Efficacy of rights-based management of small pelagic fish within an ecosystems approach to fisheries in South Africa

References

• Alchian A, Demsetz H. 1973. The property rights paradigm. Journal of Economic History 33: 16–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnason R. 2001. A review of international experiences with ITOs. CEMARE Report 59. Portsmouth: Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources, University of Portsmouth.
   Google Scholar
• Arnason R. 2005. Property rights in fisheries: Iceland's experience with ITQs. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 15: 243–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bromley D. 1989. Property relations and economic development: the other land reform. World Development 17: 876–877.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butterworth DS. 2007. Why a management procedure approach? Some positives and negatives. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64: 613–617.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butterworth DS. 2008. Some lessons from implementing management procedures. In: Tsukamoto K, Kawamura T, Takeuchi T, Beard TD, Kaiser MJ (eds), Fisheries for global welfare and environment: memorial book of the 5th World Fisheries Congress 2008. Tokyo: TerraPub. pp 381–397.
   Google Scholar
• Christy FT. 2000. Common property rights. An alternative to ITQs. In: Shotton R (ed.), Use of property rights in fisheries management. Proceedings of the FishRights99 conference, 11–19 November 1999, Fremantle, Western Australia. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 404/1. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• Copes P, Pálsson G. 2000. Challenging ITQs: legal and political action in Iceland, Canada and Latin America. A preliminary overview. In: Johnston RS (ed.), Proceedings of the 10th biennial conference of the International Institute of Fisheries Economics and Trade (IIFET), 10–14 July 2000, Corvallis, Oregon. Oregon: International Institute of Fisheries Economics and Trade. pp 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Cury PM, Boyd IL, Bonhommeau S, Anker-Nilssen T, Crawford RJM, Furness RW, Mills JA, Murphy EJ, Österblom H, Paleczny M, Piatt JF, Roux J-P, Shannon LJ, Sydeman WJ. 2011. Global seabird response to forage fish depletion – one-third for the birds. Science 334: 1703–1706.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DAFF (Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries). 2012. 2009/10 Performance review of fishing right holders. Overall report/summary: limited commercial and full commercial rights holders. Cape Town: DAFF.
   Google Scholar
• DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism). 1997. White paper: marine fisheries policy for South Africa. Pretoria: DEAT. Available at www.info.gov.za/whitepapers/1997/marine [accessed 4 December 2011].
   Google Scholar
• DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism). 2005a. General policy on the allocation and management of long term commercial fishing rights, 2005. Unpublished Report. DEAT, Pretoria.
   Google Scholar
• DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism). 2005b. Policy for the allocation and management of commercial fishing rights in the small pelagics (anchovy and sardine purse-seine) fishery: 2005. Unpublished Report. DEAT, Pretoria.
   Google Scholar
• DEAT (Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism). 2008. Section B. Permit conditions: pelagic fish (sardine/pilchard) fishery: 2008. Unpublished Report. DEAT, Cape Town.
   Google Scholar
• de Moor CL, Butterworth DS, De Oliveira JAA. 2011. Is the management procedure approach equipped to handle short-lived pelagic species with their boom and bust dynamics? The case of the South African fishery for sardine and anchovy. ICES Journal of Marine Science 68: 2075–2085.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Finance. 1996. Growth, employment and redistribution: a macroeconomic strategy. Pretoria: Department of Finance.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards M. 2000. The administration of fisheries managed by property rights. In: Shotton R (ed.), Use of property rights in fisheries management. Proceedings of the FishRights99 conference, 11–19 November 1999, Fremantle, Western Australia. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 404/2. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. pp 75–88.
   Google Scholar
• Eythόrsson E. 2000. A decade of ITQ-management in Iceland fisheries: consolidation without consensus. Marine Policy 24: 483–492.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairweather TP, Hara M, van der Lingen CD, Raakjær J, Shannon LJ, Louw GG, Degnbol P, Crawford RJM. 2006. A knowledge base for management of the capital-intensive fishery for small pelagic fish off South Africa. African Journal of Marine Science 28: 645–660.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FAO. 2003. The ecosystem approach to fisheries: issues, terminology, principles, institutional foundations, implementation and outlook. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 443. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• George Warman Publications. 2007. Fishing industry handbook: South Africa, Namibia and Mozambique (35th edn). Cape Town: George Warman Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Hallowell AI. 1943. The nature and function of property as a social institution. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1: 115–138.
   Google Scholar
• Hara M. 2009. Crew members in South Africa's squid industry; whether they have benefitted from transformation and governance reforms. Marine Policy 33: 513–519.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hara M, Raakjær J. 2009. Policy evolution in South African fisheries: the governance of the sector for small pelagic. Development Southern Africa 26: 649–662.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hatcher A. 2005. On the microeconomics of quota management in fisheries. Marine Resource Economics 20: 77–99.
   Google Scholar
• Hatcher A, Read A. 2001. The allocation of fishing rights in UK fisheries. Case studies on the allocation of transferable quota rights in fisheries. In: Shotton R (ed.), Use of property rights in fisheries management. Proceedings of the FishRights99 conference, 11–19 November 1999, Fremantle, Western Australia. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 411. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. pp 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Hersoug B. 2002. South African fishers on the road to equal access? – from “informal fishers” via “subsistence fishers” to “micro-commercial entrepreneurs. In: Hersoug B (ed.), Fishing in a sea of sharks: reconstruction and development in the South African industry. Delft: Eburon. pp 173–200.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchings L, Roberts MR, Verheye HM. 2009. Marine fisheries monitoring programmes in South Africa. South African Journal of Science 105, March/April 2009: 94–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Isaacs M. 2003. Understanding the social processes and politics of implementing a new fisheries policy, the Marine Living Resource Act 18 of 1998, in South Africa. PhD thesis, University of Western Cape, South Africa.
