This paper puts forward a model of Pearl River Delta (PRD) fishery in the South China Sea (SCS) that integrates the ecological, social and economic costs and benefits of fisheries activities in a multidisciplinary framework. In particular, an integrated ECOST model is composed of links between an ecological model constructed by Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) software and a region Social Accounting Matrix (SAM). Then the costs and benefits of five fishing methods are compared from economic, ecological and social three dimensions base on the ECOST model. The potential effects of fishing effort reduction on fishing communication are explored by a series of dynamic simulations for a 10-year period. Key results from prediction (2005-2015) and policy simulations illustrate that fisheries of PRE are geared toward short-term economic profits at the expense of ecological gains and the whole group of societal benefits associated with fishing. However, the status quo can be improved to better levels by reducing fishing efforts.
Integrated ECOST Model Ecopath with Ecosim Costs and Benefits Analysis Fishing Activities1. Introduction
In China, the Pearl River is the second largest river (2200 km) in terms of water discharge, after the Yangtze. Currently, the coastal region of the Pearl River Estuary (PRE) is a significantly and quickly developing economic zone in China [1] . Due to recent large increases in the number of fishing boats and improvements in fishing technology, intensified fishing pressure on commercial fish species result in a decline in the biomass of many large-size and high-quality species and “prey release” of some low-valued species of small fish [2] -[4] . As an unavoidable result of the overcapacities of the PRD’s fishing fleets and the overexploitation of its fisheries resources, greater numbers of marine fishing vessels are no longer economically viable [5] . Therefore is quit important to understand the trade-offs between ecological, social and economic objectives.
Increasingly, scientists and economists from different disciplines have begun to realize the importance of pooling their information and results into multidisciplinary studies [6] [7] . The published ecological economic models that focus on marine fisheries can be categorized into three groups, traditional bio-economic models, regional fisheries economic models and ecosystem-based fishery management models.
The traditional bio-economic model is based on the Gordon-Schaefer model [8] [9] and has been explored by Clark [10] and other researchers from the mid-1970s onward. Bio-economic model tries to link the biological and economic models and reveal the optimal levels of yield. Traditional fisheries manage tools are more suitable for homogeneous fleets targeting one species and it is difficult to analyze large number of species [11] .
The second group is regional fisheries economic models, which focuses on the regional economic impacts of fishing sector. After Andrews and Rossi [12] reviewed input-output (IO) model studies of fisheries, increasing numbers of regional economic studies of fisheries have been published. In these literatures, regional economic impacts of fisheries have been studied using demand-driven input-output model [13] and supply-driven input-output model [14] . The role and linkages of the fishery sector have been examined in Hawaii [15] and Korean [16] [17] . While many of these studies used conventional IO models, a broader range of regional fisheries economic models has also been utilized [18] [19] . Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) model is an extension of input and output accounts, and the main advantage of a SAM based-analysis over the IO analysis is that the social-economic linkages are taken into account as well as other transactions such as linkages between the production and household sectors. Fernandez-Macho et al. [20] and Seung and Waters [21] develop SAM model to assess the contribution of fishery sector on employment and income. More recently, Arita et al. [22] demonstrate the use of SAM modeling to assess the income distribution linkages of commercial fishery sector in Hawaii. However, these models are static that don’t describe the dynamics interaction in economics and biological system.
Rather than the traditional management focus on individual stocks and individual regional fishery economics, nowadays, widespread acceptance that a more integrated perspective is needed would take marine ecosystem preservation, economics and social objectives into account. In this context, the ecosystem-based fishing management (EBFM) approach has emerged as a promising approach [23] . However, few ecosystem approaches based regional fisheries economic models are carried out, because it requires multi-disciplinary research, which may increase the complexity of the regional economicanalysis. Jin et al. [24] develop an economic-ecological model by coupling a region input-output model of a coastal economy to a linear ecological model of a marine food web. As one of first application of a CGE model in a marine ecosystem-based fishery management, Finn off and Tschirhart [25] [26] developed an integrated regional economic-ecological dynamic CGE model of Alaska fisheries to examine the welfare changes related to regulating commercial fishing quotas. Jin et al. [27] develop the framework by linking a CGE model to an end-to-end (E2E) model of marine food web to help assess the implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM) in New England. To our knowledge, no study has so far estimated the societal benefits and costs from social, economic and ecological three directions at métier level. Here, métiers are defined as a particular fishing fleet targeting at several particular species with a particular gear.
