The Impact of Sea Fishing on Social Well-being in Scottish Fishing
Communities Report for the Marine Analytical Unit, Marine Scotland
Introduction
Methods
This project has been
commissioned to investigate
possible linkages from fishing
activity to wider community
wellbeing.
Analysis of Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) and Fisheries Landings Data
The project involved an
investigation into the social
conditions found in fishing
communities in Scotland that
have experienced a reduction in
fishing opportunity in recent
years. It examined whether
social deprivation or other
aspects of social change had
occurred in these communities
and could be accounted for by
trends in fishing activity.
The analysis followed three
stages;
1. A review of the literature
around ‘fisheries-dependent’
communities, and the linkages
between marine fisheries and
social conditions
2. A data analysis exercise to
collate national data on social
indicators and fishing activity
to gauge whether fishing
communities in Scotland are
suffering from deprivation
3. Four case studies on fishing
communities on Scotland’s
west coast to gather key
informant opinions on how
communities have dealt with
changes in the fishing industry
Quantitative analysis on the links between the SIMD (2004, 2006, 2009 and 2012) with the volume
and value of fish landings and fisheries employment data from the same period.
Case Study analysis
Four case studies on the west coast of Scotland using data collected from semi-structured interviews
with 16 key informants.
Results
Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD)
Analysis found that in 2004 fishing communities were suffering less severe deprivation than other
areas, but since 2006 the incidence of deprivation increased to similar rates found in other coastal
areas. Over half of fishing units (54.7 per cent) are now in the lower half of the SIMD ranking and
they appear to be doing relatively less well now than in the recent past. This is most likely to be
because of relative improvements in non-coastal areas rather than due to deterioration in the fishing
areas themselves.
Change in income and employment scores against landings and fisheries employment
When the observed change in two of the key indicators that contribute to the SIMD is assessed
against changes in the value of landings no clear evidence of a relationship emerges. The scatter
plots on the following page, show no patterns and the changes in the income and employment scores
(vertical axis) show no correlation with changes in fishing activity (horizontal axis). When we looked
at urban/rural ports in isolation the relationship that we expected to see - a decrease in
employment/income score with an increase in landings/fisheries employment - is present for urban
ports but the relationship is weak and not significant and could therefore be found by chance.
We therefore conclude that changes in fishing income and employment are not significant drivers of
deprivation and overall social wellbeing in fishing communities, probably because fishing represents a
small proportion of overall economic activity. Public sector, tourism and traditional activities, as well
as external industries (oil and gas and the military) all contribute and provide alternative avenues of
employment. Fishing households may also respond to any decline in employment and income
opportunities by holding two or more jobs which will reduce or masking any recorded deprivation.
Skills associated with having an active fleet are still highly valued, as they supply labour market
entrants with sea-faring experience that enable them to compete and secure other marine based
employment. Having an active, inshore fishing fleet is considered central to this.
Key case study findings are reported overleaf…
Conclusions
Deprivation: a multifaceted
concept that focuses on two
criteria; material goods and
social life. A relative concept
defined by the societal norms
and expectations from the
societal group being measured.
 Fishing areas suffer less that non-coastal units, and in much the same way as coastal units,
however fishing areas do appear to be doing less well now than ten years ago
 Fishing income and employment do not appear to be key drivers of social change, because fishing
is a small economic component as other sectors have taken up the slack as well household
responses e.g. holding two or more jobs are preventing deprivation
 Field interviews reveals that: 1) whilst crews are increasingly likely to be foreign, other marine
activities benefit from locals gaining seafaring skills with an active fishing fleet; 2) inability to
diversify across species, makes communities less resilient and vulnerable to shocks and; 3) there
are visible tension between economic and social objectives, the extent of these trade-off is not
effectively documented and requires further investigation
For further information Please contact the Marine Analytical Unit at Marine Scotland.
Disclaimer This two page summary is based on a report prepared for Marine Scotland. Views expressed and conclusions drawn are those of the
author and not Marine Scotland and in no way pre-empt future policy in this area.
Key themes from interviews and supporting charts for the previous page summary
CREWING: Foreign and local crews
Skippers, mostly on trawler vessels, are recruiting foreign crews as a response to difficulties in recruiting locally.
Initially crews came from Eastern Europe and more recently from South-east Asia with acceptance of modest wages, a
willingness to work hard, and quality seamanship. Interviewees implied that many trawler skippers feel local, and
increasingly Eastern Europeans, are less reliable and prone to substance abuse which hinders the smooth running of
vessels and safety at sea.
This trend suggests coastal communities are no longer dependent on fishing to provide employment opportunities.
Whether this is an issue purely for the mobile sector requires further investigation as key informants stated that static
gear vessels still have high levels of localised recruitment, because of good profit margins in the fisheries. The static
sector appears to be expanding with young local teams keen to take on vessels, as demonstrated with the Western
Isles Fisheries Loan Scheme.
Interviewees were keen to explain that the stepping-stone nature of local inshore vessels is very important for giving
local youths experience at sea which increases their chances of employment in other maritime careers. This system is
considered invaluable for support the diversification of opportunity in island and remote communities.
DIVERSIFICATION: Quota access
The fieldwork uncovered a sense that West Coast fisheries are now financially dependent on nephrops as the availability
of other quota stocks is squeezed. The increased uptake in effort by larger offshore vessels over the summer of 2012
highlighted concerns over the future of the nephrops fisheries with some respondents fearing a trend of consolidation
with smaller vessels unable to compete against larger ventures. The inshore sector and its associated communities,
respondents argued, is highly vulnerable because of a dependency on a single species and no ability to diversify, at least
not without significant cost. Diversification within fisheries was repeatedly mentioned as fundamental to making fishing
communities more resilient to change.
GROWTH VS. EQUALITY: Trade off
One of the key themes to emerge from this study is the tension between economic growth and social objectives between a consolidated, modern and efficient fleet as opposed to a diverse, dispersed and localised fleet. Productivity
growth, the ability to achieve more with a given set of resources and inputs, is the key driver of economic growth.
However, as clearly demonstrated in Barra, small productive factories require a minimum volume of landings to remain
viable. It was argued by respondents that similar circumstances affect many other businesses and ports, where a small
decline in landings, for whatever reason, can be enough to tip the balance and lead to precipitous decline across a
range of fishing-related activities. The extent and prevalence of such ‘knife-edge’ situations is unclear, but where they
do exist then the marginal value of fish landed to the community could be far greater than the price received at
quayside.
2
The Impact of Sea Fishing on Social Wellbeing in Scottish Fishing Communities
A report for the Marine Analytical Unit, Marine Scotland
by Estelle Jones
ESRC/Scottish Government Internship Scheme
August 2013
Barra - Outer Hebrides
Lochinver - Highlands
This report was prepared by Estelle Jones for the Marine Analytical Unit at Marine Scotland. Note that the views
expressed in this report are those of the author and not of Marine Scotland and in no way pre-empt future policy
in this area.
Contents
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1 Coastal Communities
2.2 Fisheries-Dependent Communities
2.3 Social Conditions in Fishing Communities in Scotland
3. Methodology
3.1 Working Definition
3.2 Data from National Databases
3.3 Case Studies Site Selection
3.4 Key Informant Interviews
4. Results
4.1 Scotland Marine Fisheries - Overview
4.2 West Coastal Case Studies
Case Study 1 - Stornoway, Outer Herbrides/Western Isles
Case Study 2 - Barra, Outer Herbrides/Western Isles
Case study 3 - Ullapool – Highlands
Case Study 4 - Lochinver, Highland
5. Discussion
5.1 Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation
5.2 Spatial Dependency - a Shift in Crewing Profiles
5.3 Challenging Identity
5.4 Diversification
6. Conclusion
7. References
2
Executive Summary
Introduction
This project has been commissioned by the Marine Analytical Unit in Marine Scotland to
investigate possible linkages from fishing activity to wider community wellbeing. The Scottish
Government has reconfirmed its commitment to supporting ‘fisheries-dependent
communities’ (FDC) by ‘promoting thriving and safe coastal communities’, however, social
objectives must not undermine the ecological sustainability of Scotland’s marine resources
(Marine Scotland, 2010).
Marine fisheries have changed significantly in recent years, with fewer vessels, fewer
fishermen and lower landing volumes. At the same time the value of landings has continued
to grow in real terms. This study is investigating Scottish fishing communities and the links
between changes in fishing opportunities, in particular declines in whitefish landings, and
social deprivation. A literature review, along with data analysis of the Scottish Index of
Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) as well as 16 key informant interviews, informed this project.
Literature Review
Understanding the links between fisheries and social conditions has been predominantly
researched within the field of economics and the financial performance of targeted fisheries
(OECD, 2007). This has limited our understanding of the complex interaction been fishermen
and fisheries, because it has largely overlooked the needs of communities dependent on
fishing. Dependency in fishing is often divided by sector: it has been stated that
underinvestment in the inshore sector had resulted in degradation of coastal communities
(Brookfield et al. 2005) whilst dependency on the offshore sector is in terms of processing,
which is important in supporting many coastal areas through employment. It has, however,
been claimed that the offshore fleet are corporate enterprises, which are ‘increasingly
detached from local communities’ (Piriz, 2000: 124).
