In Pursuit of the Three Pillars of Sustainability in Fisheries: A Faroese Case Study

Abstract

The prevailing perspective in fisheries has been that the three pillars of sustainability—ecology, economics, and social—are incompatible due to inherent tradeoffs. That assumption is now being questioned in the literature. The primary objective of this article is to evaluate the triple-bottom line performance of key fisheries in the Faroe Islands and determine if outcomes vary between management systems. Fisheries managed with limited-access rights demonstrated systematic overfishing, generated little to no resource rent, had poor profits, remuneration was at times very poor, and employment declined. The fleets managed with harvest rights performed better overall. They were more sustainable, more profitable, generated large resource rents, remuneration was large, and employment increased. We conclude that the three pillars of sustainability are compatible and mutually reinforcing and that fleets with harvest rights are more likely to achieve good triple-bottom line results.