Je n'ai pas lu l'étude. L'article
dans The Gazette parle de « responsabilité partagée » entre le
gouvernement et les parties prenantes locales, soit une sorte de
partenariat public-privé, ce qui me fait toujours un peu peur. Les PPP
sont un type d'arrangement qui peut être dangereux et mener à des
résultats parfois pires qu'un contrôle étatique complet, parce que ni le
gouvernement, ni les acteurs privés, ne sont vraiment tenus
responsables, et chacun rejette le blâme pour la mauvaise gestion sur
l'autre. Mais dans le cas des pêcheries, le pire est déjà survenu, et je
présume que ce serait un pas dans la bonne direction. Les explications
que donne l'article, à tout le moins, sont très sensées et me rappellent
les discussions que nous avions il y a quinze ans.
The results showed that the framework, based on shared responsibility
between the government and local fishers, is the "only realistic
solution" to the problems fisheries face, said lead researcher Nicolas
Gutierrez, who studies aquatic and fisheries science.
(...) "Many
people believe that having fishermen involved in the management process
is letting the fox guard the henhouse. What (this research) shows is
just the opposite – that the more involved the fishing industry is in
management, the better the outcome," co-author Ray Hilborn said.
Major
components identified in the co-managed fisheries studied included a
leader who enforces guidelines based on community input, securing catch
and ownership over an allotted space and protecting harvested areas for
conservation.
Incorporating these components resulted in less illegal fishing, a
greater abundance of resources and higher profits, Gutierrez said.
Hilborn
said many fisheries can't succeed under government management alone
because some are so small that officials can't devote the resources
needed to monitor them.
On the
smallest scale, the co-management system would include mayors and
fishers from different villages agreeing to avoid fishing in each
other's waters.
Boris
Worm, a marine biologist at Dalhousie University in Halifax, said the
model "makes sense" because it provides fishermen, who have first-hand
knowledge of the region, with ownership of a piece of the waters so
they'll take better care of that space.
He
pointed to Canadian lobster fisheries on the East Coast – an industry
worth nearly a quarter of a billion dollars – that have adopted the
community-based comanagement method.
"It's not
by coincidence that it's one of the most successful fisheries we have.
It's been sustained for more than 150 years and is economically very
important to hundreds of fishers," he said.
"When
people have a sense of ownership over their resource, they absolutely
want to make sure no one takes their lobster, and if somebody does, that
person is ostracized in the community, and that's a stronger penalty
than a fine," he explained.
Les droits de propriété, individuels ou même sur une base
« communautaire » régionale, sont la meilleure façon de protéger les
ressources naturelles. Au contraire, le contrôle étatique mène
inévitablement au gaspillage, à la surexploitation et à la pollution. Il
serait temps que les écolo-socialistes, qui prétendent se préoccuper de
ces questions, sortent de leur bulle, apprennent quelques notions
économiques de base et cessent d'appuyer des politiques qui ont toujours
échoué.
|