The spatial dimension of the fleets has been classified as ‘place-based’ vs. ‘occupation-based’.
Place-based communities are associated with the inshore sector, and occupation-based
communities, to others who fish or who have an understanding of the industry. Support
networks are found in both place- and occupation-based communities which reflect and
reinforce the extent of social capital. Much has been made of this social support network,
which is felt to be under threat from ‘corporate take over’ of the industry (Piriz, 2000: 124).
Research on the social dimensions of Scotland’s fishing communities has concentrated on east
coast communities and the decline of communities connected to whitefish. The west coast
has had less attention, so has become the focus of this study.
Results
Analysis suggests that Scottish fishing areas were performing better than coastal and noncoastal areas in the 2004 SIMD - Scotland’s measure of acute deprivations but this had
changed from 2006 onwards to match other coastal areas and by 2012 10.5% of fishing areas
were suffering from severe levels of multiple deprivation compared with 19.1% in non-coastal
areas. Analysis of the 2012 SIMD shows that 54.7% of fishing areas are in the bottom half of
the index. However, when we plotted changes between fishing, coastal and non-coastal units,
fishing unit behaved in similar ways to coastal unit, whilst non-coastal units experienced
3
improvements even though this category still accounts for the majority of the most severely
deprived areas. Further, when we plotted these changes against the changes in value of
landings and changes in fishing employment, there did not appear to be a any relationship
between them.
From the four case study ports (Stornoway; Barra; Ullapool; and Lochinver), key issues raised
during informant interviews were, in Stornoway, the age of the trawling fleet, the social links
with aquaculture and the potential of renewables. In Barra, the high direct dependence on
fishing and access to quota, lack of diversification in the fisheries and the health of west coast
nephrops. In Ullapool, the dependence on tourism, dependence on offshore vessels and local
links with fish consumption. And in Lochinver, concerns about the potential deep-water ban
and the knock-on effects in the community.
Discussion
Analysis of the SIMD has highlighted areas exposed to deprivation and explored the observed
decline in the number of units in the country’s bottom 15% most deprived. We conclude that
the decline in the rankings for some fishing areas from 2006 to 2012 is a relative shift where
other areas are improving rather than an indicator that fishing areas are deteriorating in
absolute terms. Further analysis found no relationship between a change in fishing activity
and a change in the scores used in the index and therefore we conclude that reductions in
fishing opportunity are not a significant driver of multiple deprivation. This is at least in part
because fishing represents a small proportion of overall economic activity. The public sector,
tourism and traditional activities, as well as external industries such as oil and gas and the
military all contribute economically. This is in part due to adaptability of maritime people and
the skill-set obtained by having access to the marine environment, which includes fisheries.
Evidence from the fieldwork suggests it is also because the trawling sector is much less
dependent on local labour than in the past. Respondents said that young recruits are difficult
to find and retain, which has resulted in a shift to overseas workers. In many cases, skippers
prefer foreign workers and the contract pay scheme, and they appear less willing to revert
back to local labour. Interviewees also argued that the stepping-stone nature of local inshore
vessels is very important for giving local youths experience at sea which can increase their
chances of employment in other maritime careers. The system is considered invaluable to
support the diversification of opportunities in island and remote communities.
A recurring theme among those interviewed for this project was a perception that the inshore
sector of the fleet is highly vulnerable because of its dependency on a single species
(nephrops) and an inability to diversify. It is felt that corporations are forcing out community’s
access to diverse species and boats are getting ‘boxed in’. Diversification within fisheries was
repeatedly mentioned as making fishing communities more resilient to change, but in rural
areas job creation is challenging and inshore fisheries have an important role in providing
local job opportunities. One of the key themes of this study is the tension between economic
growth and equality, or between a consolidated, modern and efficient fleet and a diverse,
dispersed and localised fleet. This is a key challenge for policymakers in creating a more
successful industry. Quota allocation is key to this issue.
4
1. Introduction
It is often said that fishing is not a job, but a way of life. The traditions, culture and structure
of fishing in coastal communities have been built over the centuries and have supported their
development and sustained their existence (OECD, 2007). Community identity tied to a
particular industry is not uncommon especially in extractive industries and is often
maintained even as the industry’s role in supporting communities diminishes (Bell, 2010).
Understanding the impacts on social conditions from changes in an industry, such as marine
fisheries, is integral for supporting the social structures that make up that community and can
lead the industry on to a more sustainable footing.
From the industry’s point of view, the economic plight of marine fisheries would appear to
have been poorly served by those who, for the last 30 years, have had a dominant role in their
fate – the centralised management of the European Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). Many
have felt that the CFP has made a challenging job almost impossible because of unworkable
regulations, favouring the wealthy and powerful (Thomson, 2001), which poorly address the
social-cultural situation in coastal communities directly dependent on marine fisheries (Symes
and Phillipson, 2009; Urquhart et al, 2011)
This project has been commissioned by the Marine Analytical Unit, Marine Scotland at the
Scottish Government to investigate how fisheries policy has impacted on the social well-being
of coastal fishing communities and how to integrate social indicators into Scotland’s vision for
a ‘clean, healthy, safe, productive, biologically diverse marine and coastal environment
managed to meet the long term aim of the people and nature’ (Marine Scotland, 2010). The
Scottish Government’s primary aim is ‘to focus the Government and public services on
creating a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through
increasing sustainable economic growth’ (Scottish Government, 2011: 11). More specifically,
Scotland has reconfirmed its commitment to supporting marine fisheries, with Richard
Lochhead, Scottish Fisheries Minister stating ‘The sector is a vital mainstay of our coastal
economy and we can’t allow outside influences to undermine Scottish jobs’ (Fishing News,
2011). This commitment has been reviewed by an independent panel on the future of
fisheries management in Scotland who state that, ‘in small and medium sized settlements,
especially on the islands and remote regions on the mainland, fishing in many cases is vital to
their survival’ (Independent Panel, 2010: S19). The Independent Panel highlighted three key
factors in achieving viability: 1) the protection of individual rights of access to the fisheries; 2)
a renewal of social capital, which supports the relations, networks and information exchange
needed for a functioning industry and; 3) the rebuilding of confidence in fishing as an
occupation of choice by the younger generation keen and able to enter. However, these
social objectives must not undermine the ecological sustainability of Scotland’s marine
resources: ‘social objectives, however defined, must complement rather than challenge those
set of sustainable fisheries and the profitable fisheries sector as a whole’ (Independent Panel,
2010: S12.1).
Although Marine Scotland have not stated their vision for fisheries-dependent communities
as clearly as has the independent panel, they have made clear commitments to ‘promote
thriving and safe coastal communities’ by ‘protecting and enhancing our most important
5
marine heritage… [so] that they can be valued, understood and enjoyed’ (Marine Scotland,
2010).
This project will examine the connection between marine fisheries and thriving coastal
communities with opportunities for all to flourish. Marine fisheries have been affected in
recent years by the decline in the number of people employed in the capture industry from
5,707 in 2002 to 4,747 in 2012 (Marine Scotland). This decline has been due to a combination
of factors, such as technological advances, historic overexploitation of stocks, and subsequent
policy initiatives responding to degraded stocks, and is expected to continue;
‘Unless there is an unexpectedly rapid rate of recovery for key demersal stocks,
notably cod, we have to accept the most likely outcome of fisheries development in
Scotland over the next decade to be fewer active fishing vessels, further
rationalisation of processing capacity and, therefore lower levels of employment in
fishing related activities’ (Independent Panel, 2010: S12.3)
Whilst this is far from a foregone conclusion, the present study has carried out an
investigation into the situation found in fishing communities in Scotland that have
experienced a reduction in fishing opportunity in recent years to examine issues such as social
deprivation and whether these areas have suffered from it. There are three stages to this
investigation;
1. A theoretical review of what is a ‘fisheries-dependent’ community, and the linkages
between capture fisheries and the social conditions in the fishing communities
2. A data mining exercise to collate national data on social indicators and fishing activity
to gauge whether fishing communities in Scotland are suffering from deprivation
3. Case study of four west coast communities to gather key informant opinions on how
their communities have dealt with changes in the fishing industry
The report begins with a literature review of previous work on the subject. This is followed by
a methods section on the data mining and key informant interviews. The outcomes of these
two exercises will be presented together with a review of Scottish fishing communities and
indicators of deprivation, followed by a section on key themes that have emerged from the
key informant interviews. Recommendations and issues for further investigation will be
proposed in the final section.
6
2. Literature Review
This section provides the results of a literature search on concepts important to this project.
