Who is Right to Fish? Evolving a Social Contract for Ethical Fisheries

Abstract

ABSTRACT. Most debates on government fisheries management, focusing on dramatic fishery collapses, have skirted the ethical dimension implicit in the exploitation, for private gain, of fishery resources that are publicly owned. The privilege to fish, a conditional right often nefariously perceived as a legislated "right," implies ethical responsibilities linked to marine stewardship. To date, however, granting this privilege to fish has not been legally tethered to the fiduciary responsibilities of businesses to their clients or governments to their citizens: sustainable management of fisheries and conservation of living marine resources. Legal rights must be coupled with moral responsibilities if governments, private fishing enterprises, and civil society are to conserve marine resources for present and future generations. Evolving a social contract for ethical fisheries that explicitly mandates collaborative governance and corporate responsibility can protect public goods and society's right to fish, both to eat and to exist in the sea.

A method for assessing fishers’ ecological knowledge as a practical tool for ecosystem-based fisheries management: Seeking consensus in Southeastern Brazil

“…The incorporation of LEK/FEK and fishers' participation in management plans are also important in order to decentralize government and institutional power, reduce conflicts between fishers and governmental institutions, promote community development and empowerment, and support enforcement, helping to ensure representativeness of local actors in the public policy arena (Begossi, 2008;Garcia and Charles, 2008;Gasalla, 2011;Lam and Pauly, 2010). Furthermore, in traditional fisheries management, purely biological objectives may be imposed in a top-down manner, without considering fishers' livelihoods.…”

Of Fish and Fishermen: Shifting Societal Baselines to Reduce Environmental Harm in Fisheries

“…Historically, patterns of resource appropriation have shifted, as resource availability diminished with human population growth (Lam and Pauly 2010). Emerging social institutions and legislation govern resource use by redefining individual and state rights and duties.…”

“…They reflect shifting societal sensibilities regarding liabilities of property and damage related to natural resources, human laborers, and the environment. In the workplace, where slaves were once the http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol17/iss4/art18/ norm, firms now must exercise due care to guarantee the basic welfare of laborers (Lam and Pauly 2010). Whereas polluters were once compensated for preventing air pollution, seen as a provision of a social benefit, they now must bear the cost of pollution causing environmental damage, as reflected in the "polluter pays principle" (Fischel 1995, cited in Lin 2006.…”

“…To counteract adverse trends in fisheries, laws that reflect shared environmental values for society are shifting societal baselines or norms of acceptable fishing behavior. When a social contract becomes harmful to society, as argued in fisheries (Lam and Pauly 2010), its terms need to be adapted, via new regulatory procedures and incentive mechanisms (Rosenberg 2009), and enabled by restraining legislative acts.…”

“…Fishing harm can be reduced via a tiered approach: (1) regulate the fishing industry with management tools that internalize the social and environmental costs of fishing, by requiring fishermen to pay for the privilege to fish via access and extraction fees, both scaled with fishing capacity; (2) develop fisheries policies with the explicit goal to reduce fishing harm so as to help achieve sustainable fisheries and marine conservation; (3) legislate binding laws to create and regulate societal norms that protect the public trust in fisheries; and (4) adopt a collaborative fisheries governance framework that shares the decisionmaking rights and responsibilities of marine stewardship among government, the fishing industry, and civil society. (Lam and Pauly 2010). Cost internalization requires that the social costs of an activity (the externalities) be charged to that activity (internalized), so that the private costs reflect the costs imposed on society (Pigou 1932).…”