IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/ijfirm/v1y2011i1p16.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rights Based Management and the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy: The Debate

Author

Listed:
  • Manuel Pacheco Coelho
  • José António Filipe
  • Manuel Alberto Ferreira

Abstract

Besides some interesting results, the Common Fisheries Policy has not delivered a sustainable use of fish resources. Recently, the Pew Environment Group released a study that finds that E. U. fisheries have failed to reduce fleet capacity thus exerting fishing pressure on stocks at two/three time sustainable levels. Overcapacity and overcapitalisation of the sector was identified as the principal failure of the CFP. This conclusion may be well important in the CFP reform (2012) and put again the discussion about the tools that can be used to get sustainable management and better cohesion. The idea of creating markets for fishing rights as a means of internalising the externalities derived from the common property nature of fisheries have received considerable attention from the founding fathers of Law and Economics and Fisheries Economics such as Coase, Scott and Christy. Rights Based Management schemes have already been experimented in some specific fisheries and localizations. These experiences have a lot of teaching results about good practices of sustainable fisheries management and also about the limitations/risks of these tools. These conclusions are fundamental to explore the feasibility of these tools. The purpose of our study is to enter this debate and investigate the feasibility of introducing these new management regimes in the CFP.

Suggested Citation

  • Manuel Pacheco Coelho & José António Filipe & Manuel Alberto Ferreira, 2011. "Rights Based Management and the Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy: The Debate," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 1(1), pages 1-16.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:ijfirm:v:1:y:2011:i:1:p:16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journalfirm.com/journal/2/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Lequesne, 2000. "Quota Hopping: The Common Fisheries Policy Between States and Markets," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5), pages 779-793, December.
    2. Morin, Michel, 2000. "The fisheries resources in the European Union.: The distribution of TACs: principle of relative stability and quota-hopping," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 265-273, May.
    3. Hatcher, Aaron & Frere, Julian & Pascoe, Sean & Robinson, Kate, 2002. ""Quota-hopping" and the foreign ownership of UK fishing vessels," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 1-11, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Manuel Pacheco Coelho, 2011. "“On Rents of Fishing Grounds” Revisited," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 1(2), pages 1-74.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manuel P. COELHO & José B. FILIPE & Manuel A. FEREIRA, 2015. "ITQs Common Fisheries Policy Reform and Stakeholders Perceptions," 2015 EAFE (European Association of Fisheries Economists) Conference Papers 001, Nisea.
    2. Stefanie Bailer & Mikko Mattila & Gerald Schneider, 2015. "Money Makes the EU Go Round: The Objective Foundations of Conflict in the Council of Ministers," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 437-456, May.
    3. Bertrand Le Gallic & Simon Mardle & Sébastien Metz, 2018. "Brexit and Fisheries: A Question of Conflicting Expectations," EuroChoices, The Agricultural Economics Society, vol. 17(2), pages 30-37, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ers:ijfirm:v:1:y:2011:i:1:p:16. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journalfirm.com/ .

    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.