What is of particular interest is research into the possible linkages between fishing activity,
the broader community, and its social wellbeing. This section will explore the theory and
evidence for these linkages and consider key underpinning concepts such as ‘fishing
communities’ and ‘fisheries-dependent communities’.
Researching the links between fisheries and social conditions has been largely undertaken in
the field of economics focusing on the financial performance of targeted fisheries (OECD,
2007). When fisheries are performing well, it has often been assumed that better social
conditions in dependent communities follow. Now with many fisheries in severe decline, the
opposite is often assumed - that dependent communities must be facing hardship
(Independent Panel, 2010) and in some cases deprivation, especially in rural areas. This
single-discipline focus has limited our understanding of the complex interaction been fishers
and fisheries and how this is linked to supporting communities’ basic needs and maintaining
social, cultural and psychological health along with community cohesion and social stability.
2.1 Coastal Communities
To explore this linkage, a clear working definition of ‘fishing communities’ is required, but
achieving this is far from problem-free. Even the broader classifications of ‘coastal’ and
‘coastal community/town’ are ambiguous, even when based on geographical characteristics
(Department of the Environment and Welsh Office, 1992). A recent project undertaken for
the Marine Management Organisation (MMO, 2011) developed criteria to select coastal
communities for the purpose of formulating a typology of English coastal communities to
inform marine spatial planning policy. The working definition was based on physical and
ecological metrics, using the ‘limits of tidal influence’ applied through transitional water data.
A coastal ‘boundary’ extending 10 km inland was mapped to capture the coastal nature of
populated areas, but not too restrictive so it resulted in the exclusion of coastal hinterland
(MMO, 2011: 7). This practical definition has been adopted by the Scottish Government for
preliminary work on their coastal regions and will be used in the nationwide analysis in this
project.
Whilst geographic definitions have their value, exploring the less tangible aspects that portray
a community’s identity and considering the conditions that contribute to an area’s social wellbeing requires analysing in detail the social profile of communities and how they function.
This means looking in depth at what makes up a community, including its economic, social
and cultural dimensions in addition to the physical. This identity and therefore social function
is often found in a dominant industry (Bell, 2010), especially extractive industries such as coal
mining, timber or fisheries. In fisheries, these are often termed ‘fisheries-dependent
communities’.
2.2 Fisheries-Dependent Communities
The term ‘fisheries-dependent communities’ pervades government documentation, official
reports and academic literature but without any clear definition, very ambiguous boundaries
7
and little guidance on selection criteria. ‘Community’ and ‘dependency’ are described by Ross
(2012) as interlinked in the fisheries literature. A dictionary definition describes dependence
as;
‘the state of relying on or needing someone or something for aid, support, or the like.’
1) Economic dependence
Dependence is often quoted in economic terms with income, employment, gross value added
(GVA) and other indicators linked to wealth generation at its centre. This is understandable as
low income is considered at the heart of dependence through the belief that ‘people are in
poverty if they lack the resources to escape deprivation’ (SDRM, 2003: 5) and one of the main
resources required is finance. Income and employment are two common units when
considering financial dependency, but it has been stated that fishing has never supplied
regular employment or stable incomes due to the seasonal fluctuations of fishing opportunity
and markets (Symes & Phillipson, 2009). Dealing with this level of instability has resulted in
unusual financial coping mechanisms in fishing communities, which means that economic
dependence may not be adequately measured by income alone and is therefore potentially
misinterpreted in national indices. Economic dependence on fisheries is not just limited to
the catch sector, but to onshore businesses, such as support services (net makers, boat
builders, chandlers etc) as well as the processing sector. This results in sites not necessarily
associated with fisheries becoming economically and socially tied to fishing due to the high
dependence on marine species.
The decline in Scotland’s fisheries has been well documented, with reductions in stock levels
followed by lower quotas, decommissioning and fleet consolidation to improve efficiency,
affecting the number of active vessels, employment figures and landings. However, making
the link between economic performance, social well-being and degree of deprivation is
problematic. It has been stated by the Marine Management Organisation that “the biggest
determinant of how a marine activity will affect deprivation is likely to be the extent to which
it generates labour demand at the unskilled end of the labour market” (2011: 31). Whilst the
debate around the skill levels in capture fisheries continues (Parliament.uk, 2011: 4:14pm), a
significant number of workers in the processing sector and increasingly the capture sector,
are foreigners, employed not because of their skill level, but due to the harsh working
conditions associated with the industry. These jobs are increasingly seen as undesirable by
local people, and therefore, given a choice, they often choose to work elsewhere. Therefore,
as rightly argued by Phillipson (2000) high employment does not necessary mean high
dependency on a particular sector if alternative employment opportunities are available in
the locality. This idea has been used to create the Occupational Alternative Ratio (OAR) (HallArber, 2001) which has been used to define dependency in the USA as well as in a small study
in Shetland Islands (SAC, unpublished). The OAR looks at the unique relationship between two
independent occupations, which in this case are fishing as an occupation and a similar
occupation with identical skill requirements in the local economy. This results in a ratio of
fishers to other individuals working in a single alternative occupation, the higher the ratio of
fisher:other, the higher the dependency. Although this formula is not a widely used method,
and is complicated by multiple alternative occupations, it highlights the challenges in defining
dependency on employment figures and income only.
8
In the fisheries literature, dependency is often divided by fishing sector, typically grouped as
1) inshore/small-scale/artisanal fleet, and 2) offshore/large-scale/commercial fleet as
separate contributors. Local communities and the inshore sector are considered linked in
terms of directly supporting each other through local employment, utilising local harbours
and services and strengthening local identity. This linkage is reflected in the management
structures in Marine Scotland’s, Sea Fisheries Division, to ‘support communities and the
inshore sector’ (Ross, 2012: 2). It is also stated by Brookfield et al. (2005) who claim that
underinvestment in the inshore and small boats sector had resulted in degradation in coastal
communities (Ross, 2012) and by Symes and Phillipson (2009) who claim that the ‘inshore
fisheries in particular have a strong influence on the social values of the local communities’
(Urquhart et al., 2011: 243). As for the offshore sector, Brookfield et al. (2005) describes
dependency on the offshore fleet more in terms of processing, which employs more than
three times the number of people in capture fisheries. Using traditional employment and
income criteria, the offshore fleet is important in supporting many coastal communities
therefore creating high dependency on this sector. However, what has been counter argued
is that the offshore fleet is made up of corporate enterprises, which are ‘increasingly
detached from local communities’ (Piriz, 2000: 124), due to the spatial operations and landing
of catch to distant and industrialised ports.
This tension between small-scale and large-scale fishing in southeast England has been
explored in a paper by Gray et al (2011) in the context of discarding because of quota
allocation favouring the offshore sector. Almost 97% of cod quota is now in the hands of
>10m vessels because of historical records, which <10m vessel were not legally required to
keep and therefore ‘entitlement’ favoured the larger vessels. The inshore sector argued for a
redistribution of quota to local fisheries, under the concept of ‘desert’, meaning ‘people get
what they deserve’ (Gray et al, 2011: 123), due to amongst other reasons, ‘the vital
contribution they make to fisheries-dependent communities’ (Gray et al, 2011: 127). The
inshore sector claimed that the local, small-scale fleet is being cut to fit the current quota
allocation. Symes and Phillipson believe that efficiency is the primary drivers, as ‘the
elimination of smaller, less profitable enterprises are integral to the reform agenda for a
leaner, more easily managed fisheries sector.’ (2009: 4)
2) Social dependence
One of the ways social dependence has been classified relates to the spatial dimension of the
fishing fleets, and is divided into two categories: ‘place-based’ vs. ‘occupation-based’
communities. Ross (2012) has referred to these terms, with the former arising from location
in a port town alongside the people who live and work there sharing an understanding and
feeling of connectedness to the industry. This sense of place can extend to regions of coastal
villages that form a ‘fishing area’ and have a fishing identity. Academic researchers have
explored the roles that women play in place-based communities as well as the roles of
community members who reside in these areas but do not fish. These place-based
communities are more readily associated with the inshore sector. Then there are occupationbased communities which are considered characterised by connections to people who fish or
who have an understanding of the industry, no matter where they are from and can span
entire coastlines and seas. It could be argued that the impact of fisheries on communities and
their social conditions would be stronger than other industries due to the migratory nature of
fishing activity and the frequency of boats landing in distant harbours, which supports these
9
relationships with frequent interactions and a shared understanding of occupational risks.
Such occupation-based communities are more readily associated with the offshore fleet.
Ideas of support networks which are found in both place- and occupation-based communities
are a common element in the fisheries literature. These support networks both reflect and
reinforce the extent of social capital in communities, and are of interest to governments as a
means of creating resilience and cohesive communities. For fisheries-dependent
communities, social capital has always been central to the functioning of the fishing industry,
for recruitment, safety, efficiency and solidarity, and it pervades not only capture fisheries
and crew relations, but also onshore trading, processing and support services such as
mechanics and net makers with the banter and camaraderie of this dynamic industry (Ross,
2012). Much has been made of this social support network, which is felt to be under threat
from the ‘corporate take over’ of the industry (Piriz, 2000: 124).
