To prevent the overfishing of marine fish populations, governments often limit fishing access through the allocation of fishing opportunities. While some studies have linked particular systems of ...fishing opportunities to sustainable outcomes (particularly individual transferable quota), it remains unclear whether it is the use of exclusive access (individual allocation), the use of a market (tradability), the duration of this access or the quota limits themselves that drive the sustainable outcomes. To determine which attributes of fishing opportunities are associated with sustainable fishing, we developed a novel method to systematically classify how fishing opportunities are allocated for 443 global fish stocks from 1990 to 2018 to produce the longest and most comprehensive dataset and longitudinal study of its kind. Our results revealed that quota limits and individual allocation are linked to a reduced probability of overfishing, with the most robust result for quota limits. No attributes were robustly linked to a reduced probability of overfished biomass. Whereas some previous studies have found that systems with market‐based features or strong property rights (i.e. a long duration) were linked to sustainable fishing, these benefits were found to be small or not significant once proper controls for other system attributes were introduced. These results highlight the importance of considering all attributes of institutional design in the governance of common pool resources.
Background Anthropogenic degradation of marine ecosystems is widely accepted as a major social-ecological problem. The growing urgency to manage marine ecosystems more effectively has led to ...increasing application of spatial management measures (marine protected areas MPAs, sectoral e.g. fishery closures and marine spatial planning marine plans). Understanding the methodologies used to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures against social, economic, and ecological outcomes is key for designing effective monitoring and evaluation programmes. Methods We used a pre-defined and tested search string focusing on intervention and outcome terms to search for relevant studies across four bibliographic databases, Google Scholar, 39 organisational websites, and one specialist data repository. Searches were conducted in English and restricted to the period 2009 to 2019 to align with current UK marine policy contexts. Relevant studies were restricted to UK-relevant coastal countries, as identified by key stakeholders. Search results were screened for relevance against pre-defined eligibility criteria first at title and abstract level, and then at full text. Articles assessed as not relevant at full text were recorded with reasons for exclusion. Two systematic map databases of meta-data and coded data from relevant primary and secondary studies, respectively, were produced. Review findings Over 19,500 search results were identified, resulting in 391 relevant primary articles, 33 secondary articles and 49 tertiary reviews. Relevant primary articles evaluated spatial management measures across a total of 22 social, economic and ecological outcomes; only 2.8% considered all three disciplines, with most focused exclusively on ecological (67.8%) or social (13.3%) evaluations. Secondary articles predominately focused on ecological evaluations (75.8%). The majority of the primary and secondary evidence base aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of MPAs (85.7% and 90.9% respectively), followed by fisheries closures (12.5%; 3.0%) with only 1.8% of primary, and 6.1% of secondary, articles focused on marine plans or on MPAs and fisheries closures combined. Most evaluations reported within primary articles were conducted for a single site (60.4%) or multiple individual sites (32.5%), with few evaluating networks of sites (6.9%). Secondary articles mostly evaluated multiple individual sites (93.9%). Most (70.3%) primary articles conducted principal evaluations, i.e. basic description of effects; 29.4% explored causation; and 0.3% undertook benefit evaluations. Secondary articles predominately explored causation (66.7%) with the remainder conducting principal evaluations. Australia (27.4%), the USA (18.4%) and the UK (11.3%) were most frequently studied by primary articles, with secondary articles reporting mostly global (66.7%) or European (18.2%) syntheses. Conclusions The systematic map reveals substantial bodies of evidence relating to methods of evaluating MPAs against ecological outcomes. However, key knowledge gaps include evaluation across social and economic outcomes and of overall merit and/or worth (benefit evaluation), as well as of: marine plans; networks of sites; real-time, temporary or seasonal closures; spatial management within offshore waters, and lagoon or estuary environments. Although the evidence base has grown over the past two decades, information to develop comprehensive evaluation frameworks remains insufficient. Greater understanding on how to evaluate the effectiveness of spatial management measures is required to support improved management of global ocean resources and spaces. Keywords: Fishery closures, Fishery exclusion zones, No-take zones, Marine management, Marine protected areas, Marine reserves, Marine spatial planning, Maritime planning, MPAs, Policy evaluation
