Context

In this section, we briefly introduce the history and current state-of-play for commercial fishing and ocean research, highlight key work that we build upon, outline motivations for improving sustainability, and describe the guiding frameworks and exemplars for this project. We also note out-of-scope topics.

Recreational fishing including catch reporting

Recreational fishing is a popular activity in Aotearoa New Zealand with an estimated 700,000 people going fishing in a given year. An estimated 7 million individual finfish and 3.9 million individuals of other marine species were caught by recreational fishers in 2017-2018.[2] Recreational fishing is significant economically, with one report estimating that recreational fishers spend approximately $1 billion a year.[3]

The New Zealand Marine Research Foundation estimates that 6% of all landed catch is taken by recreational fishers.[4] However, the recreational take is more significant for certain species, such as snapper/tāmure,[5] the largest recreational fishery, with recreational fishers responsible for over 40% of total catch across Aotearoa New Zealand.[6] In some areas, the recreational catch exceeds the commercial catch – for example, in Tīkapa Moana the Hauraki Gulf, recreational catches of snapper, kahawai[7] and kingfish/haku[8] exceed commercial takes.[9]

Recreational fishing is restricted by rules (such as daily catch limits and size limits) depending on area and species. In Aotearoa New Zealand, recreational fishing includes both amateur fishers and charter fishing vessels. While the per person catch limits apply to each passenger on a charter vessel, the number of passengers can be such that the vessel’s take could exceed the catch of a smaller commercial vessel (as has been anecdotally reported). While recreational fishing is a contributor to overall catch volumes, it is not a focus of this project. We note that improving our estimates of recreational catch and incidental fishing mortality will be essential for enhancing the sustainability of our fisheries, as well as confronting the challenge of shared fisheries.

Customary fishing (non-commercial)

Customary fisheries are a right of tangata whenua. They include traditional and customary practices and customary non-commercial food gathering. Customary fishing takes place in rohe moana (defined customary fishing areas). Customary fishing rights are guaranteed under the Treaty of Waitangi – and protected by the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992 and 1992 Deed of Settlement.

Customary fisheries are significant although volumes of catch are not readily available. Over 200 kaitiaki have been appointed by tangata whenua to manage customary food gathering, and there are over 40 mātaitai reserves and 10 taiāpure (where tangata whenua can undertake management of fisheries resources). As with recreational fishing, customary fishing is another fisheries activity that sits outside the QMS and commercial fisheries. While recommendations in relation to customary fishing are out of scope, customary practices and knowledge are discussed.

Pā kahawai (trolling lure), Aotearoa New Zealand 1750-1850. Oldman Collection, gift of the New Zealand Government 1992. Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa.

In the years following the introduction of the QMS, some stocks increased[19] although some others declined, but overall, the QMS was acknowledged to be a big step forward as stocks were generally maintained, and the system was recognised and imitated internationally.[20, 21] The introduction of the Fisheries Act in 1996 occurred as a part of wider resource management law reform and further defined the use of sustainability in fisheries management.

Meanwhile, Māori fishing rights (both commercial and customary) had been severely eroded since 1840. The Treaty of Waitangi recognises the rights of Māori to their natural and cultural resources, including fisheries. But these rights were not realised until the Māori fisheries settlement was implemented under the Māori Fisheries Act 1989 and the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992. The settlement acknowledged the forced accommodation between the Treaty and the QMS by mutual consent between Māori and the Crown.

Since the settlement, the Māori seafood sector has experienced significant growth.[22] Iwi and Māori businesses comprise a significant proportion of the commercial fisheries and aquaculture sector, owning 27% of quota.[23, 24]

Our fisheries management is led by government agency Fisheries New Zealand, part of the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI). We continue to use the QMS within the Fisheries Act 1996 as part of a fisheries management programme that draws on an increasingly broad evidence base to inform management. A significant amount of the fisheries research and data collection undertaken is cost recovered from quota owners.

A report in 2017 by The Nature Conservancy found that Aotearoa New Zealand’s QMS has consistently ranked well against a range of indicators. However, the report noted that we do not routinely report on the ecosystem impacts of fishing, and there are many stocks we know little about.

We continue to learn about the health of our marine environment, the ecosystems within it, and the impacts of commercial fishing. This growing body of knowledge could be a driving force for adapting the way we manage fisheries to ensure their sustainability. But in practice, capturing this information can be expensive and challenging. It is thus a body of knowledge that remains incomplete, meaning many decisions are inevitably made without a comprehensive evidence base, or decisions are not made at all. Combined with the many diverse and strongly held views, this creates an environment in which fisheries management approaches are highly contested, both globally and in Aotearoa New Zealand.[26–31]

As well as the range of stakeholders within the commercial fishing industry, many others have an interest in the health of our shared marine environment. This includes the recreational and customary fishers, the general public, researchers, government representatives, tourism operators, those interested in mining the seabed, environmental groups, iwi, community groups and future generations.

Tensions between commercial and environmental priorities often surface, but new multi-stakeholder approaches show that, with a shared vision and goal, people can come together to address complex issues in our marine environment. Currently, these are relatively few and covering small areas, but they provide inspiration for a way forward.

There is a significant opportunity for innovative technology, new scientific approaches, and more extensive data collection and use, to better inform our fisheries management as we strive for more sustainable practices. This report examines these in detail.

Choosing how we focus our data collection and research efforts is critically important. We need to have the right knowledge to progress towards a more sustainable fishing future and to measure whether we are moving in the right direction – while accepting that decisions need to be made in the absence of complete information.

Our marine environment 2019 from the Ministry for the Environment and Stats NZ

Stock assessments apply to individual fish stocks so they do not account for interactions between different stocks or interactions with the broader marine environment.”

– Our marine environment 2019, Ministry for the Environment and Stats NZ.

Although fisheries decisions can consider direct environmental interactions, e.g. with associated or dependent species, biodiversity or habitats of particular significance to fisheries (if information is available), this is often not the case.

Focusing Aotearoa New Zealand’s environmental reporting system by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (PCE)

Current fisheries management systems have a single-species focus and rarely take into account the effects of fishing on the wider ecosystem. For example, ecosystem changes due to fishing and climate change are rarely explicitly included in the single-species fisheries management carried out in New Zealand.”

– Focusing Aotearoa New Zealand’s environmental reporting system, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment.

While a focus on assessment of individual stocks does not necessarily mean that wider ecosystem effects are not being taken into account (e.g. through other sections of the Fisheries Act 1996), it similarly does not provide assurance that they are. There is very little explicit, relevant and useable information about ecosystem changes available to fisheries managers beyond what is monitored by fisheries stock assessments.

Te Mana o te Taiao – Aotearoa New Zealand Biodiversity Strategy 2020 by the Department of Conservation

The Department of Conservation also recently published Te Mana o te Taiao – Aotearoa New Biodiversity Strategy 2020. The document provides a strategic direction for the protection, restoration and sustainable use of biodiversity, particularly Indigenous biodiversity, in Aotearoa New Zealand. The strategy and planned approach to implementation are highly relevant to management of our fisheries and marine environment.

Papatūānuku (Earth mother), Ranginui (sky father) and their offspring are in serious trouble, and we urgently need to do a better job of looking after them. The state of nature is a legacy that we leave for future generations.”

– Te Mana o te Taiao 2020, Department of Conservation.

Fisheries Change Programme by Fisheries New Zealand

A regulatory work programme called the Fisheries Change Programme is underway by Fisheries New Zealand to enhance and update the fisheries management system, in response to a review by Fisheries New Zealand in 2015. The successful implementation of electronic reporting across the commercial fishing sector produces far more information than its paper-based predecessor. The opportunity, or challenge, is how to make fullest use of this data in the timeliest way possible. This opportunity provides a potentially greatly expanded role for scientific input into fisheries management. Allocative choices should be specific about the basis for decision making, whether this is based on scientific evidence or on other considerations.

Our report seeks to build on this recent work and provide an evidence base to support policy objectives from the Fisheries Change Programme and other workstreams, as well as suggesting wider recommendations for consideration, prioritisation and implementation as appropriate.

