Exploring inequalities within the fishing industry, looking at changes over time and space of the distribution of catch volume and catch value between large-scale fishery operations and other actors within the industry

Exploring inequalities within the fishing industry,

looking at changes over time and space of the

distribution of catch volume and catch value between

large-scale fishery operations and other actors within

the industry

Master’s Thesis

University of Amsterdam

Author: Natalie Parke

Supervisor: Joeri Scholtens

11248068

2017

1

Abstract

Global inequalities within income, wealth and opportunities have existed for centuries, but as the world becomes more globalised and we enter an era of rapid technological advance, the global inequality debate has never been more relevant. Many researchers claim that extreme inequality is problematic in how it creates a lack of opportunity, affects social cohesion, and affects economic growth. One sub-sect of this is the inequality that exists within the contemporary fishing industry, which has been heightened by rapidly depleting fish stocks and the ‘race for fish’. Much emphasis has been placed on the environmental degradation caused by overfishing, however there has not been as much attention placed on the distribution of the catch, and who is doing the overfishing. This research will look at the

inequalities that have manifested within the industry and their potential consequences for social, economic and environmental issues. This will be done by looking at the growth of Distant Water Fleets, large ‘mega boats’ and transnational fishing corporations and their impact on the available catch. This research will identify what information is available for the largest fishing vessels in the industry to try and understand how significant their role is in global fishing issues compared to small scale fisheries and medium sized trawlers. Unboxing the term ‘inequality’ I shall use both quantitative and qualitative methods to look at distribution of catch, catch volume and catch value. Taking a political ecology perspective I aim to place my findings within the context of contemporary policy and globalisation.

2

Table of Contents

2.2 What discourses legitimise inequality? 8

2.3 Income & Wealth inequality 8

2.4 Political Ecology & the Fishing industry 10

3. Issues of Inequality within the fishing industry 10

3.1 The Value of fish 10

3.2 The Fishing Sector 13

3.3 Fisheries and Globalisation 16

3.4 Contemporary Global fisheries and Inequality 19

3.5 Aims for research 20

4. Methodology 21

4.1. Research Approach 21

4.2. Approaches to Inequality at Sea 23

4.2. Research Questions 24

4.2.1 Main Research Question 24

4.2.2 Sub-Questions 24

4.3 Hypotheses 25

4.4 Research Methods 25

4.4.1 Data Sources 25

4.4.2 Factors Influencing results 27

4.4.3 Interviews 28

4.4.3.1 Purpose of Interviews 28

4.4.3.2 Interview Structure 28

3

4.5 Limitations and External Validity 29

5. Operationalisation 30

5.1 Relevant Data 31

5.2 Mapping the contemporary mega-boat fleet 32

5.3 Intersectional Inequalities 33

5.4 Vessels & Catch 33

5.5 Corporations 34

5.6 Employment 35

5.7 Spatial Change 37

6. Results 37

6.1. The Mega-boat Fleet 37

6.1.2 Size & Capacity 37

6.1.2 Vessel Characteristics 39

6.1.3 Distribution of Large Scale Vessels 40

6.1.4 Historical Growth 42

6.2 Intersectional Inequalities 43

6.3 Corporate Wealth Concentration 44

6.4. Vessels and Catch 46

6.5 Employment in Fisheries 48 6.6 Spatial Change 50 7. Discussion 51 7.1 Trends in results 51 7.1.1 Mega fleet 51 7.1.2 Intersectional Inequalities 52

7.1.3 Corporate Wealth Concentration 53

7.1.4 Inequalities among Vessels 56

7.1.5 Inequalities within Employment 57

7.1.6 Spatial 59

7.2 Possible explanations of results 60

7.2.1 Capitalism 60

7.2.2 Globalisation 61

4

7.3 Implications for Inequality at Sea 64

7.4 Ideal Management 68

7.5 Opportunities for further Research 69

8. Conclusion 69

References 71

Appendices 76

Appendix 1: Locations of Databases 76

Appendix 2: Expanded Data 77

Megaboats 77

Vessels 78

Corporations 79

Employment 80

5

Exploring inequalities within the fishing industry,

looking at changes over time and space of the

distribution of catch volume and catch value

between large-scale fishery operations and other

actors within the industry

1. Introduction

1.1 Introduction to research

Global inequalities have always existed, in income, wealth, opportunity and social standing, and this is true when comparing countries and individuals (Milanovic, 2007). As it is now, there seems to be a trend of polarisation within income, with wealth collecting in the hands of fewer and fewer individuals

(Piketty, 2014). This has led to many academics agreeing that the current levels of income inequality are excessive and unacceptable (Atkinson, 2015). The causes of these inequalities as well as the potential merits and consequences they possess have been well debated and documented. However, now that more data have become available for more countries, and now that we experiencing great economic and technological change, the global inequality debate has grown even more prominent in the academic world. The first part of the debate focuses on the patterns of inequality, and the argument of whether it is a natural part of the market mechanism, and benefits economic growth as Kuznet’s theory argued, or if it is a major flaw of capitalism and is to be addressed through policy (Piketty, 2014). Second to this is the debate on the causes of contemporary income inequality and the role of that development and globalisation have to play. Many scholars argue that as the market becomes more global and

interdependent that new approaches are needed, as the process of globalisation has a huge effect on wealth distribution (Milanovic 2007, Atkinson, 2015).

Inequalities pervade every part of the current global economy, but the one addressed here will be those that have developed within the fishing industry. The migratory nature of the resource transcends national boundaries and the nature of its fragile ecology makes it defenseless to unregulated markets (Thorpe & Bennet, 2001) therefore making it both difficult yet essential to govern effectively. The global fishing market is incredibly vital to the livelihoods and sustenance of many millions of people (Bene et al. 2015) and in the past few decades it has grown and developed substantially due to the influence of technology and globalisation. Fish are also a vital component of global food security, especially in what is considered the ‘global south’ (Bene et al. 2015). Currently, however, global fisheries are in what many researchers have described as a crisis (Kooiman et al. 2005), and the discourse that surrounds this issue

6 usually focuses on declining fish stocks, overfishing of endangered or declining species and increasing environmental degradation (FAO, 2016. Quaas, 2016). However these discussion often do not separate the different fishing sectors at work here and have little focus on who is actually furthering these problems the most. Therefore, another perspective regarding the fishing crisis is to look at the

distribution of fishing effort1 _{and the inequalities within the sector, as there are those who argue that as}

fish stocks reduce, it is the small-scale fishers that will suffer first (Smith, 1990). For this research, I wish to look at the power imbalances and inequalities that exist within the global fishing industry and

examine what factors affect the dynamics of the actors involved. Specifically, I wish to look at this by deconstructing the global fleet by looking closer at the emergence of mega-industrial trawlers and large distant sea fleets and their effect on small scale fisheries globally. Although the small-scale fishers vastly outnumber these trawlers, in terms of workers and boats, the trawlers are getting a much larger slice of the global catch. To explore this, I intend to map the distribution of catch and show the disparity between the fleets and the small-scale fishers. Often in contemporary analysis the large and medium sized boats are joined together in one category and classified as ‘large scale,’ this often masks the difference between them, therefore for this research I intend to separate them and narrow in on the largest group of boats. I wish to explore what data are available, where they are fishing, how much they are catching and the value of their catch.

