Muddying the Waters of the Landing Obligation: How Multi-level Governance Structures Can Obscure Policy Implementation

Hoof, L.J.W. van; Kraan, Marloes; Visser, Nico; Avoyan, Emma; Batsleer, Jurgen; Trapman, B.K.

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-03308-8_9

Cited by 12 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has, moreover, been shown that there are different ways and practices of scientists and fishers to frame the state of fish stocks. While a fisher trusts his on-board equipment to iteratively follow fish to catch it (i.e., fine spatial scale and local) and observes stock from their on-boat or practice perspective, researchers use scientifically standardized routes to estimate stock size through scientifically sound and robust epistemologies (i.e., large spatial scale and universal) [69][70][71][72]. The assessment of and knowledge about stock size is thus not only determined by different technologies but rather by the background of different epistemologies, rationales, practices and approaches.…”

Section: The Theoretical and Methodological Entrance To The Multifaceted Species Codmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ‘Cod-Multiple’: Modes of Existence of Fish, Science and People

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fish represent a politically regulated, scientifically researched, industrially processed, commercially marketed and socially contested living marine resource. Related to this, the incorporation of resource users and stakeholders into fisheries management is particularly important. Such involvement has recently improved in terms of frequency, but institutional frameworks often result in a lack of recognition and integration of the diverse ‘knowledges’ of stakeholders involved. Against this background, we aim to uncover the potentials of additional knowledge types for management purposes, paving the way toward a more collaborative management. We first conducted qualitative expert interviews with different stakeholder groups (e.g., commercial fisheries, eNGO and administration) to map various ‘knowledges’ about cod (Gadus morhua), a major resource species in the Western Baltic Sea to reveal the various experiences and epistemologies revolving around it. The second analytical step consisted of examining how these ‘knowledges’ structure, inform and often enter into conflict with perspectives on and assessments of fisheries management. Potentials were identified regarding enhanced stakeholder engagement in management processes that provide food for thought to seek change in sustainable management of fish stocks in the future. Our study is a pointer to the need to transform fisheries management in a more social and participatory way. We argue that sustainable natural resource management cannot be designed solely by integrating more ‘knowledges’ (knowledge sharing) but requires the creation of social contexts and institutions with stakeholder empowerment at the local level (power sharing) to sustainably manage natural resources such as commercially importance fish stocks.

show abstract

Section: The Theoretical and Methodological Entrance To The Multifaceted Species Codmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ‘Cod-Multiple’: Modes of Existence of Fish, Science and People

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First of all, it should be noted that the adoption of the LO was preceded by a strong social debate spurred by the Hugh's Fish Fight campaign [55,56]. Thus, the whole picture was a four-party debate (policymakers, fishermen, scientists and NGOs and civil society), with NGOs advocating for the reduction of waste associated with discards.…”

Section: Perceptions Of the Eu Landing Obligationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, the whole picture was a four-party debate (policymakers, fishermen, scientists and NGOs and civil society), with NGOs advocating for the reduction of waste associated with discards. Secondly, the new CFP defined the LO in general terms and the regulation was developed only at a later stage [55]; it was only from that moment on that fishers were included in the decision-making process [57] such that little room was given for fishers' involvement in the definition of the objectives of the LO. When discussing proximity later on, we are referring to only a particular stage of the development and implementation of the new regulation.…”

Section: Perceptions Of the Eu Landing Obligationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On the Role of Perception: Understanding Stakeholders’ Collaboration in Natural Resources Management through the Evolutionary Theory of Innovation

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural resources management deals with highly complex socioecological systems. This complexity raises a conundrum, since wide-ranging knowledge from different sources and types is needed, but at the same time none of these types of knowledge is able by itself to provide the basis for a viable productive system, and mismatches between the two of them are common. Therefore, a growing body of literature has examined the integration of different types of knowledge in fisheries management. In this paper, we aim to contribute to this ongoing debate by integrating the evolutionary theory of innovation—and specifically the concept of proximity—and the theory of perception. We set up a theoretical framework that is able to explain not only why the different types of knowledge differ, but also why they should differ and why this divergence is useful to develop fisheries management. This framework is illustrated through a well-known complex scenario, as was the implementation of the Landing Obligation (LO) in Europe. We conclude that diversity (distance) between types of knowledge is essential for interactive learning, innovation, the incorporation of new ideas or to avoid lock-in, etc. At the same time, cognitive, institutional, geographical, etc. proximity is needed for effective communication, participation and dialogue.

show abstract

“…Nobody on the policy side wants to give in". This sentiment of the fishing industry towards the LO has been discussed in existing literature as well [25,[34][35][36]. To prepare for the implementation of the LO, the Dutch government launched a working group (werkgroep Aanlandplicht) in autumn 2012 [36].…”

Section: Fisheries Policy and Legislationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Let Them Eat Fish!—Exploring the Possibility of Utilising Unwanted Catch in Food Bank Parcels in The Netherlands

Rao

Bilić

Duwel

et al. 2021

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Common Fisheries Policy of the European Union was reformed in 2013 with the aim of improving the sustainability of the fishing sector. The Landing Obligation, a cornerstone of this reform, requires fishers to land their unwanted catch instead of discarding it at sea. Existing literature pays little attention to what becomes of this unwanted catch once it is landed. To further the discourse on the sustainable valorisation of unwanted catch, this study explores whether unwanted catch that is safe for human consumption could be used for improving food security. The paper focuses on Dutch food banks, which deliver critical food aid to over 160,000 individuals yearly but struggle to provide all dependant recipients with nutritionally balanced food parcels. The research question is addressed in two ways. The food bank recipients’ willingness to consume UWC is evaluated quantitatively through a survey. Next to this, data from interviews with relevant stakeholders are analysed qualitatively. Results indicate that the Food Bank Foundation and its recipients are willing to receive this fish if it is safe to consume and accessible. However, various factors such as existing infrastructure, lack of economic incentive to donate, competition from non-food and black markets, and the fishing industry’s conflict with the landing obligation might pose barriers to this kind of valorisation. The dissonance between fisheries, food, and sustainability policies is discussed and identified as a key limiting factor. To bridge the differences between these policy areas, we propose public-private partnerships and voluntary agreements among involved stakeholders.

show abstract

Muddying the Waters of the Landing Obligation: How Multi-level Governance Structures Can Obscure Policy Implementation

Cited by 12 publications

References 27 publications

The ‘Cod-Multiple’: Modes of Existence of Fish, Science and People

The ‘Cod-Multiple’: Modes of Existence of Fish, Science and People

On the Role of Perception: Understanding Stakeholders’ Collaboration in Natural Resources Management through the Evolutionary Theory of Innovation

Let Them Eat Fish!—Exploring the Possibility of Utilising Unwanted Catch in Food Bank Parcels in The Netherlands

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About