The Fisheries Settlement 1992 is seen as having restored Māori commercial fishing rights. Prior to the settlement, the rights had been widely accepted, but never defined in law. In 1987, court action and the ensuing passing of the Māori Fisheries Act 1989 provided an interim settlement whereby 10% of quota species in the QMS at the time were to be bought back by the Crown and transferred to Māori over three years. The Fisheries Settlement 1992 subsequently provided Māori with funds to buy a 50% share of Sealord, including a large share of quota. Government also promised that 20% of any future quota would be allocated to Māori. This reconfigured the economic landscape of Aotearoa New Zealand’s fishing industry. Māori established commercial enterprises, such as Aotearoa Fisheries Limited (trading as Moana New Zealand), which is the sole or joint shareholder of several Aotearoa New Zealand commercial fishing companies. A trust, Te Ohu Kaimoana, was established to advance and advocate for Māori fisheries. Te Ohu Kaimoana and various iwi charitable organisations deliver economic and social benefits to some Māori. In 2011 the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 was enacted, which provides for the special status of the common marine and coastal area as an area that is incapable of ownership.

The 1992 Fisheries Settlement is seen as having restored Māori commercial fishing rights. Prior to the settlement the rights had been widely accepted, but never defined in law.

As part of the Settlement, Māori endorsed the QMS. The Settlement also restored customary fishing rights, ensured Māori would be appointed to statutory fishing bodies, and agreed to regulate Māori self-management of fishing for communal subsistence and cultural purposes.

However, there are ongoing issues – for example, around the resolution of historic quota management issues, which are known colloquially as ‘28N rights’.[46–48] ‘28N rights’ give holders preferential rights where there are increases in total allowable commercial catch (TACC), which can result in those without these rights (including iwi) having their share of TACC proportionately decreased.[49] These unresolved issues continue to hinder current fisheries management.

As per the Treaty, Māori have perpetual rights to fish and to exert rangatiratanga over their fisheries – maintaining the sustainability of fisheries and their surrounding environment. Sustainability of the fisheries resource is a pillar of these agreements and, to uphold the fundamental rights of Māori, there needs to be a sustainable resource for future generations to fish. Maintaining environmental and ecosystem health in our oceans to meet these obligations is paramount. These rights also mean that the way we achieve sustainable fisheries must uphold the terms of the Fisheries Settlement 1992, unless this is changed by mutual consent of Māori and the Crown. Commentators have highlighted the tensions inherent between kaitiakitanga principles and commercial rights. Dame Anne Salmond comments, “Once again, modernist ideas of ‘property’ and profit have entangled in complex ways with mana and ancestral tikanga relating to the ocean”.[50]

‘Safety first’ sign onboard the RV Tangaroa.

These findings have been used to inform a fisher wellbeing strategy to improve wellbeing and resilience across the sector. The Fisher Wellbeing Programme has five objectives:

1. Identify key wellbeing drivers, challenges and opportunities for fishers in New Zealand.
2. Facilitate and build cross-sector commitments to fisher wellbeing.
3. Increase wellbeing support capacity of frontline Fisheries New Zealand staff.
4. Increase regional wellbeing support for fishers.
5. Increase resilience of fishers, their whānau and fishing communities.

The timeframe to achieve these outputs is by June 2023, at which point governance of the support network is likely to shift from Fisheries New Zealand to the industry.

At the same time there has been an increase in participation by small-scale fishers in the inshore fishery, apparently driven by the introduction of the ACE.[64] Currently small-scale ACE fishers make up around 80% of the inshore fleet.[61] Financially it can be difficult for independent fishers to compete against companies with vertical integration that own large amounts of quota. That said, these companies do provide an option for independent fishers to operate under an owner-operator model which provides infrastructure and a route to market that may not otherwise be accessible. There are costs and benefits associated with every model of ownership or use.

Roughly 15 years after the QMS was established, over 3,000 predominantly small-scale fishers had exited the industry, largely due to compliance costs, uncertainty about future QMS policy and the high cost of quota.

Fisheries contribute to the wellbeing of coastal communities. The introduction of the QMS shifted the fisher ecosystem towards large-scale operators, based in larger ports, resulting in a loss of local employment in fisheries.[65] This change within the sector came with both positive and negative outcomes. The Faroe Islands provide an example of a fisheries management system that has prioritised social sustainability as highly as ecological and economic sustainability. The wellbeing of our commercial fisheries sector is an important aspect of sustainability that should be considered during fisheries management decisions.

Managing health and safety is important in a risky environment

In 2017, Maritime New Zealand published survey results on health and safety in the commercial fishing sector from perspectives of both workers and employers. Commercial fishing is a high-risk sector, along with other sectors such as agriculture, construction, manufacturing and forestry.

There are relatively high numbers of workers who say that they behave in risky ways, particularly when it comes to working when overtired or when sick or injured.

Over the last ten years there have been 13 work-related fatalities in the fishing sector. The majority have occurred within the ‘fish trawling, seining and netting’ industry categorisation and almost half were classified as a drowning. This compares to 50 work-related fatalities in the forestry sector over the same time period, which has a smaller workforce than fisheries. Worldwide, the number of work-related fatalities among fishers is likely in the thousands, but a precise estimate is difficult to pin down due to patchy data. In the UK, there were 79 work-related fatalities in the fishing industry over the ten-year period from 2008 to 2018.

Health and safety is increasing as a priority for employers. More are saying that formal audits at regular intervals are part of their normal business and that everyone in the business values ongoing improvements.[66] These changes will help to ensure the health and safety of the fisheries workforce.

There is also growing recognition of the mental health challenges faced by fishers globally, although this has not received as much attention as physical health.[60] A 2015 study from Australia found that Australian fishers exhibit poor mental health, including depression, anxiety and self-harm.[67] This was linked to the inherent resource dependence of fishing and uncertainty associated with top-down policy changes, issues also faced in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Approaches that make fishing more humane and sustainable, and ways to share that information easily and transparently with customers, will help to maintain demand for wild-caught fisheries from Aotearoa New Zealand. These changing demands provide impetus to innovate to make fishing more humane and sustainable.

The current fisheries management regime has mechanisms that can enable an ecosystem approach. Aotearoa New Zealand has already incorporated some aspects of ecosystem-based approaches into fisheries management alongside the QMS,[73] often through the use of fisheries plans. For example, the Draft National Inshore Finfish Fisheries Plan, released for consultation in November 2019, suggests certain ecosystem approaches to fisheries management, such as integrating management of multiple stocks caught within a fishery, that could be applied in future. However, this plan is yet to be implemented.

The New Zealand Government has committed to taking an ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management that integrates sustainable harvesting with wider biodiversity considerations.[74] Local research to foster ecosystem thinking in Aotearoa New Zealand’s fisheries management system is underway as part of Sustainable Seas (see case study), but more work is needed to integrate the research and policy intent with community knowledge, and to translate lofty goals to day-to-day decision making in the fisheries management system and practice in our oceans.

Perhaps the fundamental challenge faced by all those focused on a sustainable fishing goal is to translate an incomplete but increasingly sophisticated understanding of the complex interactions and cumulative pressures on our ecosystems into effective and actionable policies and regulations, along with robust indicators to monitor progress. This ambitious goal is likely to take some time to achieve and demands strong leadership by the fisheries management agency, and a connected community of stakeholders with a shared vision of the future. However, it offers an opportunity to be world leaders in managing future commercial fisheries.

This report aims to address this challenge by focusing on how we can fill data gaps, translate data into knowledge, and draw on new innovations to inspire the development of a fisheries management system within the Fisheries Act 1996 that enables more sustainable commercial fishing practices.

He Waka-Taurua framework for recognising multiple worldviews to achieve holistic co-governance/co-management. Image from [79]. Click to enlarge.

