Making rules to live by: Was the proposed regulatory regime for invasive species reasonable? Perceptions of the South African trout industry
- Marire, Juniours, Snowball, Jeanette D, Fraser, Gavin C G
- Authors: Marire, Juniours , Snowball, Jeanette D , Fraser, Gavin C G
- Date: 2015
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/68566 , vital:29285 , http://2015.essa.org.za/fullpaper/essa_2938.pdf
- Description: Publisher version , Despite considerable economic impact of trout-based aquaculture and recreational fishing, the Department of Environmental Affairs has been focusing almost entirely on ecological criteria in deciding the regulatory regime for trout. We examined whether the proposed regulatory regime for alien and invasive species that was published by the Department of Environmental Affairs in 2014 for public comment was reasonable. The analysis produced factors that might matter in the design of reasonable institutional arrangements that impose a reasonable regulatory burden on economic sectors utilising invasive species. We conducted factor analysis using an online survey that we conducted between May and July 2014. We obtained four clusters of factors: participatory policymaking, people-centeredness, credible scientific evidence for listing species as invasive and contextualisation of international evidence. We then utilised the factors in a logistic regression framework to assess their influence on the probability of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable. The likelihood of a trout sector player perceiving the regulations to be reasonable was 1.2%. We found that a one standard deviation increase in the “credibility of scientific evidence” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 1645%. A one standard deviation increase in “participation” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 410%. A one standard deviation increase in “people-centeredness” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 600%. Lastly, a one standard deviation increase in the variable “contextualising international evidence” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 415%. This research demonstrates that properly addressing the socioeconomic aspects of new policies in addition to ecological criteria makes it far more likely that stakeholders will regard them as reasonable, even if the new policies impose increased regulatory transaction cost burden on users or reduced access to a resource.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Marire, Juniours , Snowball, Jeanette D , Fraser, Gavin C G
- Date: 2015
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/68566 , vital:29285 , http://2015.essa.org.za/fullpaper/essa_2938.pdf
- Description: Publisher version , Despite considerable economic impact of trout-based aquaculture and recreational fishing, the Department of Environmental Affairs has been focusing almost entirely on ecological criteria in deciding the regulatory regime for trout. We examined whether the proposed regulatory regime for alien and invasive species that was published by the Department of Environmental Affairs in 2014 for public comment was reasonable. The analysis produced factors that might matter in the design of reasonable institutional arrangements that impose a reasonable regulatory burden on economic sectors utilising invasive species. We conducted factor analysis using an online survey that we conducted between May and July 2014. We obtained four clusters of factors: participatory policymaking, people-centeredness, credible scientific evidence for listing species as invasive and contextualisation of international evidence. We then utilised the factors in a logistic regression framework to assess their influence on the probability of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable. The likelihood of a trout sector player perceiving the regulations to be reasonable was 1.2%. We found that a one standard deviation increase in the “credibility of scientific evidence” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 1645%. A one standard deviation increase in “participation” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 410%. A one standard deviation increase in “people-centeredness” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 600%. Lastly, a one standard deviation increase in the variable “contextualising international evidence” increased the odds of perceiving the regulations to be reasonable by 415%. This research demonstrates that properly addressing the socioeconomic aspects of new policies in addition to ecological criteria makes it far more likely that stakeholders will regard them as reasonable, even if the new policies impose increased regulatory transaction cost burden on users or reduced access to a resource.
- Full Text:
Regulatory incoherence and economic potential of freshwater recreational fisheries: the trout triangle in South Africa
- Marire, Juniours, Snowball, Jeanette D, Fraser, Gavin C G
- Authors: Marire, Juniours , Snowball, Jeanette D , Fraser, Gavin C G
- Date: 2014
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/68621 , vital:29295 , https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2753/JEI0021-3624480406
- Description: Publisher version , We apply John R. Commons’s negotiational psychology, specifically his principle of sovereignty, to the development of a discordant regulatory culture and its likely impact on the economic potential of recreational fishing. Using South African environmental judicial precedents and other documentation, we formulate six plausible hypotheses. We argue that regulatory incoherence, entitlement insecurity, corporate-dominated social valuation, strategic power coalitions, lack of procedural fairness, and the extent of judicial enforcement of environmental rights help explain the economic potential and isolation of the freshwater recreational fisheries sector. We find a consistent pattern of extraction and monopolization of sovereign power by the Department of Mineral Resources from propertied parties. Thus, regulatory domination is a major mechanism affecting the economic potential of recreational fisheries in the Trout Triangle. While Commons postulated that private property is a sufficient condition for participation in the determination and use of sovereign power, we argue that private/public property is only a necessary condition. The conjunctive sufficient condition is the existence of both regulatory coherence between spheres of government and property.
- Full Text: false
- Authors: Marire, Juniours , Snowball, Jeanette D , Fraser, Gavin C G
- Date: 2014
- Language: English
- Type: text , article
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/68621 , vital:29295 , https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2753/JEI0021-3624480406
- Description: Publisher version , We apply John R. Commons’s negotiational psychology, specifically his principle of sovereignty, to the development of a discordant regulatory culture and its likely impact on the economic potential of recreational fishing. Using South African environmental judicial precedents and other documentation, we formulate six plausible hypotheses. We argue that regulatory incoherence, entitlement insecurity, corporate-dominated social valuation, strategic power coalitions, lack of procedural fairness, and the extent of judicial enforcement of environmental rights help explain the economic potential and isolation of the freshwater recreational fisheries sector. We find a consistent pattern of extraction and monopolization of sovereign power by the Department of Mineral Resources from propertied parties. Thus, regulatory domination is a major mechanism affecting the economic potential of recreational fisheries in the Trout Triangle. While Commons postulated that private property is a sufficient condition for participation in the determination and use of sovereign power, we argue that private/public property is only a necessary condition. The conjunctive sufficient condition is the existence of both regulatory coherence between spheres of government and property.
- Full Text: false
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »