Does MPA mean ‘Major Problem for Assessments'? Considering the consequences of place‐based management systems

Marine protected areas (MPAs) have been increasingly proposed, evaluated and implemented as management tools for achieving both fisheries and conservation objectives in aquatic ecosystems. However, there is a challenge associated with the application of MPAs in marine resource management with respect to the consequences to traditional systems of monitoring and managing fisheries resources. The place‐based paradigm of MPAs can complicate the population‐based paradigm of most fisheries stock assessments. In this review, we identify the potential complications that could result from both existing and future MPAs to the science and management systems currently in place for meeting conventional fisheries management objectives. The intent is not to evaluate the effects of implementing MPAs on fisheries yields, or even to consider the extent to which MPAs may achieve conservation oriented objectives, but rather to evaluate the consequences of MPA implementation on the ability to monitor and assess fishery resources consistent with existing methods and legislative mandates. Although examples are drawn primarily from groundfish fisheries on the West Coast of the USA, the lessons are broadly applicable to management systems worldwide, particularly those in which there exists the institutional infrastructure for managing resources based on quantitative assessments of resource status and productivity.     

Primary fisheries management: a minimum requirement for provision of sustainable human benefits in small‐scale fisheries

The social and economic importance of small‐scale fisheries is frequently under‐valued, and they are rarely effectively managed. There is now growing consensus on how these fisheries could be managed for sustainability and to minimize the risks of crossing undesirable thresholds. Using a concept developed in health care, these approaches have been referred to as primary fisheries management. By encouraging the use of best‐available information in a precautionary way, the approaches will facilitate sustainable use and should therefore be encouraged, but they accept high scientific and implementation uncertainties as unavoidable because of limited management and enforcement resources and capacity. It is important to recognize that this limitation will result in social costs, because application of a precautionary approach in the face of high uncertainties will require forgoing potential sustainable benefits. Acceptance of primary fisheries management as a final and sufficient goal could therefore add a further constraint on the possibility of fishing communities escaping the poverty trap. Primary fisheries management should be seen as a first and minimum target for fisheries where there is currently no or inadequate management, but the longer‐term goal should still be well informed and adaptive management that strives for optimal benefits, referred to here as tertiary management.     

Reconciling sustainability,economic efficiency and equity in fisheries: the one that got away?

Concern about the global state of fisheries and fish resources has highlighted the three primary considerations in fisheries management: sustainable utilisation, economic efficiency and equity in access to resources. We appear to be failing in pursuit of all three goals. Living marine resources are particularly threatened by overfishing, leading to many of the world’s fish stocks being heavily, fully or over exploited. Similarly, the economic diagnosis is that costs of fishing exceeded the value of the world’s catch by about US$ 40 billion at the beginning of the decade. Statistics on equity are less available, but the necessary spread of limited access to fisheries frequently has the greatest impact on the small scale, traditional fisher. This paper considers the reasons underlying the general failure of fisheries management and the solutions that are being proposed. Factors contributing to the problems include high biological uncertainty, conflict between the constraint of sustainability and social and economic priorities, poorly defined objectives, and institutional failures related to access rights and participation in management by the users. These issues point to the real complexity of fisheries management. It is argued that this complexity can be abused by all interest groups to avoid responsibility and to suit their own objectives. It is suggested that there are eight simple principles controlling fisheries management that are generally well‐understood and, if properly considered in fisheries management systems, would lead to improved performances. Responsible management will, however, only be effective if there is a genuine desire to achieve the objectives. Fishing capacity, frequently reflecting dependency of users on fisheries resources, is commonly in excess of the sustainable production of the resources. Excess dependency can preclude the political will to consider alternative strategies and only once it has been overcome, probably requiring solutions borrowed from outside fisheries, is effective management likely to be considered seriously. Thereafter, responsible management requires setting unambiguous objectives and management measures in co‐operation with users and other interest groups. The agreed strategy must be included in legislation to ensure transparency and accountability and to constrain decision‐makers. The performance of the strategy must be monitored and revised as necessary.     