Recent research has explored the Māori perspective of fisheries management and sought to effectively integrate te ao Māori and western science for true collaboration and co-governance. The Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge has published work in this area while also embracing the partnership model in practice.[77, 79]

One outcome of these efforts is the He Waka-Taurua model, a metaphorical framework for marine co-management.[79] A waka-taurua consists of two waka temporarily lashed together to achieve a common purpose (see figure above).

• Cultural Health Index (CHI)[85]: A Māori-led and developed tool to monitor change in a specific environment based on three components: 1) whether the site has traditional significance to tangata whenua (yes/no); 2) a qualitative assessment of the mahinga kai (natural resources) of the site; 3) a stream health index made up of qualitative ordinal rankings. The tool is adaptable for different environmental domains.
• Te ao Māori framework for environmental reporting[86]: This scoping document includes a series of measures for environmental monitoring that align with te ao Māori values and would give full voice to the Māori worldview for reporting on environmental impacts.

Successful partnerships of Indigenous and western knowledge have occurred both here in Aotearoa New Zealand and overseas. Some examples are outlined below. Effective co-governance examples have several characteristics in common: key among these is that Indigenous people and their perspectives must be included at the very beginning of a programme or initiative. There is a power imbalance between western and Indigenous worldviews, and Māori must have rangatiratanga or power within co-governance frameworks for meaningful implementation of te ao Māori principles.[22,87]

Aotearoa New Zealand examples:

• Sea Change – Tai Timu Tai Pari brought together stakeholders across Tīkapa Moana the Hauraki Gulf to develop a marine spatial plan, aiming to restore the mauri of the Gulf.[88] This was a complex undertaking with a wide array of iwi, enterprises and voices contributing to the development of the plan over four years and not without tensions. The Māori worldview was incorporated into the eventual spatial plan. The Government appointed a Ministerial Advisory Committee to help shape their response to the conservation and fisheries related proposals in the spatial plan, which is pending (see case study ‘Managing land-based impacts through a multi-sector marine spatial plan’).
• The community group Kaikōura Coastal Marine Guardians (Te Korowai) developed a management strategy for the Kaikōura marine environment in 2012.[79] This was built around four pillars, including ‘sustaining customary practices’, which aimed to restore and maintain Ngātī Kurī’s traditional fishing areas, tikanga and mātauranga. The strategy was enacted through the Kaikōura (Te Tai ō Marokura) Marine Management Act 2014. This legislation also made the Kaikōura Marine Guardians a statutory body, appointed by Ministers to advise on issues affecting the Kaikōura marine environment, but required a specific act of Parliament (see case study ‘Te Korowai o te tai ō Marokura in Kaikōura shows how regional responsibility can streamline fisheries management’).
• He korowai o Matainaka – in this project, traditional ecological knowledge was merged with scientific understanding and engaged the mana whenua Kāti Hauirapa to improve management of īnaka/whitebait[89] spawning and mahika kai sites along the Waikōuaiti River in Otago.[90] “What really counts in an ever changing world is the re-engagement between people and the environment that will reinstate mātauraka[91] Māori processes into contemporary mahika kai management relationships and practices… the knowledge will be combined with science to ensure the most beneficial adjustments are made for efficient and sustainable future environmental management.”
• The Moana Project brings together iwi, Māori academics and other researchers, and the seafood sector to develop sensors and knowledge exchange platforms to gather oceanographic data.[92] It is envisaged that data collected will feed into models and lead to more efficient and informed forecasting and decision making (see case study ‘The Moana Project – arming vessels with sensors to help validate ocean models’).

What really counts in an ever changing world is the re-engagement between people and the environment that will reinstate mātauraka Māori processes into contemporary mahika kai management relationships and practices… the knowledge will be combined with science to ensure the most beneficial adjustments are made for efficient and sustainable future environmental management.”

Fresh catch on the dock in Seward, Alaska. Image credit: Arthur T. LaBar/Flickr (CC BY-NC 2.0).