This paper presents the integrated ecological-economic-social model-ECOST on the fisheries societal costs and benefits in the PRD. The ECOST model was developed by Failler and Pan [28] foran international fisheries research project―Ecosystems, Societies, Consilience, Precautionary principle: Development of an assessment method of the societal cost for best fishing practices and efficient public policies (short for ECOST), of the European commission. In particular, the ECOST model is developed by coupling a region Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) to an ecological model constructed by Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) software. The main goal of this model is to combine social, economic and ecological systems into an integrated assessment, better describing the interaction between socio-economic and ecological systems.
2. Case Study
As a result of rapid economic development in recent decades, the coastal Pearl River Delta has experienced rapid industrialization and urbanization. The high population density and rapid development of industry and agriculture have resulted in severe stress to the aquatic environment. The PRE is also an important fishing ground in the South China Sea, and it provides abundant fishery resources for the PRD. The PRE ecosystem in this study (less than 60 m depth) ranges from 112˚30'E to 115˚00'E, 21˚30'N to 23˚30'N. The PRE falls largely within the PRD Economic zone. The study area is associated with six municipal cities, including Guangzhou, Zhuhai, Zhongshan, Dongguan, Shenzhen and Jiangmen, and two special administered regions, namely, Hong Kong and Macau (Figure 1). According to these boundaries the scope of the research covers approximately 72,490 km2 [29] .
Because of the special hydrological features of the PRE, the interaction among fish species in the Pearl River are quite complex, primarily because of the large variety of species involved, and their diverse mechanisms of biological predation and habits [30] . These factors cause a very composite tropical marine ecosystem to exist in this region.
Chinese fisheries policy has moved in a new direction toward the sustainable utilization of fisheries resources. Since fisheries are facing obvious risks from depleting natural resources and serious environmental pollution [5] [31] , the goal of fisheries is shifting from an emphasis on employment and economic benefits to one that sought a balance between maximizing societal wealth and conservation of fisheries resource [6] [32] . Using the PRE as a case study, the trade-offs between ecological and socio-economic objectives of fisheries management in an estuary ecosystem are explored.
3. Mechanism of ECOST Model
ECOST model presents a fishery assessment method that attempts to assess the social, economic and ecological
Map of the Pearl River estuary
costs and benefits in a framework coupling the ecosystem to socio-economic systems. As a typical estuary ecosystem, the PRE ecosystem can be described by the interactions of species in a complex food web. Therefore, understanding the biomass stock and ecological relationships of these species is an important part of designing renewable resource policies. In this paper, the PRE ecosystem is simulated by applying an Ecopath model, which has been widely used for constructing food-web models of marine and other ecosystems [33] . The species in the food web are represented by predator-prey relationships, and several of these function groups are commercial fishes that provide inputs to economics system.
An accounting method is applied for economic analysis of the fisheries, and a social accounting matrix (SAM) is constructed for the PRD fishing sector to examine both the linkages between the fishing industry and other industrial sectors, and their relationship with social levels from the household to the global scale. The SAM table provides a consistent database that allows for a detailed analysis of the economic structure of the PRD, and it is a useful tool for assessing the impact of fishing activities on the economy as a whole. Then we try to link the socio-economic model and the ecological model to produce an integrated ECOST model for fisheries management. And this integrated ECOST model is adopted to assess the societal benefits and costs for fisheries activities in the PRD. Finally, simulations are developed for a 10-year (2005-2015) period under five scenarios based of the 1998 Ecopath model with each scenario involving reduction of fishing effort of vessels by different métiers at annual rate of 5% from 1985 to 2015 for 30 years. The heterogeneity of fleets, such as vessel size and fishing gear types, leads to a variety of economic, social and ecological evaluation.
