Conflicting perceptions of quota-based systems in Australian fisheries

Individual transferable quotas (ITQs) have been implemented in many fisheries in Australia and elsewhere, primarily in response to stock management challenges. However, unanticipated economic and social outcomes are also apparent, particularly for small-scale fishers. In December 2020, the Australian Senate initiated an Inquiry into the operations of ITQ management systems in Australian fisheries. Submissions were made by individual fishers, industry organisations, fisheries managers, research groups and others, detailing their perceptions on performance in terms of environmental, social and economic outcomes. We summarise the key points raised in the submissions, identifying areas where claims and perceptions were similar or diverse for the different groups. We find that the individual fishers who made submissions were largely negative about the impacts of ITQs in terms of all three outcome domains, whereas industry organisations and others were mostly positive overall. Social issues, particularly ownership of quota by non-fishers (i.e. investors), were flagged by most groups as a problem with the current system. Addressing these concerns with ITQ systems may be difficult. Enshrinement as user rights means that small-scale fisheries and local communities may be disadvantaged in the long-term due to past trade-offs favouring economic and ecological sustainability over social impacts.

Automated summary

Individual transferable quotas (ITQs) have been introduced to address stock management challenges in fisheries, but they also bring about unexpected economic and social outcomes. An inquiry conducted in Australia revealed that individual fishers had negative perceptions of ITQs, while industry organizations and others were mostly positive. Concerns were raised about social issues, particularly the ownership of quotas by non-fishers.