Availability of Non-Market Values to Inform Decision-Making in Australian Fisheries and Aquaculture: An Audit and Gap Analysis

Abstract

Fisheries and aquaculture management can have impacts on economic, social and environmental outcomes. Assessing alternative management options requires an understanding of the different trade-offs between these outcomes. Cost–benefit analysis provides a framework in which these trade-offs can be assessed, but requires all costs and benefits to be enumerated in monetary terms. However, some impacts associated with fisheries and aquaculture, particularly environmental, have no explicit monetary value, so they require non-market values to be derived. In this study, we identify and prioritize, through a stakeholder workshop, non-market values that are of the most relevance to Australian fisheries and aquaculture managers. We assess the potential of existing studies to provide appropriate values for use by managers through a detailed review of available studies. We found a deficiency in the number of recent studies across all priority areas. Non-market valuation of recreational fishing has attracted the most attention previously in Australia, but studies in the last five years were found in only half of the states. Other priority non-market values have been estimated in only one or two states, and most have no estimates within the last five years. The results of the study highlight the need for further research in this area.

Economic value of regional spearfishing competitions

“…Travel cost analysis is used more frequently than any other valuation method in studies exploring non-market values of recreational fishing in Australia (Coglan et al, 2021), and has long been implemented in case studies exploring recreational economic value throughout the world (Samples and Bishop, 1985;Pokki et al, 2018;Terashima et al, 2020). However, travel cost valuation alone cannot explain how different environmental and societal factors contribute to estimates of economic value, nor how changes in these factors may impact the value of fishing activities or trips in the future.…”

An ecosystem-based natural capital evaluation framework that combines environmental and socio-economic implications of offshore renewable energy developments

“…Rarely is CBA used as the sole factor in decisions, even for measuring human well-being; rather it is often considered alongside other important criteria, such as job growth, changes in gross value added (GVA) or gross domestic product (GDP), economic impact analysis, distributional impact analysis, and a wide array of other decision aids (Harrison et al 2018, OECD 2018. For example, in Australia CBA is regularly used to choose between policy alternatives in natural resource management, whilst in fisheries and aquaculture, its use is less systematic (Coglan et al 2020). The use of social indicators in an CBA approach has been identified as important to ensure sustainability in the use of marine resources and other environmental contexts (Olander et al 2018, Oleson et al 2020, Schaar and Cox 2021.…”