首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>other >Euros vs. Yuan: Comparing European and Chinese Fishing Access in West Africa
【2h】

Euros vs. Yuan: Comparing European and Chinese Fishing Access in West Africa

机译:欧元兑人民币:比较欧洲和中国在西非的捕鱼渠道

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

We compare the performance of European Union (EU) and Chinese fisheries access agreements with West African countries in terms of illegal and unreported fishing, economic equity, and patterns of exploitation. Bottom-up re-estimations of catch reveal that the EU (1.6 million t•year-1) and China (2.3 million t•year-1) report only 29% and 8%, respectively, of their estimated total catches (including estimated discards whenever possible) from West African countries between 2000 and 2010. EU catches are declining, while Chinese catches are increasing and are yet to reach the historic maximum level of EU catches (3 million t•year-1 on average in the 1970s-1980s). The monetary value of EU fishing agreements, correlated in theory with reported catches, is straightforward to access, in contrast to Chinese agreements. However, once quantified, the value of Chinese agreements is readily traceable within the African economy through the different projects they directly cover, in contrast to the funds disbursed [to host governments] by the EU. Overall, China provides resources equivalent to about 4% of the ex-vessel value [value at landing] of the catch taken by Chinese distant-water fleets from West African waters, while the EU pays 8%. We address the difficulties of separating fees directly related to fishing from other economic or political motivations for Chinese fees, which could introduce a bias to the present findings as this operation is not performed for EU access fees officially related to fishing. Our study reveals that the EU and China perform similarly in terms of illegal fishing, patterns of exploitation and sustainability of resource use, while under-reporting by the EU increases and that by China decreases. The EU agreements provide, in theory, room for improving scientific research, monitoring and surveillance, suggesting a better performance than for Chinese agreements, but the end-use of the EU funds are more difficult, and sometime impossible to ascertain.
机译:我们从非法和未报告的捕鱼,经济公平和剥削方式方面比较了欧盟和中国与西非国家的渔业准入协议的执行情况。对产量的自下而上重新估计显示,欧盟(160万吨•年 -1 )和中国(230万吨•年 -1 )仅报告了29%分别占2000年至2010年来自西非国家的估计总捕捞量(包括可能的丢弃物估计数)的8%。 1970年代至1980年代平均为300万吨•年 -1 。与中国的协议相比,欧盟捕捞协议的货币价值在理论上与报告的捕捞量有关,因此很容易获得。但是,一旦量化,中国协议的价值就可以通过它们直接涵盖的不同项目在非洲经济内部追溯,这与欧盟向[东道国政府]支付的资金形成了鲜明对比。总体而言,中国提供的资源约占中国远洋船队从西非水域获取的捕捞量的船上价值(着陆值)的4%,而欧盟则支付8%。我们解决了将与捕鱼直接相关的费用与其他经济或政治动机中的中国收费分开的困难,这可能会给目前的调查结果造成偏见,因为此操作并未针对与捕鱼相关的欧盟准入费进行。我们的研究表明,在非法捕捞,开采方式和资源利用的可持续性方面,欧盟和中国的表现相似,而欧盟的漏报率却在增加,而中国的漏报率却在下降。从理论上讲,欧盟协定为改进科学研究,监测和监视提供了空间,这表明与中国协定相比,该协定的执行情况更好,但欧盟资金的最终用途更为困难,有时无法确定。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号