Understanding fisheries credit systems: potentials and pitfalls of managing catch efficiency

Following implementation in a range of other resource sectors, a number of credit‐like systems have been proposed for fisheries. But confusion exists over what constitutes these nascent ‘fisheries credit’ systems and how they operate. Based on a review of credit systems in other sectors, this study fills this gap by defining how credit systems function and what credits add to prevailing fisheries management. In doing so, we distinguish ‘mitigation’ and ‘behavioural’ fishery credits. Mitigation credits require resource users to compensate for unsustainable catches of target species, by‐catch species or damaging practices on the marine environment by investing in conservation in a biologically equivalent habitat or resource. Behavioural credit systems incentivize fishers to gradually change their fishing behaviour to more sustainable fishing methods by rewarding them with, for instance, extra fishing effort to compensate for less efficient but more sustainable fishing methods. The choice of credit system largely depends on the characteristics of specific fisheries and the management goals agreed upon by managers, scientists and the fishing industry. The study concludes that fisheries credit systems are different but complimentary to other forms of management by focusing on ‘catchability’ or gear efficiency in addition to effort or catch quota, affecting overall economic efficiency by setting specific goals as to how fish are caught. Credit systems therefore incentivize specific management interventions that can directly improve stock sustainability, conserve habitat and endangered species, or decrease by‐catch.     

Reconciling traditional inland fisheries management and sustainability in industrialized countries, with emphasis on Europe

In northern industrialized countries, the inland fisheries sector has long been dominated by recreational fisheries, which normally exploit fish for leisure or subsistence and provide many (poorly investigated) benefits to society. Various factors constrain the development and existence of inland fisheries, such as local user conflicts, low social priority and inadequate research and funding. In many cases, however, degradation of the environment and loss of aquatic habitat are the predominant concerns for the sustainability of inland fisheries. The need for concerted effort to prevent and reduce environmental degradation, as well as conservation of freshwater fish and fisheries as renewable common pool resources or entities in their own right is the greatest challenge facing sustainable development of inland waters. In inland fisheries management, the declining quality of the aquatic environment coupled with long‐term inadequate and often inappropriate fisheries management has led to an emphasis on enhancement practices, such as stocking, to mitigate anthropogenic stress. However, this is not always the most appropriate management approach. Therefore, there is an urgent need to alter many traditional inland fisheries management practices and systems to focus on sustainable development. This paper reviews the literature regarding the inputs needed for sustainability of inland fisheries in industrialized countries. To understand better the problems facing sustainable inland fisheries management, the inland fisheries environment, its benefits, negative impacts and constraints, as well as historical management, paradigms, trends and current practices are described. Major philosophical shifts, challenges and promising integrated management approaches are envisaged in a holistic framework. The following are considered key elements for sustainable development of inland fisheries: communication, information dissemination, education, institutional restructuring, marketing outreach, management plans, decision analysis, socioeconomic evaluation and research into the human dimension, in addition to traditional biological and ecological sciences. If these inputs are integrated with traditional fisheries management practices, the prospects for sustainability in the inland fisheries will be enhanced.     

Human behaviour: the key source of uncertainty in fisheries management

There is broad consensus that the main problem facing fisheries globally is too many boats chasing too few fish. Unfortunately it is also possible to argue that there are too many proposed solutions and not enough practical answers to improving fisheries management. There is a deepening divide between those who propose alternative regulatory controls on fishers, including establishing large areas permanently closed to fishing, and those who argue for better alignment of incentives combined with broad participation of resource users in fishery management decisions (in simple terms, between top down and bottom up systems of governance). However despite the choice of policy instruments used, a consistent outcome is that resource users behave in a manner that is often unintended by the designers of the management system. Hence whilst uncertainty is broadly recognized as a pervasive feature of fisheries management, to date most of the attention has focussed on only part of that uncertainty – scientific uncertainty about the status of exploited resources. The effect of uncertainty generated on the human side of fisheries science and management has received much less attention. However, the uncertainty generated by unexpected resource user behaviour is critical as it has unplanned consequences and leads to unintended management outcomes. Using empirical evidence of unexpected resource user behaviour and reviewing current responses to unexpected management outcomes, we identify different approaches that both improve prediction of human behaviour in fisheries systems and identify management measures that are more robust to these sources of uncertainty. However, unless the micro scale drivers of human behaviour that contribute to macro scale implementation uncertainty are communicated effectively to managers and considered more regularly and in greater depth, unanticipated responses to management actions will continue to undermine management systems and threaten the sustainability of fisheries.     

