Governance of Small-Scale Fisheries
importance, vulnerability and deficient
knowledge
Jeppe Kolding (UiB)
Christophe Benė (IDS)
Maarten Bavinck (UvA)
FiskeriFaglig Forum, 2014
Governance and knowledge

Governance is about getting and dispersing
power – the power to steer!

Power holders are always selective in the field of
knowledge. They choose the knowledge they like
and suppress the knowledge that threatens them

Just like we choose (or are taught) to believe in
some information, and ignore or distrust other.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
3 citations from IPCC AR5 WGII Ch. 7 (1)
1.
Key adaptations for fisheries and aquaculture
include policy and management to maintain
ecosystems in a state that is resilient to
change
3 citations from IPCC AR5 WGII Ch. 7 (2)
2.
In addition to measures of calorie availability,
food security can be broadened to include
nutritional aspects. There is robust evidence
and high agreement that lack of essential
micronutrients such as zinc and vitamin A
affect hundreds of millions
Primary sources of vitamin A and zinc
= fish and seafood
3 citations from IPCC AR5 WGII Ch. 7 (3)
3)
Food insecurity is closely tied to poverty;
Fisheries make particular contributions to
food security and more than 90% of the people
engaged in the sector are employed in smallscale fisheries, many of whom are found in the
poorer countries of the world
Small Scale Fisheries (SSF) are not small



> 60 % of total world captures
> 70 % of total landings for human consumption
> 90 % of all fishermen (≈ 80 % live in Asia)
Many ecosystems only exploitable on small-scale





Coastal lagoons
Tidal flats, shallow shores
Estuaries
Coral reefs
Most freshwaters
Comparison
between
large scale
industrial
and
small scale
artisanal
fisheries
Marine only,
freshwater
fisheries are
around 40 mill
tonnes too
Kolding et al. (2014)
SSF versus LSF
 SFF
are many and generally poor
 LSF are few and generally rich
 This
 do
a governance dilemma –
we want wealth or welfare?
Unutilized?
1,000
Google scholar
hits for
fisheries
crisis
Still
Waters:
The Global
Fish Crisis
> 1,000,000
Google hits for
fisheries
crisis
http://ocean.nationalgeographic.com/ocean/global-fish-crisis-
…and the doomsday predictions
based on the extrapolation of
regression there will be 100%
collapse in the year 2048
Global loss of species from LMEs. Trajectories of collapsed fish and invertebrate
taxa over the past 50 years (diamonds, collapses by year; triangles, cumulative
collapses). Worm et al. (Science 2006).
… becomes a management crisis

The fisheries “crisis” - and associated
management crisis - is extrapolated worldwide,
also in small scale fisheries

Countless “management projects” are set up and
implemented. Their theoretical background are all
based on our old Western legacy on how to do it.

These are pressures from ‘above’.. How can we
govern these fisheries?
The welfare perspective
 Small-scale
fisheries in many developing
countries are functioning as the ‘social
security system’– A common good!
 May serve as the ‘last resort’ when
everything else fail.
 This requires open access.

These are pressures from ‘below’.. What are
the needs in these fisheries?
Sustainability: Fishery objective
UNCLOS (1982), WSSD (2002) Declaration § 31 (a):
«Stocks should be kept at biomass levels
that can produce maximum sustainable
yields (MSY).»
Sustainability: Conservation objective
CBD (1998) The Malawi principles for Ecosystem Approach:
«A key feature of the ecosystem approach
includes conservation of ecosystem
structure and functioning»
FAO adopted EAF in 2001
Only 2 biological questions in fisheries management

How much?

= Fishing pressure
• (effort f)

How?

= Fishing pattern
• (catchability q)
• (selectivity s)
Fishing mortality

Fishing mortality = ‘How much’ x ’How’

Catch = Fishing mortality x Biomass
Fishing mortality (F) or solving the number problem
Better methods
Increasing these is
Development
So while we ‘manage’
and ‘develop’ the
fishing mortality stays
the same.
Only we get fewer and
fewer fishers
catchability (q)
Fishing mortality (F)
Effort (f)
More units (capacity)
Decreasing these is Management
f and q development in Norway
180
4 000 000
160
3 500 000
140
3 000 000
120
2 500 000
100
2 000 000
80
Catches not
changing
60
40
1 500 000
Quantity (tons)
Fishermen (1000) / Catch per
fisherman (tons)
Effort (f) decreases while Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE)
increases because catchability (q =efficiency) increases
1 000 000
500 000
20
0
0
1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Quantity (tons)
Fishermen (1000)
?
Catch (tons) per fisherman
Total catch, numbers of fishers, and catch per fisherman in the Norwegian fishery 1945-2005
«Look at Norway»
World champions in fisheries management
”Nature”(Feb-09): Compliance with the FAO Code of Conduct
..only 2(3) factors we can regulate

