Abstract:
In this article fishery management is used as an excellent case to illustrate the way
the confusion between positive economics (the domain that deals with descriptive
and predictive aspects) and normative economic (the domain that deals with
prescription aspects) may lead to the promotion of policies and regulations that may
not benefit the public. The main argument of the article is that the predictive and
descriptive contents of economics must not be presumed to necessarily constitute
prescriptions. Caution is invoked in importing economic theory to the design of
public institutions. It is further argued that not each prediction or description
constitutes a social optimality. A critical review is provided of the assumptions
and conditions that make profit maximisation in fisheries seem to be an important
social goal. The article is divided into five sections: section one discusses the overall
theoretical background; section two presents an account of the reason why, from the
standpoint of a welfare approach, open access to a commercially valuable fishery
tends to lead to economically sub-optimal catch; section three discusses the issue
of distribution; section four describes briefly the capability to function approach to
social evaluation and the relevance of this approach to fishery management; and
section five concludes by reiterating the point made earlier that the predictive and
descriptive contents of economics must not be presumed to necessarily constitute
prescriptions.
