Artisanal.Pdf

Marine Policy 108 (2019) 103634 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Marine Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol Defining global artisanal fisheries T Yannick Rousseaua,b,c,*, Reg A. Watsona,b, Julia L. Blancharda,b, Elizabeth A. Fultonc,b a Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, Hobart, Australia b Centre for Marine Socioecology, Hobart, Australia c Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Hobart, Australia ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: While small-scale and artisanal fisheries are undeniably important globally, there is no global consensus onhow Artisanal fisheries to define the sectors, hindering comparative studies and international agreements. We focused on theusageof Small-scale fisheries the words in both the scientific literature and legal documents and show that the confusion stems from amisuse Transdisciplinary of the terms artisanal, small-scale, coastal and subsistence, and is further propagated by language barriers. Definition Accepting the complexity and subtleties of each term, we developed a simple method based on rhetoric and within a transdisciplinary background, which allows the ‘level’ of artisanal fisheries between nations to be parameterised and compared. 1. Introduction in the variety of national legal frameworks and in the scientific literature, complicating comparative studies and international agreements. Small-scale artisanal fisheries are undeniably important and remain Although some have suggested that a strict global definition for central to issues of livelihood, human rights, employment, poverty and artisanal fisheries would be inappropriate [7], previous authors have malnutrition [1]. The sector represents half the world's fishing effort argued that a definition is often required to clarify the scope andap- [2], over one-quarter of the catch in volume [3] and 90% of employ- plication of multilateral agreements, and lack of a clear agreed defini- ment in capture fisheries [4]. Quantitative analysis – of status and tion can lead to reduced effectiveness, such as seen in international trends and global comparisons – have a significant role to play if we subsidies disciplines [6]. In an attempt to address the complex situation want to elevate small-scale artisanal fisheries to their rightful place in without introducing self-defeating rigidity, efforts have been made to the global fisheries discussion. Such efforts, however, have often been create flexible approaches, such as the Food and Agriculture Organi- stymied to date. While there have been an extensive number of local sation (FAO) Voluntary Guidelines [4]. While such flexibility does have scale (or at least constrained) studies of small-scale fisheries from a its place, particularly in discursive considerations, more quantitative social sciences perspective, there have been far fewer large-scale approaches require a categorisation of items in order to treat and study quantitative analyses. In contrast with industrial fisheries, which are them [8], as a lack of categorisation (definition) leads to a proliferation recognised and studied throughout the world, quantitative/compara- of uncertainties. This can be clearly seen in fisheries science, where (for tive scientific studies on small-scale artisanal fisheries have been car- example) global estimates of the proportion of artisanal in the catch ried out in a limited number of research hubs, typically from the de- have been given variously at levels from 25% [9] to 50% [4]. veloped world [5], and only rarely do they attempt to encompass a Specialised fisheries literature has focused on the problem ofde- global range of data, focusing instead on case by case analysis. fining artisanal fishing and its consequences, but few have triedto A significant hurdle to broader analyses is that confusion exists determine its source. We suggest the problems arises from failing to see between the terms used (artisanal, small scale, coastal, inshore, …), artisanal fisheries as an enterprise that transcends scientific and legis- which lack clear definitions in the literature. This confusion is accen- lative concerns, and that a simple exercise of rhetoric and reconnecting tuated by the variation in how different terms are used interchangeably with the meaning of each term used can explain much of the confusion. in different countries and regions [4,6]. This, in turn, is reflected both In order to expose the root of the confusion, two distinct reviews of * Corresponding author. Institute for Marine and Antarctic studies, Hobart, Australia. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (Y. Rousseau), [email protected] (R.A. Watson), [email protected] (J.L. Blanchard), [email protected] (E.A. Fulton). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103634 Received 11 January 2019; Received in revised form 25 July 2019; Accepted 26 July 2019 0308-597X/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Y. Rousseau, et al. Marine Policy 108 (2019) 103634 the scientific literature (section 2 below) and national legislations1 artisanal fisheries, with very different components, might have very (section 3) have been carried out, to analyse the various methodologies different impacts, and often restricts itself to geographic areasof and terminologies used when describing or defining ‘artisanal’ fishing. similar socio-cultural backgrounds [2]. We further compared the terms used in fishery-related laws to their • Decisive describes an attitude whereby a (relatively) clear distinc- historical definitions outside of the field, to unveil both similarities and tion between what is and is not artisanal is parametrised with discrepancies. We subsequently used an exercise of semantics based on quantifiable criteria. A cut-off point, more often than not relatedto Aristotle's rhetoric [10] in order to distance ourselves from specific technical parameters such as the length of the boat (e.g. 12 m ac- jargon (section 4). We then demonstrated that it is possible to associate cording to EU law), is used when the study needs to compare or the rhetoric to a quantitative framework based on available data, al- describe various fisheries which would otherwise have little in lowing comparative analysis of international components of the sector. common. As no agreed global definition of artisanal fisheries exist, studies have used a variety of cutting methods: 2. Defining artisanal fisheries in the literature - By exclusion, such as considering artisanal fisheries are all that is not censused or which does not use specific gears [22,23]. This The complexity of the definition of artisanal and small-scale fish- method historically highlighted the focus of studies on the in- eries is as difficult in the scientific literature as anywhere. Published dustrial/large-scale sector and the lack of knowledge on the arti- work shows various attitudes towards the sector, which we categorized sanal/small-scale fisheries. as: receptive, descriptive and decisive2: - By single or multi-field criteria, whether they be technical/vessel- based such as length, gear or engine power [24–26], or economic • Receptive (or acceptive) is the acknowledgement that artisanal such as number of employees [27], end-use of the catch, such as fisheries exist and are delimited in a way, usually implied bythe consumption and/or non-commercial [28], total catch (value or data or the specific fishery studied. By extension all vessels/people/ volume), spatial (depth or location) or fishing effort. The method industry linked to the data are in the sector [11]. The focus is then allows for comparison across countries but presents the dis- not on the boundaries of the sector but on correlated aspects, such as advantage of aggregating sub-sectors of very different styles to- describing the life of fishermen, or specific issues linked tothe gether and then comparing the ‘incomparable’, in very general management of the fishery. Various studies have focused on poverty terms, such as via fishing power, economic or social background [12], vulnerability [12,13], interdependences and cooperation and environmental impact. Conversely, in the European Union, [14–16], well-being [13], socio-environmental impact [15–17], where a unified definition of 12 m allows for comparability, ithas gender equality [13,18], etc. This approach, arguably the most been shown that vessels of 15–16 m length, technically industrial, common in the literature, particularly in social science and gov- behave like the small-scale coastal fleet [29]. ernmental/NGO reports,3 often limits itself to reviewing various - By comparison, often of a social, communitarian, developmental examples of artisanal fisheries and their impact. While useful to or cultural nature. When comparing across regions with limited understand the consequences of the sector, it lacks causal analysis data, the method allows for characteristics of the artisanal sector and is reductive in the sense that the lack of clear defining terms of (often) a country to be inferred from neighbouring/similar rarely allows for expansion of the study. The contextuality of arti- countries, such as Norwegian artisanal fisheries considered under sanal fisheries implies that what is applicable to one spatially dis- 12 m, as per EU law [2]. The focus of these papers is often less on tinct fishery might not be valid for another one[15]. the definition of the sector itself than its implications. • Descriptive goes beyond receptive by not only acknowledging the existence of artisanal fisheries, but also by

Load more