Bonding social capital, the relations between families, has been investigated through
Robinson’s (ESRC, 2009) work in Alaska. He found that the financial rewards of the Pollock
fisheries could sustain the economic pressures of a modern family (house ownership,
children’s education), but the social instability of long absences at sea often led to family
breakdown. For the families that do remain united, extreme adaptation is required and a
shift in family expectation is common. Of course, one could argue that family cohesion is
challenged by occupational absence in any industry, but it is particularly problematic in the
offshore sector of the fishing industry when crews may be away from home for six months of
the year.
Fishing has been described as an intense and mutually dependent occupation where
traditional knowledge, technology, competency, risk and resilience (Reed, 2012) mean a
physically and psychologically challenging occupation. Fishing is considered a ‘way of life’,
which helps to ‘support the sense of community and the history of that community’
(Brookfield et al, 2005: 56). Indeed, so deep-rooted is fishing that fishers’ ‘relation to fishing is
expressive and existential…therefore, fishers often persist in working in a failed fishery’ (van
Ginkel, 2001: 189 in Brookfield et al, 2005: 56). Recent works in developing countries has
questioned the assumption that fishing communities are poor, as commonly assumed in the
literature, but are increasingly viewed as highly vulnerable (Allison et al, 2006). This
vulnerability is due to the nature of the work, the associated risks and shocks that can take
place at any time, whether this be poor catch rates for sustained periods, severe weather, loss
of boats or fishing gears and most deeply felt, loss of lives at sea. This element of
vulnerability contributes to the social structures highlighted above, and the networks that
have formed in fishing communities which are as readily found in developed countries fishing
communities. “They are vulnerable to the challenges of the sea, they’re vulnerable to the
weather, you know, but they are strong resilient people from [Scottish] coastal communities”
(key informant; Ross, 2012: 5).
The concept of vulnerability has been highlighted in the review of the future of fisheries
management in Scotland, where the Independent Panel stated that, ‘communities become
vulnerable when their social cohesion is undermined and their cultural identity is challenged,
and particularity when direction, leadership and self-determination are missing. The role of
10
government, both, national and local, therefore, is to create an environment in which self
determination is possible’ (Independent Panel, 2010: S12.4).
3) Cultural dependence
The culture of fisheries-dependent communities is another subject that has been receiving
attention. There are two questions here: 1) What is the essence of a fisheries-dependent
community’s culture? 2) Can that culture survive in the absence of fisheries activity? This
issue brings us back to the question of what is a fishing community. Generally economic
definitions infer a ‘real’ dependence on fisheries – e.g. a spatial/ economic/ demographic
classification, such as the number of people living/ working in/ near X for whom survival is
dependent on some sort of fisheries related activity. However, Jacob et al. (2001) state that
this strict definition would result in very few fisheries-dependent communities being classified
and that a looser definition, in which ‘substantial, but not fatal, damage would be caused… by
the loss of fishing’ (Brookfield et al., 2005: 57) would be more suitable because it would
include the social-cultural dimensions of fisheries.
On this premise Brookfield et al. (2005) investigated the idea of real vs. virtual fishing
communities, with the former typically associated with ‘products’, direct employment, regular
landings, a local fleet and harbour side facilities to service the vessels, whereas the latter is
characterised by ‘image’, harboured towns, with landings in recent times or still receiving
some landings but where the focus has shifted to the representation of the fisheries for
tourism and investment goes into supplying facilities for visitors such as museums, shops,
seafood restaurants and recreational fishing, all building on the image of commercial fishing.
What is problematic is whether the transition that takes places in these ‘virtual’ communities
- the overlap of a declining fishery with the expansion of a tourist base - can continue to the
point that no actual fishing takes place at all. In other words how much decline can a fishing
community absorb before it becomes entirely ‘virtual’, and would it still be classed as a
fisheries-dependent community?
Some have argued that the identity of fisheries-dependent communities is in the fishing not in
the tourist value that can be made from selling an image. Research from Hasting, southern
England, found that the fleet was a fundamental part of the character and identity of the
town and its cessation it was felt would result in a ‘placelessness’, a ‘high street [that] is
pretty much the same and you could be anywhere’ (Urquhart and Acott, 2012: 8). This has
been echoed by those who feel that there is a ‘dependence on the industry to support the
sense of community and the history of that community’ (Jacob et al., 2001: 17-18). On this
view, a ‘disneyfication’ of fishing communities undermines the identity, values and
authenticity adaptation of traditional fisheries community members whose skills and status
are ill-fitted to a ‘virtual’ existence that is no longer directly dependent on the quayside
landings.
2.3 Social Conditions in Fishing Communities in Scotland
Scotland has a long history of marine fisheries and is still one of the largest sea fishing nations
in Europe. Scottish vessels accounted for 65% of weight and 60% of value, of total landings by
the UK fleet (FAO, 2012). Scotland has landings from four species types, with the pelagic
sector represented in the north sea and the east coast, the demersal sector from both seas
11
and landed mainly in the northern ports, and mollusc and crustaceans from both seas and
landed in almost all ports, but dominant on the west coast. Scotland has both urban/largescale ports, such as Lerwick, Peterhead, and Fraserburgh, and rural/small-scale ports of which
there are hundreds dotted around the coastline and in some cases like the larger ports,
support substantial landings often for an international market.
Research on the social dimensions of Scotland’s fishing communities has been concentrated
on east coast communities and especially focused on the declining fortunes of communities
dependent on the whitefish fleet. This research has been reviewed in two syntheses for the
Scottish Government (University of Aberdeen, 2002; Jamieson et al, 2009) as well as in some
more recent studies, and the following four key themes have emerged:
1) Remote Areas
Scotland is famous for its wild lands and remoteness. In rural Scotland, agriculture, forestry
and fishing taken together is the largest employer along with the public sector, followed by
hotels and restaurants (National Statistics, 2011). The predominance of agriculture, forestry
and fishing over any other sector is the greatest difference between rural and urban areas in
terms of economic activity. ‘The fishing industry provides important social goods in many
remote and deprived areas, with, for example, the inshore sector supporting at least 45% of
total UK fisheries employment, not counting informal and family labour’ (Cabinet Office, 2004
in Urquhart et al, 2011). What is also markedly different is the number of people who are self
employed, with 21-29% in rural areas compared with only 12% in urban areas (National
Statistics, 2011). Although rates of income and employment deprivation are generally lower in
rural areas than in urban areas, it has been recognized that macro-level data often conceal
local dependence and possibly associated hardship. Nevertheless, the decrease in income
generated from traditional livelihoods e.g. fishing and farming, has led to diversification into
multiple forms of income generation which is believed to have maintained household income
and ‘it has also been recognized as a survival strategy particularly in a resource constrained
environment’ (de Silva, 2010: 3).
Munro (ESRC, 2009) has argued that where ‘remoteness’ was once of little concern due to
the self-contained societies and access when required by sea, connectivity and accessibility is
now fundamental for creating communities where people want to live, thrive and diversify
and to attract back the young educated workforce needed to develop and continually support
these dynamic locations.
2) Sustainable Fisheries
Prioritising ecological objectives is ‘usually taken as a given’ (OECD, 2007; ESRC, 2009: 9) for
achieving sustainable fisheries. Whilst economic objectives are often prioritised over social
objectives, doubt is cast over the ordering of economic and social objectives on the one hand,
over ecological sustainability on the other hand. Alastair McIntosh (ESRC, 2009) describes the
CFP as ’survival of the fittest’ in economic terms rather than ‘survival of the most fitting’ in
terms of human ecology (ESRC, 2009: 8) with consolidation of vessel, quota and licensing to
create a lean, profitable and efficient fishing fleet. McIntosh argues that this focus on
economics has resulted in substantial wealth generation for a handful of individuals whilst the
numbers of local skippers and workers have reduced year on year, with large economic and
social losses in communities and increased unsustainable practices at sea which are
12
overriding the primary objective of an ecologically healthy fisheries. He feels that the policy
environment is where change is needed to ensure that economic rewards go to those who
make conservation efforts.
The sustainability of fisheries also raises the question of what level of recovery are we trying
to achieve and for whom? One tension in this question is between ‘inter-generational justice’
and ‘intra-generational justice’; do we support future coastal communities at the expense of
current coastal communities, by restricting current access to aid stock recovery? If support is
for inter-generational justice, it begs the questions, how do we ensure that the current
industry is able to build human capital and transfer skills to allow a future fishing fleet to
flourish if we overly disadvantage the current fleet to such an extent that it can no longer
operate? If we rebuild the stocks but reduce our fleet, are we merely building stocks for other
nations that have supported their fleet and protected the skill base required to exploit these
stocks?
