Evidence of bias in assessment of fisheries management impacts

Abstract

Melnychuk et al.'s analysis (1) is not a trustworthy evaluation of the effectiveness of fisheries management. Given the strong bias in the NZ sample, it would be surprising if NZ was the only country for which there were problems with the selection of respondents. Instead of providing a robust analysis of the effectiveness of fisheries management, Melnychuk et al. (1) seem to be arguing for business-as-usual while ignoring broader issues, such as ecosystem impacts, environmental change, and social outcomes. Such an analysis does fisheries management no service.