Jessica Spijkers, Mary Mackay, Jemma Turner, Asha McNeill, Kendra Travaille, Chris Wilcox
{"title":"Diversity of global fisheries governance: Types and contexts","authors":"Jessica Spijkers, Mary Mackay, Jemma Turner, Asha McNeill, Kendra Travaille, Chris Wilcox","doi":"10.1111/faf.12713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Fisheries governance systems designed to regulate fishing are often described as being highly diverse across countries. However, there is little systematic work that directly examines and describes the (dis)similarities across such systems, and how socio-political and economic contexts drive such variation at a global scale. In this paper, we use 68 indicators from a novel dataset to examine the fisheries governance systems in place to constrain overfishing in national waters across 142 countries. We found that countries cluster in just two distinct governance groups which display different traits to constrain overfishing. Where one group takes a tougher stance on aspects regarding access to its fisheries resources, the other is more focused on gathering fisheries information and publicizing the data. The 10 greatest differences between groups relate to the gathering of information and monitoring of their fisheries, the effectiveness of compliance systems and the existence of policies around sustainability. On these key differences, one group consistently displays more far-reaching governance traits. The overall governance capacity of a country and the national socio-economic importance of fisheries are identified as potential drivers of this variation. Despite their differences, the two groups show substantial overlap for many indicators, particularly those that are inexpensive, but also for certain costly policies. These patterns prompt hypotheses of policy transfer or convergence across fisheries governance systems, most notably regarding ‘low-hanging fruit’ policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":169,"journal":{"name":"Fish and Fisheries","volume":"24 1","pages":"111-125"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/faf.12713","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fish and Fisheries","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12713","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Fisheries governance systems designed to regulate fishing are often described as being highly diverse across countries. However, there is little systematic work that directly examines and describes the (dis)similarities across such systems, and how socio-political and economic contexts drive such variation at a global scale. In this paper, we use 68 indicators from a novel dataset to examine the fisheries governance systems in place to constrain overfishing in national waters across 142 countries. We found that countries cluster in just two distinct governance groups which display different traits to constrain overfishing. Where one group takes a tougher stance on aspects regarding access to its fisheries resources, the other is more focused on gathering fisheries information and publicizing the data. The 10 greatest differences between groups relate to the gathering of information and monitoring of their fisheries, the effectiveness of compliance systems and the existence of policies around sustainability. On these key differences, one group consistently displays more far-reaching governance traits. The overall governance capacity of a country and the national socio-economic importance of fisheries are identified as potential drivers of this variation. Despite their differences, the two groups show substantial overlap for many indicators, particularly those that are inexpensive, but also for certain costly policies. These patterns prompt hypotheses of policy transfer or convergence across fisheries governance systems, most notably regarding ‘low-hanging fruit’ policies.
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.