Any paper that has in the abstract this paragraph:
While there is no one-size-fits-all approach to designing and implementing information sharing schemes in fisheries, this paper highlights how industry and stakeholder support is often important, and understanding the needs, concerns, and motivations of any group of fishers is fundamental in developing and expanding such approaches.
Does immediately call my attention…
@franciscoblaha - Mozambique
As ex-industry I have always been interested in industry involvement in research and compliance… which is to be driven by incentives.
The whole idea that people should do things because they have been told to do so, does never sits well with most people and even less with quite independent (and authority resistant) people like fishers… yet convince me that what is done has a benefit in terms of making me more money or saving me money… and I change in seconds.
For example, if my fishing access costs (licences, permits, VDS, etc) were prorated to my level of compliance, i.e. the more compliant I am are the less I pay… then I have a direct incentive to comply.
For example here in the Pacific FFA maintains a vessel compliance index (from 0: good to -5: terrible) calculated and assigned to a Vessel based on how compliant a Vessel is over a period of time. So if you were to give good vessels a 20% discount for example and bad vessels a 50% increase… I guarantee in 2-3 years they are all in -1 to -2. Or with EM… if you have EM on board, we allow you use of the footage so you talk to the insurance companies for a lowering of premiums based on footage sharing when needed… for example.
Anyway… you get my drift.
The paper is called “An evaluation of information sharing schemes to identify what motivates fishers to share catch information”. The paper compiles information from 15 case study examples of existing information-sharing schemes in fisheries throughout the world. They compare the structure and operation of each of these schemes and determine what motivated participants to join and share potentially sensitive catch information.
I really liked this paper! As someone that has worked in fisheries in around 50 countries… I see it as almost a study that could have gone into the areas of anthropology and cultural understanding of authority and relationship to peers
As always read the original! (And big thank you to the lead author, Julia Calderwood for sending me a copy)
Below I just quote the conclusions
From all of the examples in this paper, it is clear that there is no one size fits all solution for designing and incentivizing participation in catch sharing and bycatch avoidance schemes. There certainly may be more success in at least achieving longevity in information sharing schemes where data collection on bycatch is mandatory within a fishery, as in the US examples, rather than voluntary, as in many European fisheries. Trust between participants and willingness to join in schemes may also be more likely when there are already established relationships of fishers working together, through a co-operative for example. Additional incentives may be required to encourage data collection and information sharing, especially where data collection is voluntary. Yet there were examples of the use of additional incentives across both schemes with mandatory and voluntary data collection, and an additional reward may be required to increase bycatch avoidance behaviours regardless. It is clear that these incentives and rewards need to be sufficient to outweigh the time and burden of providing information and of avoiding unwanted catches. There is also evidence across a number of the schemes that it is important to ensure sharing of information does not reduce an individual’s competitive edge in a fishery. The importance of anonymity was evident across a majority of the case studies. Assurances that information sharing will not result in harsher restrictions or individual penalties may also be important for some.
All of these factors need to be considered when designing and implementing any form of information sharing scheme in fisheries, as industry buy-in is essential (O’Keefe and DeCelles, 2013). Despite this seeming like an almost impossible balancing act, many of the examples in this paper demonstrate that it is possible to design schemes which have industry support. It is clear, however, that it is important to avoid making assumptions about what will motivate fishers to participate in information sharing schemes. This highlights a need for more research to be focused on better understanding these motivations, which could be achieved through directly asking and interviewing those who have shared catch information to reflect on their experiences. Taking a collaborative approach, when designing and implementing such schemes, is also vital to fully understand the needs, concerns, and motivations of any group of fishers, which is certainly fundamental in adopting and expanding such approaches.