Rebuilding the Northeast Arctic Cod Fisheries ? Economic and Social Issues

• Author: Claire W. Armstrong, Arne Eide, Ola Flaaten, Knut Heen, Inga Wigdahl Kaspersen
• Pages: 11-37

11

Arctic Revie w on Law and Politics, vol. 5 , 1/2014 pp. 11–37. ISSN 1891-6252

[start kap]

Rebuilding the Northeast Arctic Cod

Fisheries – Economic and Social Issues

Claire W. Armstrong, Arne Eide, Ola Flaaten,

Knut Heen and Inga Wigdahl Kaspersen

Claire W. Armstrong, PhD Fisheries Science, Norwegian College of Fishery Science,

University of Tromsø. E-mail: claire.armstrong@uit.no

Arne Eide, PhD Fisheries Science, Nor wegian College of Fishery Science, University of

Tromsø. E-mail: arne.eide@uit.no

Ola Flaaten, PhD Economics, Norwegian College of Fishery Science, University of

Tromsø. E-mail: ola.flaaten@uit.no

Knut Heen, MBA, Nor wegian College of Fishery Science, University of Tromsø. E-mail:

knut.heen@uit.no

Inga Wigdahl Kaspersen, Master Fisheries Science, Norwegian College of Fishery

Science, University of Tromsø. E-mail: inga.w.kaspersen@uit.no

Received February 2013, Accepted May 2013

Abstract: e Northeast Arctic cod (NEA cod) fisheries in Norway are now one

of the richest cod fisheries in the world. In the past the fishery has experienced

several stock declines a nd low economic returns. In th is paper we review manage-

ment approaches applied over 20 years to address one of the most severe crises in

the fishery. Emphasis is on management strategies and the measures carried out

to ensure successful rebui lding of the fishery, both biologically and economic ally.

ough the rebuilding of the Northeast Arctic cod fisheries has in many ways

claire w. armstrong et al.

12

been a success, a multitude of issues connected to social and economic conse-

quences still remain. e lessons learned from this study relate to management,

legitimacy, and economic issues, and may be releva nt to other struggling fisheries.

Key words: Northeast Arctic cod (NEA cod); Fisheries Management, rebuilding

shery

1. Introduction1

e Northeast Arct ic (NEA) cod stock is the largest in t he world, and currently in

very good condition. NEA cod are highly migratory sh, grazing in the Barents

Sea and spawning along the Norwegian coast. From January to April each year

they accumulate in particular around the Lofoten islands, and since the Viking

Age this spawning sher y has been important both for the region and for Norway

as a whole as a source of food and export income. e cod stock moves across na-

tional boundaries between Norway and Russia, who toget her, based on biological

advice, determine tota l allowable catches and their respective share, as well as

those of third countries.2

e Norwegian share of the sher y has been managed using a number of input

controls, such as limiting gear type, mesh size, and number of vessels. Trawlers

were rst made to adhere to a total quota in 1978, while coastal vessels operated

relatively freely until 1989, when the shery was ha lted in April due to an estimated

stock decline. Since then coastal vessels too have been limited to individual and

group quotas. Some transferability of quotas was also introduced.3 Post-1990 the

NEA cod stock and har vests increased rapidly, but combined with low individual

sh growth a nd a rise in cannibalism, yet a nother decline occurred towards the end

of the 90s. is tr iggered new management approaches for rebuilding the shery.4

Like many other sh stocks, the NEA cod stock has uctuated with prolonged

periods of stock decline (see Figure 1). A recent study shows that more than half

the sheries around the world are in decli ne, and that the stocks are in worse con-

dition than previously t hought. But the study also shows that strong mana gement

1. is paper is bas ed on an earlie r report car ried out for OECD. e authors th ank Ingr id

Pettersen and M arius Berntsen for assi stance with data , Bjørn Hersoug and Svein Jento for

inputs on lessons lea rned, and Guri Hjalle n Eriksen , Sverre Johansen a nd Vidar Landmark

for valuable comm ents on an earlier version. Two anonymous rev iewers are also th anked for

useful c omments. Any errors or omissions rem ain the responsibilit y of the authors.

2. A rmstrong and Flaaten 1991: 137; Eide et al. 2012.

3. A rmstrong and Clark 199 7: 206; Hersoug 2 005.

4. For presentation of the se management approaches , see Nakken et a l. 1996; Sandberg e t al. 1998.