The ECOST model is built on Microsoft Excel 2007 version and contains several sheets, which are divided into the following three parts: data input, connection between ecological and socio-economic systems, and results output. The data input includes six sheets: macroeconomic, métier, microeconomic, economy, social and efforts. The results output includes the biomass, input and output table, multiplier, society and 10-year dynamic simulation. The connection section is an Ecopath sheet in the ECOST model describing the linkage between the socio-economic and ecological models. The results of the biomass changes, which are simulated by Ecosim model, are imported into ECOST model. Finally, fishing policy is simulated through time-series of fishing efforts, which are based on the optimal allocation of fleets among different métiers. The theoretical and mathematical backgrounds of the ECOST model are detailed elsewhere [28] [34] . We used a flow diagram (Figure 2) displaying the variables and process to illustrate the mechanism of integration of social, economic and ecological systems.
3.1. Ecosystem Model
The Ecopath with Ecosim is applied in the ecological model to analyze the structure of trophic interaction in the ecosystem. The method and theory of Ecopath and Ecosim modeling are detailed in the EwE user guide [35] [36] . The vulnerability fact is one of the most important parameters that determine the form of predator-prey re-
ECOST model with integrated of social, economic and ecological system
lationship. Here, observed time-series catch rate data of commercial fish and fishing effort data of five fishing métiers from 1981-2005 are used to estimate the vulnerability factors which provided some empirical support to the model. A previous constructed Ecopath model [3] for the PRE ecosystem is used as the base for Ecosim prediction of biomass and catches dynamic. The parameters of Ecopath model are presented in Table 1.
3.2. Social Accounting Matrix
Here, a social accounting matrix (SAM) provides a consistent database that allows a detail analysis of the eco-
Basic parameters of the PRD coastal ecosystem model (1998)
No.
Group name
Trophic level
B (t∙km−2)
P/B (year−1)
Q/B (year−1)
EE
P/Q
1
Benthic producers
1.0
153.000
11.89
-
0.01
-
2
Phytoplankton
1.0
13.000
231
-
0.47
-
3
Zooplankton
2.0
10.400
32.00
192.00
0.31
0.167
4
Jellyfish
3.1
1.075
5.01
25.04
0.74
0.200
5
Polychaeta
2.0
0.800
6.75
22.50
0.89
0.300
6
Mollusks
2.2
0.700
3.50
11.70
0.86
0.299
7
Echinoderms
2.3
0.240
1.20
3.58
0.88
0.335
8
Benthic crustaceans
2.2
0.560
5.65
26.90
0.84
0.210
9
Other zoobenthos
2.6
1.690
1.00
9.00
0.74
0.111
10
Shrimps
2.3
3.08
16.35
0.95
0.188
11
Crabs
2.5
3.79
12.50
0.95
0.303
12
Squids
3.2
1.475
3.10
8.00
0.95
0.388
13
Melon seed
3.0
0.101
2.41
24.00
0.97
0.100
14
Pomfret
3.4
0.393
3.03
15.15
0.93
0.200
15
Upeneus bensasi
3.1
2.10
10.28
0.95
0.204
16
Chub mackerel
2.8
0.045
2.62
8.80
0.97
0.298
17
Silver croaker
3.4
0.034
3.55
7.71
0.96
0.460
18
Lionhead croaker
3.3
0.060
7.36
29.16
0.96
0.252
19
Greater lizardfish
3.3
0.020
4.26
7.12
0.93
0.598
20
Japanese jack mackerel
3.5
0.412
2.15
7.86
0.90
0.274
21
Threadfin bream
3.1
0.486
2.07
7.25
0.93
0.286
22
Bigeyes
3.4
0.216
2.94
8.00
0.92
0.368
23
Japanese scad
3.1
0.461
1.87
11.08
0.92
0.169
24
Cutlass fishes
3.8
1.200
3.02
6.21
0.91
0.487
25
Small pelagic fish (30 cm−)
2.8
1.772
4.26
17.04
0.97
0.250
26
Large pelagic fish (30 cm+)
3.1
0.368
4.26
6.27
0.96
0.679
27
Benthopelagic fish
2.8
0.922
3.08
15.42
0.91
0.200
28
Small demersalfish (30 cm−)
2.6
4.70
23.50
0.95
0.200
29
Large demersalfish (30 cm+)
3.0
0.164
3.50
6.21
0.94
0.564
30
Sharks
3.8
0.005
0.20
4.13
0.10
0.048
31
Seabirds
3.4
0.003
0.06
66.10
0.06
0.001
32
Turtles
2.9
0.0002
0.10
2.50
0.10
0.040
33
Marine Mammals
4.0
0.009
0.04
14.77
0.05
0.003
34
Detritus
1.0
200.000
-
0.00
0.16
B―biomass, P/B―production to biomass ratio, Q/B―consumption to biomass ratio, P/Q―production to consumption ratio, EE―ecotrophic efficiency.