This thesis shall begin by exploring the concept of global inequality and the theoretical framework regarding the global economy. The inequality debate will allow me to place the fishing industry’s issues into the wider interactions of the entire world. I will use this framework to explore the fishing industry’s growth, both spatially and temporally, by looking closely at the growth of its individual sectors and the growth of the global fleet. Working under several hypotheses, for example; expecting the proportion of global catch have shifted to become more in the favour of the bigger trawlers over time, I shall evaluate which indicators would be best to measure inequality and use them to investigate the availability of fishing industry data for the public. Using what data is available I shall attempt to quantify each

indicator, in terms of catch volume and value and compare and contrast them with each other. With the addition of speaking to those involved in data collection and management within the industry, via interview, a discussion on inequalities within the fishing sector will be built. This will include discussing the existence of inequalities, possible factors that may have influenced this development, as well as examining the inherent problems of extreme inequality and possible solutions for the future.

7

2. Theoretical Context

2.1 Exploring ‘Inequality’

The larger context of this research will be set within the debate on inequality from a global

perspective, which has swept up the academic world in the past years. This debate has focused on the merits of studying inequality, what the definitions of inequality should be and how it should be measured. In particular, whether it is best to look at inequality from country to country, simply within countries, or to treat each person as an individual and compare them globally. The concept of inequality looks at the distribution of certain characteristics or possessions that individuals or nations have in comparison to others, therefore these inequalities present themselves through various different indicators. This can be measured by citizens standard of living, with their purchasing power, life expectancy and social and economic opportunities (Beitz, 2001).

The world as it is, is not an equal one, it is apparent that within many social and economic planes there is a small amount of people with a disproportionate amount of resources in comparison with the rest of the world. Therefore, one of the main drivers of this debate is the focus on how these

inequalities came about. There is great discourse on whether current global issues regarding inequalities and inequities are due to a lack of resources, or flaw in distribution. Many academics have revealed their views on how to approach inequality and how it has developed over history, with many researchers seeking to understand whether inequalities have grown due to individual events or whether they rise and fall naturally as part of the development cycle, and will naturally level out after development has concluded. Among these views are those of the economists Atkinson and Piketty, who have evaluated historical global income distribution and found that income distribution has been heavily affected by historical events and contextually specific incidents such as war, colonialism and the industrial revolution (Atkinson et al. 2011). They take a political economy stance in their discussion and outline how major changes in political regimes, for example the fall of the Berlin Wall and the establishment and fall of the British empire and colonialism all had major parts to play in global distributions of wealth (Milanovic, 2016). Additionally, they explain how the world wars led to a major fall in the top incomes due to a loss of capital income, physical destruction and inflation but then rose again shortly after (2016). Additionally, Pikketty outlines the many non-context specific theories as to why income is unequally distributed, such as the idea that capitalism naturally brings inequality, which is in-line with the theories of Marx who cited that it is the failure of the market, that capital has a natural tendency for concentration and centralisation in the hands of the richest members in the economy (2014). This also leads to arguments that the recent economic growth has been good as it leads to increased living standards and the spread of technology, however ultimately it has contributed to the widening of the gap between the rich and the poor (Greig et al. 2007). One important train of thought in this debate would Harvey’s argument of accumulation by dispossession, in which he explains that within capitalism markets create a monopoly of power, and essentially, they require scarcity to perform to their potential, which can increase price and lead to more accumulation (2003). This cannot happen if a resource is in

8 abundance, and therefore it becomes a system where the only way to become rich is to take from others. This line of argument is key to the debate that is ongoing about the distribution of fish, as it emphasises that it is not a resource issue, but a distributional one.

Another stimulating factor to this debate is the process of globalisation, which many scholars cite as another key factor in the current world inequalities. Globalisation has meant that markets are

connected on a global scale and therefore, any inherent flaws in the market system of capitalism are being perpetuated on a global scale. The issue becomes; what is the best way to deal with this? Are resources more easily managed if everything is connected? Are the income inequalities perpetuated within the global market a natural part of human society? and does there exist an ideal level of equality? These are all considerations that will be inherent within this research.

2.2 What discourses legitimise inequality?

In addition to quantifying global inequalities, there is also a case to be made as to whether or not inequalities within society should be viewed as a detriment. Milanovic highlights the ethical issues behind growing inequalities, with the key question; is it morally right to let part of the world population live in opulence while others struggle to survive? Or is inequality merely a part of capitalism and the market economy? (2007). Beitz also remarks on this point when he discusses whether egalitarianism and the fight for equality is a cultural construction or based on solid moral grounds (2001). He argues that a certain degree of equality in basic capabilities is fundamental in society, yet a more equal

distribution of income could result in greater aggregate social welfare (Beitz, 2001). It is a fact that some people live in terrible conditions and he argues that reducing inequality could be one route to solving this, without placing others in the same position (Beitz, 2001). He also goes on to illustrate that income inequality is often tied to being inferior in social hierarchies, and influencing caste in certain societies, leading to feelings of dishonor and a reduction of agency (Beitz, 2001). Many scholars argue that although it is not perhaps imperative to aim for perfect equality, a reduction in income inequality could benefit many aspects of the global society. In this vein of thought, Atkinson highlights the benefits that the reward system in capitalism gives, however he goes on to say that a reduction in inequality is still necessary (2015). He explains that there is a difference between an equal starting point or opportunity, and the actual outcome an individual receives. Overall it seems there is a solid argument that a

reduction in income inequality would benefit the global society, this is reinforced by Amina Mohamed’s statement at the World Economic Forum, that inequality “threatens to reduce both the sustainability of economic growth and weaken social cohesion,” (2015).

2.3 Income & Wealth inequality

Inequalities in specific regard to income were talked about a little previously, but here we will focus on it more in depth, as income and wealth are typically what the academic world focuses on when discussing global inequality (Piketty, 2014). Income being defined as, the amount of money or resources accumulated by an individual or household over a certain period of time (Johnson & Webb, 1993)

9 whereas wealth is measured as the value of assets possessed at a certain time, (Johnson & Webb, 1993). In the past, this was looked at through international inequality, the inequalities that exist between nations, but in recent times the concept of global inequality has become more popular to study, i.e. the inequality between individuals regardless of their nation or where they live (Milanovic, 2007).

International and global income inequality can be measured by looking at the proportional distribution of income across segments of the population, (Piketty & Saez, 2006). The most common measure over the past few decades has been the Gini index which shows cumulative incomes shares against cumulative percentage of the population being studied, this is then presented as a number, with 0 representing perfect equality and 1 representing perfect inequality (Markovic, 2014).

Of course, all of the above measures would be meaningless if there was no valid reason to study and question inequality, however many academics have made the case that it is a vital subject affecting [things] from the economy to social issues. Milanovic claims that studying global inequality is nothing less than studying the economic history of the world (2007) which will influence how scholars approach economic studies in the future. He goes on to explain that current circumstances make this the ideal time to study inequalities, as we now we have more information on income from household surveys from a large net of countries, and this is worth looking at to see how the world has shifted economically (Milanovic 2007). Piketty & Saez highlight that global inequalities can have effects on economic growth, social mobility, crime rates and physical well-being (Piketty & Saez, 2006). Ortiz et al. agree with this and claim that income inequalities have always been closely associated with social inequalities (2011). Using the Gini Index and several other methods many scholars have outlined the changes in income inequality across the world and across history, to try and identify patterns, triggers and possible causes. It is widely accepted that income has never been particularly evenly distributed, either

internationally, or individually, and remains distinctly uneven today. Currently a trend that has been highlighted by academics is the polarisation of wealth, the idea that ‘the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’. Currently, 71% of the world’s people holds 3% of the global wealth, and the top 8.1% owns 84.6% of the global wealth, and according to the Forbes list the top 10 billionaires own more than the annual GDPs of several nations such as Belgium, Iran and Norway (Savchuk, K. 2016, IMF, 2017).

Historical analysis have shown that that income inequality has been constantly increasing since the early 19th century (Ortiz et al. 2011). Specifically, Milanovic (2009) calculated, using the Gini Index, that global income inequality rose steadily from 1820 to 2002, and dramatically so after 1980. A common concept within the study is the North-South divide, looking at the large-scale inequality of income which seems to have manifested, creating a ‘rich, developed North’ and ‘poor, developing South’. This idea has been dissected in the recent past to look more closely at inequalities between individual countries, and perhaps more importantly, inequalities between individuals within countries (Treitler et al. 2016). Piketty and Saez’s research on several affluent countries showed that income inequality has increased in most high-income countries since the 1970s, and there has been a notable trend of polarisation, where income distribution is moving more towards the high and low incomes (2006). Their research also showed that English speaking countries were noted for the large concentration in the top 1% since 1970 (Piketty & Saez, 2006). One country that scholars have particularly focused on is the USA where

10 income going to the top 1% has been increasing since 1983 in the USA (2015). Throughout their research on income distribution for UNICEF (Ortiz et al. 2011) found varied inequality patterns within regional groups, especially in Asia. China and India are the two of the most populated places on earth and have recent patterns of high economic growth and have shown evidence of increasing inequality. They go on to explain how high-income inequality is common throughout most of Asia, although countries such as Malaysia and Thailand stand out as exceptions (Ortiz et al. 2011).

Overall, income inequality is a fascinating facet of the inequality debate and quite a significant part of it, it becomes relevant to fishers as income is one of the driving forces for both the large scale and small-scale fisheries.

2.4 Political Ecology & the Fishing industry

I have focused above on just one subset of inequality, income and wealth, as that has been at the forefront of social discussion for a long time and is inextricably linked to every industry on earth. However, for this research it is the inequality of distribution of natural resources that I shall be analysing. To do this, I will utilise the theoretical threads above while also using political ecology as a lens to view this issue. Within his book Robbins offers up many explanations and definitions for the practice of political ecology, and here we shall express it as an aim to “hold a skepticism precisely of the institutions within which it operates” (2012, p.85). Simply, they advocate in favour of fundamental changes in the management of nature and the rights of the people (Robbins, 2012) to challenge traditional viewpoints and use a wider perspective on any given issue. This can be applied to fish because it is a limited resource, currently undergoing an environmental crisis, in which there are many diverse arguments claiming to know the cause and solution to it. Additionally, it is social issue, linked with both sustenance and job security (Teh and Sumaila, 2013). Fishing as a method of resource accumulation is hard to regulate, as it primarily happens at sea and because fish are such a migratory resource, which makes it unclear who has the rights to the resource.

3. Issues of Inequality within the fishing industry

3.1 The Value of fish

It is widely accepted that fish are valued by humans because they provide a nutritious food source and an enjoyable pastime with recreational fishing. However just how important fish species are, both in reference to humans and to the environment is often not fully recognised, fish are extremely crucial to not just food security, but also ecologically and culturally and for job security.

First and foremost, fish represent an enormous part of global food security. Humanity is facing a global food crisis and has been for quite some time, at present over 30% of humanity is malnourished or suffering from food–related diseases and issues due to hunger can be devastating, with experts claiming that it is in fact the world’s number one health risk (Tacon and Metian, 2013).This hunger is of course

11 extremely negative to society's health, both directly and indirectly. Furthermore, the issue is not merely about lack of food, but about lack of vital nutrients such as iron, iodine, vitamin A, and zinc, that are necessary for a decent quality of life (Tacon and Metian 2013) Therefore, it goes without saying that there is a huge need for all available food sources to be accessible to everyone, and not just all food, but nutrient rich, healthy foods that are capable of nourishing the body and preventing disease. Fish have been linked to preventing coronary heart disease and other negative health issues (Tacon and Metian 2013) and some research has stated that fish could be used to replace other proteins in the global diet (Bene et al. 2014). This is why Tacon and Metian regard fish as central to global food security, as they outline the current state of world hunger alongside the contribution of fish products (2013). The World Food Summit’s definition of food security is that it “exists when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food that meets their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life” (World Food Summit, 1996) and the contribution of fish to this on a global scale is huge and has been since humanity discovered how to harvest them (Tacon and Metian 2013). Currently, the global market demand for these nutritious products is so high that more edible aquatic animal food products are internationally traded than all traded beef, pork, and poultry combined and in 2009 aquatic animals were 6.5% of all plant and animal protein consumed (Tacon and Metian 2013). This number is only growing, as Bene et al. highlight that fish have been the fastest growing food supply industry in the last 40 years (2014). They also highlight that the fishery sector is a major source of income for millions of people in relatively low income families, therefore both directly and indirectly essential to their ability to gain food for themselves and their food security (2014). Bene et al. agree with Tacon and Matian in the argument that the international debate on food security has largely ignored and under-utilized the fishing sector (2014, 2013). Another dimension of this issue is global distribution, as it is definitely not spread equally. Developing countries exhibit a huge

dependence on fish, as well as being the majority of those suffering, as currently there are 925 million chronically undernourished people in the developing world (Tacon and Metian 2013). Additionally, a study in 2010 discovered that in 30 countries where fish contribute more than a third of total animal protein supply, 22 were low income countries. Facts such as these led Kawarazuka and Bene to argue that “their direct use as human food should be encouraged and promoted for the benefit of the rural poor and needy” (2011). Additionally, fish play a role outside of direct hunger, as they are used as feed for other mammals, supporting economies in the west (Bene et al. 2014).

As well as access food, a family must also be able to afford to purchase their food, which leads on to the second major value that fish represent to humans; job security. Many arguments sustain that international fish trade contributes to improved food security of developing countries through export revenues (Schmidt 2003), the fish have an economic value, and through it a country can help sustain itself. In general, fish production contributes 0.5–2.5% of GDP globally but in some instances this can be a lot more, for example in some Pacific small island states dependent on fisheries, 25% of their GDP can be from the fishing sector (Gillett, 2009). The Big Numbers Project estimates that worldwide there are currently 95 million jobs, full time and part time, in fishing, processing and marketing (Worldfish Center, 2008). These are especially important in rural areas as job variety is limited and therefore fishing is necessary to maintain job security and by association, food security. This becomes an important point

12 when regarding the fact 100 million of those mentioned above are from developing countries, and around 70 million of those are involved in small scale operations (FAO, 2016). Béné et al. also agree that aquaculture and fisheries play an essential role in low income and developing countries, emphasizing the number of small-scale operators engaged in the entire chain of fish harvest, processing and sales (2010). As well as the traditional, direct roles in fishing and processing, other indirectly related activities such as net‐making, boat building, engine repair and maintenance can provide additional fishery‐related employment and income opportunities in marine and inland fishing communities (FAO 2004, OECD Globalisation of Fishing). In fact, the Big Numbers Project state that auxiliary activities, like supportive services in landing ports and harbours, could be potentially more important (Worldfish Center, 2008). They highlight how for each person involved as a fisher, there are 2-3 more people involved further along the chain (Worldfish Center, 2008). Not only is it a source of income for millions of low income households around the world, but this is a growing number, as in the past 40 years it has been the fastest growing industry in the world (Bene et al. 2013).

Fish also have a place in humanity’s cultural community for a variety of different reasons, they hold a traditional part of our heritage and history and still have a strong place in society today, in institutions such as public aquaria, recreational sport fishing and the various scuba diving and ocean sailing activities to view wild species in tropical reefs and out in the open ocean (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999).

Additionally, they are also used for producing renewable goods for society and for supplying aesthetic and recreational uses, or alternatively for use in pharmaceutical research and products (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999).

As much as fish have value to humans, it is important to realise that fish also must be respected for their ecological role and the ecosystem services they provide. They are part of a complex ecosystem and play a vital role in its maintenance (Holmlund & Hammer 1999), which in turn, helps human thrive, as explained by Daily in her definition of ecosysytem services, “conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems and species in them, sustain and fulfill human life,” (Daily 1997 p.3). This is achieved by fish in a variety of ways, for example they are not only important due to their function in the food chain throughout the global oceans but also in food webs for coastal and nearshore ecosystems as well. They are necessary for the health of coastal regions and for the oceans themselves as several species feed on and control aquatic disease holding plants (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999). Additionally, they act as a regulating service to the trophic structure by maintaining carbon flux (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999) and also help with ocean and land resilience in areas threatened by extreme weather events. This is because the surrounding ecosystems in these areas are dependent on the rapid colonisation of larval fish to gain strength and become healthy again after rapid weather events (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999). Following on from the political ecology discussion earlier, it is also implied that the maintenance of the oceans and coastal areas by fish are also helping all areas of the globe, as negative environmental impacts in coastal regions would undoubtedly affect inland regions as well. Lastly, they open up the scientific knowledge base on the oceans as they are easily sampled to give information of the sea and to assess ecosystem

All of these factors culminate to prove the fact that fish are an essential part of our planet and are therefore a necessary subject to research and understand. This concept of proving the importance of

13 fish research was well executed by the Big numbers Project (2008), who highlight how an improved knowledge on the fishing industry would benefit the design of management when facing issues of sustainability. They also narrow their research to emphasise the importance of understanding how different actors within the industry interact with each other and the impacts of this. Their research suggested that special consideration should be payed to the small-scale fisheries as many of the factors outlined above apply especially to them, as well as the fact they are subject to increased vulnerability. This concept of contrasting scales of fisheries is something I wished to explore within my own research. To contextualise this, the history and structure is outlined in the following section.

3.2 The Fishing Sector

As important as fish are, both explicitly and implicitly to human societies, there of course has

developed a huge and diverse industry devoted to accumulating and profiting from the resource. Fishing has been a part of human culture for centuries, across many cultures and utilising a wide variety of gear, the FAO summarizes the industry by saying that it is “a dynamic and evolving sector employing labour intensive harvesting, processing and distribution technologies to exploit marine and inland water fishery resources,” (Bene et al. 2005 p.4) and today three main sectors of the industry can be identified;

industrial; artisanal; and subsistence (Bene et al. 2004, Pauly & Zeller, 2016). There are approximately 16.5 million fishers globally, working in businesses ranging from large scale to small scale, with the largest group being the small-scale, who number around 15 million individual fishers (Couper et al. 2015). Kurien, in 1998, highlighted the difficulty in strictly defining the different scales of fisheries, but instead attempted to approximately characterise the differences between large, medium and small scale. He estimated that large scale operations would have a crew size of 40-60 people per vessel and would consume around 1600-1800 tonnes of fuel per vessel per annum, while small scale operations would have a smaller crew of 1-5 fishers and consume on 1-60 tonnes of fuel per vessel per annum. He also claimed that small-scale fisheries operate in both developed and developing countries and are found primarily in coastal waters, whereas large scale fisheries tend to utilise the high seas more frequently (Kurien, 1998).

The Big Numbers Project quantifies large scale, or industrial fisheries, as associated with high capital costs and sophisticated technologies (Worldfish Center, 2008). They associate small-scale with low productivity and yield rates, with consumption of fish limited to the household and community, however they also highlight that some of the more modern small-scale fisheries can be very

economically efficient and produce products for international markets (Worldfish Center, 2008). The three subsets that are commonly associated with the term ‘small scale’ are artisanal, subsistence and recreational, to which the Sea Around Us Project have given the following definitions; the artisanal sector consists of small-scale and fixed gears with catch being principally sold commercially. they are also assumed to operate only in in their country’s immediate waters (Pauly and Zeller, 2016). Within these coastal waters, they are generally limited to an area to a maximum of 50 km. The next small-scale subset would be subsistence, which often overlaps with the third, recreational. The subsistence sector consists of fisheries that often are conducted by women and non-commercial fishers for consumption of

14 the household (Pauly and Zeller, 2016). Finally, the recreational sector consists of fishing practices conducted mainly for pleasure, although a portion of the catch may end up being sold or consumed by the recreational fishers and their families and friends (Pauly and Zeller, 2016).