Australia

In Australia, there are eight different jurisdictions each with their own fisheries legislation.[108] The Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) works with state/territory government agencies to meet sustainability objectives. Many fisheries in Australia are ITQ-based, mostly single-species but some multi-species fisheries.[109] Some fisheries activities are defined as ‘threatening processes’ under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. These include ‘incidental catch (or bycatch) of seabirds during oceanic longline fishing operations’, ‘incidental catch (or bycatch) of sea turtle during coastal otter-trawling operations within Australian waters north of 28 degrees south’, and ‘injury and fatality to vertebrate marine life caused by ingestion of, or entanglement in, harmful marine debris’. Australia has established spatial closures for gillnet fisheries in certain areas to protect Australian sea lions[110] in their habitat and breeding colonies. There is also a gillnet dolphin mitigation strategy aiming to empower fishers using gillnets to avoid and mitigate dolphin interactions.

Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge

In Aotearoa New Zealand, ‘creating value from a blue economy’ is one of the core research themes for the Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge. This theme is underpinned by four key ideas:

1. Societies will rely on the oceans for future food, energy and economic security.
2. Oceans offer economic development potential.
3. Realising this potential requires investment in science and technology.
4. We must transition to sustainable growth.[115]

Research emerging from this theme has mapped Aotearoa New Zealand’s growing marine economy, visualised the complex interconnections and feedback loops inherent in marine enterprises, and envisaged new categories to help us rethink management of the economy.[118–120]

An economic analysis commissioned by Sustainable Seas estimated that ‘blue economy’ activities contribute around 3% to our GDP and employ around 70,000 people (3.3% of total employment).[121] The analysis showed that tourism was growing (pre-COVID-19), offshore oil and gas exploration was declining, while aquaculture was poised for growth.

As the ‘blue economy’ concept has originated overseas, adapting it for the Aotearoa New Zealand context requires some work. For example, an Indigenous worldview is not explicit within most blue economy frameworks, but here in Aotearoa New Zealand it makes sense to incorporate a te ao Māori lens (see Te ao Māori).[44] Sustainable Seas has identified other unique Aotearoa New Zealand drivers for a blue economy, including our export market, green premiums, and capital/wellbeing approaches to central and local government.[115] Use of this concept more widely would require a definition of blue carbon for use in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Blue Economy Cooperative Research Centre

An Australia-based initiative, the Blue Economy Cooperative Research Centre aims to bring together stakeholders in the seafood, aquaculture, marine renewable energy and offshore engineering sectors to address the challenges of offshore food and energy production. Several Aotearoa New Zealand-based organisations are partners of the Blue Economy Cooperative Research Centre, including New Zealand King Salmon, AUT, Plant & Food Research, Cawthron Institute and the University of Auckland.

But there are also limitations: a catalogue of single-species measures alone does not capture the full picture (see section on commercial fisheries in 2020). First of all, there may be large uncertainties associated with stock assessments, especially for small fisheries where data gathering is poorly resourced or even with data the species is hard to assess. Beyond this, complex interactions are at play within an ecosystem. Long-term resilience of stocks to heavy fishing might require a more complete set of data which reflects the capacity of the marine environment to sustain the fisheries stock. Looking at a collection of single species as a measure for ecosystem health is limited. It is analogous to monitoring spending as a measure for financial health, without looking at debt. We need to measure and monitor more parts of the ecosystem and the interactions among them, across different trophic levels, to truly understand ecosystem health and mitigate the risk of ecosystem collapse. An explicit ecosystem approach builds on the best practice of experienced fishers who understand their environment after many years of observation. We found examples where this works well and include them to inspire more widespread adoption of these practices.

Incorporating measures of ecosystem health may lead regulators down an EAFM path. EAFM can be defined in many different ways.[122, 123] Fisheries New Zealand has described it as an “integrated approach to managing the competing values and uses of fisheries resources while maintaining the ecosystems that support them”.[124] Challenges in implementing EAFM include having robust methods for recognising when an ecosystem is adversely impacted, understanding direct and indirect effects of fishing one species on other ecosystem components, reconciling multiple fisheries operating under different management systems, and identifying indicators that can deliver useful information for these management systems.[125] There are no ‘off-the-shelf’ measures to reassure regulators that ecosystems are well managed, and local knowledge will be vital in translating these general principles into action.