Another tension is between sustainable fisheries and sustainable communities. But Jentoft
states that ‘viable fish stocks require viable fishing communities’ (2000: 53) and that if the
social structure in fisheries is corroded, productive fisheries can no longer be sustained.
Figure 1 shows that, as Ross (2012) states, most districts have experienced a significant
decline in fisheries jobs during the last 10 years (Fig. 1).
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
3
1
-150
-100
-50
Full time
0
50
Part time
%
100
150
200
250
Source: Marine Scotland
Figure 1: Changes between 2001 and 2012 in employment by district in Scotland
The highest decline in the number of people employed in capture fisheries is Lochinver,
followed by Aberdeen, Buckie and Eyemouth where full-time employment has declined by
over 50%. Decline has also been observed in part-time employment in Lochinver and
Aberdeen, though not in Buckie and Eyemouth where there have been large increases in parttime employment, suggesting a change in crew work patterns. Mallaig, Shetland, Peterhead
and Scrabster have all seen declines in both full- and part-time employees, though they still
have substantial numbers of fishers. By contrast, Kinlochbervie has seen an increase in fulltime fishers of 32.3%, though a 100% decline in part-time, which suggests that part-timers
have moved into full-time employment. Campbeltown, Oban, Stornoway and Ullapool have
also seen some increase in full-time employment in the capture fisheries.
13
3) In and out-migration
Migration, both emigration and immigration, has been a concern in fisheries-dependent
communities and rural and coastal communities more generally. Emigration affects young
people, with the attractions of higher education, big cities and diverse career opportunities
not found in coastal fishing communities. This has led to problems of crew recruitment and
young people willing to take over businesses. Phillipson (ESRC, 2009) states that unattractive
working conditions, low confidence in the industry, economic instability and many regulations
are unappealing to young workers. In some cases young people are being actively encouraged
to look for alternative occupations or pursue higher education, which involves leaving the
area. This shift has also involved young women, who are becoming more ambitious and keen
to pursue careers, and are therefore leaving fishing communities which compounds the
problems facing the young men who do remain to work in the fishing industry (Jamieson and
Groves, 2008).
With regard to immigration, it is now recognized that migrant workers are important
contributors to the fishing industry. Eastern Europeans and more recently South-east Asia
workers have been supplying the shortfall in local recruits and taking on the low-waged work
in trying conditions. These workers have often been classed as temporary economic migrants,
but recent studies have shown that some Eastern Europeans have long-term ambitions to
stay permanently in the UK, though assistance from the authorities with integration has been
lukewarm.
4) Social Capital
Ross (2012) found evidence to suggest that traditional social networks in and between FDCs
was being undermined by the contraction of the fleet and the increased industrialisation of
the sectors. Ross reported perceptions of a ‘dog-eat-dog’ attitude in the larger ports,
resulting in decisions focused on self and family (bonding capital) rather than the well-being
of the wider communities (bridging capital). Bonding capital is considered a close knit
network in which the primary focus is survival of the household compared with the latter,
bridging capital, which allows wider networks more commonly associated with community
development.
The decline in fish stocks and weakening social capital in the fishing industry has driven many
fishers to seek alternative employment. This has exacerbated the problem of recruiting local
crew, who have diversified into other industries and are showing little desire to return and
make fishing a career. However, the technical nature of their jobs is not believed to be readily
transferable and the desire to undertake other forms of employment is rare in fishers as they
are often quoted as ‘loving their jobs’ (Ross, 2012) and have little aspiration to do anything
else. As we shall see, interviews highlighted three residual problems for the fishing industry;
1) the attraction of further education has resulted in motivated individuals moving away and
often not returning; 2) the financial capital required to access fisheries is often beyond the
reach of young skippers and; 3) local skippers increasingly see local crew as unreliable, with
drinking and drug taking contributing to this perception. This has brought into question the
long-held perception that local cohesion and social networks are key to a successful fishing
industry as the processing sector and increasingly the capture sector become highly
dependent on imported labour to maintain production.
14
3. Methodology
This section describes the data and methods used to: 1) explore the links between landings
and fisheries employments and the Scotland Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) and; 2)
carry out stakeholder interviews to gather qualitative data on social conditions in four case
study sites. Before reviewing the data and methods, we will describe the SIMD and how we
are defining fisheries-dependent communities.
3.1 Working Definition
Deprivation - Deprivation is a multifaceted concept that focuses on two criteria; material
goods and social life. It is a relative concept that is defined by the societal norms and
expectations from the societal group being measured. Deprivation is linked with ideas of
poverty, but includes social living standards that could be a result of poverty such as social
exclusion and injustice.
“Deprivation takes many different forms in every known society. People can be said to
be deprived if they lack the types of diet, clothing, housing, household facilities and
fuel and environmental, educational, working and social conditions, activities and
facilities which are customary, or at least widely encouraged and approved, in the
societies to which they belong” (Townsend, 1987: 126)
Townsend’s definition contains two distinct parts. The first is material; the ability to obtain
food, suitable clothing, shelter and fuel. This is relatively clear, measurable and has a clear link
to income. These elements are relatively well represented in deprivation indexes. The second
part of Townsend’s definition – on social life - is much less tangible and more subjective.
There are clear baselines which most would agree are minimum standards of social life; such
as management of household waste, mandatory schooling until 16, maximum daily working
hours. However perceptions of adequate environmental, working and social conditions are
highly variable, shaped by local situation, location, and culture, and are much less well
represented in large data sets than are those used to measure concepts such as material
deprivation.
The UK measures deprivation for the whole kingdom, but the Scottish Government have
developed their own index and interactive program which is nation specific. This index has
data from the years 2004, 2006 and 2009, with updates scheduled for November 2012.
The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) consists of seven domains, and a range of
quantitative data sets feed into each domain. Domains are weighted with income,
employment, health and education given higher weighting compared with access, crime and
housing. Of primary importance are the two indicators on income and employment which are
both given the highest weighting due to reliability of data and theoretical support described
by Townsend:
“while people experiencing some forms of deprivation may not all have low income,
people experiencing multiple or single but very severe forms of deprivation are in
almost every instance likely to have very little income and little or no other
resources.” (Townsend, 1987)
15
The data is ranked from 1 - the most deprived to 6,505 - the least deprived. Depending on the
total score from the domains described below, a unit will be given a ranking which is relative
and can change in position in later surveys if any of the domains change in score.
 The Income domain is classified as ‘income deprived’ which is an amalgamation of
benefit claims available to individuals on low income. Deprived areas have a high number
of benefit claimants, and more affluent areas have a low number of benefit claimants.
 The Employment domain signifies ‘employment deprived’ which is a combination of all
benefit claims available to people of working age who are not working. Deprived areas
have higher benefit claims.
 The Crime domain is a sum of recorded crimes from a predefined list (violence,
dishonesty - domestic housebreaking, vandalism, drugs offences and minor assault).
Deprived areas have higher number of reported crime.
 The Education domain represents ‘cause’ (performance, absenteeism and progression
to higher education) and ‘outcome’ (lack of qualification, 16-19 yrs old out of work) and
classified as ‘educationally deprived’.
 The Health domain is a combination of indicators which result in a higher than expect
level of ill health or mortality. Hospital episodes, depression or stress related
prescriptions and low birth weights amongst other factors contribute to health
deprivation.
 The Housing domain combines two indicators; housing without central heating and
overcrowding.
 The Access domain captures issues of financial cost, time and inconvenience of having
to travel to access basic services. Road networks, public transport, schooling, shopping,
petrol stations and post offices are all included.
The SIMD has been successfully used to target funding for policy to reduce poverty in areas
identified as exposed to multiple deprivation. However the SIMD has been criticised for not
adequately identifying deprivation in rural areas. The SIMD identifies deprived zones by
highlighting the top 5%, 10%, and 15% nationwide, but this clustering is dominated by cities
which are affected by deprivation in different ways to rural regions. The problem is that data
zones in rural areas are generally large and do not capture the dispersion of deprivation as
well as is captured in urban areas. Of particular interest to the present study are coastal
areas. In a previous project, Marine Scotland ran an analysis to classify coastal and non-coast
units using the MMO definition of coastal - areas within 10 km of the coast, including estuary
and river limits to include transitional waters. This definition was applied but resulted in areas
not considered to be coastal, such as Glasgow and Stirling owing to the Clyde and Firth rivers
flowing far inland. Further analysis maintained the 10 km buffer, but excluding estuaries and
rivers which was felt offered a more accurate representation of coastal areas in Scotland.
Only data zones which bordered the coast or had >50% of their area within 10 km were
classified. This resulted in 52.2% of Scotland’s data zones and 51.8% of its population
classified as coastal. This data was then combined with the fisheries data to identify fisheriesdependent data units, which is detailed below.
Fisheries Dependent Communities - To select fisheries-dependent communities we use
economic measures. Whilst we recognize the limitations of selecting purely on active fishing
16
areas rather than areas that identify themselves with fishing, our primary reasoning is data
availability. To look at social change, we require time-series data over a large spatial scale
which limits us to landings and employment in the capture sector which are geographically
tied to creeks and ports. One of the key challenges with collating the time-series data is the
array of different geographical scales and different time-series that the data is classified
under, which varies by source.