Multi-sector resource allocation and integrated management of abalone stocks in Western Australia: Review and discussion of management strategies

ABSTRACT:   Fishery policy formation is a multilateral political process that typically involves conflicting attitudes towards management, and opposing interests among resource users. As fisheries resources continue to decline, conflict between and within fishing sectors will grow. The challenge for fisheries policy makers is to ensure fisheries resources are evenly allocated among the stakeholders whilst managing resources in a sustainable manner. Australian fisheries management has been revolutionized by the introduction of Integrated Fisheries Management (IFM), which is based on a systematic approach involving the inclusion of all sectors in the management process. This approach means determining the total amount of fish that can be harvested from a fishery and then adopting management strategies for allocating explicit catch shares between the competing sectors. The recent increased burden on fisheries stocks, caused by higher recreational user participation, has forced policy makers to make large changes relating to the allocation of resources. Policy makers in Western Australia, aware of conflict developing between users of the abalone resource, developed a unique management system based on resource sharing. By integrating the recreational sector in the overall management process, the primary objective of the new agenda is to decrease conflict between competing users and develop a management system without partisanship.     

The Potential and Sustainability of Aquaculture in India

ABSTRACT

India is a very populous country with more than one billion people. In order to provide food for this growing population, serious environmental problems may result. Despite many benefits from the green, blue, and silver revolutions adopted in India, there has been much concern resulting from intensive agricultural practices that led to environmental problems in both terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. Increasing demand for aquatic resources also caused inland fisheries to decrease over the past few decades. The location of aquaculture projects, landscape destruction, soil and water pollution by pond effluents, over-exploitation of important fish stocks, depletion in biodiversity, conflicts over agriculture and aquaculture among various stakeholder groups over resource and space allocation, and international fish trade controversies have threatened the long-term sustainability of fisheries and aquaculture industries. The subject of sustainable aquaculture has not been adequately projected in terms of current aquaculture practices aimed to boost a rural economy. This review briefly describes the key issues of aquaculture unsustainability in terms of intensive aquaculture, nutrient enrichment syndrome, soil and groundwater salinization, destruction of mangroves, loss of biodiversity, marine pollution and loss of fish stock, use of aquachemicals and therapeutics, hormone residues, etc. The strategies for sustainability have been highlighted with respect to rice-cum-fish culture, carp polyculture, integrated farming with livestock, rural aquaculture, intensification of small farms, wastewater-fed aquaculture, crop rotation, probiotics, feed quality, socioeconomic considerations, environmental regulations and fisheries acts, transboundary aquatic ecosystems, impact of alien species, ethical aspects of intensive aquaculture, responsible fisheries, and environmental impact assessment. A suggested model outlines the feedback mechanisms for achieving long-term sustainability through improved farm management practices, integrated farming, use of selective aquachemicals and probiotics, conservation of natural resources, regulatory mechanism, and policy instruments.     