Catch = Fishing mortality * Biomass

We can regulate directly or indirectly on:
Yield (Y), Fishing mortality (F) or Biomass (B).
Output
control
Input
control
Options of regulations
BMSY, Minimum SSB, MBAL, Bpa
Stocking, Bio-manipulation, Enhancement
B
Y = F⋅B
Y
MSY, TAC, ITQ, Bag limit
F
That is all!
Any available
choice belongs
to one of the 3
Size of capture: tc (selectivity)
Mortality index: F= Z-M
Exploitation rate: F/Z = E
Effort control: f = F/q
F control: F0.1, Fmed etc.
Closed area (MPA, F =0)
Closed season (F =0)
Choice and cost of management


The choice of management regulations depends
on value of the resource vs costs:
In terms of required knowledge
(= management costs) then:
BB > Y > F, where for the latter f > q
Expensive
cheap
Data driven
constant
Small Scale Fisheries (SSF)
= ‘q’ - management

For fisheries where little or nothing is known,
management regulations are always based on
regulating catchability q (in particular selectivity):





Mesh size
Size of capture
Gear regulations (e.g beach seines…)
Closed area or season (MPAs!)
Find one example
where one or
several of these
do not apply
When nothing is known these regulations are based
on assumptions (derived from model results).
The global perception of SSF?

“Fisheries have reached their peaks – now
declining in several countries”

“To save the oceans and restore healthy
ecosystems there is a need for reforms”

But this is what we hear or think – For
SSFs there is practically no data to support
the statement.
Without data we use extrapolations
FAO (2012) stock status
13% developing
57% fully exploited
30% overexploited

FAO statistics..

The majority is assessed by the “Catch method”:
? ?

We have limited info about the left side (C), and
no clue whatsoever about the right side of the
equation!
Global trends
Percentage of fisheries
Courtesy of Trevor
Branch
Global status:
catch method
FAO (2012) status
13% developing
57% fully exploited
30% overexploited
Developing
Fully exploited
Overexploited
Collapsed
Year
Collapsed
Figure: Pauly (2008) Journal of Biological Research 9:3-9.
Other sources using similar catch status plots: Froese & Kesner-Reyes (2002), Garcia & Grainger (2005), Pauly (2007), Pauly et
al. (2007), Worm et al. (2006), Froese et al. (2012), Kleisner et al. (2012), Sea Around Us Project website, Halpern et al. (2012)
Global trends
Courtesy of Trevor
Branch
Percentage of fisheries
Underdeveloped
Developing
Fully exploited
Overexploited
Method applied to
random numbers with
no trend
Collapsed
Developing
Fully exploited
Overexploited
Applied to global
catches
Collapsed
Year
Year
Daan et al. (2011) ICES J Mar Sci 68:1375-1378
Also: Branch et al. (2011), Wilberg & Miller (2007)
So what do we know in SSFs?
 “Catches
are declining”
 “Fish are getting smaller”
“Catches are declining”
CPUE or Biomass
Age and size structure changes
under selective fishing to younger
and smaller individuals.
effort
Individual catch and total catch
Yield
or
CPUE
System yield
“The catches decrease”
is an expected normal sign
of fishing!
A decrease in total yield is
a sign of overfishing!
CPUE
A decrease in CPUE is
NOT a sign of overfishing
Fishing effort
Jul-Larsen et al. (2003)
Common property theory (CPT)
(open access)
dB
= Yield
dt
Max = MSY
This is what we fear
MEY
Costs
Profit = 0
Profit = max
Stock collapse
Overfishing
B∞
B∞/2
Effort
This
we see
Thisisiswhat
our model
MSY Where are the data on
the descending side?
Are we driven by fear
and imagination?
Or indoctrinated by a
model?
Predator-prey
MSYprey = Carrying Capacity predator
So who controls who?
Who controls who?
Is catch a
function of effort?
Or is effort a
function of catch?
Catch, effort and water levels
17 major lakes and
reservoirs in Africa.
Fish productivity
•
Lake level changes
Kolding and van Zwieten 2012
Catch per area (ton per km2 per year)
In African lakes effort seems self-regulated
(from catch rates)
Average yield per fisher is 3 ton per year
irrespective of system
Effort density (Number of fishers per km2)
Kolding and van Zwieten 2012
Catch per area (ton per km2 per year)
In African lakes effort seems self-regulated
(from catch rates)
Average yield per fisher is 3 ton per year
irrespective of system
Result of ”management
Effort density (Number of fishers per km2)
Is yield driven by effort or is effort driven by yield?
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)
Halpern (2003)
Do Marine Reserves work?
Density doubles
inside reserves.
However, a reduction
in density to around
half the ‘virgin’
density is generally
where the highest
production occurs
Does reserve size matter?
P = 0.49
P = 0.95
P = 0.25
P = 0.76
Halpern (2003)
What is the effect of time?
P = 0.45
P = 0.71
P = 0.36
P = 0.83
Halpern (2003)
How fast is regeneration?
Decrease in rate =
Density dependence
(years)
Halpern and Warner (2003)
What
we they
see isoverfished
density dependent
growth
Where
before MPA?
Conservation
Density doubles
inside reserves
Fishing
Density
Surplus = yield = 0
Surplus = yield = Max
Kolding et al. 2014
Inside MPAs populations regenerate back at a decreasing rate until asymptote
“Fish are getting smaller”
 Is
that a sign of overfishing?
 Or is it a sign on how we fish?
Selectivity

