The apparent conflict of Norwegian pelagic fisheries management and Norwegian seafood council export promotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Norwegian government operates pelagic fishery management systems designed to avoid overfishing and foster sustainable annual landings while at the same time managing an export promotion program designed to increase foreign sales of herring and mackerel. Simultaneously promoting foreign sales of pelagic fish and limiting the availability of those fish for sale are policies in apparent conflict. This research demonstrates, however, that effective limits on the availability of pelagic fish for export tend to complement the profitenhancing export promotion objectives of the Norwegian Seafood Council (NSC) for the Norwegian herring and mackerel industries. Assuming highly (but not perfectly) effective limits on herring and mackerel exports arising from their respective fishery management systems over the 2003 to 2018 period of analysis, NSC herring and mackerel export promotion contributed 5-7% to Norwegian herring export revenue and industry profit, respectively and 11-15% to Norwegian mackerel export revenue and industry profit, respectively. Less effective limitation on Norwegian herring and mackerel export supplies would erode the respective industry revenue and profit gains from NSC export promotion. In essence, the NSC effectively exploits the limits on herring and mackerel export availability imposed by Norwegian fishery management systems for the benefit of Norwegian herring and mackerel industries.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".