The political ecology of gear bans in two fisheries: Florida's net ban and Alaska's Salmon wars

Parametric management in fisheries, which describes the management of how, where and when fishing occurs, is often essential for achieving sustainability. Changes to these parameters likely have impacts on stakeholders, however, for example through the costs and allocative consequences of spatial restrictions or gear changes. Here, I discuss two cases where gear bans have been implemented or proposed in response to conservation concerns: the commercial net ban enacted in Florida in 1995 and the failed ban on set gill‐nets in parts of Alaska. The two cases are remarkably similar, although the outcomes were quite different because of the social context of each fishery. Lessons from the Florida ban, which resulted in numerous negative social and ecological impacts, are informative regarding the impacts that likely would have accompanied the Alaska ban, had it proceeded. In both cases, the gear bans have had or were poised to have notable impacts on allocation, but scientific evidence for their necessity was limited. These cases show how ethical considerations can be inseparable from the ecological aspects of managing fisheries, and that when communities grapple with the sustainability of fisheries, they are simultaneously seeking to define the socially acceptable uses of those resources. I suggest a set of questions that can be asked when proposing parametric changes to fisheries, including how those changes will impact social well‐being and community resilience. These are questions that I argue must be addressed if both ethical and sustainable fisheries are the goal.     

Using ecological indicators in the context of an ecosystem approach to fisheries for data-limited fisheries

The tenets of ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) now occupy centre stage in our efforts to maintain the sustainability of fisheries and rebuild marine ecosystems. The paper discusses how an EAF can be adopted for data limited fisheries and uses the northern South China Sea fishery as an example to demonstrate the selection and use of indicators for determining the states of the fishery and its relevant ecosystem to provide advice on management. Implementing EAF management requires indicators and models that address the impact of fishing across entire ecological communities and determine management actions to be taken to achieve the preset objectives according to decision rules. Data limited fisheries necessarily have limited resources for data collection and scientific studies and therefore could not support complex models. To overcome the data limitation and absence of modelling support, simple indicators have to be used to assess the current state and monitor changes of the fishery and its ecosystem. Such indicators should: (1) be observable and understandable by all stakeholders, (2) be based on easily obtainable and reliable data, (3) adequately reflect the condition of the resource, and (4) have associated reference values and responsive management measures. The paper also reviews the recent development and use of indicators and harvest strategies in both conventional and EAF management to better understand the differences and to shed light on the challenges of EAF, in particular for data limited fisheries.     

Toward sustainable harvest strategies for marine fisheries that include recreational fishing

Recreational fishing (RF) is a large yet undervalued component of fisheries globally. While progress has been made in monitoring, assessing, and managing the sector in isolation, integration of RF into the management of multi-sector fisheries has been limited, particularly relative to the commercial sector. This marginalises recreational fishers and reduces the likelihood of achieving the sector's objectives and, more broadly, achieving fisheries sustainability. We examined the nature and extent of RF inclusion in harvest strategies (HSs) for marine fisheries across 15 regions in 11 nations to define the gap in inclusion that has developed between sectors. We focused on high-income nations with a high level of RF governance and used a questionnaire to elicit expert knowledge on HSs due to the paucity of published documents. In total, 339 HSs were considered. We found that RF inclusion in HSs was more similar to the small-scale sector (i.e., artisanal, cultural, or subsistence) than the commercial sector, with explicit operational objectives, data collection, performance indicators, reference points, and management controls lacking in many regions. Where specified, RF objectives focused on sustainability, economic value and catch allocation rather than directly relating to the recreational fishing experience. Conflicts with other sectors included competition with the commercial sector for limited resources, highlighting the importance of equitable resource allocation policies alongside HSs. We propose that RF be explicitly incorporated into HSs to ensure fisheries are ecologically, economically, and socially sustainable, and we recommend that fisheries organisations urgently review HSs for marine fisheries with a recreational component to close the harvest strategy gap among sectors.     

Beyond Individual Transferrable Quotas: methodologies for integrating ecosystem impacts of fishing into fisheries catch rights

