Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend a policy which could be introduced to limit the unsustainable use of fisheries around the world. [10]
The following thoughts are based on my reflections after grading a class of essays. The exam paper was Paper 3, November 2023, which asked
Using the text/data provided and your knowledge of economics, recommend a policy which could be introduced to limit the unsustainable use of fisheries around the world. [10]
1. Moving Beyond Explanation to Justification
Main Issue: Many essays merely explained policies rather than providing a strong justification for why a specific policy would be most effective in the global fisheries context.
Why This Matters: The command term "recommend" requires you to present an advisable course of action with appropriate supporting evidence. This means not just explaining how a policy works, but critically evaluating why it is the best solution for this specific situation.
Examples to Illustrate:
Weak Approach: "Transferable quotas should be implemented to limit overfishing. This policy would work because fishermen would only be allowed to catch a certain amount of fish. New Zealand has used this policy."
This merely explains what the policy is without justifying why it's appropriate for the global context or why it would work effectively.
Stronger Approach: "I recommend implementing transferable quotas globally because this market-based approach directly addresses the core problem of overexploitation while accounting for economic efficiency. As demonstrated by New Zealand's success mentioned in the text, this policy creates direct incentives for sustainable fishing practices. The evidence from Canada's sea scallop fishery further demonstrates the policy's versatility across different marine ecosystems. Transferable quotas are particularly appropriate for addressing international fishery challenges because they establish clear property rights that incentivize long-term resource management, addressing the 'tragedy of the commons' problem explained earlier. Furthermore, the text states that 'if the tax is too high it may lead to problems, such as the under-declaring of the size of the catch,' but transferable quotas create a different incentive structure that encourages accurate reporting since the quota itself becomes a valuable asset."
2. Developing Balanced Inference and Original Analysis
Main Issue: Students appear hesitant to offer credible balanced inference and often resort to simply restating information from the case study rather than developing original analysis, evaluation, and critical thinking.
Why This Matters: Upper-level marks (7-10) require "evidence of appropriate synthesis or evaluation that is mostly balanced" and "effective and balanced synthesis or evaluation." Without pushing your analysis beyond the case material, your essay cannot demonstrate the depth of understanding needed for top marks.
Examples to Illustrate:
Weak Approach: "Ending subsidies would help limit overfishing. The text mentions that global fishery subsidies are estimated at US$35 billion annually and two-thirds of that is used to increase fishing capacity. The World Trade Organization has tried to limit these subsidies but has not succeeded yet."
This simply repeats information directly from the case study without adding any original analysis or balanced evaluation of strengths and limitations.
Stronger Approach: "I recommend ending fishing subsidies as the most effective policy to address the unsustainable use of fisheries globally. While the text states that 'global fishery subsidies are estimated at US$35 billion annually and two-thirds of that is used to increase fishing capacity,' the implications of this go beyond mere financial support. These subsidies fundamentally distort market signals by artificially lowering fishing costs, which enables continued fishing even when fish stocks are depleted to levels where it would otherwise be unprofitable.
The policy would directly support Sustainable Development Goal 14 mentioned in the text by removing the economic incentives that drive overcapacity. However, implementing this policy would likely face significant political resistance from fishing communities and governments concerned about short-term employment impacts. A balanced approach would require transitional support programs to help fishing communities adapt, possibly redirecting subsidy funds toward sustainable fishing practices or alternative livelihoods. Despite these challenges, ending subsidies addresses the root economic cause of overfishing by allowing market prices to reflect the true scarcity of fish stocks, creating natural incentives for conservation without requiring complex enforcement mechanisms."
This response goes beyond the case material by analyzing how subsidies distort market signals, offers balanced evaluation by acknowledging political challenges to implementation, and proposes solutions to these challenges – demonstrating critical thinking that pushes the analysis forward.
3: Beyond Generic Textbook Knowledge to Contextual Application
Main Issue: Students often apply generic textbook knowledge without considering the unique nuances and context of global fisheries. For example, some students inappropriately recommended price ceilings without considering their contextual relevance.
Why This Matters: The assessment criteria reward "appropriate" use of economic theory that "effectively" supports the recommendation. This requires carefully matching economic policies to the specific context rather than applying memorized concepts indiscriminately.
Examples to Illustrate:
Weak Approach: "I recommend implementing price ceilings on fish to make them more affordable and reduce demand. This would help prevent overfishing by reducing the quantity of fish that consumers purchase. According to economic theory, price ceilings create a shortage in the market."
This applies a generic economic concept (price ceilings) without considering whether it's appropriate for addressing fishery sustainability. The student has misunderstood that price ceilings would actually increase quantity demanded while decreasing supply, potentially worsening overfishing.
Stronger Approach: "I recommend education and consumer nudges as an effective policy to address fishery sustainability. The case study mentions that 'today, each person eats on average 19.2 kg of fish a year – around twice as much as 50 years ago,' indicating a demand-side component that other policies might not address. Consumer education programs and nudges like eco-labeling (similar to Marine Stewardship Council certification) would work by altering preferences rather than merely adjusting incentives within existing preference structures.
This policy aligns with behavioural economics theory, which recognises that consumers often lack information about the environmental impact of their choices. By making the negative externalities visible to consumers through education and labeling, demand can shift toward sustainably caught fish and away from overfished species. This approach is particularly contextually appropriate given the elasticity calculations in parts (iii) and (iv) of the case study, which show European seabass has a high income elasticity of demand (4.22) and price elasticity (-5.58), suggesting consumer preferences are responsive to information and can be influenced."
This response demonstrates careful application of economic theory specifically chosen for the fisheries context, showing an understanding of why behavioural economics is particularly appropriate for addressing the negative externalities in this market rather than applying a generic policy that might work elsewhere.