3.2 Data from National Databases
This report is based on nationwide data of fish landings by volume and value along with
employment figures from 2001 to 2012 to quantify changes in activity over the past decade.
This data was collated at a fine scale to map smaller harbours, creeks or island communities.
All landing data is identified by port or creek which is mapped as point data with a
geographical location. All the social data is identified by data unit (used by the SIMD) which is
mapped as a polygon covering an area. A data unit is determined by population density which
ranges from 600 to around 1000 people per unit, and a cluster of units in an area represents a
town while one large unit represents rural terrain with low population density. Marrying the
point data and polygon data is problematic due to the diversity of the Scottish coastline which
renders some systematic techniques that are suitable for one stretch of coast, inappropriate
for another. Due to time limitations we have selected polygons on a visual interpretation of
clusters in populated areas around port point data (dominant on the east coast), or the data
unit the port was located in, if rural (dominant on the west coast). We recognise a limitation
in this method that it does not identify where fishers or people dependent on fisheries live,
but since we are interested in whether an area is suffering from deprivation due to a change
in the fisheries, we feel that this must be gauged as an area-wide affect rather than as a
household effect.
To collate the main data set, landings data were taken from FIN (Fisheries Information
Network), an internal Scottish Government database, populated by port authorities from daily
landings. This was used to create total landings by volume and value by year and then by
creek. This was mined for all creeks which had landings totalling over £500,000 at some point
in the last town years to exclude ports with little financial links to fishing, but to also include
ports that might have seen a major decline after substantial landings. Data was clustered
every three years to coincide with the SIMD data and change calculated between clusters for
statistical analysis. This data was plotted in SPSS against two of the key domains which
contribute to the SIMD (income and employment) as the other domains could not be
compared because of methodological changes in data collection with the remaining five
domains. Statistical analysis was undertaken to look for relationships between the whole
data set as well more focused analysis between urban fishing ports (population of >3000) and
rural fishing ports (<3000).
3.3 Case Studies Site Selection
In selecting the case study sites, initial exploration started with the 2001 UK census as it was
the only dataset that collects employment by industry clustered by ‘wards’ (the smallest
spatial area) in 2001. Unfortunately, at the time of writing, the 2011 census had yet to be
17
published. Wards can be used to find data units, which are the newest unit for demographic
analysis and used in the SIMD. Wards that had >1% of people employed in fisheries in 2001
were collated to form a list of areas with some form of fishing activity. In the 2001 census
there is no disaggregation of fishing activity and so the figures may include employment in
freshwater fisheries, aquaculture and fish processing. If we considered all the wards that had
less than 1% of people working in fishing, this would result in the vast majority of inland
wards, which would include fresh water fisheries in the country’s extensive lochs. Therefore
we decided on >1% which is significantly higher than the national average (0.3%), and which
incorporated areas the majority of which were coastal, and supported the infrastructure and
human capital associated with marine fisheries. Table 2 outlines key details from the census
relevant to fishing employment including the local authority (LA), number of wards with
fishing activity, % of people employed and % of wards with fisheries employment in the LA.
Table 1: Fishing employment 2001 UK census1.
Local Authority
(LA)
No.
wards
Eilean Siar
Orkney Islands
Shetland Islands
Aberdeenshire
Argyll & Bute
Highlands
Moray
Scottish Borders
South Ayrshire
Fife
16
12
12
43
34
75
25
33
30
78
No. fishers
employ in
LA
626
304
600
1135
727
1387
211
160
149
77
No. wards
fishing >1%
of employ
16
12
12
18
18
24
6
3
2
2
No. wards
fishing >3%
of employ
11
6
6
15
6
11
3
0
0
0
% in ward
with highest
employ
15.2
8.7
22.7
7.4
8.4
11.5
4.5
2.7
1.17
2.1
% of wards in
LA with >1%
fishing employ
100
100
100
42
53
32
24
9
7
3
% of wards in
LA with >3%
fishing employ
69
50
50
35
18
15
12
0
0
0
The list has been ordered by the last column, (% of ward in LA with >3% employment) with
the objective of ranking by the relative proportion of wards with high fisheries employment.
It needs to be noted that LAs at the bottom of the list have been underrepresented as they
include large areas of non-coastal wards. Adjusting these to calculate coastal wards only was
not considered time effective as all the data presented will contribute to indications of
dependency and we stress this ranking is not meant to represent a continuum of the most- to
the least- dependent.
The three island authorities (Eilean Siar, Orkney and Shetland) are ranked the highest with
>1% fisheries employment present in all wards and >3% employment in over half of the
wards. The first mainland LA (Aberdeenshire) is home to two of the UK largest fishing
harbours, Peterhead and Fraserburgh and has significant employment. Argyll & Bute are
home to two smaller ports on the west coast, Oban and Campbeltown. The Highlands has a
number of remote ports, but with substantial landings and overall has the highest number of
fishermen who are widely dispersed over the authority. The remaining four are small ports
mainly in southern Scotland whose LAs are dominated by other industries, but still home to
many fishermen in a small number of wards.
1
At time of writing 2011 census data has been collected, but not published.
18
Looking at the raw data only, the east coast and the Shetland Islands have the highest
landings and employment figures, suggesting high dependence. However the review above
indicated that the Western Isles has fishing present in all wards and the Highlands have the
highest number of employed fishers over a large geographical area. We were also aware that
the literature is dominated by reviews of the east coast, so it was decided to select
communities on the west coast for the case studies. To focus this selection further, results
from the national data analysis was used to highlight ports that had seen a steep decline in
landings, which we felt would assist the investigation into the links between fisheries decline
and social change. Ullapool and Lochinver were two such ports and due to our interest in
the Western Isles and our short field study period, Stornoway and Barra were also selected
because of good transport links between the sites.
3.4 Key Informant Interviews
Key informant interviews were arranged at the four sites with individuals who were
considered to have an overview of the changes that had taken place in the areas. Since our
key interest was in fisheries, the objective was to get a diverse range of views on its
importance from a range of experts and stakeholders from a range of industries, such as
tourism, energy - renewables and policy and planning. Overall, 16 interviews were conducted,
five in Stornoway, two in Barra, six in Ullapool and three in Lochinver. Interviews were
conducted in an informal manner with 15 open questions based around four themes: 1)
composition of activity/fishing in the area; 2) employment; 3) sustainability and; 4) changes in
the fisheries. Interview durations ranged from 40 minutes to 2 hours, depending on the time
interviewees had available.
19
4. Results
This results section is divided into two parts; the first is an overview of Scottish ‘fishing’
communities which investigates the relationship between the SIMD data and the volume and
value of landings and employment for all of Scotland’s active fishing creeks. This data is from
four SIMD surveys (2004, 2006, 2009 and 2012) and predefined classifications of ‘rural fishing
units’ and ‘urban fishing units’. The second part is a detailed investigation into four case
studies using qualitative data collected from key informant interviews.
4.1 Scotland Marine Fisheries - Overview
Scotland has 6,505 data units for the whole country, 3,428 are coastal units as defined by
Marine Scotland, and 3077 are non-coastal units. Of the coastal units, 324 were identified as
having financial links to fisheries, hereafter known as fishing units and the remaining 3,069 as
non-fishing coastal area, hereafter known as coastal units. Of the 324 fishing units, 34 were
listed in Scotland’s most severely deprived areas in 2012 which was up from 24 in 2004. This
equates to a raise from 7.1% to 10.5% of units classified as fishing compared with a rise of
9.1% to 10.6% for coastal units and a decrease from 21.7% to 19.2% for non-coastal units
stated as severely deprived (or in the country’s bottom 15%). This indicates that fishing units
are on average performing better than coastal and non-coastal units, with lower rates of
severe multi-deprivation. However, the number of fishing units in the bottom 15% have
increased significantly over this time period. As this is a relative ranking, changes in position
do not necessarily mean that units have deteriorated in absolute terms, although this is a
possibility, but could equally mean other areas have improved and moved up in the ranks
which would have resulted in a change in position of other units. Further investigation is
therefore required.
Table 3 lists the fishing units in the country’s 15% most deprived areas in 2012. Ayrshire has
the majority of deprived fishing units around the harbour of Ayr. This town was included in
this analysis because it met the selection criteria. However, marine fisheries has almost
disappeared from the town with total landings of £70,617 in the last three years down from a
still-modest £417,969 in 2000. This indicates that fisheries has been of little relative
importance to this town for some time in comparison with other industries and that current
deprivation levels have little to do with changes in fishing activity during the last decade. All
other fishing locations in the bottom 15% have significantly higher landings.
