A comparative review of fisheries management experiences in the European Union and in other countries worldwide: Iceland, Australia, and New Zealand (original) (raw)
Related papers
Aquatic Living …, 2009
This review aims at comparing the fisheries management systems existing in New Zealand and in the European Union. The involvement of stakeholders at all stages of the management process is generally more transparent and better established in New Zealand than in the EU. Both systems aim at achieving an adequate balance between sustainability and utilisation and consider the precautionary approach as a founding principle. The social objectives are probably more explicit in the EU management system. In New Zealand, BMSY is a legal management target for all stocks in the quota management system (QMS), but management strategies were poorly explicit until most recently. In the EU, there have not been any legal management targets or strategies until 1999. Since 1999, a number of multi-annual recovery and management plans have been established, including both management targets and strategies. Both management systems include conservation and access regulation measures. The EU management measures aim at regulating fisheries outputs and inputs, and discarding is tolerated. New Zealand management is almost exclusively output-based, and discarding practices are banned. In the EU, while individual quotas (IQs) are implicit in several countries, there is no consistent pattern across Member States for allocating TACs. In New Zealand, individual transferable quotas (ITQs) are implemented, and some flexibility in catch-quota balancing is provided by a carry-over allowance and the payment of a landing tax, the deemed value, for every fish landed above quota. If rights-based management were introduced in the EU based on, e.g., the New Zealand model, we suggest that concentration rules be set in accordance with the social objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy, and also that the deemed value should be set based on science and economics.
Nordic experience of fisheries management
TemaNord, 2009
The Nordic countries have developed seven distinct types of fisheries management. Unlike the West Nordic countries (Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands and Norway), which are not members of the European Union, Denmark, Sweden and Finland are subject to the EU's Common Fisheries Policy. The seven systems operate in societies that, historically and socially, are characterised by a close sense of affinity and shared values. However, these systems operate under conditions that differ significantly from nation to nation, especially in terms of the countries' economic dependence on fishery resources, their socio-cultural approaches to fisheries, and their marine ecosystems. As a result of these factors, the Nordic countries have relatively diverse systems of fisheries management. International evaluations of global fisheries management take place at regular intervals. These are conducted by different organisations and employ different criteria. All of these evaluations have ranked the Nordic systems, especially the West Nordic ones, among the best in the world. Nordic diversity i Fisheries Mangement has therefore proven successful at an international level. The Nordic Region is home to many highly sustainable solutions. The report in your hand is part of the Nordic Council of Ministers' contribution to the debate about reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The Commission's Green Paper on the CFP, which was published in spring 2009, posed many relevant questions about future fisheries policy and stressed the need for a wide-ranging and fundamental debate on the current situation. The whole basis of EU fisheries policy is up for discussion, and the Nordic Council of Ministers has decided to make an active contribution to that debate.
The waters surrounding the Nordic countries are rich in fish resources. Up to this date fisheries has been among the most important productive sectors in the Nordic economies, and in the Faroe Islands and Greenland it is by far the most important sector. Management of marine fisheries has over time had various objectives in the Nordic countries, ranging from fiscal and social purposes to stock conservation and socio-economic well-being in recent years. There are strong similarities between the Nordic countries, but differences in ecosystem and the socio-cultural settings of the fisheries have lead to differentiated management systems anyhow. The purpose of this note is to bring Nordic experience into the discussion of the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. The discussion takes as its point of departure the so-called Green Paper in which the Commission has summarised the status of the EU fisheries and also put themes and questions up for discussion. The themes and cases of this n...
Objectives of fisheries management: case studies from the UK, France, Spain and Denmark
Marine Policy, 2002
The main objectives of fisheries management are generally similar throughout the world. These are often stated in policy documents such as the Common Fisheries Policy and the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. However, at the local level often the key objectives of management are more detailed, characterised by both the overriding management structure and the status and type of fishery concerned. In this paper, we consider case study fisheries from the UK, France, Spain and Denmark to compare some of the various types of fisheries and fisheries management systems that exist in the European Union. From this, we define the key objectives for each management system. r
The regional management of fisheries in European Western Waters
Marine Policy, 2015
A survey of past and existing management measures applied to different fisheries in European Western Waters is analyzed as a typology of co-management between governments and stakeholders. Faced with increasing constraints on accessing fish stocks, management measures have evolved toward fishing rights individualization, limited access and various other specific measures. Restrictions on access have changed fishermen's behaviour in several significant ways. A comparative analysis, based on qualitative data collected through interviews and focus groups, is developed for fisheries from the following European countries: France, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom. Past and existing individual harvesting rights in the four countries are reviewed and compared.
Can fisheries management be quantified?
Marine Policy, 2014
Policy efforts to reduce fisheries impact have often created micro-management. Detailed regulations are restricting the fishing industry, and are also acknowledged to limit the progress towards sustainable management. Industry representatives, political bodies and scientists have therefore argued for more simplicity and transparency. Here, fisheries management is quantified in terms of trends in regulations for different Swedish fisheries in the Baltic Sea during the period 1995–2009. The results suggest that many fisheries are suffering from increased micro-management, but interestingly some fisheries showing a different trend.
Comparative Evaluations of Innovative Fisheries Management
2009
for their unremunerated contributions that did so much to improve the quality of this volume. This study was funded by the Commission of the European Communities Sixth Framework Program, project N • 022686 'Comparative Evaluations of Innovative Solutions in European Fisheries Management' (CEVIS). The book does not necessary reflect the Commission's views on its future policy in this area.
Is Europe ready for a results-based approach to fisheries management? The voice of stakeholders
The reformed Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), adopted by the European Union in 2013, aims to achieve sustainable exploitation of marine resources. Beyond the mainstream of stakeholders' engagement, the literature increasingly calls for shared accountability in fisheries management. In such scenarios, identifying stakeholders' insights becomes critical for a successful design of innovative management approaches. This paper analyses how the stakeholders perceive a results-based management system for four fisheries in different European sea-basins as well as at a pan-European level. The results indicate a need for adaptive and participatory management approaches, building on regional adaptations within transparent and plural frameworks for fisheries. To succeed, the system should explicitly address its associated public and private costs; neither participation nor accountability comes for free.
Management effectiveness of the world's marine fisheries
PLoS Biology, 2009
Ongoing declines in production of the world's fisheries may have serious ecological and socioeconomic consequences. As a result, a number of international efforts have sought to improve management and prevent overexploitation, while helping to maintain biodiversity and a sustainable food supply. Although these initiatives have received broad acceptance, the extent to which corrective measures have been implemented and are effective remains largely unknown. We used a survey approach, validated with empirical data, and enquiries to over 13,000 fisheries experts (of which 1,188 responded) to assess the current effectiveness of fisheries management regimes worldwide; for each of those regimes, we also calculated the probable sustainability of reported catches to determine how management affects fisheries sustainability. Our survey shows that 7% of all coastal states undergo rigorous scientific assessment for the generation of management policies, 1.4% also have a participatory and transparent processes to convert scientific recommendations into policy, and 0.95% also provide for robust mechanisms to ensure the compliance with regulations; none is also free of the effects of excess fishing capacity, subsidies, or access to foreign fishing. A comparison of fisheries management attributes with the sustainability of reported fisheries catches indicated that the conversion of scientific advice into policy, through a participatory and transparent process, is at the core of achieving fisheries sustainability, regardless of other attributes of the fisheries. Our results illustrate the great vulnerability of the world's fisheries and the urgent need to meet well-identified guidelines for sustainable management; they also provide a baseline against which future changes can be quantified.