FAO 2003 (Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries):
"Selectivity, or lack of it, is central to many biological
issues affecting fisheries. …. In addition, the
discarding of unwanted catch, which is particularly
important in unselective fisheries, is being considered
by society not only as wasteful but as unethical.
The Code of Conduct dedicates a whole section to
the issue (8.5). It promotes the use of more selective
gear (7.6.9; 8.4.5) and calls for more international
collaboration in better gear development (8.5.1;
8.5.4), as well as for the agreement on gear research
standards.”
Gullestad et al. 2013
«Promotion of species and size
selective fisheries is an important
foundation for Norwegian fisheries
management»
Two main narratives guiding fisheries regulations

“Let them spawn”


Propagation theory – fish should have at least one
chance to reproduce before being caught (Fulton 1890,
Holt 1895)
“Let them grow”

Growth theory – fish should not be caught too small
before they reach their growth potential (Petersen 1894,
Beverton and Holt 1957)
“if all fish are allowed to grow“?
Survival and reproduction
Few
More
Millions
Kolding and van Zwieten 2011
Young
fish
are
likely
to
die,
only
a
Fish are not mammals…
fraction ( < 1%) will mature..
..but large fish have more eggs
100 cm = 16 mill eggs
50 cm = 1 mill eggs
Age at maturity
Natural mortality in fish
Master, I marvel how the fishes live
in the sea. Why, as men do a-land;
the great ones eat up the little ones.
Shakespeare, Pericles, prince of Tyre
Solution: Grow and be Big!
Age (years)
Cartoon by Frits Ahlefelt
Predation vs fishing mortality..
Instantaneous rate of mortality
.. is almost exactly opposite
Predation
mortality
Fishing mortality
Age (years)
From ICES (1997).
..and this is what happens: Fish are getting smaller!
Median age-at-maturation (sexes combined) of Northeast Arctic cod based
on spawning zones in otoliths (from Jørgensen, 1990).
Lake Kariba,
Zambezi River
Lake Kariba – a man-made lake
Non regulated and non enforced
Yield = 6000 tonnes yr-1
Regulated and enforced
Yield = 1000 tonnes yr-1
Lake Kariba
Zimbabwe - Catch rates
Zambia - Catch rates
14
Artisanal CPUE (kg/45m net) from CAS surveys
12
Experimental CPUE (kg/45m)
Controlled effort
8
Artisanal CPUE (Kg/net) from CAS surveys
Open access
Experimental CPUE (Kg/45 m net set)
Artisanal CPUE (Kg/net/night) from Scholtz 1993
CPUE
CPUE
10
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
6
4
2
0
1962
1967
1972
1977
1982
1987
1992
1997
1959 1964 1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999
Average mesh size (mm stretched), Zambia
thesedecrease
symptoms of
As Are
CPUE
overfishing?effort,
with increasing
Is there cause for
so does concern?
mesh sizes to
maintain catch rates
180
160
R2 = 0.86
140
120
100
80
60
1960
Kolding et al. (2003)
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
Kolding and Zwieten 2014
Kolding and Zwieten 2014
Slopes are parallel,
species and size
composition identical,
but everything is less
Kolding and Zwieten 2014
Is the Zambian IUU fishing an example of EAF
- that has reconciled our objectives?
Johannesburg 2002 Declaration § 31 (a):
«Stocks should be kept at biomass levels that can
produce maximum sustainable yields (MSY).»
CBD Malawi principles for Ecosystem Approach:
«A key feature of the ecosystem approach
includes conservation of ecosystem structure and
functioning»
What is the best way to fish?
How do we
A non-selective
manage
a multiharvesting
pattern
is
species
fishery?
what they
are criticised
for
What is the right
But a gears
non-selective
and mesh
harvesting
pattern is
sizes?
ecosystem conserving.
The system remains
unchanged,How
except
?
everything is less.
How much ?
Small-scale fisheries are often ‘non-selective’ !
Can we fish everything proportionally?
Governance and conservation


Is there a need for reform in SSF?
Will fewer (and richer) fishers solve the problem?





What about all those excluded?
Will open access always lead to tragedy?
Is the ‘Norwegian model’ (wealth-based)
something we should promote?
Are fishing small fish illegally with small mesh
sizes bad for the ecosystem?
Do we have the data and the knowledge to
answer these questions?
Thank you for your attention!
Jeppe Kolding
[email protected]
FiskeriFaglig Forum, 2014