   Google Scholar
• Isaacs M, Hara M. 2008. Transformation in the South African fishing industry and its ability to redistribute fishing rights. In: Nielsen J, Dodson JJ, Friedland K, Hamon TR, Musick J, Verspoor E (eds), Proceedings of the fourth world fisheries congress (reconciling fisheries with conservation), 2–6 May 2004, Vancouver. Bethesda: American Fisheries Society. pp 687–703.
   Google Scholar
• Isaacs M, Hara M, Raakjær J. 2007. Has reforming South African fisheries contributed to wealth redistribution and poverty alleviation? Ocean and Coastal Management 50: 301–313.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobsberg I, Govender S. 2010. Fixing price fixing – South Africa (December 2, 2010). Eversheds, Johannesburg. Available at www.hg.org/article [accessed 24 January 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Nyikahadzoi K, Hara M, Raakjær J. 2010. Transforming ownership and governance: lessons from capital intensive pelagic fisheries in South Africa and Zimbabwe. International Journal of the Commons 4: 663–682.
   Google Scholar
• OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development). 1997. Towards sustainable fisheries: economic aspects of the management of living marine resources. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom E. 2009. Design principles of robust property rights institutions: what have we learned. In: Ingram GK, Hong Y-H (eds), Property rights and land policies. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. pp 25–51.
   Google Scholar
• Ounanian K, Delaney A, Raakjær J, Ramirez P. 2012. On unequal footing: stakeholder perspectives on the marine strategy framework directive as a mechanism of the ecosystem-based approach to marine management. Marine Policy 36: 658–666.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson B, Isaacs M, Hara M, Jarre A, Moloney CL. 2010. Achieving transdisciplinary co-operation for EAF: a South African case study. Marine Policy 34: 782–794.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterson B, Petersen S. 2010. EAF implementation in southern Africa: lessons learnt. Marine Policy 34: 276–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petersen S, Paterson B, Basson J, Moroff N, Roux J-P, Augustyn J, D'Almeida G. 2010. Tracking the implementation of an ecosystem approach to fisheries in southern Africa. Cape Town: WWF South Africa Report Series.
   Google Scholar
• Pitcher T, Lam ME. 2010. Fishful thinking: rhetoric, reality, and the sea before us. Ecology and Society 15: article #12. URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol15/iss2/art12/ (published online under license by the Resilience Alliance).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raakjær Nielsen J, Hara MM. 2006. Transformation of South African industrial fisheries. Marine Policy 30: 43–50.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RSA (Republic of South Africa). 1995. Labour relations act (Act No. 66 of 1995). Government Gazette, South Africa 366 (16861).
   Google Scholar
• RSA (Republic of South Africa). 1998a. Marine living resources act (Act No. 18 of 1998). Government Gazette, South Africa 395 (18930).
   Google Scholar
• RSA (Republic of South Africa). 1998b. Competition act (Act No. 89 of 1998). Government Gazette, South Africa 400 (19412).
   Google Scholar
• RSA (Republic of South Africa). 2002. Basic conditions of employment amendment act (Act No. 11 of 2002). Government Gazette, South Africa 444 (23539).
   Google Scholar
• Schlager E, Ostrom E. 1992. Property rights regimes and natural resources: a conceptual analysis. Land Economics 68: 249–262.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shannon LJ, Cochrane KL, Moloney CL, Freon P. 2004. Ecosystem approaches to fisheries in the southern Benguela: a workshop overview. In: Shannon LJ, Cochrane KL, Pillar SC (eds), Ecosystem approaches to fisheries in the southern Benguela. African Journal of Marine Science 26: 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Shotton R. 2000. Use of property rights in fisheries management. Proceedings of the FishRights99 conference, 11–19 November 1999, Fremantle, Western Australia. Fisheries Technical Paper 404/1. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
   Google Scholar
• UNCSD (United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development). 2002. World summit on sustainable development (WSSD), 24 August to 4 September, Johannesburg. New York: UNCSD.
   Google Scholar
• van der Lingen CD, Coetzee JC, Hutchings LF. 2011. Causes and effects of changes in the distribution of anchovy and sardine in shelf waters off South Africa. In: Zietsman L (ed.), Observations on environmental change in South Africa. Stellenbosch: SUN MeDIA. pp 252–257.
   Google Scholar
• van Sittert L. 2002. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it: comparing fisheries reforms in South Africa. Marine Policy 26: 295–305.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward T, Tarte D, Hegerl E, Short K. 2002. Ecosystem-based management of marine capture fisheries. WWF Australia.
   Google Scholar
• Wood LJ. 2007. MPA Global: a database of the world's marine protected areas. Sea Around Us Project, UNEP-WCMC & WWF. Available at www.mpaglobal.org/index [accessed 7 December 2011].
   Google Scholar
• World Bank. 2004. Saving fish and fishers. Washington, DC: World Bank.
   Google Scholar