How to Fish Sustainably

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Photo by Fir0002, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Photo by Fir0002, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.
 
Community-based cooperative management—wherein fishers, fisheries managers, and scientists work together to create sustainable fisheries—yields big catches. Now the authors of a new paper in Nature present their findings on what elements of co-management are most effective. They write:
The dominant theme in fisheries management has been that privatization is necessary to avoid Hardin’s tragedy of the commons, whereas Ostrom and others have argued that community-based co-management can often achieve sustainability.
In other words, how does that age-old divide in human thinking (capitalism v. socialism, by one set of labels) play out in the arena of the ocean?
 
Photo by Diliff, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Photo by Diliff, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.
 
 The advantages of co-management, according to the authors:

  • An enhanced sense of ownership that encourages responsible fishing
  • Greater sensitivity to local socioeconomic and ecological restraints
  • Improved management through use of local knowledge
  • Collective ownership by users in decision making
  • Increased compliance with regulations through peer pressure
  • Better monitoring, control and surveillance by fishers

 

Photo by Petr Ruzicka, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Photo by Petr Ruzicka, courtesy Wikimedia Commons

In light of stark realities—1 billion people depend on seafood for protein, yet a third of fish stocks are depleted—the researchers asked: Exactly what part of co-management works to save fisheries? Here’s what they did to find answers:

  • Identified 130 co-managed fisheries in 144 countries with a wide range of economic development, ecosystems, fishing sectors, and type of resources
  • Conducted a systematic search of the peer-reviewed and grey literature (~1,168 documents) for evidence of the impacts of fisheries co-management practices 
  • Identified and evaluated the relative merits of 19 different co-management attributes across fisheries
  • Used those 19 attributes to predict three kinds of success: ecological (increase in stock abundance); social (increase in social welfare); and economic (increase in unit price)
  • Combined those predictors to reach a single holistic success score reflecting natural and human dimensions of fisheries
 
From Nature DOI: 10.1038/nature09689From Nature DOI: 10.1038/nature09689
 
All that enabled them to zero in on the aspects of community management that work best. Their findings: 
  • Strong leadership is the single most important predictor of success
  • Next comes individual or community quotas, social cohesion, and protected areas
  • Less important conditions include enforcement mechanisms, long-term management policies, and life history of the resources
  • Fisheries are most successful when at least 8 co-management attributes are present, with a strong positive relationship seen between the number of attributes and success (i.e., redundancy in the system is good)

Photo by Thomas Tolkien, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.Photo by Thomas Tolkien, courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

The authors write:

Our results demonstrate the critical importance of prominent community leaders and robust social capital, combined with clear incentives through catch shares and conservation benefits derived from protected areas, for successfully managing aquatic resources and securing the livelihoods of communities depending on them.

The paper:

Crossposted from Deep Blue Home.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate