• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.1-17
• /
• 1991

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.1-52
• /
• 1991

This study deals with the evolutional history of the holding and utilization of fisheries resources in Korea. Fisheries resources have the basic characteristics of the density dependent self-regulating renewable and common property resources, Irrational utilization of fisheries resources is mainly due to the unlimited access to the resources. The holding and utilization of fisheries resources in Koryo era was opened to everyone. But it was nationalized in the early Yi Dynasty. The purpose of its nationalization was to provent the paticular powered-man with their monoplized holding and to levy fisheries tax. Eoeop-peop, the first modern fisheries law in Korea, was enacted as a part of the invasion policy of Japan in 1908. With the japanese annexation of Korea in 1910, the Japanese Government established a new institutional system of fisheries as a part of an overall reformation of the institutional for an implementation of the colonial policy. It was very the new enacted Fisheries Law (Gyogyorei). Also the Government enacted compulsorily another new Fisheries Law (Chosen Gyogyorei) with its adjunct laws and regulations revise the institutional system of fisheries on May 1, 1930. After Eoeop-peop enactment, the fisheries resources in Korea could be used only under the license, permission, and statement. After Korea was from Japan in 1945, Korea Government at last enacted the new fisheries law (Susaneop-peop) in 1953. The goal of Susaneop-peop was to achive the general usage and protection of the fisheries resources, and to attain the development and democratization of the fishery in Korea. This law was amended 13 times until 1990. The license fishery have a legal right on the fishery, called a fishery rigt. This right means a right of exclusive occupation and utilization of a unit of the inshore fishing grounds. The main evolutional issues of license fishery are as the following : 1) the foundation of the exclusive usable fishery right(1911, Gyogyorei), 2) the deletion of the settled U9space lift net and settled space sein net fishery, and the expansion of the cooperative fishery-No.1, 2, and 3 type cooperative fishery-(3rd amendment, 1963), 3) the deletion of the No.2 and 3 type cooperative fishery, and the separation of the culturing fishery in No.1 and 2 type culturing fishery (13th amendment, 1990). The effective period of the license fishery was amended as the following : 1) 1908(Eoeop-peop) : within 10 years, renovation system, 2) 1929(Chosen Gyogyorei) : within 10 years, unlimited extension system, 3) 1971. 7th amendment : 10 years, renovation system, 4) 1972. 8th amendment : 10 years, only 1 extension system, 5) 1975. 9th amendment : 5-10 years, only 1 extension system, 6) 1990.13th amendment : 10 years, within 10 years of total extensional years. The priority order of the fishery license was established in 1953 (Susaneop-peop). The amendment of it is as follows : 1) 1953. enactment \circled1 the fishing grounds that the fishery right is extablished 1st order : the existing fishery right man, unlimited renovation 2nd order : the corporate that the regional fisherfolk organized 3rd order : the rest experienced fishermen \circled2 new fishing grounds 1st order : the corporate that the regional fisherfolk organized 2nd order : the rest experienced fishermen 2) 1971. 9th amendment \circled1 the fishing grounds that the fishery right is established 1st order : the existing fishery right man, unlimited renovation 2nd order : the Eochongye that the regional fisherfolk organized 3rd order : the regional fishery cooperative that the regional fisherfolk organized 4th order : the rest experienced fishermen \circled2 new fishing grounds 1st order : the Eochongye that the regional fisherfolk organized 2nd order : the regional fishery cooperative that the regional fisherfolk organized 3rd order : the rest experienced fishermen 3) 1981. 10th amendment \circled1 the inside of No.1 type cooperative fishing grounds 1st order : the Eochongye that the regional fisherfolk organized 2nd order : the regional fishery cooperative that the regional fisherfolk organized 3rd orer : the rest experienced fishermen 4) 1990. 13th amendment \circled1 No.1 type cultural fishery 1st order : the Eochongye that the regional fisherfolk organized 2nd order : the regional fishery cooperative that the regional fisherfolk organized 3rd order : the rest experienced fishermen \circled2 No.2 type cultural and settle fisher : general priority order The effective period of the permission fishery was amended 6 timed. First, it was within 5 years and renovation system (Eoeop-peop). Now it is 5 years and renovation system. The effective period of the statement fishery was amended 4 times. First, it was within 5 years, and then was amended within 3 years(Chonsen Gyogyorei). Now it is 5 years.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.54 no.4
• /
• pp.1-18
• /
• 2023

This study examines the significance and problems of the Fourth Amendment to the Fisheries Act, which went into effect in January 2023. Following the passage of the Aquaculture Industry Development Act, the fourth amendment to the Fisheries Act sought to reform the fisheries legislative framework, while also including significant changes. In particular, a number of new systems for managing fishing gear have been implemented, and local governments now have some autonomy in fisheries management, which has allowed for adjustments to be made to meet the needs of the fishing industry and changes in socioeconomic situations. However, as independent legislation for each fisheries sector continues, the subject of regulation under the Fisheries Act, as well as the Act's position as a basic legal system, has been continuously reduced, overshadowing the Act's objective. As a result, a full-fledged assessment of changing the legislation's name in the future is required, as well as addressing issues such as the lack of difference in the legislative purpose clause and the necessity for further revision of the definition clause. Therefore, any future revisions to the Fisheries Act should aim to overhaul the existing framework, including fishing licenses and permits.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.57 no.4
• /
• pp.401-409
• /
• 2021