Table 2: Fishing units in the Scotland’s 15% most deprived
Local Authority (LA)
# units in LA
Location of units
South Ayrshire
10
All in Ayr
Highlands
5
1 in Balintore and 4 in Wick
Dumfries & Galloway
4
3 in Stranraer and 1 in Annan
Aberdeenshire
4
3 in Peterhead and 1 in Fraserburgh
Angus
3
All in Arbroath
Argyll & Bute
2
Both in Campbeltown
20
Figure 2: Visual representation of the SIMD ranking for all fishing data units. Insets are zoomed in
representations of key ports not distinguishable on the national map.
21
Figure 2 is a visual representation of all fishing units and their ranking on the 2012 SIMD. The
east coast has much higher population density, which makes it hard to interpret the units at
this scale. The west coast has many areas ranked in the middle of the index whilst the Outer
Hebrides and Northern Highlands have large areas that are ranked as lower on the index,
even if they are not classed as in the bottom 15% of the country’s most deprived areas.
Pockets in urban fishing ports such as Peterhead, Fraserburgh, Wick and Ayr are classed as
severely deprived but are alongside other areas which are performing well.
Figure 3: Scatter plot of fishing units and rank on the 2012 SIMD.
Figure 3 shows the position of all fishing units on the SIMD 2012 index (Y axis) which are
equally distributed across the SIMD scale. The units at the top are the least deprived whilst
those at the bottom are the most deprived. The X axis is the 324 units classified as fishing
units. The majority of the points are clustered in the middle third of the index between 2000
to 4000 in the ranking. The dotted line represents the midpoint and 54.7% of the data units
are positioned in the bottom half of the index. Whilst useful, to understand the effects of
change in fishing units, the changes in their scores over time are required so this change was
plotted from 2004 to 2012 (Fig. 4) using the employment and income scores, which are the
only two domains which could be compared over time (see methods section) but are also the
two key domains contributing to the main SIMD.
These plots (Fig. 4) shows the changes in income and employment scores in fishing units
between the relative indexes, which is a measure of the percentage change of people
claiming either employment or income related benefits. Between 2004-2006 the changes in
both income and employment scores were highly scattered with a similar number of fishing
unit experiencing an increase as decrease in both scores. Between 2006-2009, however
income scores increased, which means the majority of fishing units saw an increase in the
amount of people making claims for income related benefits, whilst there was a notable
decrease in all fishing units for people claiming employment related benefits. This trend was
reversed between 2009-2012, where employment claims increased and income claims
decreased.
22
Figure 4: Scatter plot of fishing units and the
change in rank on the SIMD between 2004-2012.
Blue dots represent the change in income scores
and the red the change in employment scores.
2009-2012 look different due to the scores being
rounded, which had not be the case in past
indexes.
When we examine this pattern in relation to the other groups we see that they are behaving
in very similar ways, although it would appear that the degree of change is more severe in nocoastal units (Fig. 5). The boxplots in figure 5 are the median value and interquartile range for
each group (fishing, coastal and non-coastal).
Figure 5: Boxplots showing interquartile range and median value of areas by year from income (left)
and employment (right). Boxplots below the 0 line have experienced a reduction in the percentage
of people claiming those types of benefit and those above the line the opposite is the case. The
circles represent outliers which extend more than 1.5 box-lengths from the edge of the box and
stars extreme outliers extending more than three box-lengths.
As we can see in 2004-2006, fishing and coastal unit on average remained the same, whilst
non-coastal unit saw a decrease in claims. Between 2006-2009 it would appear that fishing
units saw an increase in the number of people making claims, however this was also the case
in coastal and non-coastal units (Fig 5. left). Between 2009-2012 there was a large increase in
23
fishing units making employment claims, but again this was also the case in coastal and noncoastal unit (Fig 5. right). For income claims fishing unit saw a much high decrease in claims
compared with either coastal and non-coastal units (Fig. 5 right).
Figure 6: Scatter plot of change in income scores against change in value of landings for the period
2006 to 2009. Value at 2011 prices. Only the 2006-2009 plot is presented here due to the similarity
in patterns between the other years.
To establish whether these changes have any link to fishing activity we plotted the data
against fishing value and fishing employment. When plotting the change in income scores
against changes in value of landings (Fig. 6) no relationship was found. Figure 6 shows that a
increase in income scores is not necessarily related to a decrease in value of landings, as units
that have increased in income claims have seen very little change in value or, in some cases,
have seen an increase in the value that fishing has brought to the area. To check further and
due to the majority of severe deprived units being in large towns (Fig. 2), we divided the data
points by rural (<3000 people) and urban (>3000 people) to see if any difference was visible.
When looking at the urban units (green data points) the relationship that we would expect to
see is present - there is a decrease in claims as landing value increases, however this
relationship is weak and not significant (Table 3) and could therefore be there by chance.
Table 3: Pearson product-moment correlation of change in landing value against changes in income
scores of all fishing units, all rural fishing units and all urban fishing units.
Value of landings
change in all fishing units
change in rural units
change in urban units
2004-2006
r = .098, n = 103, p = .324
r = -.143, n = 77, p= .215
r = .309, n = 26, p = .124
2006-2009
r = .001, n = 117, p = .989
r = .129, n = 90, p = .227
r = -.195, n = 27, p = .330
2009-2012
r = -.035, n = 118, p = .710
r = .009, n = 91, p = .936
r = -.245, n = 27, p = .219
When the change in employment scores is plotted against employment in fishing (Fig. 7) again
there is no relationship to suggest that a change in employment score is related to a change in
24
the numbers of people employed in capture fisheries2. Much like the previous plot, urban
ports did show the pattern expected - employment claims decreased as employment in
fisheries increased - but again this is a very weak relationship and not significant (Table 4)
Table 4: Pearson product-moment correlation of change in the number of jobs in fishers against
changes in employment scores of all fishing units, all rural fishing units and all urban fishing units.
Number of fisheries jobs
change in all fishing units
change in rural units
change in urban units
2004-2006
r = -.066, n = 117, p = .479
r = -.072, n = 91, p= .495
r = -.098, n = 26, p = .634
2006-2009
r = -.014, n = 117, p = .878
r = .025, n = 91, p = .817
r = -.222, n = 26, p = .275
2009-2012
r = -.052, n = 117, p = .578
r = -.032, n = 91, p = .762
r = -.113, n = 26, p = .582
Figure 7: Scatter plot of change in employment scores against change in number employed in
fisheries for the period 2006 to 2009. Value at 2011 prices. Only the 2006-2009 plot is presented
here due to the similarity in patterns between other years.
In summary, preliminary analysis shows that whilst less fishing units are classed as severely
deprived compared with coastal and non-coastal units, over 57% are in the lower half of the
2012 SIMD index. Since 2004 the number of fishing units in the bottom 15% of the country’s
most deprived has increase suggesting a decrease in relative well-being in these communities.
This change in status is more likely due to improvements in conditions in non-coastal unit,
rather than a worsening in fishing areas. Non-coastal units experienced a significant decrease
in both employment and income claimants between 2004-2006, which would have moved
non-coastal units up in the rank and others down in the ranking. This was further supported
by comparing the change in the income and employment domains against the change in the
value of landings and employment in fisheries.
The scatter plots produced for these correlations found a wide spread of data units and
therefore no clustering which suggest no associations between variables. When analysed by
urban and rural port, the expected relationship was observed for urban ports, but due to the
2
Only data on those employed in capture fisheries was used as no figure were available on other fisheriesrelated industries such as processing and aquaculture
25
strength of the correlation this could have just been displayed by chance and therefore we
conclude that there is no relationship between a change in income and employment scores
with a change in fish landings and employment. This would suggest that other industries play
a more important role in how communities rank on the SIMD than fisheries. This will be
qualitatively reviewed and discussed in the following section of this report which focuses on
four fishing ports on the west coast of Scotland.
4.2 West Coast Case Studies
Case Study 1 - Stornoway, Outer Herbrides/Western Isles
Stornoway is the administrative centre for the Outer Hebrides and their largest urban area
and is home to one third of the Western Isles’ population. As with many British ports,
Stornoway’s fishing was built on the herring fishery, evolved into whitefish and is now almost
completely dependent on crustaceans. Stornoway port, with 3% employment in fisheries, has
a low level of fisheries related employment compared with other ports in the Outer Hebrides
(European Commission, 2006).
Table 5: Overview of Stornoway and key data relating to the wild fishing sector from KI interviews3
Local vessels
13 nephrop trawlers (Western Isles boats)
Landings by foreign vessels
Rarely
Processing
Youngs Bluecrest (nephrops processing ~50 employed)
Salmon farming
None in near vicinity to Stornoway
Salmon processing
The Scottish Salmon Company (~70 employed)
Other fish related services
Slipway for servicing large vessels
Creel manufacturers (Gael Force)
Chandler
Haulage (3 firms transporting fish)
Other important industries
Public sector
Harris Tweed (~80 mill workers and ~100 home weavers)
Pharmaceutical (marine based products 30-40 employed)
Services and Communications (~120 employed)
Tourism (no figures)
Offshore oil & gas (no figures)
Other potential industries
Renewables (terrestrial wind farms and marine wind and wave)
Seaweed and mussel farm expansion
Vessels landed around £3.5 million worth of marine species into Stornoway in 2012 which is a
decline of around 30% in value from 2000. Volume remained relatively stable at around 1700
tonnes from 2000 to 2007, but declined at a steady rate to under 1000 tonnes by 2010 (Fig.