Previously there have been attempts to display the different sectors and compare them, the most prominent example being the Thomson table, developed by David Thomson in 1980. This table, while understanding the complexities of the industry as a whole, sought to generalise it into two main

categories, large and small scale, in order to create a clear comparison and contrast. The purpose of this was to analyse the roles held by each within the global industry and to demonstrate the importance of the small-scale fisheries. Overall, Thomson argued in favour of the protection of inshore fishing grounds and the support of small-scale fisheries. Within the table both scales were compared by measurements such as vessel type and size, fishing grounds and employment statistics, as can be seen in Table 1. This table succeeded in showing the vast differences between scales, highlighting the importance of the smaller fisheries for both employment and food security and showing the consequences for

sustainability. The original table has been updated several times since 1980 and a more up to date table was created by Pauly in 2006 reinforcing Thomson’s argument. It demonstrated the reliance on the smaller fisheries for employment, as over 12 million fishers were employed in the small scale compared with the half a million in the larger scale. It also showed how both sectors produced an equal amount of 30 million tonnes each for human consumption per year (2006). Additionally, it touched upon the implications for environmental sustainability of both scales, with small scale fisheries discards being virtually negligible while the larger fisheries discarded 8-20 million tonnes per year (Pauly, 2006). The core argument of the importance of small scale fisheries was explored more deeply by the Big Numbers Project in 2008, who placed emphasis on its relevance to developing countries. They explained that 90% of people dependent on fisheries for their livelihoods, for example, working as fishers,

processors, or in other ancillary activities, live in developing countries (Worldfish Center, 2008). This is reinforced by research done by the Index Initiative who estimated that developing countries earned considerably more from seafood export than from any major food commodity like rubber, cocoa, coffee or sugar (2015). The Big numbers project also makes the point that small fisheries often do not have a strong political voice, or adequate power to influence fishing policy. This, and the fact that often global focus is placed on the large fisheries, means that small fisheries in developing are left vulnerable to competition and other threats (Worldfish Center, 2008). The importance of small scale also reflects the importance of studying and quantifying the extent of the large scale, as they are both connected and affect each other. In contrast, the large-scale fisheries have been growing in capacity and effort and may be contributing to the hardships experienced by the small-scale fisheries. Although fishery catch

statistics are from countries and compiled in global databases by the FAO, the data collected often don’t distinguish between large‐ scale and small‐scale fisheries and the small‐scale sector is often poorly covered in official statistics.

15

Table 1: Outlining the characteristics of the different types of fisheries Source Worldfish Center, 20082

Characteristics

Categories of fisheries Small-Scale

Large Scale Subsistence Other Small Scale

Size of fishing

craft/vessel and engine

Non or small (5-7m; <10GT), Usually non-motorised

Small (<24m; <50GT) with low power engine (<40HP)

Large (>24m; >50GT) with high power engine (>400 HP)

Type of craft/vessel Canoe, dinghy, wooden boat, boat with no deck Steel hull boat, trawlers, factory vessels

Fishing Unit Individuals, or family or community groups

Small groups, some specialisation and division of labour; importance of household and

community

Smaller and larger groups, specialisation and division of labour

Ownership Craft/gear owner operated

Usually owned and operated by senior operator, some absentee ownership

Concentration of ownership, often by non-operators, cooperative ownership

Time commitment Mostly

Parttime/occasional

Fulltime/parttime Usually full time

Fishing Grounds On or adjacent to shore; inland and marine

Inshore/coastal; inland or marine

All marine areas

Disposal of catch Primarily household consumption but some local barter and trade

Sales to local, national and international markets; household consumption

Primarily sale to organised markets

Utilisation of Catch Fresh of traditionally processed for human consumption

fresh or processed - generall traditionally - for human consumption

Mostly processed; large share for reduction for non-food products

Knowledge and technology

Premium on skills and local knowledge; manual gear

High skills and knowledge needs; manual and mechanised gear, some electronic equipment

Skills and experience important but supported by technology; mechanised gear; automation and electronic equipment

2 _{This table was constructed by the Big Numbers Project using research from Berkes et al, 2001; Chuenpagdee, 2006 and}

16 Integration into economy Informal, not integrated Partially integrated Formal, fully integrated

3.3 Fisheries and Globalisation

As mentioned above in the theoretical section, globalisation is not a new phenomenon, and has been around since the spread of capitalism in the 15th century (Kurien 1998), therefore it of course has had a significant influence in the composition of the contemporary fishing industry. Høst remarks that

although fishing is one of the oldest occupations in the world, it has undergone extreme development changes in the last 100 years and outlines how the relevant narrative for fishery change begins at the turn of the 19th century. The OECD define globalization as the process towards closer economic integration of markets (2010, p.18), this means that markets previously separated due to distance and other factors have become connected and able to influence and trade. This occurred within the fishing industry for a number of reasons, including a rise in demand due to increased global communication and a rise in ability to preserve and transport fish, through improved railways and technologies such as canning, salting and freezing (Høst 2015). These changes also facilitated the rise in demand for different species of fish as well. This in turn led to a population increase, and also wealth accumulation in the north lead to even more increased demand for more diverse species which led to an increase in price and effort (Kooiman et al. 2005). These fundamental changes in industry soon led to a complete restructuring in how fish were harvested. Railroads development meant that harbours were better connected to inland markets, meaning fish could be transported faster (Høst, 2015). This faster

connection to the large markets mean that fishers could catch and sell more without worrying about fish perishing.

The fishing industry became globally connected in a second way, though the increased ability to go farther for fish. This can be seen through the timeline of growth for the Distant Water Fleets,

characterised by large vessels who were capable of fishing thousands of miles from their domestic ports (Bonfil et al, 1998). Their spatial expansion can be explained by both the increase in technological advances, and the integration of regional and national markets into a larger, global market. As well as this, the driving factor of the exhaustion of fish resources and the resulting need to search for new fishing grounds also kickstarted extreme spatial growth (FAO,). This growth can be seen during the period of 1950-1994, where the nations that owned these fleets dominated catch proportions. Pauly explains that post 1950 most countries had recovered from the second world war and began to rebuild their industrial fisheries. One aspect to note is that during this time many of the present-day developing countries remained under European rule, which Pauly remarks may have held them back and could be a factor in the dynamics of the fishing sector today (2006). Kurien then explains that after the 1980s international trade was opened up in Asia and further stimulated this growth (1998).