In this study, an improvement plan was derived by statistically analyzing the system and current status of tests in Korea and survey of seafarers perception in order to improve the expertise of the Korean fishing vessel officer examination. Recently, about 70% of marine accident occurs from fishing vessels. Therefore, it's necessary to improve the examination to reduce marine accidents. As a result, it was identified that an average of 29,265 applicants have applied over the past four years, and among them, 1,833 people have applied for fishing vessel licenses, accounting for 6.3% of the total. According to the result of explanation and response of 115 people, they responded that practical utilization was low, each operation waters has different requirements and it's necessary to improve the contents of the questions for the specialty subject. In addition, inappropriate questions were found in previous exams. To reduce marine accidents caused by human error and to improve the professionalism of fishing vessel officers, it is necessary to adjust the test criteria and ratio with characteristics of fishing vessels and in the long run, institutional improvements such as the distinction between test subjects and licenses are needed.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.57 no.3
• /
• pp.194-204
• /
• 2021

The research was analyzed the catch data of the five years (2016-2020) for six joint venture company tuna purse seiners in the Atlantic Ocean, with the aim of suggesting improvement measures for responsible and sustainable fishing according to changes of recommendation by International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) on the tropical tunas. In the last five years, the average catch of six tuna purse seiner gradually increased to 7,745 tons, 8,364 tons and 9,053 tons from 2016 to 2018, but decreased to 7,761 tons in 2019 and 6,214 tons in 2020. The reason for the decrease in fishing volume in 2019 and 2020 was the fluctuation of the formation of the cold water zone (22-23℃), and the total ICCAT convention area of FAD closure in January and February due to the expansion of the FAD closure area and poor free school catching during two months period, respectively. The analysis on fishing area showed that the percentage of fishing in the high sea was about 85% although the FAD closure area included the EEZ zone in coastal countries; the rise of the fishing license in coastal countries is also believed to be a factor. In order to overcome such situations and improve catching volume, it will be possible if excellent manpower is secured, school fishing is expanded, and the production of high value-added catch (purse seine special: PS).

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.11 no.1_2
• /
• pp.115-155
• /
• 1980

Nowadays managers of fisheries enterprises and users of accounting information have a considerable interest in the fishery right. The fishery right, which is given by administrative quarters, is referred to exclusive fishing right in a certain coastal fishing ground, and it has been one of the property rights since the turn of the century. The main purpose of this study is to provide an improved accounting method of the fishery right from the side of accounting. To achieve this purpose, legal nature of the fishery right should be understood in the first place, for the fishery right, an intangible asset, is a sort of property right guaranteed by the fisheries laws, According to the basic law in the fisheries "Fisheries Law, " the fishery right is broken down largely into three categories; culture fishing right, set fishing right and common fishing right. The legal characteristics of these fishery rights are as followings: 1. The fishery right is a private right. 2. The fishery right is a property right. 3. The fishery right is a right in rem, and legal provisions pertaining to land are applied to the fishery right with necessary modifications. In addition to the above fishery rights, the Fisheries Law provides some provisions on the so-called entrance right, and those who obtained the right are authorized to access to a certain common fishing right fishing ground where they have been traditionally fishing. In the inland fisheries, the fishery right system similar to that of the coastal fisheries discussed above is adopted in conformity with the Inland Fisheries Developing and Expediting Law. Viewing from an angle of accounting, there are two kinds of additional fishing rights which are dealt as assets. These fishery rights dealt as asset include the license of entry in the so-called permitted fishing which is also called as fishery right in plain language, and tile entrance right obtained abroad. Although these two kinds of rights are not the fishery right from a viewpoint of law, they are regarded as fishing rights in accounting which intends to provide a useful economic information.formation.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.49-74
• /
• 2002

