A story of the successful application of a comanagement fishing regime in Suruga Bay, Japan
Paper published as Ch.13, in Nunes P.A.L.D., L.M.Svensson and A. Markandya . (eds.) Handbook
on the economics and management of sustainable oceans, Edward Elgar, 2017 (co-authoredwith Makoto Omori and Nami Okubo, )Ayumi Onuma
Keio University
International workshop on“Improving the Energy-WaterMaterial Nexus towardsustainable future in EastAsia” , Andong University
29 August 2017

1. What is sakura-ebi(a sergestid shrimp)?

2• In 1894, twofishermen from Yuitown happened todiscover sakura-ebi.
• Ever since that
discovery of shrimp
in the deep waters,
sakura-ebi fishinghas thrived in three
districts, Yui,Kanbara, andOoigawa.
3

Biology and fishery of
Sakura-ebi• Sakura-ebi scatter widely
between 200m and 350m near
the bottom on during the day. In
the night, they begin toaggregate and ascend to a depthof about 20-50m.
• Fishing is conducted in the night.
4

In Japan, Fishery Cooperative Association(FCA) plays a central role for coastal fishery• Allocates to individual fishermen thelegal rights to fish certain stocks andresources.
• Responsible for the management andconservation of the fish resources in thejurisdiction.
• Sakura-ebi fishing is conducted by 3 (2today) FCAs (Ooigawa, Yui-port, andKanbara), issuing 120 fishing rights.
5• Fishermen use the paired trawling system, in which
two vessels tow a single net stretched between
them.
• 60 units (120 vessels) are engaged in sakura-ebi
fishing.
• The fishing season is divided into the spring
season and the fall season.

http://yamatosyokuhin.blogspot.ru/2013/10/blog-post.html

6Sakura-ebi is used for various
foods as well-know local brand.

7

Local Processors• All the sakura-ebi are sold to anumber of local processors.
– There are 70 processors today.

• The processors’ revenues depend
heavily on Suruga Bay’s shrimp
catch, though Taiwanese shrimps
are available (discovered in 1988).
8A Scene from the auction

9

Drying Sakura-ebi

10

2. History of fishing in Surugabay

11

Fishing ground of Sakura-ebi isnarrow and limited

12

Operations in this fishery closely
resembled the Darby race until 1960s• All of the fishing vessels often led tointense competition for catches, whichcaused disputes between fishing vessels
and overfishing.
• Processing of the shrimps by sun drying isaffected by the weather, and only a limited
quantity could be processed in one day.
• As a result, when the catch exceeded thatquantity, the auction price dropped
dramatically.
13

The crisis came in 1960s• The catch continued toincrease after 1945,
until 1960s when thecatch dropped
dramatically.
• Fishing grounds werepolluted by effluent
from paper mills.
• There arose a concern
over the resource stock.
14

3. Pool Arrangement (PA)15

Pool Arrangement (PA) was introduced in
1968, in each of the three districts, unified
later in 1977.

• PA is to share equally the total catch
revenues among all vessels, regardlessof catch of each vessels.
• The PA is intended to provide– improved resource management ofsakura-ebi by stopping overfishing– stabilization of sakura-ebi price throughproduction control
16

Present sharing system• After market handling fee (5%), the total
revenue is equally divided among 120 vessels.
Each revenue is then divided among the crewsand vessel owners in a 50/50 ratio.
• In dividing each crew’s share among itsmembers, each skipper and engineer receives
20 percent more than a regular crew member
receives.
– Each vessel has a skipper, an engineer and 4 crews.

17

Fishing rule under PA• The FCAs created a committee named

the Board for the Countermeasures for
the Fishery (BCF).
– Composed of two vessel owners and fiveskippers from each of three FCAs.

• The 21 members of the BCF meet every
day during the fishing season to decideon the details of the fishing activities.
– fishing ground, departure time, operating
hours and target catch sizes.
18

Fishing under PA (cont.)• Owing to the BCF’s directives, the60 units (120 vessels) are often
divided into four parties and only
specified parties are allowed tocast their nets, while the otherparties wait for their turn in thefishery.
19

Contributions of PA• Stopping overfishing by reducing
fishing days.
– from 67-108 days (1955-1964) to 25–41days（2005-2014).

• Maintaining or even increasing total
revenue in spite of less catches.
As a result, the districts was recoveredfrom the economic and resource crisis.
20

Catches and the prices

21Catches and the revenues

22Fishing days and average catch23

4. Significances of PA

24

Adaptive management isimplemented• Fishing resource conservation requires
prompt control of the catch whennecessary.
– Adaptive management• Such control usually requires a hightransaction cost.
• The cost is interpreted as

1. the difficulty of coming to an agreement
among fishermen about the target catch
2. the difficulty of agreement on the allocationof the costs and benefits among fishermen.
25

Ostrom (1990) points out theimportance of transaction Cost
• Transaction cost is crucial for successfulcommunal management of naturalresources.
• Ostrom suggested, transaction costdepends largely on the fairness of
allocating the costs (burdens) andbenefits (profits) among the stakeholders.
– If the members of the community do notregard the allocation as fair, the transaction
cost for the members to arrive an agreement
will be high.
26

Transaction cost under PA• Under the PA, any modification to thecatch rule equitably affects all of thefishermen.
– The allocation of costs and benefits is
identical among vessels.
– No advantage and disadvantage in any
modification• Transaction cost is low enough to modify
the rule in a smooth and prompt way.
27

Solidarity• PA enhanced the solidarity among
fishermen.
• Each fisherman naturally considers more
the interest of the community under PA.
• Before PA, there were many disputes
among fishermen.
– Witnessed by a medical doctor in Yui• Solidarity in turn contributes to loweringtransaction cost.
28

5. FAQs

29

1. Is there any moral hazard forfishermen?
• Not occurred in Suruga Bay, wherestrong relationships among fishermen
are maintained.
• Under such circumstances, afisherman who caught less shrimp
would feel great shame in being
supported under the PA by the otherfishermen who caught more shrimp.
30

2. How were all of the fishing vesselowners able to agree to the PA?
• The strong leadership of one particularvessel owner, Kozo Hara, was verysignificant. He gained a strong
reputation in the community and wasalways able to catch the largest volumeof shrimp.
• Such a trusted person advocated thenecessity of the reform, despite himself
suffering a loss caused by the reform.
• It could convince all of the fishermen toagree to the PA.
31

3. Can the PA be applied to otherspecies?
• Even before PA, the fishermen empiricallyknew the price of sakura-ebi was
negatively related to catch volume,
because they had a monopoly of themarket.
• If the market of a fish species iscompetitive, a reduction in the catch
volume will lead to a decline in total
revenues.
• Not so easy for fishermen to commit to.
32

6. Discussion

33

Sakura-ebi resource seems tobe decreasing again today.
• No one knows the exact reason.
– climate change, deforestation in theupstream of the revers flowing into the bay.

• The catch size is still too large and thenumber of vessels is too many incomparison with the fishery area.
• The need for reform is alreadyrecognized by the fishermen, but
deciding to reduce the scale of thefishing industry is not easy for them.
34Thank you!

35