Allow only small-scale, traditional (artisanal) fishing

Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

not assessed
Certainty

not assessed
Harms

not assessed

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Artisanal fisheries are the commercial component of small‐scale coastal fisheries mostly practiced using traditional methods. They are particularly important in some areas such as the Mediterranean where they constitute about 80% of the fishing fleet (Marengo et al. 2015). Artisanal fishing uses a large range of gear types and techniques but is typically operated by a single fisher or a pair of fishers. They target a high number of species, but the fishing methods employed are generally low technology and non-destructive. Allowing only artisanal fishing in an area helps to regulate fishing pressure while balancing conservation and socio-economic needs of local communities, many of whom rely on marine resources. Co-management agreements involving the artisanal fishers may also encourage compliance and may be more easily used to adapt the local fishing effort and/or selectivity to avoid overfishing.

Marengo M., Culioli J.M., Santoni M.C., Marchand B. & Durieux D.H. (2015) Comparative analysis of artisanal and recreational fisheries for Dentex dentex in a Marine Protected Area. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 22, 249–260.

Study locations

Key messages

One study examined the effects of allowing only small-scale traditional (artisanal) fishing in an area on marine fish populations. The study was in the Adriatic Sea (Italy).

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

OTHER (1 STUDY)

Commercial catch abundance (1 study): One site comparison study in the Adriatic Sea found that a marine protected area zone allowing only artisanal fishing activity for three years had higher overall commercial catch rates of five of seven species compared to unprotected areas openly fished.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A site comparison study in 2005–2008 of an area of rocky and sandy seabed in the Adriatic Sea off the southeast coast of Italy (Guidetti et al. 2010) found that the ‘buffer’ zone of a marine protected area fished only by artisanal commercial fishers for three years using trammel nets, resulted in higher catch rates of five of seven commercial fish species compared to unprotected fished areas outside. Catch rates varied between years but were overall higher inside the buffer zone than outside for: striped red mullet Mullus surmuletus (inside: 5–17, outside: 1–3 kg/km net/d ); large-scaled scorpionfish Scorpaena scrofa (inside: 5–7, outside: 0–1 kg/km net/d); peacock wrasse Symphodus tinca (inside: 2–3, outside: 0–1 kg/km net/d); common pandora Pagellus erythrinus (inside: 1–2, outside: 0–1 kg/km net/d) and common dentex Dentex dentex (inside: 1–2, outside: 0–1 kg/km net/d). Common seabream Pagrus pagrus and forkbeard Phycis phycis catches were similar (inside: 0–5, outside: 0–1 kg/km net/d). From January 2005 to July 2008, artisanal commercial fishing catches (exclusively using trammel nets) were monitored inside the buffer zone (1,885 ha, artisanal commercial fishing permitted since 2005 under a co-management protocol with local fishers) and in surrounding no-take zones (352 ha) in the Torre Guaceto Marine Protected Area (all fishing banned in the entire area from 2001–2005). Catch rates of the most important species (those contributing most to the differences between areas) were compared from 217 deployments inside the buffer zone and 66 outside over three years.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Guidetti P., Bussotti S., Pizzolante F. & Ciccolella A. (2010) Assessing the potential of an artisanal fishing co-management in the Marine Protected Area of Torre Guaceto (southern Adriatic Sea, SE Italy). Fisheries Research, 101, 180-187.

Please cite as:

Taylor, N., Clarke, L.J., Alliji, K., Barrett, C., McIntyre, R., Smith, R.K., and Sutherland, W.J. (2021) Marine Fish Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Selected Interventions. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Marine Fish Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Cease or prohibit all types of fishing in a marine protected area Action Link	Awaiting assessment	79	Synopsis Link
Cease or prohibit all non-towed (static) fishing gear Action Link	Awaiting assessment	1	Synopsis Link
Restrict fishing activity (types unspecified) in a marine protected area Action Link	Awaiting assessment	2	Synopsis Link