While there has been a growing concern for the adverse ecological impacts of fishing, progress on incorporating these into operational fisheries management has been slow. Many fisheries management organizations have addressed the problem of overharvesting and over‐capitalization first. In this domain, the question of access regulation has gained growing recognition as a key dimension of fisheries sustainability, leading to recommendation and progressive implementation of rights‐based systems, in particular Individual Transferrable Quotas (ITQs). While adjustments in fishing capacity resulting from the implementation of these systems may entail a reduction in some unwanted ecosystem impacts of fishing, it is also recognized that they will not be sufficient to achieve the ecological outcomes increasingly demanded by the global community. There is thus a need to examine the possibilities for a common management framework for dealing with both over‐capitalization of fisheries and adverse ecological effects of fishing. In this paper, we examine the feasibility of incorporating greater ecosystem goods and services into ITQ policy instruments initially designed with a narrow focus on commercial target species. We consider the advantages and limitations of alternative approaches in this respect and identify some of the practical issues associated with the different alternatives, in particular the underpinning knowledge requirements. We argue that given the need for increasingly streamlined management processes, further investigation into practical ways forward in this domain is crucial if management of fisheries is to achieve economic efficiency while fully encompassing the ecologically sustainable development objectives of ecosystem‐based fisheries management.     

Economic evaluation of inland fisheries in England and Wales

Recreational inland fisheries are recognized to have considerable socio-economic benefits, not only for individuals participating directly but also for others in both local and wider communities. In England and Wales the Environment Agency (EA) has a duty to maintain, improve and develop inland fisheries. At present, there are no recent economic evaluations of the whole range of UK inland fisheries for the EA to refer to when confronted with resource issues. There is a particular need to explore the benefits of fisheries to the wider community, in order to secure more resources for management and protection of fisheries. Preliminary results from a multi-modular project to study the economic values associated with recreational fisheries in England and Wales are presented. Topics examined included recreational anglers' consumer surplus, general public non-use values of fisheries, social benefits of recreational fishing and impacts of fisheries on local communities.     

Interactions between the implementation of marine protected areas and right-based fisheries management in Australia

Abstract  The declaration of marine protected areas (MPAs) in Australia generates much confusion and controversy between government conservation and fisheries agencies, the fishing industry and NGOs. There are fundamental differences between the principles and practices underpinning the implementation of MPAs and fisheries management. This paper analyses the interactions between these two approaches to natural resource management and highlights the difficulties in integrating them effectively. The major challenges for governments are: poor cooperation between fisheries and conservation agencies; in principle inconsistencies between allocation of fishing rights by fisheries agencies and loss of these rights through MPA declaration; re-allocation of resources between user groups through spatial zoning; lack of fisheries expertise in conservation planning, and inappropriate single-species/single-issue approach to fisheries management. As fisheries agencies are now considering developing their own MPAs as tools for fisheries management, the need to address inconsistencies between conservation and fisheries approaches to the spatial management of natural resources increases further. Better collaboration between government agencies and better coordination of their activities would help more effective and less conflicting management of marine resources.     

Managing global shark fisheries: suggestions for prioritizing management strategies

• 1. Over the past two decades the number of fisheries targeting shark resources has increased dramatically. A combination of factors, including relatively slow growth rate, low fecundity and late age of maturity, result in low recovery rates from exploitation for most shark species. This, in turn, is reflected in the poor record of sustainability of shark fisheries.
• 2. One of the greatest challenges is to find a way to deal with the substantial levels of shark bycatch taken in many non‐target fisheries. Poor general recording of shark landings and paucity of shark landing data at the species level also undermine the development of effective shark management strategies. 3. This paper reviews the problems that must be faced worldwide if shark resources are to be managed sustainably and lays out a comprehensive set of prioritized management strategies to facilitate the sustainable management of global shark fisheries. It is acknowledged that the majority of sharks are harvested in developing countries and that the management of shark resources in developing and developed countries will need to incorporate different management strategies relevant to local socio‐economic agendas. The management recommendations deal with methods to improve the global regulation of fisheries, ways to improve global conservation ethics and encourage active participation in management, as well as means by which specific management strategies may be implemented.

Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Fishing impacts and the degradation or loss of habitat structure

The wider effects of fishing on marine ecosystems have become the focus of growing concern among scientists, fisheries managers and the fishing industry. The present review examines the role of habitat structure and habitat heterogeneity in marine ecosystems, and the effects of fishing (i.e. trawling and dredging) on these two components of habitat complexity. Three examples from New Zealand and Australia are considered, where available evidence suggests that fishing has been associated with the degradation or loss of habitat structure through the removal of large epibenthic organisms, with concomitant effects on fish species which occupy these habitats. With ever-increasing demands on fish-stocks and the need for sustainable use of fisheries resources, new approaches to fisheries management are needed. Fisheries management needs to address the sustainability of fish-stocks while minimizing the direct and indirect impacts of fishing on other components of the ecosystem. Two long-term management tools for mitigating degradation or loss of habitat structure while maintaining healthy sustainable fisheries which are increasingly considered by fisheries scientists and managers are: (1) protective habitat management, which involves the designation of protected marine and coastal areas which are afforded some level of protection from fishing; and (2) habitat restoration, whereby important habitat and ecological functions are restored following the loss of habitat and/or resources. Nevertheless, the protection of marine and coastal areas, and habitat restoration should not be seen as solutions replacing conventional management approaches, but need to be components of an integrated programme of coastal zone and fisheries management. A number of recent international fisheries agreements have specifically identified the need to provide for habitat protection and restoration to ensure long-term sustainability of fisheries. The protection and restoration of habitat are also common components of fisheries management programs under national fisheries law and policy.     

渔业管理理论与中国实践的回顾与展望

渔业管理一直是世界各渔业国家所面临的难题。本文首先分析了中国渔业的特点,指出中国的渔业管理比世界上任何国家都更为复杂、更为困难,描述了中国渔业管理的历史沿革和中国渔业政策的发展脉络,指出在中国的渔业发展中渔业政策对渔业生产始终起着指导和推动的作用,认为中国初步形成了以《中华人民共和国渔业法》为基本框架,层次结构完备,措施有力,不断完善和强化的渔业管理制度。然后,介绍了渔业管理的主要理论,梳理了中国学者对渔业管理研究的主要文献,指出中国通过水产养殖支撑不断增长的水产品消费需求,成功解决了水产品需求与资源环境约束之间的矛盾,对减少捕捞野生渔业资源发挥了重大作用。文章归纳了中国渔业管理的主要制度和措施,并对其效果进行综合评述,认为几十年来,特别是改革开放以来,中国不断引进先进的渔业管理理念,促进养殖业、捕捞业、加工流通业、增殖渔业、休闲渔业等五大产业蓬勃发展,渔业生态环境修复力度不断加大,依法治渔能力显著提升;但是由于中国渔业的特点和渔业的复杂性和不确定性,中国渔业仍存在着一些明显的问题。最后,本文根据相关的渔业发展规划,展望了中国的渔业管理将朝着渔业资源总量控制、强化资源保护及生态修复的方向发展。     

The impact of subsidies upon fisheries management and sustainability: the case of the North Atlantic

This paper provides both an estimate and assessment of subsidies in fisheries in the North Atlantic. The subsidies are estimated, on the basis of data taken from an OECD study and the Sea Around US Project database, to be in the order of US$ 2.0–2.5 billion per year. The assessment of the impact of the subsidies upon resource management and sustainability requires an examination of the underlying economics of subsidies in fisheries. There is general agreement, to which we subscribe, that fisheries subsidies do great harm by exacerbating the problems arising from the ‘common pool’ aspects of capture fisheries. Many economists, however, believe it that, if the ‘common pool’ aspects of a fishery could be removed by, for example, establishing a full‐fledged property rights system, the negative impact of fisheries subsidies would prove to be trivial. This paper demonstrates that the aforementioned comfortable belief is unfounded. Fisheries subsidies can be seriously damaging, even if the ‘common pool’ aspects of the fishery are removed. There is also a widely held belief among economists and government officials that subsidies used for vessel decommissioning schemes, far from being harmful, actually have a beneficial impact upon resource management and sustainability, or are at worst, neutral. About 20% of the fisheries subsidies in the North Atlantic are directed towards these purposes. In this paper, we argue that these seemingly beneficial subsides can, in fact, be highly negative in their impact.