Emerging Fisheries and Public Opinion: Insights From a Survey Experiment on Mesopelagic Fishing

IF 6.3 1区 农林科学 Q1 FISHERIES
Fish and Fisheries Pub Date : 2026-08-09 Epub Date: 2026-06-08 DOI:10.1111/faf.70100
Anna Lou Abatayo, Maartje Oostdijk, Andries Richter
{"title":"Emerging Fisheries and Public Opinion: Insights From a Survey Experiment on Mesopelagic Fishing","authors":"Anna Lou Abatayo,&nbsp;Maartje Oostdijk,&nbsp;Andries Richter","doi":"10.1111/faf.70100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Public acceptability of fisheries policy remains a key challenge for successful governance, constraining the set of feasible management options. To many, public opinion seems mysterious—rarely aligned with scientific evidence, yet not random, as it is shaped by frames, narratives and social factors. Here, we examine public acceptance of governing a new fishery through a survey experiment conducted in 10 countries. As a case, we consider the mesopelagic zone, a largely untapped resource with high biomass and economic potential. However, mesopelagic fishing also entails ecological and social risks, including impacts on food webs, carbon sequestration and global equity. Acceptance varied substantially across countries. Support was lower in wealthier countries, such as Germany and the Netherlands, where respondents also favoured stricter regulation, and higher in Indonesia, Nigeria, the Philippines, and, to a lesser extent, Spain, where support for regulation was weaker. Different frames have different effects across countries. For example, emphasizing risks to food webs reduced acceptance in Argentina and Nigeria, while highlighting disproportionate burdens on the Global South further lowered support only in Nigeria. At the individual level, confidence in government and large companies increased support for mesopelagic fishing, whereas other demographic factors played smaller roles. These findings emphasize the role of equity concerns and localized public opinion in shaping policy for fisheries and highlight the context-dependent power of narrative framing.</p>","PeriodicalId":169,"journal":{"name":"Fish and Fisheries","volume":"27 5","pages":"1074-1087"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.70100","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fish and Fisheries","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.70100","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public acceptability of fisheries policy remains a key challenge for successful governance, constraining the set of feasible management options. To many, public opinion seems mysterious—rarely aligned with scientific evidence, yet not random, as it is shaped by frames, narratives and social factors. Here, we examine public acceptance of governing a new fishery through a survey experiment conducted in 10 countries. As a case, we consider the mesopelagic zone, a largely untapped resource with high biomass and economic potential. However, mesopelagic fishing also entails ecological and social risks, including impacts on food webs, carbon sequestration and global equity. Acceptance varied substantially across countries. Support was lower in wealthier countries, such as Germany and the Netherlands, where respondents also favoured stricter regulation, and higher in Indonesia, Nigeria, the Philippines, and, to a lesser extent, Spain, where support for regulation was weaker. Different frames have different effects across countries. For example, emphasizing risks to food webs reduced acceptance in Argentina and Nigeria, while highlighting disproportionate burdens on the Global South further lowered support only in Nigeria. At the individual level, confidence in government and large companies increased support for mesopelagic fishing, whereas other demographic factors played smaller roles. These findings emphasize the role of equity concerns and localized public opinion in shaping policy for fisheries and highlight the context-dependent power of narrative framing.

新兴渔业与舆论:来自中远洋渔业调查实验的见解
公众对渔业政策的接受程度仍然是成功治理的一个关键挑战,限制了一套可行的管理办法。对许多人来说,民意似乎是神秘的——很少与科学证据一致,但也不是随机的,因为它是由框架、叙事和社会因素塑造的。在这里,我们通过在10个国家进行的调查实验来检验公众对管理新渔业的接受程度。作为一个案例,我们考虑中上层区域,一个很大程度上未开发的资源,具有高生物量和经济潜力。然而,中远洋捕捞也会带来生态和社会风险,包括对食物网、碳封存和全球公平的影响。各国的接受程度差异很大。德国和荷兰等较富裕国家的支持率较低,这些国家的受访者也支持更严格的监管;印度尼西亚、尼日利亚、菲律宾的支持率较高,西班牙的支持率较低,但对监管的支持较弱。不同的框架对不同的国家有不同的影响。例如,强调粮食网的风险降低了阿根廷和尼日利亚的接受度,而强调全球南方负担过重进一步降低了只有尼日利亚的支持度。在个人一级,对政府和大公司的信心增加了对中远洋捕鱼的支持,而其他人口因素的作用较小。这些发现强调了公平问题和当地公众舆论在制定渔业政策方面的作用,并强调了叙事框架的语境依赖力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Fish and Fisheries
Fish and Fisheries 农林科学-渔业
CiteScore
12.80
自引率
6.00%
发文量
83
期刊介绍: Fish and Fisheries adopts a broad, interdisciplinary approach to the subject of fish biology and fisheries. It draws contributions in the form of major synoptic papers and syntheses or meta-analyses that lay out new approaches, re-examine existing findings, methods or theory, and discuss papers and commentaries from diverse areas. Focal areas include fish palaeontology, molecular biology and ecology, genetics, biochemistry, physiology, ecology, behaviour, evolutionary studies, conservation, assessment, population dynamics, mathematical modelling, ecosystem analysis and the social, economic and policy aspects of fisheries where they are grounded in a scientific approach. A paper in Fish and Fisheries must draw upon all key elements of the existing literature on a topic, normally have a broad geographic and/or taxonomic scope, and provide general points which make it compelling to a wide range of readers whatever their geographical location. So, in short, we aim to publish articles that make syntheses of old or synoptic, long-term or spatially widespread data, introduce or consolidate fresh concepts or theory, or, in the Ghoti section, briefly justify preliminary, new synoptic ideas. Please note that authors of submissions not meeting this mandate will be directed to the appropriate primary literature.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书