Improving fisheries management in New Zealand: Developing dialogue between fisheries science and management (FSM) and ecosystem science and management (ESM)

Abstract

This paper attempts to overcome the dichotomy between the broadly different and largely separate fisheries science and management (FSM) and ecosystem science and management (ESM) knowledge systems that characterise the international literature and are found in fisheries management practice in different countries. The paper argues that the construction of a heuristic we term the fisheries problematic, around issues and contexts, reveals the breadth of international fisheries management concerns and the variety of contexts in which these concerns are being faced. Adopting a political economy informed nature-society approach the paper considers ecological and socio-economic processes in their institutional settings in an attempt to shift from the either/or arguments around fish or ecosystems found in the FSM or ESM literatures to investigation that is grounded in understandings of the historically and geographically specific trajectories of fisheries related interactions and understandings of how knowledge about the trajectories and their interactions is fashioned. Drawing on recent conceptual innovations in the field, the paper develops a matrix-centred approach to explore ecological, industry, community and policy domains in New Zealand’s Quota Management System (QMS) and Individual Transferable Quota (ITQ) fisheries management regime. The extended framework prioritises scrutiny of the interaction amongst the four domains, as a strategy to help develop institutional frameworks that facilitate behaviours that are societally inclusive. The paper offers three conclusions. First, the landscape of New Zealand fisheries issues is very much a product of the contingent interaction of the QMS, a management regime designed around the principles of a FSM approach and laid down in a neo-liberal political environment and Maori aspirations encompassing the fisheries sector. Second, the conceptual mapping of FSM and ESM perspectives over New Zealand’s fisheries management experience highlights that a number of management issues have been down played by the commitment to FSM, a situation that has led to on-going tensions between commercial, recreational and customary stakeholders regarding fisheries management. Put another way, there is more to running a sustainable fishery (as defined in the Fisheries Act 1996) than QMS and other tools and dialogue about the development of these should be a priority. Third and more generally, improved dialogue on fisheries questions is likely to be most expeditiously advanced by studies that explicitly conceptualise and contextualise ecological and socio-economic processes and their institutional arrangements.