Elsevier

Marine Policy

Volume 35, Issue 2, March 2011, Pages 130-139
Marine Policy

Solving complex fisheries management problems: What the EU can learn from the Nordic experiences of reduction of discards

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2010.08.011Get rights and content

Abstract

A crucial issue for the new EU common fisheries policy is how to solve the discard problem. Through a study of the institutional set up and the arrangements for solving the discard problem in Denmark, the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway, the article identifies the discard problem as related to both natural, other material and to cultural conditions. Hence, solving the discard problem requires not only technical and regulatory instruments, but also arenas and structures that allow and facilitate processes of cultural change.

Introduction

Many problems in fisheries management are what one can call complex. Complex in this respect means that the problems consist of different and interacting parts, but the problem cannot be solved through solutions directed towards the parts alone [1], [2]. When the models and the designed institutional frameworks that are presented as the solutions to the management problems are adapted to the complex empirical reality in the fisheries sector, unexpected and problematic outcomes are the results [3]. One such example is the problem of discards from fisheries, a problem that, as shown by experience, cannot be solved only through design of a general regulatory framework based on technical measures, input or output regulation in certain combinations. Discards of marine organisms from fisheries are regarded both as a waste of resources and as a threat to marine ecosystems [4], [5]. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), discards are the portions of fish catches that are thrown back into the sea. While discarding can be a big problem, it can also be consistent with responsible fishing principles, for example when healthy egg-bearing individuals and other females are returned to the sea [6], [7]. Thus, discard of fish and organisms that are in a healthy condition and that are likely to survive is not regarded as a problem and is either allowed or even mandatory in some cases (for example, sharks, whales, turtles) in countries with general discard bans [8]. Discarding is a problem when the organisms returned to the sea are dead or unable to survive, because such discard represents both a biomass removed from the sea that is not taken into account in stock estimates and a reduction of the potential future value of the discard. Discarding can have many reasons: wrong catch, wrong sizes, damaged catch, no quota or high grading. High grading means that less valuable catch or sizes are discarded in favour of bigger or more valuable fish. This article will focus on the problematic discard in the European Union (EU) and solutions to the discard problem in other Northeast Atlantic fisheries.

In the EU Green Paper on the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), discard is seen as a problem—chiefly because it is waste of a precious resource that should be kept in the sea or used for human consumption. In a management context, discard of bycatch and undersized fish actually seems to have prevented several stocks from recovering in spite of low quotas [9]. This is, of course, especially a problem in mixed fisheries, as a considerable part of the European fisheries. The Green Paper therefore states that “the future CFP should ensure that discarding no longer takes place” [9: 15]. According to the Green Paper, “new initiatives to eliminate discards and protect sensitive species and habitats” will be taken [9: 25]. A central issue is what character these new initiatives shall have? To answer that, there is need to clarify what kind of problems discards in the EU represent and establish what can be learned from other countries. This article discusses discards in the EU in relation to the measures that have been taken to avoid discards in the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway, and presents a project to reduce discards in Denmark. The aim is to clarify if the Nordic experience can be of relevance for the coming CFP reform and if some of the Nordic solutions could be appropriate for solving complex problems.

Section 2 presents the discard problem in the EU, Section 3 describes the theoretical framework, Section 4 deals with the specific Nordic experiences, while Section 5 outlines the lessons that can be learned from the Nordic experiences.

Section snippets

Discards in the EU—a complex and complicated problem

In relation to the total world catch, the discard rate is estimated to be approximately 8% or around 7 million tons. Shrimp and demersal trawl fisheries are responsible for about 55% of the total world discard. The problem is higher in industrialised large-scale fisheries than in small-scale fisheries, and hence, the rather industrialised Northeast Atlantic and Northwest Pacific fisheries account for 40% of the world discard [6]. An illustration of the discard situation could be from the North

The pillars of institutions

As mentioned, the complexity of the discard problem is related to both natural and social components. The natural components make it difficult to undertake selective fishing. Some fisheries target species that are mixed with other species, and if capture of the targeted species requires gear with low selectivity with respect to species, bycatch is unavoidable. Bycatch on the other hand, is not necessarily a problem in itself. It becomes a problem when the catch cannot be landed and the

Effort and output regulations

Both the EU and the Nordic countries use direct conservation measures in form of effort and output regulation of the fisheries. In addition, for direct regulative measures, they play on the fishers’ economic motivation in different ways with varying effects on discard-related behaviour. Compared to output regulation, effective effort regulation is a cheaper and simpler way of regulating fisheries, but it requires a relatively stable relationship between fishing effort and ability to catch fish,

Elements in common in the Nordic countries

Independently of the type of general management system, the solutions to avoiding discard can be grouped into four different types. In relation to the four institutional pillars the solutions are mostly related to the regulative pillar, while a few solutions draw on the normative and cognitive pillar as well:

  • Technical measures

  • Regulatory measures including enforcement and control

  • Learning and communication

  • Normative and cognitive elements of compliance

Discussion—lessons learned from the Nordic countries

The fishery systems in the Nordic countries apply a mix of effort and quota regulations as their main principles for regulating fisheries. The Faroe Islands have a rather pure fishing-days system inside the EEZ, while Denmark, as the rest of the EU, uses a mix of quota and days-at-sea regulation. Iceland has mainly based their system on ITQs, while Norway combines effort regulation in the form of licences and capacity measures with an individual quota system with limited transferability.

Conclusion and recommendations

In the Nordic countries, a combination of effort and quota regulations is seen. Though the main regulation system influences the incentives to discard (as discussed very recently by the EU Commissioner for Maritime Policy and Fisheries [13]), the study explores that this is not the only factor to take into account, or enough to face the complex and complicated problem of discard.

Under the present CFP-regime, based on quotas and relative stability, introduction of a discard ban, can imply

References (48)

  • S Zhou

    Fishery by-catch and discards: a positive perspective from ecosystem-based fishery management

    Fish and Fisheries Series

    (2008)
  • Anon. Regulation about fishing in Norwegian waters, Forskrift om utøvelse av fisket i sjøen 22. desember 2004, endret...
  • EU Commision.

    Green Paper Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy

    Commission of the European Communities

    (2009)
  • Y Stratoudakis et al.

    Discarding practices for commercial gadoids in the North Sea

    Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science

    (1998)
  • J Raakjær

    A fisheries system in crisis: the EU common fisheries policy

    (2009)
  • Damanaki M. Managing fleets and conserving resources under the future Common Fisheries Policy. Speech at the EPP...
  • W Martinussen

    Sosiologisk analyse

    (1984)
  • AL George et al.

    Case studies and theory development in the social sciences

    (2005)
  • RK Yin

    Case study research : design and methods

    (2009)
  • Eliasen S, Sverdrup-Jensen S, Holm P, Johnsen JP. Nordic experience of fisheries management. Seen in relation to the...
  • Pope J. Input and output controls: the practice of fishing effort and catch management in responsible fisheries. FAO...
  • FAO. A Fishery manager's guidebook—management measures and their application. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 424. FAO,...
  • B Hersoug

    Closing the commons: Norwegian fisheries from open access to private property

    (2005)
  • R Hannesson

    The privatization of the oceans

    (2004)
  • Cited by (0)

    The study is based on data from the project: Nordic experience of fisheries management. Seen in relation to the reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy, financed by the Nordic Council of Ministers 2009.

    View full text