Collective fishery management in TURFs: The role of effort coordination and pooling arrangement.

摘要

Fishery co-management has recently garnered a considerable amount of interest among fishermen and regulators in both developed and developing countries, in response to the failure of traditional fishery management that relied on direct command-and-control regulations, and as an alternative to other individual rights-based systems including, particularly, ITQs. The key feature of fishery co-management is that fishermen form a group to manage the fishery in a collective manner based on mutual-agreed rules. Community-based fishery co-management has been actively promoted both by local governments, of developing countries in particular, and international aid institutions.; Despite increasing interests and attention, however, fishery co-management is not well understood. Disciplines such as sociology and anthropology, on the other hand, have been studying co-management regimes for some time but mostly qualitatively. To generalize the key factors of successful fishery management, it is necessary to go beyond case studies and quantitatively examine different types of fishery co-management regimes.; This study investigates the fishery co-management regimes adopted in Japanese coastal fisheries. Utilizing many fishery co-management examples nationwide, it searches for key co-management measures and operations beyond the layers of traditional, cultural, and social influence. This study focuses on the rules of the game adopted by the co-managing groups, called Fishery Management Organizations (FMOs). Two distinctive measures often associated with the success were identified: effort coordination and pooling arrangements.; A conceptual dynamic model developed in this research show that with pooling arrangements, such alignment is likely to occur. Then, using the real-world data this study tested whether these two measures actually resulted in higher economic return. The results from empirical analyses indicated that (1) just establishing co-managing groups, such as FMOs, has limited effect; (2) FMOs with pooling arrangements had higher fishery revenue, and this was particularly so if combined with the effort coordination activities; and (3) pooling arrangements and effort coordination combined with marketing activities resulted in the greatest revenue.