nomic structure of a region. It is also a useful tool to assess the socio-economic linkages of a production sector. A SAM can be represented as a square matrix T whose tij element shows the transaction value where the income obtained by account i originates from the expenditure by account j. The matrix of direct coefficient in the PRE SAM model, denoted S, is derived as follows
where S is the matrix of SAM direct coefficients; A is the matrix of technical coefficients, includes sales and purchases; V is the matrix of value added coefficients that includes payments from production accounts to factors; Y is the matrix of value added distribution coefficients that includes factor payments to the institution accounts; C is the matrix of the expenditure coefficients that includes household purchases of industry output; and H is the matrix of institutional and household distribution coefficients that includes inter-household/institution transfer payments.
The SAM model can then be written as follows
or
where x is the vector of total production output; v is the vector of total value added; y is the vector of total institutional income; ex is vector of exogenous goods and services demand (from exogenous stimulus measures, government expenditure/investment, export demand, or other exogenous resources of demand); and ey is vector of exogenous household transfer payment (primarily government transfer payments). Here (I − S)−1 is called the SAM multiplier matrix or matrix of SAM inverse coefficient.
In this paper, the inter-industry accounts of SAM in the PRE are retrieved from the 2002 Guangdong province input-output model (Table 2). As detailed in column 2, the total output value of the PRD fishing reached 1643.82 million Euro in 2004, representing 1.42% of the PRD’s gross production at current price, an increase of 13.4% from the previous year (unless otherwise specified, increase rates are calculated at the constant price of 1990). The value of fishing processes and rest of the fisheries economy are 190.93 and 1314.72 million Euro, respectively. Row 4 shows that, of the 1643.83 million in fishing industry income, 1512.25 million are sales within the PRD region, and 131.57 million are exported to nearby households and neighborhoods (e.g., Hong Kong and Macao).
A simplified basic fish production table that considers the addition of fisheries harvesting sectors to detail the production of fish is presented (Table 3). Our model encompasses five métiers from the PRE area: the demersal species trawling, the shrimps trawling, the Japanese scad purse seine, the threadfin bream gill net and the squids hook and line. The main fishing target species or groups include squids, melon seed, pomfret, upeneus bensasi, chub mackerel, silver croaker, lion head croaker, greater lizardfish, Japanese jack mackerel, threadfin bream, bigeyes, Japanese scad, Cutlass fishes, shrimp, crab, squid, and jellyfish, etc. [37] .
3.3. Valuation of Societal Cost and Benefit3.3.1. Economic Cost and Benefit
The economy consists of the PRE fishery sectors, including marine capture and fish processing, and the PRD households, and is linked to the rest of the world through the commodity and factor (labor and capital) markets. The economic model combines macroeconomic structure with microeconomic fishery production, thereby reflecting the production chain of the fisheries.
The economic value of an estuary ecosystem is defined on the basis of its relevant ecological features, and its
ReferencesDuan, L.J., Li, S.Y., Liu, Y., Jiang, T. and Failler, P. (2009) A Trophic Model of the Pearl River Delta Coastal Ecosystem. Ocean & Coastal Management, 52, 359-367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2009.04.005Duan, L.J., Li, S.Y., Liu, Y., Moreau, J. and Christensen, V. (2009) Modeling Changes in the Coastal Ecosystem of the Pearl River Estuary from 1981 to 1998. Ecological Modelling, 220, 2802-2818.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2009.07.016Wang, Y., Li, S.Y., Duan, L.J. and Liu, Y. (2012) Fishery Policy Exploration in the Pearl River Estuary Based on an Ecosim Model. Ecological Modelling, 230, 34-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.01.017Wang, Y., et al. (2015) Modeling the Effect of the Seasonal Fishing Moratorium on the Pearl River Estuary Using Ecosystem Simulation. Ecological Modelling, 312, 406-416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2015.06.011Yu, H.G. and Yu, Y.J. (2008) Fishing Capacity Management in China: Theoretic and Practical Perspectives. Marine Policy, 32, 351-359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2007.07.004Ommer, R.E., et al. (2012) Social-Ecological Dynamism, Knowledge, and Sustainable Coastal Marine Fisheries. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 4, 316-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2012.05.010Kittinger, J.N., Finkbeiner, E.M., Ban, N.C., Broad, K., Carr, M.H., Cinner, J.E., Gelcich, S., Cornwell, M.L., Koehn, Z.J., Basurto, X., Fujita, R., Caldwell, M.R. and Crowder, L.B. (2013) Emerging Frontiers in Social-Ecological Systems Research for Sustainability of Small-Scale Fisheries. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5, 352-357. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.06.008Gordon, H.S. (1954) The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery. Journal of Political Economy, 62, 124-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/257497Schaefer, M.B. (1957) Some Considerations of Population Dynamics and Economics in Relation to the Management of Marine Fisheries. Journal of Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 14, 669-681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/f57-025Clark, C.W. (1976) Mathematical Bioeconomics: The Optimal Management of Renewable Resources. Wiley, New York.Worm, B., Hilborn, R., Baum, K.J., Branch, T.A., Collie, J.S., Costello, C., Fogarty, M.J., Fulton, E.A., Hutchings, J.A., Jennings, S., Jensen, O.P., Lotze, H.K., Mace, P.M., McClanahan, T.R., Minto, C., Palumbi, S.R., Parma, A.M., Ricard, D., Rosenberg, A.A., Watson, R. and Zeller, D. (2009) Rebuilding Global Fisheries. Science, 325, 578-585.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1173146Andrews, M. and Rossi, D. (1986) The Economic Impacts of Commercial Fisheries and Marine Related Activities: A Critical Review of Northeastern Input-Output Studies. Coastal Zone Management Journal, 13, 335-367.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08920758609361987Steinback, S. (1999) Regional Economic Impact Assessments of Recreational Fisheries: An Application of the IMPLAN Modeling System to Marine Party and Charter Boat Fishing in Maine. North American Journal of Fishery Management, 19, 725-736. http://dx.doi.org/10.1577/1548-8675(1999)019<0724:REIAOR>2.0.CO;2Leung, P. and Pooley, S. (2002) Regional Economic Impacts of Reductions in Fisheries Production: A Supply-Driven Approach. Marine Resource Economics, 16, 251-262.Cai, J.N., Leung, P.S., Pan, M.L. and Pooley, S. (2005) Economic Linkage Impacts of Hawaii’s Long Line Fishing Regulations. Fisheries Research, 74, 232-242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2005.02.006Kwaka, S.J., Yoob, S.H. and Changa, J.I. (2005) The Role of the Maritime Industry in the Korean National Economy: An Input-Output Analysis. Marine Policy, 29, 371-383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2004.06.004Lee, M.K. and Yoo, S.H. (2014) The Role of the Capture Fisheries and Aquaculture Sectors in the Korean National Economy: An Input-Output Analysis. Marine Policy, 44, 448-456. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.10.014Seung, C. and Waters, E. (2006) A Review of Regional Economic Models for Fisheries Management in the U.S. Marine Resource Economics, 21, 101-124.Seung, C. and Waters, E. (2006) The Role of the Alaska Seafood Industry: A Social Accounting Matrix (SAM) Model Approach to Economic Base Analysis. The Annals of Regional Science, 40, 335-350.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00168-005-0048-0Fernandez-Macho, J., Gallastegui, C. and Gonzalez, P. (2008) Economic impacts of TAC Regulation: A Supply-Driven SAM Approach. Fisheries Research, 90, 225-234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2007.10.019Seung, C. and Waters, E. (2009) Measuring the Economic Linkage of Alaska Fisheries: A Supply-Driven Social Accounting Matrix (SDSAM) Approach. Fisheries Research, 97, 17-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2008.12.013Arita, S., et al. (2014) The Distributive Economic Impacts of Hawaii’s Commercial Fishery: A SAM Analysis. Fisheries Research, 145, 82-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2013.02.005Pikitch, E.K., Santora, C., Babcock, E.A., Bakun, A., Bonfil, R., Conover, D.O., Dayton, P., Doukakis, P., Fluharty, D., Heneman, B., Houde, E.D., Link. J., Livingston, P.A., Mangel, M., McAllister, M.K., Pope, J. and Sainsbury, K.J. (2004) Ecosystem-Based Fishery Management. Science, 305, 346-347. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1098222Jin, D., Hoagland, P. and Dalton, T.M. (2003) Linking Economic and Ecological Models for a Marine Ecosystem. Ecological Economics, 46, 367-385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2003.06.001Finnoff, D. and Tschirhart, J. (2003) Harvesting in an Eight-Species Ecosystem. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 45, 589-611. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0095-0696(02)00025-6Finnoff, D. and Tschirhart, J. (2008) Linking Dynamic Economic and Ecological General Equilibrium Models. Resource and Energy Economics, 30, 91-114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2007.08.005Jin, D., et al. (2012) Development of an Integrated Economic and Ecological Framework for Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management in New England. Progress in Oceanography, 102, 93-101.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2012.03.007Failler, P. and Pan, H.R. (2007) Global Value, Full Value and Societal Costs: Capturing the True Cost of Destroying Marine Ecosystems. Social Science Information, 46, 109-134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0539018407073660Qiu, Y.S., Zeng, X.G., Chen, T., Wang, Y.Z. and Yuan, W.W. (2008) Fisheries Resource and Fisheries Management in South China Sea. Beijing Press, Beijing.Li, Y.Z., Chen, G.B. and Sun, D.R. (2000) Analysis of the Composition of Fishes in the Pearl River Estuarine Waters. Journal of Fisheries of China, 24, 312-317.Xue, G.F. (2004) China’s Response to International Fisheries Law and Policy: National Action and Regional Cooperation, Centre for Maritime Policy. University of Wollongong, Wollongong.Zhong, Y. and Power, G. (1997) Fisheries in China: Progress, Problems, and Prospects. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 54, 224-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/f96-265Plagányi, é.E. (2007) Models for an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper, No. 477, FAO, Rome.Pan, H.R. (2009) The ECOST Model: An Integration of Social, Economic and Ecological Systems for Fisheries.
http://www.ird.fr/ecostproject/doku.php?id=wp_5_production_of_ecost_model_9_monthsChristensen, V., Walters, C.J. and Pauly, D. (2005) Ecopath with Ecosim: A User’s Guide. Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.Christensen, V. and Pauly, D. (1992) ECOPATH II: A Software for Balancing Steady-State Ecosystem Models and Calculating Network Characteristics. Ecological Modelling, 61, 169-185.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3800(92)90016-8Jia, X.P., Li, C.H. and Qiu, Y.S. (2005) Survey and Evaluation of Guangdong Marine Fishery Resources and the Measures for Sustainable Utilization. Chinese Ocean Press, Beijing.Farber, S., Costanza, R., Childers, D.L., Erickson, J., Gross, K., Grove, M., Hopkinson, C.S., Kahn, J., Pincetl, S., Troy, A., Warren, P. and Wilson, M. (2006) Linking Ecology and Economics for Ecosystem Management. BioScience, 56, 121-133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)056[0121:LEAEFE]2.0.CO;2Pauly D. ,et al. (1988)Some Definitions of Overfishing Relevant to Coastal Zone Management in Southeast Asia Tropical coastal Area Management 3, 14-15.Murawski, S.A. (2000) Definitions of Overfishing from an Ecosystem Perspective. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 57, 649-658. http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jmsc.2000.0738Srinivasan, U.T., Cheung, W.W.L., Watson, R. and Sumaila, U.R. (2010) Food Security Implications of Global Marine Catch Losses Due to Overfishing. Journal of Bioeconomics, 12, 183-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10818-010-9090-9Mace, P.M. (2001) A New Role for MSY in Single-Species and Ecosystem Approaches to Fisheries Stock Assessment and Management. Fish and Fisheries, 2, 2-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-2979.2001.00033.xWalters, C.J., Christensen, V., Martell, S.J. and Kitchell, J.F. (2005) Possible Ecosystem Impacts of Applying MSY Policies from Single-Species Assessment. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 62, 558-568.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.icesjms.2004.12.005Liu, Y.J., Sumaila, U.R. and Volpe, J.P. (2011) Potential Ecological and Economic Impacts of Sea Lice from Farmed Salmon on Wild Salmon Fisheries. Ecological Economics, 70, 1746-1755.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.04.017Gourguet, S., Macher, C., Doyen, L., Thébaud, O., Bertignac, M. and Guyader, O. (2013) Managing Mixed Fisheries for Bio-Economic Viability. Fisheries Research, 140, 46-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2012.12.005Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003) Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: A Framework for Assessment. Island Press, Washington DC.Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington DC.Teh, L.S.L., Teh, L.C.L. and Sumaila, U.R. (2011) Quantifying the Overlooked Socio-Economic Contribution of Small-Scale Fisheries in Sabah, Malaysia. Fisheries Research, 110, 450-458.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2011.06.001Crilly, R. and Esteban, A. (2013) Small versus Large-Scale, Multi-Fleet Fisheries: The Case for Economic, Social and Environmental Access Criteria in European Fisheries. Marine Policy, 37, 20-27.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.04.018Cheung, W.W.L. and Sadovy, Y. (2004) Retrospective Evaluation of Data-Limited Fisheries: A Case from Hong Kong. Reviews of Fish Biology and Fisheries, 14, 181-206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11160-004-5422-yCheung, W.W.L. and Pitcher, T.J. (2006) Designing Fisheries Management Policies That Conserve Marine Species Diversity in the Northern South China Sea. In: Kruse, G.H., Gallucci, D.E., Hay, R.I., Perry, R.I., Peterman, R.M., Shirley, T.C., Spencer, P.D., Wilson, B. and Woodby, D., Eds., Fisheries Assessment and Management in Data-Limited Situations, Alaska Sea Grant College Program, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Alaska, 439-466.Zivin, J.G. (2013) Vessel Buybacks in Fisheries: The Role of Auction and Financing Structures. ISSF Technical Report International Seafood Sustainability Foundation, Washington DC.Squires, D. (2010) Fisheries Buybacks: A Review and Guidelines. Fish and Fisheries, 11, 366-387.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-2979.2010.00365.xPauly, D. and Christensen, V. (1993) Stratified Models of Large Marine Ecosystems: A General Approach and an Application to the South China Sea. In: Sherman, K., Alexander, L.M. and Gold, B.D., Eds., Large Marine Ecosystems: Stress, Mitigation, and Sustainability, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington DC, 148-174.Heymans, J.J., Sumaila, U.R. and Christensen, V. (2009) Policy Options for the Northern Benguela Ecosystem Using a Multispecies, Multifleet Ecosystem Model. Progress in Oceanography, 83, 417-425.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2009.07.013Lu, H.-J. and Lee, H.-L. (2014) Changes in the Fish Species Composition in the Coastal Zones of the Kuroshio Current and China Coastal Current during Periods of Climate Change: Observations from the Set-Net Fishery (1993-2011). Fisheries Research, 155, 103-113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2014.02.032Qiu, Y.S., Lin, Z.J. and Wang, Y.Z. (2010) Responses of Fish Production to Fishing and Climate Variability in the Northern South China Sea. Progress in Oceanography, 85, 197-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2010.02.011Cheung, W.W.L. and Sumaila, U.R. (2008) Trade-Offs between Conservation and Socio-Economic Objective in Managing a Tropical Marine Ecosystem. Ecological Economics, 66, 193-210.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.09.001Christensen, V., Steinback, J. and Failler, P. (2011) A Combined Ecosystem and Value Chain Modeling Approach for Evaluating Societal Cost and Benefit of Fishing. Ecological Modelling, 222, 857-864.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2010.09.030