2. Chris Williams NEFs Marine Socio Economics Project

26
NEFs wider fisheries work and the Marine Socio Economics Project (MSEP) [email protected] www.neweconomics.org

Transcript of 2. Chris Williams NEFs Marine Socio Economics Project

NEFs wider

fisheries work and

the Marine Socio

Economics Project

(MSEP)

[email protected]

www.neweconomics.org

Fisheries: CFP reform..

An example: the Costs of overfishing

• To the environment

– Ecosystems at risk (instability, collapse, etc)

– Irreversible loss (biodiversity)

• To people

– Food security

– Livelihoods at risk

• To the economy

– Loss of wealth (lost rents, jobs)

– Fishing industry at risk / subsidies

Key messages from NEFs work

on EU fisheries:

“Restoring fish stocks is good for

employment & the economy”

Our report compared the current performance of 43

EU fish stocks with their potential if they were at

their Maximum Sustainable Yield -MSY.

1) Catches

2) Revenues

3) Employment

Note: there are 150 commercial fish stocks in EU

Jobs lost at sea (2012)

With every passing year that EU

stocks remain overfished we are

losing out on 2.7 billion pounds

and the potential to support

100,000 jobs.

EU Common fisheries policy reform

Article 2:

‘Therefore, the Union should improve the CFP by adapting

exploitation rates so as to ensure that, within a

reasonable time-frame, the exploitation of marine

biological resources restores and maintains

populations of harvested stocks above levels that

can produce the maximum sustainable yield. The

exploitation rates should be achieved by 2015.’

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:354:0022:0061:EN:PDF

Good value

• Economic viability / profitability

• Low subsidy dependence

• Jobs

• Low impact on seabed

• Low discards

• Low C emissions

• Low by-catch

• Etc

Bad value

• The opposite

Case study: North Sea Cod

Who creates value?

Who gets the quota?

Who gets the subsidies?

Looking at trawling vs gillnets:

EU Common fisheries policy reform

Article 17:

Criteria for the allocation of fishing opportunities by

Member States

When allocating the fishing opportunities available to them, as referred to in Article 16, Member States shall use transparent and objective criteria including those of an environmental, social and economic nature.

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:354:0022:0061:EN:PDF

- Compares fish production vs

consumption.

- Estimates when a country starts

depending on fish from non-EU waters.

Fish Dependence (2012- 2015…)

In NEFs working paper on bass we recommend seven key

steps to recovery:

1. Follow scientific advice – natural limits cannot be

negotiated.

2. Increase the Minimum Landing Size to 42cm for

commercial and recreational fishers.

3. Regulate netting for bass by increasing the mesh size

of nets and the length of nets used.

4. Limit the weekly landings per vessel to 1.5 tonnes – a

necessary reduction from the current 5 tonnes and

introduce a recreational bag limit (with mandatory fin

clipping).

5. Better protect nursery areas for bass around the UK

coastline.

6. Make the seasonal pelagic trawl ban permanent, not a one-

off measure, and extend the ban from December 1st – April

30th.

7. Adequately resource regulatory bodies tasked with

fisheries management so they can extend effective

regulation to all fisheries which have an impact on bass

stocks.

‘According to the Natural Capital Committee, with regard to fisheries, ‘Persistent

overfishing drives down underlying stocks and diminishes the returns that can be

generated from the stock which remains. Paradoxically, the unfavourable current

situation means that there are likely to be substantial benefits from better

management of that stock. But there are risks too. If current stocks become too low,

the chance of irreversible collapse is all the higher. This would remove perhaps

permanently, the option to enjoy these increased benefits in the future.’

This is certainly true of bass. Restoring bass stocks will require investment .

We need to aim for a stock which is rebuilt and can deliver long-term benefits

to all stakeholders. To make this possible we need a number of commitments

from the UK Government which will demonstrate they are serious about

restoring the bass fishery. Commitments must include adequate resourcing to

Defra, the MMO and IFCAs so they regulate the fishery and take a proactive

role in regulating sea angling for bass. To make it easier for Defra to regulate

the bass fishery, help recover the stock and help IFCAs set up regionally

appropriate management we need to double the financial support from central

Government made available to them . As the Impact Assessment prior to

creation of the IFCAs showed, they actually require twice the resources they

now have at their disposal . The challenge they face and the responsibility

they have is however increasing’.

http://b.3cdn.net/nefoundation/9e98a3d20e2b904409_w1m6bs1pl.pdf

‘During the 2014 – 2015 financial year, the

ten IFCAs will commit levy-raised revenue

totalling just over £8.7m to inshore

management around the coast of England.’

‘Only four IFCAs have an annual revenue

budget exceeding £1m (Cornwall IFCA,

Eastern IFCA, North Eastern IFCA and

North Western IFCA).’

The Marine Socio-Economics

Project (MSEP) Building the Socio-Economic Capacity of Marine

NGOs

Coordinated by NEF. Four NGO partners.

Started in 2012.

Two key outcomes:

• NGOs with increased economic capacity

• NGOs working together effectively

Workshops*

• Impact Assessment workshops - 2012

• MSFD (Including Defra economist)

• MCZs (Including Natural England economists)

• Theory of Change – 2013

• Valuation – 2013 (focus on economic tools and techniques)

• Nature & Progress seminar – July 2014 – **upcoming paper:

‘’Devaluing Nature?!’’

• EMFF workshop: Poole, Nov 2014. Including Defra, IFCAs

fishermen, aquaculture businesses and FLAGs

Project activities

*all presentations online – www.mseproject.net

• www.mseproject.net

• project website and

newsletter

• Economics Briefings

and marine

case studies

Project outputs

Briefing 1 - An overview of economics

Briefing 2 - How economics is used in government

decision-making

Briefing 3 - Valuing the environment in economic

terms

Briefing 4 - Social cost-benefit analysis and social

return on investment

Briefing 5 - Discounting and time preferences

Briefing 6 - Multi-criteria analysis

Briefing 7 - Beyond GDP: Valuing what matters and

measuring natural capital

Briefing 8 - Markets, market failure and regulation

Briefing 9a - Finance and money: the basics

Briefing 9b - What's wrong with our financial system?

Briefing 10 - Property rights and ownership models

Briefing 11 - Behavioural economics - dispelling the

myths

http://www.neweconomics.org/

publications/entry/economics-

in-policy-making

• Facts and Figures ↓

Infographic Impact Assessment (IIA) for MCZs

Using best available evidence in a visual way

THANK YOU

Reports available at: www.neweconomics.org

Email: [email protected]

Follow us on twitter: @nef @MarineEconomics

Newsletter(s): NEF and MSEProject