Implementation Challenges for Quota Set-Asides: Policy Analysis to Inform Fisheries Management Decision-Making

Abstract

The implementation of catch share programs can have socio-economic and ecological benefits, yet may also change the distribution of those benefits within a fishery or across communities. Quota set-asides can mitigate the impacts of these changes. During the implementation of the West Coast groundfish trawl catch share program, 10% of the quota was set aside to be used toward five goals in the Adaptive Management Program (AMP). This quota was to serve as an insurance policy during the substantial changes that were expected to occur under the new management regime. However, this program has not yet been fully developed, in part due to delayed decision-making and the controversial nature of allocating quota. Here, we examine and score six policy options for the AMP against four criteria: effectiveness, flexibility, political viability, and implementability. While each of the options has strengths and weaknesses, those that ranked highly include allocating quota pounds (QP) via the status quo and via auction. Our results highlight the drawbacks of delaying contentious decisions, where uncertainty for participants can constrain operational decisions and subsequent economic gains. We demonstrate the utility of this decision-making framework for evaluating tradeoffs between alternatives, especially for a program with multiple, competing objectives.