Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.13000/JFMSE.2014.26.1.108

A Study on the System Reorganization for Adoption of ITQs in Korea - Focusing on comparison with South Korea and Newzealand -  

Lee, Jong-Gun (Pukyong National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education / v.26, no.1, 2014 , pp. 108-125 More about this Journal
Abstract
Although South Korea had managed fishery resources based on elements included in the fishery like fisheries licence, after agreeing on UN Convention on the law in 1999, it became inevitable to adopt TAC that regulates yield. Therefore, currently operating an indecisive system by maintaining the fisheries license system while applying TAC only to some fisheries. However, it became imperative to find ways to improve the current system as it dose not solve problems such as decrease of fishery resources and catch per unit effort, excessive input of fishing boats, rising costs for fishery management, and shortage of fishery population. For those reasons, it is time to review ITQs, which is recognized globally as the most innovative fisheries management system. To adopt the ITQs, it seems necessary to compare how the fisheries act of New Zealand which is currently most successfully operated and Fisheries Resources Management Act of Korea. To do so, in this study, the provisions on TAC of the two countries are compared to analyze the institutional necessity for Korea to adopt ITQs. The following conclusions have been made : First, it will be necessary to gradually expand the species and fisheries for which TAC is enforced, and accumulate correct data on fisheries resources. Second, while forcing traders to obtain license as well, the species and quantity of traded fisheries must be reported separately for cross-checking with the catch reported by the fisheries. Third, the number of observers must be increased and report the species and quantity of the catch to person in charge at the relevant port, and observers must check the report before disembarkation. Fourth, penalty for violating Fisheries resources management act must be enhanced, especially regarding false report of fishery activities and catch.
Keywords
ITQ; TAC; Fisheries act; Fisheries resources management act;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Frank Asche et al.(2008). Fisher's behaviour with individual vessel quotas-Over-capacity and potential rent Five case studies, Marine Policy, Vol. 32, 921.
2 Grafton Quentin R(1996). "Individual transferable quotas : theory and practice", Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 10-11.
3 Carl Safina(1998). Where have all the fishes gone?, http:/www.seaweb,org/Safina3.html.
4 Carlos Chavez et al.(2008). ITQs under illegal fishing : An application to the red shimp fishery in Chile, Marine Policy Vol. 32, 570.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Casey, Keith E. et al(1995). "The Effects of Individual Vessel Quotas in the British Columbia Halibut Fishery", Marine Resource Economics< Vol. 10, 228.
6 Cindy Chu(2009). Thirty years later : the global growth of ITQs and their influence on stock status in marine fisheries, Fish and Fisheries, 220-223.
7 Ian N. Clark et al.(1988). Development and Implementation of New Zealand's ITQ Management System, Marine Resource Economics, Vol. 5, pp. 329-330.
8 Korea Fisheries Management Act 2013.
9 Lee jong-gun(1999). A study on the Fisheries Control System of the Fisheries Act of Korea, Department of Maritime Law, The Graduate School of Korea Maritime Uni. P. 7, 19.
10 Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries(2012). A study on the introduction ITQs in Korea. A research paper. 80-113.
11 Molonet, D.G et al.(1979). Quantitative rights as an instrument for regulation of commercial fisheries, Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Vol.36, 859.   DOI
12 R. Cornor(2012). Initial allocation of Individual Transferable Quota in New Zealand Fisheries, FAO Corporate document repository, Centre for Resource & Environmental Studies Australian National Uni., 2012, 1.
13 Nam Jong-Oh(2008). A Study on the Enforcement of ITQ System in Korea : Based on the Benefit Analysis of New Zealand, Depart of Resource Economics, Graduate School, Pukyong National Uni. 17.
14 New Zealand Fisheries Act 1996(Reprint as at 18 April 2012).
15 Ragnar Arnason(2009). Conflicting uses of marine resources : can ITQs promote an efficient solution, The australian journal of Agricultural & Resource Economics, Vol.53, 151.
16 Ryu, Jeong Gon et al.(2004). " A study on the Research on foundation for Enforcement of ITQs in Korea, Korea Maritime Institute, 41.
17 Trevor A. Branch, How do individual transferable quotas affect marine ecosystems?, Fish and Fisheries, Vol. 10, 47.