You can see by looking at Graph 1 the extreme changes in fishing effort that occurred between 1950 and the present day. The graph shows the growth that individual countries experienced between those years. The pattern seems to be a continued period of growth, culminating in the peak catches on the 1990s before stabilising somewhat in the last 30 years (SAUP 2017). This process of globalisation has

17 evolved into the present-day situation, where there is seen to be a monopoly on fishery resources, not by countries, but by individual companies, where 19–40% of several of the world’s largest or most valuable capture fisheries are owned by a handful of significant factions. (Österblom et al. 2015 and Index initiative, 2015).

18

19 Within this research I am looking at the dynamics of the different actors within this industry and the inequalities that have been produced, and as mentioned above, the small-scale sector in fisheries is a vital and vulnerable component which has been impacted by globalisation. This has been due to the developments in technology as Kurien argues, explaining that globalisation impacted the self-reliance and resilience that had previously classified small-scale fisheries (1998). He then highlights several ways in which this happened; with the arrival of new technology, and through governments giving access rights to EEZs. Using this new technology gave the fishermen no significant increase in yield, yet it caused them to become locked in and deskilled. This negative experience for smaller fishers can be cited in many areas across the globe, for example the introduction of white fish on the global market

dislocated local fishers in Norway and brought with it new fishers there felt no responsibilities to the local community (Arbo and Hersoug, 1997). The overall impact of globalisation is complex, however it seems to be universally agreed that “the benefits and costs of globalisation are unevenly distributed, with developing countries facing special difficulties in meeting this challenge”3 _{(OECD, 2010).}

3.4 Contemporary Global fisheries and Inequality

Although fishing as a source of sustenance and livelihood has been round for centuries, Høst explains that when summarizing the history of the dynamics of fisheries, the story seems relatively short, as open-access4 _{fishing was the reigning policy for so long (2015). Therefore, the semi-recent}

changes in global fishing regulation and policy can be seen to have significantly molded the present-day fisheries. The policy of open-access fishing slowly became replaced with rights-based management, exemplified by the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea’s (UNCLOS) creation of exclusive economic zones or EEZs. The establishment of these EEZs gave nations exclusive control of the first 200 nmiles around their coastline, including the resources contained within them (Kurien, 1998) and then allowed countries to enter into formal access agreements using treaties with foreign nations (Alder & Sumaila, 2004). These were introduced to different nations at different times due to issues of gaining independence. In Africa, for instance, until most of the previously colonized countries gained

independence, large foreign fishing fleets were free to access their coastal and offshore fishing grounds. After independence, these fleets were still able to freely access all but the territorial waters5 _{of the}

western countries until the introduction of the EEZs (Alder & Sumaila, 2004). Rights-based management has been further established with the use of quota systems, for example the creation of Total Allowable Catch (TAC), which was then divided into Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs) where fishery operators hold quotas of how much they can catch (Abbot, 2010).

A summary of the state of the contemporary fishing industry is one filled with conflict and crisis and one cannot read anything on the subject without the discussion of depleting stocks being mentioned. This is not without reason however, as policies of open-access fishing, technological growth and the development of the ‘race for fish,’ has indeed led to a significant collapse of the resource (Høst, 2015), with production of fish declining since 1996 and the amount of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels have been in steep decline for decades (FAO, 2016). This is a defining aspect of the industry because it is currently influencing all actions by all factions working within it, i.e. fishers, companies, governments and organisations such as the UN and EU. This tension is then increased by the

3 _{Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development meeting in 2002}

4 _{Open Access is the state where access to the fishery (for the purposes of fishing) is unrestricted and the right to}

catch fish is free and open to all (OECD, 1998).

20 consideration of environmental issues, the increasing capacity of larger craft can be extremely damaging to ocean ecosystems, as well as the fact that such extreme reductions in fish populations are inevitably affecting the food chain by undermining the life-support systems of other organisms in the same or adjacent ecosystems (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999). Additionally, it is also argued that indirect effects of fishing can have more significant impacts on aquatic ecosystem structure than the direct removal of the fish (Holmlund & Hammer, 1999) Both the FAO and OECD have outlined the policy challenges facing the industry right now as governments attempt to sustain the resource environmentally while also

maintaining equity (2016, 2010).

These building issues of environmental issues and the rapid reduction in resources has re-emerged discussions on resource distribution and social justice amongst fisheries. Large corporations seem to be increasing their capacity and range so as to seek out new stocks when their old ones run dry, which places them in competition with smaller scale fisheries whose livelihoods in coastal communities, traditions and culture are dependent on their ability to adequately fish (Kooiman et al. 2005). This is also linked to the inequality debate mentioned above as this tension has led to increased competition between the small and large-scale factions and the same mechanisms described above are affecting and molding the fishing industry as well.

Another facet of this conflict is the Malthusian argument that some researchers have regarding the state of natural fish stocks. The concept that Malthus developed in the 19th century outlines how population growth will eventually outgrow food supply (Pauly, 2006). This will be because populations of people tend to grow exponentially each year, while food resources do not have the capability to

increase in this way, at such a pace (Pauly, 1990). Applying this to the fishing industry, the argument becomes that as fishers and vessel numbers grow, the capacity for fishing will outgrow the ability of fish to repopulate themselves. If this is proven to be a dominant reason for the depletion of stocks, then this could affect arguments previously stated, in support of the growth and maintenance of small-scale fisheries, as they encapsulate the majority of fishers, because in doing so it could be encouraging the growth of more fishers in those areas when stocks clearly cannot handle it. By looking at the statistics showing that there are so many millions of fishers, it could be easily assumed that this could the cause of overfishing, however this line of thought implies that each fisher or vessel is catching an

approximately equal amount of fish (Pauly, 1990). In actuality, it could be that the reduction in stocks has been due to a select number of players who have built up their capacity, or accumulated the resource, disproportionately. Therefore, knowledge on distribution of catch and capacity is vital to discovering the root causes of overfishing and it is important that future policy is based around the true facts of catch distribution (Pauly, 2006).

3.5 Aims for research

This research is, above all, an explorative study that will change and adapt in reaction to what is being found, and that will hopefully bring forth a new appreciation for the importance of looking at distribution of data and act as a push for the establishment of more thorough databases on the fishing industries. Currently the information regarding catch, vessels and employment is scattered across many different organizations and the criteria contained within are often not uniform and easy to compare from database to database. Therefore, the end results of this research aims to present what data is actually available to the public on the amount of catch volume and value landed annually by the largest vessels. It shall explore what is included in the data available and what is not. Ideally this research will

21 reveal a large portion of accurate data showing catch volume and value and how it has developed over time. This will then also show the distribution between the industrial fleets and small-scale fishers when it is compared to overall catch records. Additionally, this data will be looked at in the context of

globalisation and international policy to attempt to identify patterns and causes.

