Assessing Equity in the Distribution of Fisheries Management Benefits Data and Information Availability (2024) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Distributional Equity of Fishery Permit and Allocation Benefits
3 Distributional Equity of Fishery Permit and Allocation Benefits
Pages 33-60
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 33... ...
The first charge of the statement of task directs the committee to "determine the categories of information required to adequately assess where and to whom the primary benefits of commercial and for-hire fishery management accrue." To address this element, the committee developed a stylized model fishery, in which comprehensive data on permit (or quota) holdings and transfers are augmented with information on characteristics of permit and quota holders for a developing fishery in which all permits (or quota)
|
From page 34... ...
Given the heterogeneity across the management regions in terms of the definition and use of permits and quota, data available, and how data are collected, the methodology discussion focuses on the regional level, again using examples from the North Pacific, Northeast, and Gulf of Mexico. This section describes how to utilize data that are currently available in the regions to develop categories of information -- which could entail simply summarizing the age distribution of ownership or could entail the challenging measurement of monetary and nonmonetary benefits tied to permit and quota ownership.
|
From page 35... ...
There is no discussion of the appropriate criteria for measuring whether a distribution is equitable or whether such criteria are seen as fair among participating fishers. The criteria, for example, could include the appropriate counterfactual to use to measure whether distributional equity is improving over time, and the process for determining the appropriate counterfactual.
|
From page 36... ...
federal fisheries. However, as discussed in Chapter 2 and illustrated in Chapter 4, this full suite of personal identifying information for quota holders is insufficient for addressing questions regarding distributional equity for the fishery overall.
|
From page 37... ...
This means permit holders in the for-hire sector likely participate in multiple fisheries and the benefits become, accordingly, more dilute. Capturing only demographic information of permit owners in for-hire fisheries, as might have been the case if the stylized model used a for-hire fishery, would miss many of the elements discussed thus far.
|
From page 38... ...
to a total allowable catch, or a combination of these. Most permit applications require the name and mailing address of the permit holder.
|
From page 39... ...
undertakes natural and social science research and surveys to support fisheries management. Working with partners, GARFO currently oversees 42 fish stocks and 14 fishery management plans (Table 3-1)
|
From page 40... ...
Hence, a cross tabulation of the permit holders and operator permits could provide a foundation for assessing the level of active versus passive investors in vessel permits. The individual transferable quota fisheries provide public data that can be used to demonstrate the challenges that the pattern of bundled permits and assignment to vessels creates to assessing distribution of quota and permits in the Northeast.
|
From page 41... ...
Squid, Mackerel, Vessel • Limited access with 3 tiers • ACT monitoring for in-season Butterfish • Species specific allocations closures • Open access with low catch • Slippage reporting required allocation • VMS required Atlantic Herring Vessel • Limited access • Bycatch concerns for Atlantic • Area specific management mackerel, shads and river and possession limits herrings • Slippage reporting required Atlantic Spiny Dogfish Vessel • One trip per day • ACT monitoring for in-season closure • eVTR required Black Sea Bass Vessel • Open access commercial • VTR required involving three gear types • ACT monitoring for in-season • Open access for-hire fishery closure • eVTR required continued
|
From page 42... ...
For each species, or species complex, the committee provided a summary of the permits, the rights associated with the permits, and any important factors related to the flow of benefits to permit and quota holders. ACL = Annual Catch Limit; ACT = Annual Catch Target; CPH = Confirmation of Permit History; eVTR = electronic Vessel Trip Report; IFQ = Individual Fishing Quota; ITQ = Individual Transferable Quota; VMS = Vessel Monitoring System; VTR = Vessel Trip Report.
|
From page 43... ...
In both the South Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, commercial fisheries for shrimp and both commercial and for-hire fisheries for reef fish and coastal migratory pelagic species are managed under limited access privilege programs with vessel permits required for federal waters. Within the Gulf of Mexico, many entities including the NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center (SEFSC)
|
From page 44... ...
, NOAA Social Indicators for Coastal Communities data were used to help characterize the social environment of fishing communities alongside individual fishing quota performance indicators (Table 3-2)
|
From page 45... ...
Examples include the BSAI Crab Rationalization fisheries, the American Fisheries Act pollock fishery, the Amendment 80 nonpollock groundfish fisheries, and the halibut/sablefish individual fishing quota fisheries. The NPFMC also oversees the Charter Halibut Limited Access Program, a for-hire fishery for halibut in Southeast Alaska and the GOA.
|
From page 46... ...
