IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v31y2007i3p299-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there any hope for fisheries management?

Author

Listed:
  • Schrank, William E.

Abstract

Fisheries is not the only discipline where models have been used in attempts to fine tune an aspect of the economy. Such fine-tuning can prove ineffective because of the uncertainties in the scientific underpinnings of the models and because of the omission of critical elements. In fisheries, the biological goal is to set allowable catches so that the harvest is not so large that it endangers the future health of the fish stock while it is not so low as to waste food, while the economic goal is to maximize the net economic rent generated by the fishery. It has long been recognized that the science underlying the setting of the total allowable catch is often too uncertain to justify such fine tuning, and that attempts to achieve that delicate balance has helped lead to crises in fisheries. One solution is to abandon such marginalism in favor of seriously reducing current catches.

Suggested Citation

  • Schrank, William E., 2007. "Is there any hope for fisheries management?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 299-307, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:31:y:2007:i:3:p:299-307
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-597X(06)00095-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thaissa Sobreiro & Carlos Carvalho Freitas & Karen Prado & Fabíola Nascimento & Rafaela Vicentini & Aprígio Moraes, 2010. "An evaluation of fishery co-management experience in an Amazonian black-water river (Unini River, Amazon, Brazil)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(6), pages 1013-1024, December.
    2. Giles Austen & Sarah M. Jennings & Jeffrey M. Dambacher, 2016. "Species Commodification," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 48(1), pages 20-35, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:31:y:2007:i:3:p:299-307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.