Colonialism and the role of science in the history of Lake Malawi’s fisheries

Many scholars have studied the effects of colonial management on terrestrial resources—but what about the effect of colonialism on bodies of water? A new article in Isis: A Journal of the History of Science Society examines the ways in which fisheries science and colonial development converged for the purpose of exploiting marine resources in British-controlled Nyasaland (now Malawi).

In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, amidst the rise of limnology, or the study of inland waters, British researchers eagerly engaged in expeditions to the African Great Lakes to study their wide variety of freshwater fish. In doing so, write article authors Wilson, Gough, Nkhoma, Knapp, Morse, and Mulawfu, they established “a new pattern of knowledge production, in which freshwater science became closely linked to the assessment of the potential economic utilization of lake resources that colonial governments claimed custodianship over.”

A significant element of the British colonial management of fisheries in Nyasaland’s Lake Malawi was its insistence on “optimum yield.” To achieve this optimal harvest of fish and limit overexploitation of resources, scientists recommended governmental oversight of lake fisheries. In the case of Indigenous African-managed fisheries, technological modernization was advised in order to increase efficiency and productivity. In contrast, settler-managed fisheries were cautioned to “stem their impact on fish stocks and food security.” The article authors note that, no matter how well meaning, these science-led interventions demonstrated a drastic escalation in the role of state officials over fisheries.

Through the mid-century, colonial management of Nyasaland fisheries continued, with the creation, in 1950, of the Department of Game, Fish, and Tsetse Control (GFTC). In addition to regulating fish yields, the GFTC collected data on catches from both settler- and Indigenous- owned sites.

Despite systematic attempts to control fishery activity in Lake Malawi, many fisheries were able to act in ways that escaped colonial oversight as they adapted their practices to ecological change, greater competition, and different market opportunities. Settler-owned fisheries were able to expand their reach despite governmental regulations, and a new class of Indigenous fishers invested capital in gear that enabled them to increase yields. Governmental attempts to regulate fisheries had largely been based on insufficient data, and regulatory bodies lacked the capacity to enforce their own rules.

The article authors argue that although government regulation of Lake Malawi’s fisheries ultimately proved ineffective at controlling yields, this chapter in history left its mark. The colonial system of fishery management “entrenched a faith in and reliance on scientific management based on fragmented data and imperfect modeling, which continued long past independence.”

Since its inception in 1912, Isis has featured scholarly articles, research notes, and commentary on the history of science, medicine, and technology and their cultural influences. Review essays and book reviews on new contributions to the discipline are also included. An official publication of the History of Science Society, Isis is the oldest English-language journal in the field.  

Founded in 1924, the History of Science Society is the world’s largest society dedicated to understanding science, technology, medicine, and their interactions with society in historical context.