 A survey of US halibut IFQ holders: Market participation, attitudes, and impactsCourtney Carothers Marine Policy, 2013, vol. 38, issue C, 515-522 Abstract: This paper presents the results of a survey of US halibut IFQ holders exploring market participation, opinions about IFQs, and perceived fishery and community effects of IFQs. A four-step mail survey was sent to a stratified random sample of 14% of the total population of quota holders, producing a response rate of 46%, or 506 returned surveys. Survey results suggest that while there is a wide diversity of opinions and perceptions of IFQs, there are some predictable trends in the ways that different groups of fishery participants experience and respond to these programs. Gender, income, age, employment and ethnicity are linked to IFQ market behavior. Income, residency, and ethnicity are linked to attitudes about IFQs. A discriminate function analysis indicates that older individuals, individuals who make less money, and indigenous fishermen are more likely to sell quota and less likely to buy quota. Women and those who are primarily employed in fishing are more likely to be buyers of quota rather than sellers. Fishermen who identify as Alaska Native, residents of small remote fishing communities in the Gulf of Alaska, and low-income fishermen show the least support for IFQ management. Quota holders who have high incomes, do not consider their communities to be dependent on fishing, and residents of Community Development Quota communities express the most support for IFQs. Overall, 84% of survey respondents believe that IFQs are changing the fishing lifestyle; 75% state that IFQs are changing the values in fishing; and 75% perceive of IFQs as private property. A majority of surveyed IFQs holders perceive both positive and negative impacts of IFQs to fisheries and to communities. Perceived positive impacts include: improved safety; improved price; market stability; improved management; consumer benefits; environmental benefits; longer fishing season; and professionalization and stability of the fishing fleet. Perceived negative impacts include: limitations on access and barriers to entry; consolidation and job loss; inequities experienced by small boats, rural fishermen, and crew; creation of a privileged class of fishermen; negative environmental impacts; and less local participation. Keywords: Catch shares; Individual fishing quotas (IFQs); Pacific halibut; Alaska; Fishing communities; Human dimensions (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:marpol:v:38:y:2013:i:c:p:515-522 DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2012.08.007 Access Statistics for this article Marine Policy is currently edited by Eddie Brown More articles in Marine Policy from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.