Background Anthropogenic degradation of marine ecosystems is widely accepted as a major social-ecological problem. The growing urgency to better manage marine ecosystems has led to the increasing ...application of 'spatial management measures' including marine protected areas, sectoral (e.g. fishery) closures, and marine spatial planning. However, the designation of varied spatial management regimes is just the first step; achievement of objectives relies upon effective implementation, monitoring, evaluation and adaptation. Despite spatial management being a core component of the marine management portfolio, to our knowledge, there is no systematic overview of the evidence on methodologies available, and employed, to monitor and evaluate their effectiveness across social, economic and ecological outcomes. Methods This systematic map will examine existing evidence describing methodologies for monitoring the effects, and evaluating the effectiveness, of marine spatial management across ecological, social and economic outcomes. Our aim is to provide a resource for decision-makers, primarily in the UK but also internationally, that supports effective marine management, and to describe the current evidence base. Identification and evaluation of relevant studies will therefore be restricted to coastal countries identified by our Stakeholder Group as being relevant to the UK, and searches will be restricted to the period 2009 to 2019 to align with the current UK policy context. Searches for relevant grey and academic literature, published in English, will be conducted in four bibliographic search engines, Google Scholar, 38 organisational websites and one specialist data repository. Eligibility screening will be conducted first at title and abstract level, and then at full text. Coding and meta-data extraction from eligible studies will include: bibliographic information, general information about the spatial management measure studied, and methodological information on the monitoring and evaluation undertaken. Consistency checking amongst reviewers will be undertaken during screening, coding and data extraction phases. The outcome of the systematic map will be a database that displays the meta-data of identified relevant studies. Findings will be presented in a descriptive report detailing the evaluation approaches and analytical methodologies employed, and data collection methods applied and/or data required by relevant studies to inform evaluations on the effectiveness of marine spatial management measures. Keywords: Fishery closures, Fishery exclusion zones, No-take zones, Marine protected areas, Marine reserves, Marine spatial planning, Maritime planning, MPAs, Policy evaluation
Recent European Union policy objectives have committed to support small-scale coastal fisheries (SSCF), but the characteristics and sustainability of SSCF in Europe are poorly understood. In the UK, ...there is no clear definition of ‘small-scale’ beyond a 10-m length threshold used for fishing vessel administration. This paper examines the consequences of length-based management of English fisheries, and explores future management possibilities. The 15 highest-value species for the English under-10 m fishing fleet were evaluated according to Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) pre-assessment criteria. Based on the information collected through Project Inshore, very few of the key under-10 m fisheries, the majority of which are shellfish, would be suitable for MSC certification due to poor stock health and/or stock uncertainty. The current structure of the under-10 m fleet was examined by vessel length class. Policy measures based on the under-10 m/over-10 m vessel classification have led to an increase in high-catching capacity ‘super-under-10s’, which contribute disproportionately to total landings by under-10 m vessels, and may have fishing patterns more representative of larger vessels. In a survey of English fishers (n = 41), fisheries managers (n = 12) and other stakeholders (n = 8), the majority (91%) supported a distinction between small-scale/inshore and large-scale/offshore vessels. Most (65%) viewed the current classification (based on vessel length alone) as inappropriate. Length remained the most popular criterion for future management, but several alternatives scored highly, including fishing gear type. In the UK, post-‘Brexit’ fisheries policy reform will require further examination of the meaning of ‘small-scale’, to ensure that support for SSCF is directed appropriately.
•Definitions of small-scale coastal fisheries (SSCF) vary widely around the world and within Europe.•Few of the key stocks for SSCF in England would be considered sustainably managed according to Marine Stewardship Council criteria.•The majority of landings from the English under-10 m fleet are by ‘super-under-10’ vessels designed in response to length-based fisheries management.•There are several reasons to redefine small-scale fisheries in England to include criteria beyond length – a change supported by a stakeholder survey – as part of wider fisheries policy changes post-‘Brexit’.
Fisheries in European Union (EU) waters have been managed under the Common Fisheries Policy since 1983. The main regulatory tool in EU fisheries management is the use of Total Allowable Catches ...(TACs). In principle, TACs are set according to biological scientific advice provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) which recommends catch limits with the objective of maximising catches in a sustainable manner. The objective of this paper is to compare TACs set by the EU and its Member States between 2001 and 2015 with those recommended by ICES in their annual scientific advice in order to (a) investigate the level of compliance with scientific advice by the European Council and, (b) consider whether particular Member States have received more TACs above advice than others. For the time-series analysed, the European Council set TACs above scientific advice by an average of 20% per year, with around 7 out of every 10 TACs exceeding advice. Of all Member States, Denmark and the United Kingdom received the highest TACs in volume above scientific advice. Relative to the size of their TAC however, Spain and Portugal exceeded advice by the greatest percentage. Greater transparency is required to determine what takes place during the closed door negotiations and to improve the fishery sustainability credentials of the EU and its Member States.
•Total allowable catches (TACs) are a central tool for EU fisheries management.•On average, EU TACs were set 20% above scientific advice between 2001 and 2015.•Denmark and the UK received the largest increase to their TACs (in tonnes).•Spain and Portugal received the largest percentage increase to their TAC.•Greater transparency in decision-making is required.
Exiting the EU allows the UK to unilaterally change the frameworks that govern its environment and natural resources. This opportunity is timely given the urgent need to address the biodiversity and ...climate emergencies, and deliver the necessary policy changes to meet associated international agreements. The UK's divergence from EU environmental policy has already begun. The new Agriculture Act uses the concept of “public money for public goods” (PMPG) to seemingly revolutionise direct agricultural subsidies, replacing the much-maligned funding mechanisms under the Common Agricultural Policy and making the provision of their replacement dependent upon actions delivering societal gain. However, the potential benefits of transposing this concept to marine fisheries and aquaculture are yet to be recognised despite similar criticisms of funding mechanisms under the Common Fisheries Policy. This paper therefore considers the key distinctions between our use of marine and terrestrial environments and how PMPG could be applied to fisheries and aquaculture. The findings suggest that some forms of aquaculture are well-placed to benefit from a ‘marinising’ of the PMPG concept. Currently, capture fisheries, because they do not have ownership over marine space and interact with the marine environment in an extractive manner, have a greater challenge to adapt their business models to receive public money under this framework.
•The public money for public goods concept can be considered beyond farming.•The concept should prompt debate and recognition of the value of marine ‘public goods’.•Some forms of aquaculture are well-placed to benefit, while current fishing practices are likely to struggle.•Future research should seek to identify public goods fishers can enhance.
Energy prices increased sharply because of the military invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February 2022, heavily impacting global economies. In 2022, the EU fishing sector paid on average about EUR ...0.93 per liter of fuel; at the peak of the crisis in June, it paid EUR 1.2 per liter, around three times the normal average price. High fuel prices jeopardize the viability of the fishing sector, which is largely fuel-intensive and particularly vulnerable to fuel price increases. The European Commission responded with emergency measures, adopting a Temporary Framework for State aid rules and activating the crisis mechanism foreseen under the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF). This communication aims to examine the economic impact of the high fuel prices and the financial support available to the EU fishing sector to assess the short-term and long-term sustainability of the EU fishing sector.
Transparent, performance-based approaches to allocating fishing opportunities are required for signatories to the Aarhus Convention and the European Union's (EU) Member States via the Common ...Fisheries Policy. The lack of an operational framework to support this requirement means such a system is seldom explicitly used. Using the English commercial sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) fishery as a case study, operationalisation of this policy requirement is evaluated using a Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework. MCDA is a decision-making tool allowing users to explicitly evaluate complex, potentially conflicting, criteria, enabling wider costs and benefits to be considered. The sea bass fishery was selected as the dramatic stock decline since 2010 has meant difficult policy choices regarding the allocation of scarce fishing opportunities between different user groups. To inform the MCDA, the three main English sea bass fishing methods (nets, hooks, and trawls) are evaluated across thirteen social, economic, and environmental criteria to generate a performance score. Importance weightings for each criterion, developed from 50 surveys of fishers, industry representatives, managers, non-governmental organisations, and the wider public, are used to combine these performance scores generating an overall score for the MCDA. Results show that regardless of stakeholder group questioned, hooks achieve the highest MCDA performance, followed by nets, and then trawls. This suggests that taking a performance-based approach to the allocation of fishing opportunities in the English fishing fleet have a prioritisation by fishing type. MCDA could be used to promote transparency, objectivity and social, environmental and economic sustainability into European and UK fisheries.
•Complex trade-offs in allocating fishing opportunities are commonplace.•Using a multi criteria decision analysis (MCDA) support tool promotes transparency.•In the English sea bass fishery, thirteen performance criteria are used for MCDA.•Taking a performance-based approach prioritises the fishery by gear type.•MCDA promotes transparency and objectivity in fisheries.
PDF
