Landing the blame: The influence of EU Member States on quota setting

被引:47
作者
Carpenter, Griffin [1 ]
Kleinjans, Richard [1 ]
Villasante, Sebastian [2 ,3 ]
O'Leary, Bethan C. [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] New Econ Fdn, 10 Salamanca Pl, London SE1 7HB, England
[2] Univ Santiago, Fac Polit & Social Sci, Ave Angel Echevarry S-N, Santiago De Compostela 15782, A Coruna, Spain
[3] Campus Do Mar, Int Campus Excellence, Pontevedra, Spain
[4] Bangor Univ, Sch Environm Nat Resources & Geog, Deiniol Rd, Bangor LL57 2UW, Gwynedd, Wales
[5] Univ York, Dept Environm, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
关键词
Total allowable catch; Decision-making processes; Common Fisheries Policy; Political economy; TAC MANAGEMENT; FISH STOCKS; FISHERIES; POLICY; SUSTAINABILITY; RESOURCES; STABILITY; DECLINE;
D O I
10.1016/j.marpol.2015.11.001
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Fisheries in European Union (EU) waters have been managed under the Common Fisheries Policy since 1983. The main regulatory tool in EU fisheries management is the use of Total Allowable Catches (TACs). In principle, TACs are set according to biological scientific advice provided by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) which recommends catch limits with the objective of maximising catches in a sustainable manner. The objective of this paper is to compare TACs set by the EU and its Member States between 2001 and 2015 with those recommended by ICES in their annual scientific advice in order to (a) investigate the level of compliance with scientific advice by the European Council and, (b) consider whether particular Member States have received more TACs above advice than others. For the time-series analysed, the European Council set TACs above scientific advice by an average of 20% per year, with around 7 out of every 10 TACs exceeding advice. Of all Member States, Denmark and the United Kingdom received the highest TACs in volume above scientific advice. Relative to the size of their TAC however, Spain and Portugal exceeded advice by the greatest percentage. Greater transparency is required to determine what takes place during the closed door negotiations and to improve the fishery sustainability credentials of the EU and its Member States. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:9 / 15
页数:7
相关论文
共 37 条
  • [21] NIA, 2001, 3701 NIA
  • [22] Fisheries mismanagement
    O'Leary, Bethan C.
    Smart, James C. R.
    Neale, Fiona C.
    Hawkins, Julie P.
    Newman, Stephanie
    Milman, Amy C.
    Roberts, Callum M.
    [J]. MARINE POLLUTION BULLETIN, 2011, 62 (12) : 2642 - 2648
  • [23] Change and stability in landings:: the responses of fisheries to scientific advice and TACs
    Patterson, Kenneth
    Resimont, Martine
    [J]. ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2007, 64 (04) : 714 - 717
  • [24] The necessity for response indicators in fisheries management
    Piet, G. J.
    van Overzee, H. M. J.
    Pastoors, M. A.
    [J]. ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2010, 67 (03) : 559 - 566
  • [25] Fishing industry borrows from natural capital at high shadow interest rates
    Quaas, Martin F.
    Froese, Rainer
    Herwartz, Helmut
    Requate, Till
    Schmidt, Joern O.
    Voss, Ruediger
    [J]. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2012, 82 : 45 - 52
  • [26] Unsuitability of TAC management within an ecosystem approach to fisheries: An ecological perspective
    Reiss, Henning
    Greenstreet, Simon P. R.
    Robinson, Leonie
    Ehrich, Siegfried
    Jorgensen, Lis L.
    Piet, Gerjan J.
    Wolff, Wim J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SEA RESEARCH, 2010, 63 (02) : 85 - 92
  • [27] Sustainable use of flatfish resources: Addressing the credibility crisis in mixed fisheries management
    Rijnsdorp, A. D.
    Daan, N.
    Dekker, W.
    Poos, J. J.
    Van Densen, W. L. T.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SEA RESEARCH, 2007, 57 (2-3) : 114 - 125
  • [28] Masterstroke or paper tiger - The reform of the EU's Common Fisheries Policy
    Salomon, Markus
    Markus, Till
    Dross, Miriam
    [J]. MARINE POLICY, 2014, 47 : 76 - 84
  • [29] Salz P., 2012, SOCIOECONOMIC BENEFI
  • [30] Scientific Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF), 2015, STECF1507, P434