منطقه انحصاری اقتصادی و توسعه اقتصادی در کشورهای جزیره ای اقیانوس آرام
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|13527||2008||12 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||8835 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Marine Policy, Volume 32, Issue 6, November 2008, Pages 886–897
The exclusive economic zone (EEZ) became accepted internationally in the 1970s. This transferred resource wealth to the coastal states establishing such zones. The history of the EEZ is reviewed, and its impact on the economic development of the Pacific island states considered. The growth performance and the tuna fishery development of these states are reviewed and possible causes of limited success discussed. The use of trust funds to increase the resource wealth of the Pacific island states is briefly considered.
The so-called exclusive economic zones (EEZs) that became accepted in the 1970s were a major institutional development and fundamentally changed the jurisdictional framework for fisheries worldwide. Access to fish stocks, which used to be free to anyone outside of a narrow belt of territorial sea, became the prerogative of the nearest state, usually called the coastal state. This enabled coastal states to control access to fish stocks off their shores for their own benefit, either individually or in cooperation where stocks are shared among two or more states. This arrangement has made possible institutional innovations such as limits on total catches and individual transferable quotas, which have become widespread even if often controversial.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Despite having acquired jurisdiction over vast ocean areas rich in fish, the Pacific island states have not been successful in using this as an engine of economic development. Development of their own fishing activities has in many cases been unsuccessful. The largest ones (Fiji, the Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea) have developed their own fisheries, but in cooperation with foreign owners and with doubtful success. So far the impact on their overall economic development has been limited, and whatever positive impact it may have had has been dwarfed by adverse developments in other areas, as the overall growth rate has not increased over time.