Research

Fisheries Management

As with similar environmental problems, there are multiple ways to manage a fishery. The objective of management in general is to conserve the resource while maximizing efficiency. To achieve efficiency, management policies should minimize the costs to the industry and the fishermen themselves. In the U.S., the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act is regarded as the authority for fisheries management within the nation's borders.

From a theoretical perspective, management based purely on economics is the most efficient method. A government can impose a tax, requiring fishermen to bear the costs of not fishing sustainably. An alternative approach with the same outcome is subsidizing sustainable fishing.

Another form of fisheries management is regulatory system, which, if imposed, would require all members of the fishing industry to adhere to a set of law. Economic sanctions would be issued in the case of noncompliance.

A regulatory system can have a set of input controls, which would dictate what technology can be used, where and when fishermen can fish, and how much they are allowed to take out. This would include establishing closed areas and quotas. Setting up a system purely regulated by input controls would be ineffective, because companies merely have to comply with the laws, and there is little incentive for them to actually work towards a sustainable fishery.
Another method of regulation would be uniform performance standards, or setting output controls. This method sets a target - for example, a fishery must be maintained at the level of the Maximum Sustainable Yield - for a fishery, and it is up to the fishery to decide how to reach that target.

References

Perruso, L. & Larkin, S. "A Dual Production Analysis of a Multispecies Fishery: The Case of the U.S. Atlantic Longline Fleet." http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/st5/documents/A_dual_production_analysis_of_a_multispecies_fishery.pdf

Jenkins, G. & Lamech, R. (1994). Green Taxes and Incentive Policies. San Francisco, CA: ICS Press.

Proposed Solutions

GPS tracking

Establishing a law that requires all fishing vessels to have a GPS tracking device on board will make the regulation of fishermen and fishing companies much simpler and more effective. It will allow regulating bodies to know which fleets are in the water and whether or not they are within legal boundaries. For fishermen, it is an simple way to determine which closed areas are in effect, and the device could keep a tally on the amount of fish caught by that particular vessel and how much of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) has been caught. For all fishing vessels currently in operation, the cost of the tracking devices can be subsidized.

Excise tax on fish

Establishing a fish tax will put the cost of depleting fisheries on the consumer. Similar to gasoline tax and cigarette taxes, a fish tax will increase the cost of any fish products sold on the market. Currently there is a very high demand for fish, and if we are to keep a sustainable global fish population, we cannot catch the number of fish needed to meet this demand. An increase in fish prices will not only discourage consumers from buying more fish, thus lowering the demand, but it will make them aware of the crisis in our oceans today. Though this will make it so the lower class will have difficulty affording fish, in America and other developed countries, there are other protein options available, and fish prices will have little negative effect on public health.

Elimination of Subsidies

Currently subsidies are costing the governments around the world billions of dollars and only harming the state of fisheries by increasing the fishing effort and making it easier for us to deplete the fishing stock. Money is directed to lower the costs of shipbuilding, to compensate fishermen, and to establish joint fishermen, among other things. Studies show that fishing subsidies for the Distant Water Fleets of developed nations are harming the economy and growth of developing nations. Fishing subsidies should be eliminated and the money should instead be directed to conservation programs.

Tiered licensing

Developing nations often declare open access to their fisheries in order to attract foreign fishing companies, which try to minimize their costs by flag hopping to waters with the least regulation. Developing nations have little motivation to regulate their fisheries because doing so would only drive away business. Since their ultimate goal is economic growth and development, a solution would have to reach these goals more effectively than open access.
One such solution may be a tiered licensing system. (This can also be applied to developed nations, which also often grant foreign access to their fisheries.) Since a fishing vessel needs a license from a country to fish in its waters, the price of the license could vary depending on the vessel:
*Native fishermen who are not part of a large fishing company and who have limited technology and fish using basic methods should have the lowest license fee.
*Small fleet operators should be charged a moderate license fee.
*In order to discourage a monopoly, large fishing companies with advanced/disruptive fishing gear should be charged a percentage of their profits. Currently developed countries subsidize their Distant Water Fleets so the cost the foreign ships bear is only 1/3 what is offered for compensation to the host country, and this compensation can amount to as little as 1% of the fishing fleet's profits.
The more countries that follow this licensing system, the more each country gains from it, because it means there are fewer fisheries for large companies to exploit. This price discrimination brings in more money from foreign fleets and promotes the developing nation's own fishing industry, and while our goal is to reduce the amount of fish caught, urging countries to take control of their own fisheries instead of letting foreign fleets exploit their resources is the first step.
Another incentive for following this system is an access to the "whitelist" of fishing vessels, so the government can find out which boats use sustainable practices.

Bycatch plan

Quotas are often used to limit the amount of fish that can be taken out of a fishery, but a side effect of implementing quotas is the amount of bycatch that results from fishermen trying to avoid the penalties of bringing in too much fish. Instead of penalizing fishermen, the regulation should just state that fishermen cannot profit from any fish they catch that is beyond their quota. This extra fish should be collected and sold, instead of being cast back into the sea as dead and decaying fish, and the proceeds should go towards a local fisheries council or the appropriate regional fishery body (http://www.fao.org/fi/body/rfb/chooserfb.htm). Part of this money should fund a program that provides fishermen with representation in government, since a major obstacle in the way of a body that will give fishermen lobbying power is lack of funding. The fishermen will thus be motivated to not throw out their bycatch, but since they cannot make monetary profit off catching beyond the quota, there will be no incentive to overfish either. There needs to be strict supervision when measuring the fish, however, because if the price of fish goes up, a fishing blackmarket could develop.

Research as a priority + employing fishermen

Further research is undoubtably needed to effectively monitor and evaluate fisheries. The establishment of more research groups, particularly international research collaborations, dedicated to fisheries management and the state of the global fish stock will attract public attention and help bring awareness to this problem. A key step would be to incorporate local fishermen, many of whom are fishing fewer and fewer days of the year, in the research process through data collection and analysis. Understanding between the fishermen, the scientists, and the policymakers will accelerate the establishment of a sustainable system.

Market for "fair trade" fish

When trying to create awareness about the importance of sustainable fisheries in developed countries, tying this into economic markets might be the best idea: we can create an ecolabel that is stamped onto fish that has been harvested from a fishery with good practices. As of right now there are three groups that put a label on sustainable fish, but the process needs staffing and funding. Also, if producers want to have their fish evaluated and certified, there is a cost barrier that bars out small fishing companies who cannot afford to apply for certification. Since a substantial portion of the fish sold in the U.S. canned tuna, perhaps focusing on labeling tuna that is caught in sustainable fisheries is the first step.

Other ideas:

*set international standards for nitrates/phosphates to evaluate bodies of water and determine which ones need remediation
*set a buffer zone beyond the 200-mile EEZ where no fishing can occur