Marine fish discarding has become a contentious environmental issue, but little attention has been paid to the moral grievances that sometimes underlie discarding practices. This article explores such a moral grievance through a case study of the under-10m fishery in Sussex, England, where discarding of cod (Gadus morhua) has become a highly charged issue, skippers blaming it on inadequate quota allocations. The moral claim is analysed using two conceptions of distributive justice, entitlement and desert. The conclusion reached is that the under-10m fleet's entitlement arguments are weaker than their desert arguments, but that entitlement arguments weigh more heavily with government.

No abstract

No abstract

Small-scale fisheries (SSF) in England face several challenges to their viability. We argue that the source of these challenges can be traced to the more dominant large-scale fisheries (LSF) sector which has more influence than SSF over government policies. A recent attempt to mitigate the impact of these challenges has been made by the Future of Inshore Fisheries initiative whose main prescription is co-management, i.e., giving SSF a participatory role with the government and LSF in the decision-making in English fisheries management. Co-management is a form of democracy and it may help the SSF to deal with their problems. However, in our view, the English SSF also require an acknowledgement of their human rights to a fair quota and protected access to productive inshore waters. In making this case, we draw on normative arguments to assert that human rights are prior to democratic processes. Our conclusion is that both democratic decision-making and human rights principles are needed to secure the English SSF from the real threat of extinction.

No abstract