|
Abstract:
|
"Fisheries management issues are receiving considerable attention. Over the last few decades the situation has become acute. For example, 'of the worlds 15 major marine fishing regions, the catch in all but two has fallen; in four the catch has shrunk by more than 30%' (Weber 1994). Similarly, 'eighteen fisheries have seen their productivity fall by more than 100,000 tons each. Together, these drops represent a fall of nearly 30 million tons or more than one-third of the 1992 catch' (Weber 1994). As these fisheries decline, harvesters have begun placing increased effort on other fisheries resources. Fisheries management research has accelerated, as the scope of management problems becomes apparent. As a result, a large body of literature in economics, anthropology, political science, and other social sciences addresses problems and innovations in fisheries management.
"Presently, fisheries policy analysis can be divided into three broad categories: conservation, market-based, and community-based (Charles 1992). Each approach comes with a distinct perspective. Today, the market-based approach is probably the dominant approach recommended in the fisheries policy literature. Proponents of market- based regulation argue that the approach improves economic efficiency and productivity, while protecting fisheries at a sustainable level. It may also increase fisher incomes, modernize the industry, reduce overcapitalization, and help eliminate the 'race for fish' (See Maloney and Pearse 1989, Terrebonne 1995, Arnason 1991, Grafton 1995, Charles 1992, Beckerman 1990, Clark 1994, Grafton 1996, Buck 1995). However, critics suggest that negative outcomes including: industry consolidation, loss of small scale fishers, unemployment, loss of community and damage to local institutions, equity problems, cheating (such as high grading or bycatch dumping) and inadequate scientific knowledge to accurately set quota limits (E.g., Barber 1989, Young & McCay 1995, Palsson & Helgason 1996, Schlager 1990, Copes 1996, Haliday et all 1992, Mace 1993).
"As the earliest (1986) nation to introduce a market-based quota management system (QMS) for most of its marine fisheries, New Zealand presents a unique opportunity to study the influence that this regulatory approach has on the fishing industry and community. The length of time New Zealand's QMS has been in place means that it is possible to conduct a long-term analysis of both the strengths and weaknesses of this regulatory approach. Using a variety of sources, this study examines changes that occurred in the Auckland regions fishing community. This study primarily relies upon data from a panel survey (dating from the policy's inception in 1986-87, 1995, and 1999) of fishers, combined with analysis of national quota holding data, and documentary sources. The authors use these data sources to examine the claims made both for and against quota management. Their assessment proposes that market-based regulation is neither the panacea nor the curse that some characterizations suggest. Instead, it is a policy tool with an important mixture of strengths and weaknesses that create important and long-lasting changes on the fishing industry, fishing community, and regulatory community associated with it. Nations or fisheries considering quota-based management systems need to carefully set management goals and reflect on the set of changes and challenges they are likely to face if they adopt a market-based management approach."
|