The results mentioned above will have a variety of potential uses in real world application. Showing how unequal the distribution of catch has become may perhaps be useful to influence policy on catch quotas or lead to restrictions on the larger corporations, which could then bring economic benefits and increased equity to the small-scale fisheries. Since fish are a vital source of protein for the global, any increase in economic benefits to the small-scale fishers there could perhaps influence global food security.

It will contribute to the global inequality debate by highlighting the importance of the bigger corporations in the industry and discover if they are the key actors in the issues facing global fishing. It will help in reducing gaps in knowledge on mega trawlers and it will help by exploring whether it is better to look at catch concentration according to country, company or individual boats. A lot of the literature focuses on the majority of actors, therefore this study is relevant because it instead focuses on the minority getting the top percentages of the profit. Fish are a significant part of global food security, therefore any exploratory research on who is actually catching the fish will have relevance for those who depend on it for sustenance.It may also be added into the collection of evidence against environmental degradation.

The ultimate aim will be to provide snapshots of several entry ways into identifying and viewing inequalities within the fishing industry, and supporting this by discovering what data are there and what is missing, what the trends are, and what factors could have influenced this.

4. Methodology

4.1. Research Approach

This research was initially started to address the concern being raised of an emergence of a fleet of mega-sized boats which are monopolising catch and creating inequalities at sea. Contemplating this, it then seemed logical to create a set, straightforward goal of mapping their capacity, effort and catch historically. However, in beginning to structure and operationalise this research, it soon became clear that this would be a complicated and somewhat impossible goal. This was mainly due to absent or incomplete data in the majority of databases which house the information I needed. This led in turn to this research becoming an explorative approach to seeing what exact data was available and where it was located. This meant that as the research continued the Research Question and Sub-Questions did not remain fixed, and instead began to change as new information influenced the type of questions that needed to be asked first. Therefore, throughout this research the direct answer of the sub-questions may not be wholly answered, however definite steps have been taken so that they may be answered fully in the future as well as examining whether this is a discussion worth having in the first place.

22 I began my approach with the core concept of inequality and how this related to the fishing

industry, i.e. the inequalities that have developed between the small-scale fisheries and the large scale industrial fleets owned by transnational companies and individual countries, using arguments

arguments from publications by the Big Numbers Project (Worldfish Centre, 2008) and Fabinyi et al. (2015), who spoke about the marginalisation of small scale fisheries, to influence the creation of my hypotheses. There has always been contention on the use of the word ‘inequality’ (Goldberg, 2004) when applied to people, however here we are taking it to simply mean the situations where some groups have a larger proportion of a good or social advantage than another, in terms of wealth, resources or even opportunity. I broke this down further into issues of income inequality and social justice and measured them using several indicators from within the industry, elaborated on in Section 4.2. In exploring the possible factors contributing to this phenomenon I investigated the concepts of capitalism, globalisation, and industrialisation. These concepts are connected with inequality within the literature (Kurien, 1998. Bonfil et al. 1998) , as inequalities have been seen to grow with the

development of globalisation. Being conscious of these concepts is key to a balanced governance, as policy makers must build laws that preserve as much of the environment as possible, while not further disadvantaging the poorest in the industry.

Within my research I wish to use Greenberg and Park’s (1994, p.1) definition of political ecology as a lens to view the fishing industry, as they describe “A synthesis of political economy, with its insistence on the need to link the distribution of power with productive activity and ecological analysis, with its broader vision of bio-environmental relationships,”.

23

4.2. Approaches to Inequality at Sea

When investigating inequality as it applies to fisheries, I found that the emphasis was on the accumulation of three main resources; catch volume, landed value and profit. These are the resources that are being distributed within the industry to sustain it and mold it. To root out how they

demonstrate inequality I then looked at the potential actors that accumulate them. Table 2: Relevant actors within the fishing industry and indicators of resource accumulation

Inequalities Among

In Accumulation of

Capacity Catch Revenue Profit

Sectors

Countries

Companies

Boats

Individuals

It soon became apparent that there were many potential ways to enter this issue, that the industry could be categorised in a multitude of ways and at a multitude of scales. Looking at the various

organisations built to record the various interactions of the fishing industry, many had established different sub-sections, and the largest of these appeared to be the separate sectors. The Sea Around Us Project, as well as many other publications, acknowledged the existence of 4 main sectors, elaborated in Section 3.2. The sector that revealed to utilize the mega-boats and were accused of benefiting from growing inequalities is the Industrial sector, so it would be compared with the rest. Other avenues that had been used by the literature are by country, corporation, individual boats and then the smallest actors; individual fishermen (Table 2). These five classifications compete against each other to accumulation fish resources, firstly by their capacity; the potential of their gears and vessels to catch fish, their catch volume; how much fish they are actually catching; their revenue; how much what they catch is worth and finally their end profit; how much capital they make off of the fish they catch.

Before operationalising this research, I then looked at previous attempts to focus on one or several of these actors and their accumulation of resources, as this has been a growing concern within the

literature. Eide and Bavinck make their argument for the value and protection of small scale fisheries by looking at the issue at a country level (2011). They look at the catches in million tonnes for developed, semi-developed and least developed countries and the trends in growth they have experienced over time, as well as comparing this with how number of fisheries and fishers (2011). This succeeds in

24 demonstrating that inequalities do seem to exist between countries, however it fails to fully quantify who exactly is receiving the catch, as it does not show the dynamics of catch distribution within the countries. In another approach Österblom et al. deconstructed the issue by looking at individual corporations and demonstrated the distribution of revenue between the top 160 countries. This study also succeeds in revealing the domination of the largest corporations, showing how they receive a disproportionate amount of revenue and how they hold control along the entire chain of production. However once again there is no link to individual fisheries, boats or fishers which detaches it from the process of the fishing itself. Thirdly the effort by Thomson to quantify global fishers in 1980 has been thoroughly been discussed and replicated over the years, (Pauly 2006, Worldfish Centre, 2008). Thomson attempted to show inequality through the skewed distribution of fishers within small and large-scale operations, and between boats. His famous Thomson table visually shows the disparities between how much different groups of fishers catch and earn (1980). My research will take inspiration from these studies and attempt to create an overview of inequalities by displaying snapshots of the many actors and their dynamics.

4.2. Research Questions

4.2.1 Main Research Question

How has the distribution of catch volume and catch value changed over time and space for the

actors within the fishing industry and what are the implications of this?

4.2.2 Sub-Questions

1) What are the mega-boats, and where are they based? 2) What data are available for the fishing industry?