This study examines, from an economic perspective, the reasons for introducing a resource taxe system into the Korean off-shore fisheries and the type of charges that can be introduced. Following a review of the charging systems in other advanced fisheries, we consider the types of charging scheme and some implications for the Korean off-shore fishing industry. Charges could be used for recovering part of fisheries management cost from the industry(i.e. administration, enforcement, research, etc). This can be justified on the grounds that the fishing industry is the main beneficiary of management and that it should therefore bear at least part of the cost involved. It is arguable that publicly-funded management is in effect a subsidy to the industry. Using charges to raise revenue in excess of the cost of management would represent the extraction of a public rent from the fishery resource, but the short-run financial consqquences for the industry would be significant. Results from a qualtitative analysis suggest that while any new charge will have a significant financial impact on the industry in the short run, a landings tax would have a lesser impact on fleet structure in the long run. The study also considers the possibility of a capital gains tax on license sales in order to recover some rent from the industry. Despite any short run-financial consequences, making the fishing industry pay for at least some of the cost of management could benefit the industry as a whole if there were more cooperation between industry and managers as a result. It is acknowledged, however, that there could be disputes over the relative management costs of different sectors of the industry. Even though this study makes few specific recommendations about charging the Korean off-shore fishing industry, it does advise that the issue be reviewed on the basis of the entire Korea fisheries. Finally, the study notes that insufficient data are available on the economic performance of the Korean off-shore fishing vessels and it recommands that a comprehensive system for the collection of costs and earnings data be put in place. It also suggests that MOMAF pay much attention to the permit right market and its transactions.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Fisheries and Ocean Technology
• /
• v.46 no.2
• /
• pp.103-114
• /
• 2010

For an effective management of fisheries resources, we need fisheries informations necessary for the establishment of reasonable fishing effort and TAC distribution. To study the present state of by-catch and discard of gill-net fishery in the East Sea, we carried out fishing research using trammel nets in the coastal sea of Susan-port (Yangyang), Jangho-port (Samcheok) and Hupo-port (Uljin). As a result, a total of catch of Susan was 259,172g and that of Hopo was 577,638g. Thus Catch of Susan was 1.49 times more than that of Hupo considering the number of used fishing gear. And catch of Janho was 7.4 times more than that of Susan considering the number of experiment. Two methods of by-catch analysis in this study were used, one method is standardizing of listed species catching possible in fishing license, another method is regarding catch species under 1% of total catch as by-catch. As a result of by-catch analysis of two method, by-catch rate of Susan was 6.55% and 5.87% respectively, that of Hupo was 44.70% and 5.24% and that of Jangho was 0.96% and 2.31%. Discard rate of fish in Susan, Hupo and Jangho were 1.59%, 3.42%, 2.23% respectively.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.77-96
• /
• 1999

Since the onset of its economic reform and the open door policy in the late 1970s, China's overall economic growth rate has been continuing about 10% per year. The marine sector is not allowed exception, aquatic products increased sharply from 4.66 million MT in 1978 to 36.02 million MT in 1997, and then China is remained the largest producing country in the world aquatic market and her role would be expanded. Korea having a common boundaries to China is subjected unescapably both in domestic and export markets by the influence of the remarkable growth of China's aquatic products. If China were admitted entrance of WTO(World Trade Organization)in the near future, her influence is getting more serious. Well, we are necessary to understand the characteristics of China's aquatic products and to review fishery policies implemented by the China government. This paper is organized into two major parts, the one includes the structural changes of aquatic products, fishing and cultivating in the coast, latent and estimated production in China, and the other includes the main contents of fishery policies and measures of government administration. A characteristic of China's aquatic products is that cultivated production, especially, shellfish outputs continues to rapid increase. The major means of administration are an execution of fishing license system and setting up no-fishing zone and closed season for fishery. China is no longer a marginal player in international economic and world aquatic market. So, we will not only understand China's aquatic conditions and problems, but will also see the usefulness in continuing the cooperative relationship for a long time to come.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.146-167
• /
• 2001

Korea and China are two opposite countries located aside Yellow Sea and co-utilize the East China Sea. The two countries are close together from geological point of view, however, the competitive development of resources was more emphasized than the cooperative development of resources between the two countries because the special policy relationship. Additionally, after the communist government of China was founded in 1949, the political conception between the two countries was quite different. Therefore the establishment of appropriate international fisheries co-operation was impossible, and the international management problems of fisheries resources in Yellow Sea and East China Sea were let alone. UN convention on the Law of the Sea came to force in 1994, Korea and China adopted the exclusive economic zone system in 1996. On the other hand, Fisheries Law in Korea was enacted in 1953 in order to management of fisheries resources, and also China was enacted fisheries law in 1986. The two countries control the fisheries effort through fisheries license system, meanwhile through prohibition fishing area, prohibition fishing period, limitation of net size, and limitation of body length to conserve and manage the fisheries resource. The serious management methods of resource management in the two countries are similar such as the creation of promptly decreased species and those species that have commercial value, discharge of fish seedling stock, settlement of artificial reef and clean of fishing ground. Therefore, the two countries should consider not only the improvement of formal law system, but also how to recover the fisheries resources in circumference water zone and how to improve the efficiency of fisheries resource management. Specially the settlement and management of artificial reef should be chosen in the area that have the highest benefit to two countries, and should establish the common management system of discharge of fish seedling stock. And the two countries should adopt the same criteria through technical management and limitation of net size, limitation of body length, and prohibition area of special fisheries to ensure the highest fisheries benefit of fisherman in the two countries and the highest efficiency of fisheries resource management.