Marine Resource Economics Team, CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, Queensland Biosciences Precinct, 306 Carmody Road, Saint Lucia, 4067, Australia.
Ambio. 2022 May;51(5):1275-1286. doi: 10.1007/s13280-021-01634-7. Epub 2021 Oct 29.
In many countries, commercial and recreational fishing compete for access to marine resources. In some cases, recreational catch outweighs commercial harvest and may threaten species otherwise protected from commercial fishing. This has led to increasing calls for improved management of recreational fishing in the broader context of general fisheries management. As a result, fisheries managers face the challenge to decide how to allocate the available marine resources between competing uses. In this paper, we review and explain two common approaches that have been used to support recreational fishing allocation decisions. While economic activity analysis is an appropriate tool to assess how a change in resource allocation would affect regional economic activity (economic contributions and impacts), it is ill-suited to assess associated gains or losses in welfare of society as a whole (economic efficiency). Hence, economic activity analysis and social cost-benefit analysis complement each other, with each providing a different set of information answering a different set of questions. Unfortunately, both types of analysis use the term "economic value" suggesting that they are alternative approaches that provide the same information, whereas in fact they are not. If the objective of fishery managers is to ensure that society as a whole is made better off, the appropriate metric is economic value as defined by welfare economics. Under this definition, all goods and services provided by marine resources that are beneficial to humans have economic value. This includes non-use values such as the continued existence of an endangered marine species. The aim of this paper is to support managers and policymakers in allocating marine resources by reviewing relevant economic principles, concepts, and tools in the context of recreational fishing, including the use and challenges of estimating the non-market benefits generated by recreational fishing experiences.
在许多国家,商业和娱乐性捕鱼都在争夺对海洋资源的利用。在某些情况下,娱乐性捕鱼的渔获量超过了商业捕捞,这可能威胁到原本受到商业捕鱼保护的物种。这导致人们越来越呼吁在更广泛的渔业综合管理背景下,加强对娱乐性捕鱼的管理。因此,渔业管理者面临着一个挑战,即决定如何在竞争的用途之间分配可用的海洋资源。在本文中,我们回顾并解释了两种常用于支持娱乐性捕鱼分配决策的常见方法。虽然经济活动分析是评估资源分配变化如何影响区域经济活动(经济贡献和影响)的适当工具,但它不适合评估整个社会福利的相关收益或损失(经济效率)。因此,经济活动分析和社会成本效益分析相互补充,两者提供的信息不同,回答的问题也不同。不幸的是,这两种分析都使用了“经济价值”一词,这表明它们是提供相同信息的替代方法,而实际上并非如此。如果渔业管理者的目标是确保整个社会受益,那么适当的衡量标准是福利经济学定义的经济价值。根据这一定义,海洋资源为人类提供的所有有益的商品和服务都具有经济价值。这包括非使用价值,如濒危海洋物种的持续存在。本文的目的是通过在娱乐性捕鱼的背景下审查相关的经济原则、概念和工具,为管理者和政策制定者在分配海洋资源方面提供支持,包括娱乐性捕鱼体验产生的非市场效益的估算及其面临的挑战。