3) How have catch dynamics changed over time and space among the actors within the industry? 4) Which factors could have contributed to this?

25

4.3 Hypotheses

By reflecting on the contextual literature on that has been conducted on inequality and from the existing research on the fishing industry I decided to compose several hypotheses to focus my work around. These have been outlined expressed in the following table;

Table 3: Hypotheses on the fishing industry

1.

2.

3.

4.4 Research Methods

4.4.1 Data Sources

For my research, I will be using mostly quantitative analysis to output tabular data exploring both the contemporary and historical statistics of the industrial fishing industry and how it has progressed over space. I utilised both primary and secondary data from several organisations and individuals, outlined in detail below. These organisations have gathered data showing catch capacity for different countries from around 1950 until the present. They also show data for the catch capacity of different sectors within the industry, including artisanal and subsistence as well as the industrial sector. The organisations provide information on both wild catch and aquaculture, however for my research I will just be focusing on wild capture fisheries. These organisations show different data over different time spans spatially across the globe, so what I aim to do is aggregate the data for all of the larger trawlers into a cohesive piece of research, so I can demonstrate how their catch capacity and effort has changed over time and space. Using this data, I shall attempt to look at the industry in terms of how capital is concentrated by companies and countries.

Table 4: Locations of relevant online databases

Data Source Description Link

FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation www.fao.org

SAUP Sea Around Us Project www.seaaroundus.org

ICES The International Council for the

Exploration of the Sea

26 Who Fishes Far A database of the EU External Water Fleet www.whofishesfar.org

Index Initiative A non-profit organization, seeking to bring clarity on the role and performance of companies in contributing to the

Sustainable Development Goals closest to their core business

www.indexinitiative.org

IUU Vessels A database of all vessels that appear on the lists of vessels identified by the RFMOs and INTERPOL associated with illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing activities.

http://iuu-vessels.org

PROFISH A global program on fisheries created by the World Bank, working to improve environmental sustainability, human well being, and economic performance in the world’s fisheries and aquaculture

www.worldbank.org/en/topi c/environment/brief/global-program-on-fisheries-profish

OECD The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

http://stats.oecd.org/

Eurostat The statistical office for the European Union http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat /tgm/table.do?tab=table&ini t=1&language=en&pcode=ta g00076&plugin=1

Coral Triangle Atlas An online GIS database with data on fisheries, biodiversity, natural resources, and socioeconomics

http://ctatlas.reefbase.org/

ILO International Labour Organisation www.ilo.org ISSF International Seafood Sustainability

Foundation

https://iss- foundation.org/knowledge- tools/databases/proactive-vessel-register/

The Fish Site A website providing analysis and resources for the aquaculture and commercial fishing industries

www.thefishsite.com

Marine Traffic A fishing vessel locating project, which provides real-time information on the

https://www.marinetraffic.co m/

27

movements of vessels and the current location of ships across the globe. Their vessel database includes information on where boats were built, their dimensions, gross tonnage and IMO number.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration -

An agency that provides science-based conservation and management for sustainable fisheries and aquaculture, marine mammals, endangered species, and their habitats.

http://www.noaa.gov/fisheri es

RFMOs Regional Fisheries Management Organisations: International organisations

dedicated to the sustainable management of fishery resources in a particular region of international waters, or of highly migratory species.

CCAMLR Commission for the Conservation of

Antarctic Marine Living Resources

www.ccamlr.org

IATTC Inter American Tropical Tuna Commission www.iattc.org

ICCAT International Commission for the

Conservation for Atlantic Tuna

www.iccat.int

IOTC Indian Ocean Tuna Commision www.iotc.org

NAFO North Atlantic Fishing Organisation www.nafo.int

NEAFC North-East Atlantic Fishing Commission www.neafc.org/ NPFC North Pacific Fishing Commission http://npfc.r-cms.jp/ SEAFO South East Atlantic Fisheries Organisation www.seafo.org SIOFA Southern Indian Ocean Fisheries Agreement www.siofa.org

SPRFMO South Pacific RFMO www.southpacificrfmo.org/

WCPFC Western and Central Pacific Fishing Commission

www.wcpfc.int

4.4.2 Factors Influencing results

To answer Sub-Question 4 regarding potential triggers for the current state of affairs within the industry, I intend to review any results I achieve from the data collection to first reveal any trends that have occurred. Then I shall utilise the growing literature relating to dynamics at sea. As mentioned above in the contextual chapter, it has become a contentious issue, with many arguing about the detrimental effects of globalisation, while others viewing it as a more context based issues, with the

28 argument that there are merely too many fishers and too little fish. I shall be closely looking at the works of Pauly, Robbins & Österblom to discuss this topic. Additionally, I will initiate several interviews in order to ground my research. This will be done by making contact with relevant companies and people of interest in the fishery research community. Finally, I intend to look at current policies governance strategies relating to the fishing industry, including the UNCLOS’ EEZs. I will be looking at whether they place any actors at an economic disadvantage and what the direct results of these policies are.

4.4.3 Interviews

4.4.3.1 Purpose of Interviews

To supplement the quantitative data that was collected to analyse inequalities at sea, I also reached out to various actors within the research field of marine ecosystems and capture fisheries to interview them on their knowledge, work and perspectives on the fishing sector. This allowed me to challenge my own thoughts and hypotheses by observing their points of view. Additionally, it provided me with an inside insight into the data that are currently available on fisheries, research that is currently being, or planned to be, carried out on the industry and the methods and theories associated with them.

4.4.3.2 Interview Structure

I selected potential interviewees based on several criteria including; the relevance of their work to this topic, their perspective on this topic, and their proximity to Amsterdam at the time of researching. However, with the use of technology, such as phone and video calls, this last point was not as relevant as the others. Organisations and individuals working on the collection of data about fish and fisheries, including species, catch, revenue, company and employment were selected to be approached.

Among the organisations contacted were the Index Initiative, the ISSF and NGOs such as Greenpeace. Additionally, any organisations or researchers conducting theoretical work on the fishing industry were also approached. In order to make contact with the selected individuals I went directly to the websites of the potential respondent’s employment and online via Google and LinkedIn for their contact details, then emailed or phoned them as was appropriate. Ultimately, due to availability and time constraints, three individuals were selected to be interviewed.

For the interviews, themselves I designed a flexible interview guide using a semi-structured approach, with a list of general questions composed for each participant. Upon meeting each respondent, I

informed them that none of the information they provide will be shared without their consent, asked if they agreed to the session being recorded and outlined to them that the recordings would be used for the purposes of this research only. Included in each interview was a concise outline of the nature of my topic and my hypotheses followed by questions about their background, current work and perspective on the inequalities within the fishing industry. After the conclusion of each interview the recordings were transcribed and then deleted.