IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fishing occupational health and safety: A comparison of regulatory regimes and safety outcomes in six countries


  • Windle, M.J.S.
  • Neis, B.
  • Bornstein, S.
  • Binkley, M.
  • Navarro, P.


The actual or potential effects on fishing health and safety of the full scope of national and international regulatory regime components governing commercial fishing are often poorly understood. Especially lacking are comprehensive reviews of all the government policies that directly and indirectly affect fishing risk within countries with significant commercial fisheries. We present the results of a comprehensive, multi-national project that compares the regulatory regimes of six countries (Canada, US, UK, Iceland, New Zealand, and South Africa) and examines the impacts (either real or perceived) of legislation and regulations on fishing occupational health and safety outcomes. A conceptual model is proposed that identifies potential sources of direct and indirect risks to fishing health and safety in order to throw light on potential pathways from regulation to fishing safety. Our results highlight differences and gaps in the regulatory frameworks of the countries studied and point to the urgent need for improved assessment and for access to accurate and standardized statistics regarding fishing-related injuries and illnesses. We conclude with several recommendations for moving forward.

Suggested Citation

  • Windle, M.J.S. & Neis, B. & Bornstein, S. & Binkley, M. & Navarro, P., 2008. "Fishing occupational health and safety: A comparison of regulatory regimes and safety outcomes in six countries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 701-710, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:32:y:2008:i:4:p:701-710

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. James Eales & Catherine Durham & Cathy R. Wessells, 1997. "Generalized Models of Japanese Demand for Fish," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(4), pages 1153-1163.
    2. Henry W. Kinnucan & Øystein Myrland, 2006. "The Effectiveness of Antidumping Measures: Some Evidence for Farmed Atlantic Salmon," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 459-477.
    3. Kjell G. Salvanes, 1997. "Market Delineation and Demand Structure," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 79(1), pages 139-150.
    4. Squires, Dale & Kirkley, James, 1991. "Production quota in multiproduct pacific fisheries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 109-126, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


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

    Cited by:

    1. Béné, Christophe & Arthur, Robert & Norbury, Hannah & Allison, Edward H. & Beveridge, Malcolm & Bush, Simon & Campling, Liam & Leschen, Will & Little, David & Squires, Dale & Thilsted, Shakuntala H. &, 2016. "Contribution of Fisheries and Aquaculture to Food Security and Poverty Reduction: Assessing the Current Evidence," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 177-196.
    2. Clay, Patricia M. & Kitts, Andrew & Pinto da Silva, Patricia, 2014. "Measuring the social and economic performance of catch share programs: Definition of metrics and application to the U.S. Northeast Region groundfish fishery," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 27-36.
    3. Pinkerton, Evelyn, 2015. "The role of moral economy in two British Columbia fisheries: Confronting neoliberal policies," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 410-419.
    4. Scott Crosson, 2016. "The Affordable Care Act and Opportunities for Change in North Carolina’s Commercial Fisheries," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(2), pages 121-129.


    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:32:y:2008:i:4:p:701-710. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.