路径依赖与欧洲渔业管理

Federico Martín Palmero, Fernando González Laxe
{"title":"路径依赖与欧洲渔业管理","authors":"Federico Martín Palmero, Fernando González Laxe","doi":"10.17979/ejge.2018.7.2.4411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For a long time there has been an attempt to explain the current crisis in the fisheries sector in terms of a confrontation between those defending “fish” and those defending “fishermen”. However, the real problem concerns the governance of fisheries and how common resources are assigned; it is not just a crisis of resources per se. Therefore, an insightful understanding of the scenario leading to a satisfactory solution is more complex than it is often believed since there is a need to tackle problems related to the state of stocks, fishermen’s strategies and ecosystems. The fishing sector is not exclusively concerned with production activities as some analysts would have us believe. Rather, it is an area that integrates a number of important features and requires different approaches dealing with the industrial aspects of the sector, distribution and consumption. The fishing sector is characterised by a high level of public intervention, in terms of regulation, finance and state subsidies. The plethora of norms has become such that, currently, the main areas of debate are those concerning how best to preserve resources and ecosystems (by  managing and sustaining certain economic levels for example), the welfare of those who make their living from fishing, and the social impact on coastal communities among others. The main focus of debate used to be the conditions of access to fishing and fisheries. Nowadays, however, since early 2000s, efforts have concentrated on the limits of biological safety in order to guarantee sustainable and efficient fishing.This work carries out a dual analysis of the objectives of fisheries management. The first focuses on path dependence and the second on a debate among the three main players and their changing views. This approach allows us to clarify the different interests as regards policy-making, as well as to clearly define the different management implementation.","PeriodicalId":37945,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Government and Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Path – Dependence and European Fisheries Management\",\"authors\":\"Federico Martín Palmero, Fernando González Laxe\",\"doi\":\"10.17979/ejge.2018.7.2.4411\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For a long time there has been an attempt to explain the current crisis in the fisheries sector in terms of a confrontation between those defending “fish” and those defending “fishermen”. However, the real problem concerns the governance of fisheries and how common resources are assigned; it is not just a crisis of resources per se. Therefore, an insightful understanding of the scenario leading to a satisfactory solution is more complex than it is often believed since there is a need to tackle problems related to the state of stocks, fishermen’s strategies and ecosystems. The fishing sector is not exclusively concerned with production activities as some analysts would have us believe. Rather, it is an area that integrates a number of important features and requires different approaches dealing with the industrial aspects of the sector, distribution and consumption. The fishing sector is characterised by a high level of public intervention, in terms of regulation, finance and state subsidies. The plethora of norms has become such that, currently, the main areas of debate are those concerning how best to preserve resources and ecosystems (by  managing and sustaining certain economic levels for example), the welfare of those who make their living from fishing, and the social impact on coastal communities among others. The main focus of debate used to be the conditions of access to fishing and fisheries. Nowadays, however, since early 2000s, efforts have concentrated on the limits of biological safety in order to guarantee sustainable and efficient fishing.This work carries out a dual analysis of the objectives of fisheries management. The first focuses on path dependence and the second on a debate among the three main players and their changing views. This approach allows us to clarify the different interests as regards policy-making, as well as to clearly define the different management implementation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Government and Economics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Government and Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17979/ejge.2018.7.2.4411\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Government and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17979/ejge.2018.7.2.4411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,人们一直试图用保护“鱼类”和保护“渔民”的人之间的对抗来解释渔业部门当前的危机。然而,真正的问题涉及渔业管理以及如何分配共同资源;这不仅仅是资源本身的危机。因此,对导致令人满意的解决方案的情景有深刻的理解比人们通常认为的要复杂,因为需要解决与种群状况、渔民战略和生态系统有关的问题。渔业部门并不像一些分析人士让我们相信的那样,只关注生产活动。相反,这是一个综合了许多重要特征的领域,需要采取不同的方法来处理该部门、分销和消费的工业方面。渔业部门的特点是在监管、财政和国家补贴方面进行了高度的公共干预。过多的规范使得目前争论的主要领域是关于如何最好地保护资源和生态系统(例如,通过管理和维持某些经济水平)、以捕鱼为生的人的福利以及对沿海社区的社会影响等。辩论的主要焦点曾经是获得捕鱼和渔业的条件。然而,如今,自21世纪初以来,努力集中在生物安全的极限上,以确保可持续和高效的捕鱼。这项工作对渔业管理的目标进行了双重分析。第一部分关注路径依赖,第二部分关注三个主要参与者之间的辩论及其不断变化的观点。这种方法使我们能够澄清决策方面的不同利益,并明确界定不同的管理实施方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Path – Dependence and European Fisheries Management
For a long time there has been an attempt to explain the current crisis in the fisheries sector in terms of a confrontation between those defending “fish” and those defending “fishermen”. However, the real problem concerns the governance of fisheries and how common resources are assigned; it is not just a crisis of resources per se. Therefore, an insightful understanding of the scenario leading to a satisfactory solution is more complex than it is often believed since there is a need to tackle problems related to the state of stocks, fishermen’s strategies and ecosystems. The fishing sector is not exclusively concerned with production activities as some analysts would have us believe. Rather, it is an area that integrates a number of important features and requires different approaches dealing with the industrial aspects of the sector, distribution and consumption. The fishing sector is characterised by a high level of public intervention, in terms of regulation, finance and state subsidies. The plethora of norms has become such that, currently, the main areas of debate are those concerning how best to preserve resources and ecosystems (by  managing and sustaining certain economic levels for example), the welfare of those who make their living from fishing, and the social impact on coastal communities among others. The main focus of debate used to be the conditions of access to fishing and fisheries. Nowadays, however, since early 2000s, efforts have concentrated on the limits of biological safety in order to guarantee sustainable and efficient fishing.This work carries out a dual analysis of the objectives of fisheries management. The first focuses on path dependence and the second on a debate among the three main players and their changing views. This approach allows us to clarify the different interests as regards policy-making, as well as to clearly define the different management implementation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Government and Economics
European Journal of Government and Economics Social Sciences-Public Administration
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Government and Economics (EJGE) is an international academic journal for peer reviewed research on all aspects of government and economics. EJGE is particularly interested in current issues regarding the interrelationship between the fields of government and economics, from the influence of government on the economy (economic policy) to economic explanations of government (public choice). It is also particularly interested in questions directly or indirectly related to Europe.
期刊最新文献
Democracy, governance, and environmental policy effectiveness: a cross-country analysis with Sustainable Governance Indicators Public-private partnerships caught in a trust-trap and the potential role of information: the burden of divergent rationales Exploring citizen participation in fiscal control: insights from Manizales, Colombia Tourism, growth, and carbon emissions in Sub-Saharan Africa: a balancing act Impact of government quality on post-COVID subjective well-being in Pakistan: the mediating role of financial stress
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1