Looking to the long-term for management of tropical tunas? An assessment of special requirements arguments at WCPFC14

Abolhassani, Angela

doi:10.1080/18366503.2018.1498147

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Focusing on tuna, early iterations of tuna-related RFMO (tRFMO) conventions emphasized the need for ''maintaining the populations of these fishes at a level which will permit maximum sustained catches year after year'' (IATTC, 1949) or to ''permit the maximum sustainable catch'' (ICCAT 1966), but these early conventions make no mention of allocating fish resources to particular actors. However, despite this early emphasis on maintaining abundant fish stocks, tRFMOs are increasingly engaging in allocation processes, considering not only issues of sustainability, but also resource distribution and equity (Bailey et al 2013a;Abolhassani 2017Abolhassani , 2018Seto and Hanich 2018). In recent decades, there has been a growing consensus that global resource allocation schemes can, and should, play a role in distributive or corrective justice, aiming to counteract the concentration of resource wealth resultant from colonization and globalization processes (Gupta and Lebel 2010;Pitt et al 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resource allocation in transboundary tuna fisheries: A global analysis

Seto

Galland²,

McDonald³

et al. 2020

Ambio

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resource allocation is a fundamental and challenging component of common pool resource governance, particularly transboundary fisheries. We highlight the growing importance of allocation in fisheries governance, comparing approaches of the five tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (tRFMOs). We find all tRFMOs except one have defined resources for allocation and outlined principles to guide allocation based on equity, citizenship, and legitimacy. However, all fall short of applying these principles in assigning fish resources. Most tRFMOs rely on historical catch or effort, while equity principles rarely determine dedicated rights. Further, the current system of annual negotiations reduces certainty, trust, and transparency, counteracting many benefits asserted by rights-based management proponents. We suggest one means of gaining traction may be to shift conversations from allocative rights toward weighting of principles already identified by most tRFMOs. Incorporating principles into resource allocation remains a major opportunity, with important implications for current and future access to fish.

show abstract