. 2022 Mar 15;70(1):79–96. doi: 10.1007/s00267-022-01607-w

Table 8.

Experts opinions on Governance criteria

Criteria	Industry	Academia
Inclusive governance	Industry advisory (1): “Inclusive governance instead of top-down approaches, leads to writing policies which are more realistic and workable. Co-management provides a shared ownership of the regulations which makes it easier for the fishermen to comply and being accountable for their activities”. Fishing association (1): “Governance and transparency for me go hand in hand. The closer that those being managed are to the managers, preferable co-management, then the more positive response there will be with regard to legitimacy of regulation compliance”. Skipper (1): “We need governance otherwise it will fall down. Rules need to be universalised within reason. Stop the fat cat taking control or there’s no hope for future generations”. Skipper (2): “The system as it is needs overhauling as people making decisions have not a clue about how the job is or how it works”. Producer (1): “All sectors of the fishing industry must be part of the governance process in order for it to be successful”. Fishing association (2): “governance so that everyone is treated equally regardless of where they work”.	Academia (2): “Inclusive governance, increased transparency, and simplicity of measure are likely to lead to better adoption and compliance”.
Revisions in TAC and zonal attachment	Fishing association (1): “Issues such as quota shares, zonal attachments etc should be kept under routine review”. Producer (2): “Revision of zonal attachment should reduce over quota discards as biologically sensible levels of quota will be available for all stocks caught in a mixed fishery. Other criteria are political and their desirability is determined by socio-economic objectives in fisheries policies”. Producer (1): “The way quotas are allocated must be constantly reviewed in order to take full account of change to fish stocks’ spatial distribution”; Fishing association (2): “Quota allocations should be reviewed since it is disproportionate in catch areas. Zonal attachment recognised as there needs to be a balance between maintaining biodiversity and livelihoods in the economy”.	.Academia (2) “TAC quota allocations are often based on outdated data and need be kept under review. Review of zonal attachments can help the function of the fishery but too much change can lead to conflict between nations and regions”. Academia (1): “All four governance criteria are high priority. Quota allocations and zonal attachments belong to the category of technical management measures upon which transparency and governance ultimately depends”.
Transparency and simplicity of measures	Producer (1): “over the years measure have become complicated because they have been subjected to the “sticking plaster” approach whereas the core issues have not been tackled”. Fishing association (2): “Transparency is needed so it makes everything easier to understand”.	Scientific advisory (2): “Transparent and simple measures are important as are inclusive governance. If you can include fishers in the process of making decisions, they will follow the decisions”. Scientific advisory (4): “Transparency increases trust in measures and acceptance of solutions”.

Criteria

Industry

Academia

Inclusive governance

Industry advisory (1): “Inclusive governance instead of top-down approaches, leads to writing policies which are more realistic and workable. Co-management provides a shared ownership of the regulations which makes it easier for the fishermen to comply and being accountable for their activities”.

Fishing association (1): “Governance and transparency for me go hand in hand. The closer that those being managed are to the managers, preferable co-management, then the more positive response there will be with regard to legitimacy of regulation compliance”.

Skipper (1): “We need governance otherwise it will fall down. Rules need to be universalised within reason. Stop the fat cat taking control or there’s no hope for future generations”.

Skipper (2): “The system as it is needs overhauling as people making decisions have not a clue about how the job is or how it works”.

Producer (1): “All sectors of the fishing industry must be part of the governance process in order for it to be successful”.

Fishing association (2): “governance so that everyone is treated equally regardless of where they work”.

Academia (2): “Inclusive governance, increased transparency, and simplicity of measure are likely to lead to better adoption and compliance”.

Revisions in TAC and zonal attachment

Fishing association (1): “Issues such as quota shares, zonal attachments etc should be kept under routine review”.

Producer (2): “Revision of zonal attachment should reduce over quota discards as biologically sensible levels of quota will be available for all stocks caught in a mixed fishery. Other criteria are political and their desirability is determined by socio-economic objectives in fisheries policies”.

Producer (1): “The way quotas are allocated must be constantly reviewed in order to take full account of change to fish stocks’ spatial distribution”;

Fishing association (2): “Quota allocations should be reviewed since it is disproportionate in catch areas. Zonal attachment recognised as there needs to be a balance between maintaining biodiversity and livelihoods in the economy”.

.Academia (2) “TAC quota allocations are often based on outdated data and need be kept under review. Review of zonal attachments can help the function of the fishery but too much change can lead to conflict between nations and regions”.

Academia (1): “All four governance criteria are high priority. Quota allocations and zonal attachments belong to the category of technical management measures upon which transparency and governance ultimately depends”.

Transparency and simplicity of measures

Producer (1): “over the years measure have become complicated because they have been subjected to the “sticking plaster” approach whereas the core issues have not been tackled”.

Fishing association (2): “Transparency is needed so it makes everything easier to understand”.

Scientific advisory (2): “Transparent and simple measures are important as are inclusive governance. If you can include fishers in the process of making decisions, they will follow the decisions”.

Scientific advisory (4): “Transparency increases trust in measures and acceptance of solutions”.