46 ASSESSING EQUITY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF FISHERIES MANAGEMENT BENEFITS FIGURE 3-1 North Pacific beneficiaries. NOTE: BSAI = Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands; IFQ = individual fishing quota.
|
From page 47... ...
For example, NMFS collects economic data reports (on a mandatory basis) for a subset of limited access privilege programs in the North Pacific.
|
From page 48... ...
Yes • AFA permits were allocated to the vessels, so the Yes No No pollock fishery permit holders are companies that own the vessels • Only gross revenue • Harvested in cooperatives estimates from landings Crab Rationalization (CR) Yes • Many nonindividual entities holding quotas, some Yes Yes No Program harvesters individuals • Economic data • Alaska Fisheries Science Center (AFSC)
|
From page 49... ...
• Only gross revenue • Processor-held harvesting quota (companies) estimates from landings NOTE: A80 = Amendment 80; AFA = American Fisheries Act; AFSC = Alaska Fisheries Science Center; CDQ = Community Development Quota; CHP = Charter Halibut Permit; CR = Crab Rationalization; EDRs = Economic Data Reports; GOA = Gulf of Alaska; IFQ = Individual Fishing Quota; LLP = License Limitation Program; PQS = Processing Quota Shares.
|
From page 50... ...
When measuring the monetary and nonmonetary benefits associated with an allocation, the nature of the rights associated with an allocation is critical. Conceptually, the most straightforward case for measuring the monetary value of an allocation is a single limited access fishery in which quota shareholders are allocated a right to a defined share of a total allowable catch.
|
From page 51... ...
Measurement of economic values in the fisheries will require additional data collection efforts on the costs of fishing. The nature of rights associated with permit and quota ownership also impacts the non-monetary and sometimes non-quantifiable benefits associated with owning and participating in the fishery, such as identity, belonging, sense of place and place attachment, pride in work, continuation of subsistence practices, food sharing, status and social capital, and maintenance of social networks, among others (Donkersloot et al., 2020; Reedy and Maschner, 2014; Severence et al., 2013; Satterfield et al., 2013)
|
From page 52... ...
This complex pattern of permit ownership complicates analyses of where and to whom benefits accrue. Even in fisheries where the permits are allocated to individuals, there are prohibitions on the mandatory, or perception of mandatory, collection of demographic information (e.g., asking for the information on the same page as the information required for a permit)
|
From page 53... ...
At the same time, these conditions create a ripe environment for allowing experimentation that could lead to learning across the regions, but at the cost, at least in the short term, of developing a comprehensive national picture of ownership and participation of federally managed fisheries. Another challenge with measurement of the distribution is matching the unit of analysis to the appropriate scale of the assessment of distributional equity.
|
From page 54... ...
In the section on methodology, the committee examined substantial regional variations in the approach to allocating permits and quotas that will hinder any standardized assessment of distributional equity in the nation's fisheries. In combination, these observations indicate clearly that the data currently available are insufficient for conducting a comprehensive assessment of the distribution of benefits resulting from the issuance of permits and the allocation of quotas.
|
From page 55... ...
First, they provide information on the dynamics in individual fisheries. Second, they telegraph NMFS interest in and intent to measure distributional equity in fisheries.
|
From page 56... ...
This section covers partnerships within the agency and with external bodies and organizations. Partnerships have the potential to improve levels of engagement among traditional fishing communities, underserved communities, and Tribal Nations and Indigenous communities.
|
From page 57... ...
The committee heard testimony of noteworthy past and ongoing efforts, such as the social science workshop in 2014 hosted by the Western Pacific Regional Fishery Management Council, which provided an overview of the needs across the regions to consider equity through the NEPA social impact assessment reporting requirements. The committee sees the potential for current efforts along these lines to be used to develop a more robust national approach to operationalizing the development of communities of practice for the assessment of equity in fisheries management.
|
From page 58... ...
. Other categories of information that are collected regularly at the fishery level and analyzed in relation to residency of permit holders include age of permit holder, rate of new entrants, and fishery earnings, among others.
|
From page 59... ...
, and processes for measuring and assessing equity over time by NMFS, regional science centers, and Council staff. This document(s)
|
From page 60... ...
RECOMMENDATION 3-4: Much of the current measurement and assessment work on equity in fisheries is conducted within a research framework within NMFS, academia, and change to nongovernmental organizations. If NMFS is to meet the legislative man date for equity within MSA and recent executive orders, work on equity must transition to operational data collection and assessment programs, supported and analyzed by the increased social science capacity as recommended in Recommendation 3-3.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.