Fishing - Quota Management Group (QMG) trial: evaluation

7. Trial Options

The purpose of this report was to provide evidence and recommendations on the QMG trial. Four possible trial outcomes as set out below. As noted in the Conclusions of the review, it was not possible to quantify outcomes of the trial as qualitative information was used to determine the results. The estimated impacts of the trial options noted below similarly use positive, negative, or mixed (where they depend on other factors) ratings.

7.1. Option 1 – End the trial

This option would entail a completion of the trial and a discontinuation of QMGs. This would require the existing two trial participants to join other groups, adjust their own groups to become POs, or join the non-sector.

The estimation of positives and negatives below will be based against this option as the status quo option.

7.2. Option 2 – Formalise QMGs

This option would entail accepting the QMG system as an official alternative management model in Scotland, with no major changes to the system. The impacts relative to option 1 are noted below.

Positives

• Further access to sectoral quota management information.
• Possibly reduced administrative costs as avoiding duplication of both QMGs and POs administering the feet.

Negatives

• Risk of losing geographically or culturally relevant POs.
• Risk of divergent systems creating a dual system or accidental loopholes.

Mixed

• Risk of further consolidation in the industry, but also potentially increased competition in the sectoral space. Overall not clear if this would be positive or negative.

7.3. Option 3 – Formalise and increase requirements for QMGs

This option would entail accepting QMGs into the sectoral space and raising the requirements for QMGs (e.g. formation or management). In this example this would entail increasing the requirements to make it more onerous for anyone new to join but at a level that would allow the existing groups to remain, as well as potentially adding objectives in line with POs on compliance. The impacts relative to option 1 are noted below.

Positives

• Further access to sectoral quota management information.
• Possibly reduced administrative costs as avoiding duplication of both QMGs and POs administering the feet.

Negatives

• Risk of divergent systems creating a dual system or accidental loopholes.

Mixed

• The impacts of any compliance objectives are mixed and depend on how the Scottish Government includes, or plans to include, the sector in its compliance activities. The additional burden on groups would have to be considered against the benefits expected for the Scottish Government’s compliance system.

7.4. Option 4 – Formalise and decrease requirements for QMGs

This option would entail accepting QMGs into the sectoral space and lowering the requirements for QMGs (e.g. formation or management). In this example this would entail lowering the requirements to make it easier for new groups to establish QMGs as well as reducing the expectations on certain objectives. The impacts relative to option 1 are noted below.

Positives

• Further and wider access to sectoral quota management information.
• Possibly reduced administrative costs as avoiding duplication of both QMGs and POs administering the feet.
• Possible industry wide savings or revenue increases from any reduction in the objective expectations.
• Possibly short-term increase in sectoral competition.

Negatives

• Possibly long-term acceleration of consolidation of the fishing industry by disadvantaging smaller operators, so they can only maintain competition through aggregation.
• Risk of losing geographically or culturally relevant POs.
• Risk of short-term increase in sectoral numbers resulting in increased burden of management for the Scottish Government.
• Risk of quota not being managed in line with Scottish Government objectives if the QMG objectives expectations are reduced.

Mixed

• Risk of POs converting to QMGs to remain competitive, effectively changing the sector. This is a significant change which would require a sectoral review to fully understand potential impacts.