fishing ban:

Accidental catch of turtle or death of a caught turtle in the nets involves village mourning and
fishing halt for that day, followed by prayers to the sea goddess.

Munn Poojai​ or Mud Ceremony

Commemorate purchase of a new boat or gear. The fishers make a deity resembling the elephant
god Ganesh, using the beach sand and after the ceremony ends it is cast into the sea.

Milk offering to Gangaiamman every Friday

Mother Ganges is a spiritual symbol representing the water bodies. The milk offered to the sea
is believed to enhance the fertility of the sea and bring good fortune to the residents.

Aayudha Pooja
Festival celebrated in many parts of the city to worship and respect equipment and tools that help in
the gaining of wealth and knowledge. In the kuppam, boats are decorated on this day and the village
performs small rituals to pray for the longevity of crafts and gears.
Instead of accommodating and safeguarding these spaces and practices, the policies and regulations
seem to force fishers to adapt to trends that are unsustainable in the long run.

Fig. 5.8. Olive ridley nesting in Kottivakkam beach. Source: The Hindu, 2017

6.2. Cultural Landscape Values in Kottivakkam Kuppam

Information gathered at Kottivakkam Kuppam are categorized into 5 value systems modified
from models in literature to suit the objective of study and context of Kottivakkam Kuppam
that belong to CL elements of ​Materials​, ​immaterials​ and​ links​ (past and present).​.

26
​(Bavinck, 2014)
 20

CL Values Description Elements of CL

Aesthetic values The beach, materiality, needs

to improve “cleanliness”
through better garbage
collection and drainage.

Utility Values Active recreation tourism and Forms: Natural + Man Made
leisure, views, shore,
promenade, boats, vendors,
community spaces

Knowledge Values Landscape memories of locals, Process

Fishing practices, resource
management, environmental
awareness,

Social Values System of local governance, Relationships

Customary rights and
practices, religious spaces,
festivals, Cuisines, Rituals and
customs, resource pooling,
ethical codes, traditional sports
and games, livelihood spaces.

Environmental Values Nesting ground for Olive Natural + Manmade

Ridleys, aquatic ecosystem,
Traditional fishing practices Process and Relationships
that safeguard ecosystem,
spiritual relations tied to coastal
conditions.
Table 7 : Summary of Cultural Landscape values in Kottivakkam Kuppam adopted from
Lockwood (2006) CL values

7. Recommendations
 21

​ iagram of categories of Recommendations

Fig.7.1. D

7.1. Alternative Land Governance and Management

Designating fishing commons as Cultural Landscapes.

By extending the Role of Fishing Panchayats to Land Governance Councils, ​Cultural

Landscape Principles and values assessment, can extend to ​achieve this bottom-up local
resource management as well as a collaborative network of Land Governance Councils with
the existing Common Pool Resource management practices (Ostrom,1991), that fishing
panchayats and customary laws already possess.

By the act of mapping landscape values and creating a governable object, ownership can be
legitimized and the community made the managing entity that benefits from any changes to
its landscape. This council will involve broader representation from women, in the “collective
action” and management of the landscape. As examples in the literature point out, women
can play important management and mediation roles as part of the new CL management
framework. T​herefore by reframing fishing coastal commons as cultural landscapes, special
recognition and legal designations for their values can be leveraged and defined as per the
local fishing practices, thereby decentralizing power. The fishing communities become the
primary managing entity of the landscape, and jointly decide on activities that align with their
resources.

The Ministry of Tourism has evolved a Comprehensive Sustainable Tourism Criteria (STCI)
upon consultations with the various stakeholders for major segments of the tourism industry,
namely accommodation, tour operators, Beaches, Backwaters, Lakes and River sectors
applicable for the entire country. after. The Ministry has entered into a Memorandum of
 22

Understanding (MoU) with the Eco-Tourism Society of India (ESOI) on 15th March, 2016 to
inform and educate tourism stakeholders about the importance of Sustainable and
Responsible Tourism practices and ensuring and promoting Sustainable and Responsible
practices in the tourism industry. Cultural landscapes thus created can sustain its
recreational use, without depreciating the livelihood, ecological, social and cultural values it
encompasses.

Fig. 7.1 The results of the research established clear relationships between the challenges facing
coastal commons management and the opportunities presented in the Cultural Landscape framework.

7.2​. Creating a Public-Commons Trust at the City Level

The model of partnership with CL could be in the form of a “Public-Commons Trust”, ​a

concept proposed by Tommaso Fattori, an Italian commons activist as an alternative model
for public private partnership. ​This calls for a rethinking of the relationship of the
government as an entity that facilitates infrastructure that ​can allow collective action to
manage the commons as spaces of immense value. ​Although the fishing community will be
the primary resource management authority, the trust would encourage and build mutually
beneficial relationships between different actors in the city.

7.3. Sustainable vs Alternative Livelihood Model

In terms of addressing livelihood concerns, the literature provides both alternatives and ways
to sustain fishing, and there are some instances, a balance between the two. The below
options list sustainable livelihood models that can also incorporate alternative income
sources as part of the fishing based activities. These include maritime food cultivation to
tackle malnourishment, water based activities and sport training for adults and youth.
Informational Technology and GIS software literacy program as a youth initiative.
 23

​ eveloped as part of the community fisheries committee and funded by IDBs South East Asian
Fig 5. D
sustainable livelihood and coastal management program. It introduced food processing units, local
and sea shell handicrafts, boat repair training to reduce costs and dependence on external help and
increased participation of women and youth in community resource activities.

It is very evident from literature that successful results cannot be achieved without full
involvement and consent of local communities, who have to lead the process of
management and assess their own resources and priorities. Multipurpose planning must be
considered for more sustainable decision processes by considering spatial information.27

The fishermen see tourists as opportunities not threats. The intent of tourism experience
here is more about learning and awareness than a recreational one and must be
programmed as one. Furthermore, livelihood diversification such as lifeguard training,
setting up of fishing related cottage industries and pot gardening for food security can be
explored. This requires collaboration between the Fisheries Department roles in conjunction
with local Land Governance Councils representatives.

7.4. Visibility and Public Awareness

Living history tour of Kottivakkam Kuppam similar to the crowdsourced Urur Kuppam festival.
In the case of the coastal fishing communities along Olifants River estuary, South Africa
processes of social learning — including identification of knowledge gaps, drawing on
different knowledge sources, and engaging in transdisciplinary research — were crucial in
empowering, ensuring fishing rights and increasing participation in governance.

27
​(Turner et al., 1998).
 24

7.5. Spatial Suggestions

Many of these features are a result of the visioning and informal interview sessions with the
community such as wifi-hubs, mobile library, playground, spaces for interaction and
recreation for women, younger children and girls. ​To provide amenities and basic
infrastructure is in a way the starting point for addressing spatial issues. Apart from the
spaces proposed in the 2014 NCSCM map, the data I collected with the participatory
workshop points to cultural landscape values associated with the fishing landscape and
lifestyle as well as opportunities for spatial improvement starting with sewage, garbage
removal and recreational facilities.
Such improvements should adhere to the CRZ II regulations and be done in collaboration
with the community during the phases of design and implementation. Having small scale
incremental improvements gives enough time to test and innovate ideas.

Fishing material culture can be utilised as a unique identity to these spaces and be used as
building materials, murals and public art.
 25

The following documentation by NCSCM collected details of the spatial needs of the
community and demarcation of those proposed facilities:
 26

8. Conclusion
Urban commons are described as an important vehicle for “fostering sustainability within
cities as they require behaviours, cultures and institutions consistent with equitable and
transparent sharing of resources.”28 ​By combining the socio-spatial concept of cultural
landscapes with the customary practices and rights pertaining coastal commons on which
these landscapes exist, the study establishes links between the two. What can be gained
from the new sense of history and collective appreciation of values in the cultural landscape
idea is the change of democratic culture that we could all as beach users and public be
involved in safeguarding cultural landscapes and sense of place. The study reiterates the
idea that by reframing the commons as “cultural landscapes” can be a way to legitimize
customary land rights and enhance these values within a CL management framework. The
act of mapping, makes visible the spaces produced by interaction of fisherfolk with the
commons, and can be a useful tool for “experts”, locals and the public to make informed
decisions on the uses associated with the beach for non-fishing activities. From the
practitioners perspective, the major concerns require structural changes as well as a
renewed democratic culture that is often lacking. ​Further documentation of similar cultural
landscape values can be documented as a living history across fishing hamlets in the city.
The research methods can further contribute to new ways of engaging with seafaring
communities.

Acknowledgement

This paper was made possible by the Graduate Student Engagement Fund grant by Pratt
Institute, New York under the guidance of Ayse Yonder and Courtney Knapp. PhD, with
valuable inputs from the people of Kottivakkam Kuppam, particularly Mr. Jayakumar and
village elder Seshan Ayya. I sincerely thank the practitioners interviewed for this report,
namely, Aarti Sridhar, K. Saravanan, Nityanand Jayaraman and Vidhya Mohankumar, for
their guidance that led to deeper understanding of challenges and opportunities pertaining
coastal commons in India.

Radywyl, Natalia and Che Biggs. “Reclaiming the commons for urban transformation.” ​Journal of
28

Cleaner Production​ 50 (2013): 159-170.

.