This paper discusses a range of issues concerned with increasing the policy'relevance of fisheries research. Some important research issues are also considered.
The paper highlights the crucial importance of economic surplus, especially its resource rent dimension, to an understanding of the process of overexploitation and overcapitalisation in fisheries. It is the failure to extract or capitalise resource rent which underlies the overexploited state of many of the world's fish stocks and the overcapitalised state of most of the world's fishing fleets. Moreover, the naturally-limited physical productivity of fish stocks means that increases in the economic and social benefits of fishery exploitation are to be found in increasing the net value, rather than the physical level, of production.
Due to the importance of economic surplus, it is suggested in this paper that both fishery policy and fishery research should be based around it. The contribution that can be expected from research can be measured in terms of economic surplus - research can help with its extraction or capitalisation, it can help to increase its potential and it can help to increase its sustainability. Research could also be used as a way of targeting particular beneficiaries, such as the poor, but research is a rather poor method of achieving non-efficiency objectives, and at the very least other methods of achieving the same result should be considered alongside research.
The paper suggests a number of possible mechanisms to increase the policy impact of fisheries research. First, priority- setting mechanisms need to be reconsidered (or implemented) to improve the allocation of public expenditure. Such mechanisms should focus on the economic surplus potential of different fisheries. In evaluating the expected pay-off to individual pieces of research, focus should again be placed on the expected (or potential) contribution to sustainable economic surplus. Researchers themselves need to be persuaded to evaluate their own research in these terms. However, notwithstanding this argument, some consideration needs to be given to the issue of pure curiosity-driven research (or basic research) since the focus on sustainable economic surplus may tend to favour short-term research with a more certain payoff. There will be a need therefore to assess the expected pay-off in terms of different risks associated with different projects.
There is also a need to improve the interface between policy and research. Perhaps the most important element is to involve policy-makers more fully in the determination of priority setting. However, it would seem useful also to consider establishing a formal institutional arrangement to deal specifically with the interface problem: what have been called here "research liaison units".
The issues of financing and delivery of research need to be separated. There are strong economic arguments in favour of public support for some research, based on its public good nature. However, arguments for public delivery of research tend to be rather weaker and appear to be based on a mixture of objectives.
Careful consideration should be given to the issue of whether public or private, domestic or foreign research institutes should carry out different pieces of research. A related question is what kind of research capacity it is appropriate to develop.
Consideration should also be given to improving the research system itself, including improving the performance of individual research institutes and enhancing co-ordination between their activities, and providing incentives for researchers which are consistent with the objectives of research funders and policy makers.
The paper concludes by discussing some key issues that appear of general relevance in determining research priorities and in linking research to policy. First, it is suggested that, where possible, fishery management systems should be broadly-based, and in particular small-scale fisheries should be brought within the scope of a general management system rather than being considered as a special case. Second, it is argued that equity may be an important issue in the design of sustainable efficient management systems. Third, it is suggested that non-efficiency goals, such as gender, poverty and employment, should be addressed as constraints on the ability to achieve economic surplus, at least where research is concerned.