8). This appears to have recovered over the last two years to volumes at around 1200 tonnes
along with value. The spike in value in 2006 appears to be due to high prices for molluscs and
crustaceans experienced at that time. Crustaceans make up the majority of the Stornoway
fishery, but the number of boats targeting these species and landing into Stornoway has
declined but at a lesser rate than other species. Boats targeting molluscs and demersal have
declined by 71% and 68% respectively since 2004.
3
Data in this table includes industries specific to this port and the local area, but because of Stornoway’s administrative
importance, ‘other important industries’ may include industries based in the northern area (Lewis) and middle isles (Harris).
26
Figure 8: Landings by
weight and value from
all vessels. Values at
2012 prices
Deprivation and Community Well-being - Stornoway is positioned in the middle of the SIMD
ranging from 2238-3496 in the rankings. This is slightly higher (i.e. less deprived) than other
areas in the Western Isles due to the administrative nature of the town which is highly
dependent on public sector employment. Access is much higher than surrounding area
because of local services available in the town as well as ferry and airport links to the
mainland. Education is strong in this region, with islanders known for achieving good grades,
which has resulted in many youngsters leaving the Isles to pursue further education, however
one key informant reports people often returning to raise their families. Housing scores
fluctuate between areas around Stornoway, overall, it still ranks as high with suitable, quality
accommodation available at reasonable prices which, along with better work opportunities,
are incentives for young people to leave the rural areas and move to the main town. Income
and employment were lower in the ranking which requires further investigation than this
project allows. However from a fisheries perspective and as stated in the literature,
deprivation is often linked to low-skilled labour, and Stornoway has lost much of its
processing capacity from both wild caught and farmed fish in recent years. However other
industries are dominant in Stornoway and overall benefit claims have been decreasing at a
steady rate over the past decade with a modest rise in 2009. Income and employment
deprivation averaged 14.8% and 11.2% of households respectively, just below Scotland’s
average of 15% and 12%.
Three main issues were raised during the key informant interviews; 1) the age of the
Stornoway fleet; 2) the social links with aquaculture; 3) and the potential of renewables. For
the first, the Stornoway fleet has an average vessel age of 25 yrs for static and scallop vessels,
38 yrs for trawling vessels and an average age of skippers of 45 yrs old (European
Commission, 2009). In an attempt to rejuvenate the fleet, the Outer Hebrides Fisheries
Support Scheme (OHFSS) was established, which was a partnership between Western Isles
Council, The Royal Bank of Scotland, and the Western Isles Fishermen’s Association. Its
purpose was to assist young skippers in purchasing second-hand vessels to fish inshore
waters. The scheme ran from 2000-2010 and was considered by key informants as highly
successful [90 applications and only one recalled] for getting young fishing teams into the
industry. It was felt that a renewal of the scheme would be well received with many new
recruits keen to take on new vessels, however updating this image of an aged fleet with the
27
regenerated vessels of the 2000-2010 scheme would be required to assess current
requirements in the fleet.
Aquaculture is an important economic activity in the Western Isles, generating over 63 million
euro in value and employing around 140 people in Stornoway in 2008 (European Commission,
2009). In the 1970s, over 40 independent companies operated using low-skilled labour in the
Isles. Through drives for efficiency, sites have been consolidated and now three
multinationals dominate production along with a handful of organic farmers. Although
aquaculture has provided a significant alternative source of income to the capture sector with
good wages and a stable income, it has been criticised on two fronts; 1) it has generated
concern over environmental pollution and the impacts on wild salmon and crustaceans and;
2) there are considered to be few economic links beyond hosting the farming, and the
number of jobs created falls short of expectations because of the mechanical methods used
to service farms rather than local labour: “its an industry that is using the Western Isles to
grow salmon, and then all that’s left here are the crumbs” (KI). Recent aquaculture
expansion proposals have raised objections for the first time, which indicates local scepticism
about the perceived benefits of the farms.
Interviewees suggested that renewables are receiving much interest and are seen to be a key
component in the future for economic growth in the Western Isles. From a fisheries
perspective concern was also expressed over displacement of fishers from productive fishing
grounds; a respondent noted that a trial scheme for wave turbines, which is about to
commence, has been placed in prime lobster grounds. There are further concerns about the
revenues stream of marine renewables with key informants believing communities will only
benefit from jobs, not from rental from inshore areas, due to seabed ownership by the Crown
Estate.
Case Study 2 - Barra, Outer Herbrides/Western Isles
The most southern of the Western Isles, Barra is a small island, home to around 1140 people.
Barra has two marine ports; Northbay which lands straight into Barratlantic’s processing
facility and Castlebay in the main town. Barra’s landings are mainly nephrops, but some
demersal and mollusc species are landed as well as some by-catch species (pelagic) for
processing.
Table 6: Overview of Barra and key data relating to the fishing sector from KI interviews
Local vessels
7 local nephrop trawlers - 3 skipper/Barratlantic shares, 4 skipper
owned (12 employed)
Local creel boats 15-20 vessels (30 - 40 employed)
Landings by foreign vessels Rarely
Processing
Barratlantic (~30 fulltime employees and 10-12 seasonal employees
– summer)
3 administration staff
Salmon farming
2 sites, no data on volume produced
Salmon processing
Smokehouse at Barratlantic
Other fish related services
Island fish van – once a week, sells around island
Other important industries Public sector
Tourism (four hotels and local B&Bs, seasonal - April to Sept)
Potential Industries
Renewables (but considered a long way off)
28
Recreational fishing and tourism are the only two private sector activities on the island which
makes it highly dependent on commercial fisheries with almost 10% of the population
employed in capture and processing. Barratlantic export all their products.
Barra landed around £1.7 million of marine species in 2012 down by 23% from 2000. After a
steady decline from 2000 to 2005 in both volume and value, 2006 to 2008 saw a steep rise in
the value of landings which is most likely due to the implementation of the registration of
buyers and sellers scheme. Decline has once again been observed from 2007 to 2012 with
both volume and value at levels similar to the lows in 2005 (Fig. 9).
Figure 9: Landings by
weight and value from
all vessels. Values at
2012 prices
In the early 2000s Barra was landing a diverse range of species. Over the past decade landing
of demersal species have dropped by 60% and molluscs species by 86%. Crustaceans have
increased by 30%, making this the main species type as in most other ports on the west coast.
The number of vessels has remained stable for crustaceans but has decreased slightly for
demersal and more notably for molluscs.
Deprivation and Community Well-being - Barra has an overall deprivation ranking in the
bottom third of the index. Access, housing and health had low to medium scores due to low
access, housing availability and limited health services. It was however stated that house
construction had increased in the last 10 years, due to young adults building homes on family
land. Income, employment and education ranked in the middle of the index, with
Barratlantic as the main private sector employer based on the island. Income and
employment deprivation averaged at 15% and 9% respectively, with income the same as
Scotland average and employment lower than the Scottish average of 12%. Due to the
employment profile of Barratlantic, which supports 7 trawling vessels and many creelers, as
well as over 50 people in the processing factory and auxiliary services in the transporting of
produce, Barra is highly dependent on fisheries.
Primary concerns with maintaining this successful business (Barratlantic) is access to quota.
This facility is highly dependent on one fishery (nephrops) as they have little quota to diversify
if stocks decline, which makes the business very vulnerable to change. It was stated that the
boats cannot tie-up for any longer than a week or the factory will have to shut down. Key
informants felt there was an urgent need to protect inshore stocks and to be able to diversify
to cope with natural fluctuations as well as policy changes. Concerns were voiced over 2013
29
stocks after heavy exploitation from local and more specifically North-East vessels in 2012.
Increased effort from NE vessels changing their fishing patterns, and good weather for local
boats, has resulted in landings up in 2012 by 40% on previous years. This has raised concern
over the remaining spawning stock.
Two issues mentioned in interviews, not directly related to fisheries, were the availability of
work placements for graduates who have completed a course in a skilled trade; and the
designations for environmental protection (Fishingnewseu.com, 2012). Regarding skilled
work placements, graduates need four to five years on job training before being fully qualified
which was not considered feasible for local businesses based in Barra. It was felt that the
demand for skilled tradesmen was there, but not the support need during the transition
period from trainee to a qualified tradesperson. Regarding conservation, key informants were
concerned about the proposed designations and potential restrictions. This reservation has
resulted in external groups labelling the islanders as un-environmental, which they feel is
unfair when the community have always been environmentally aware, but are not keen to get
involved in a legislative process in which they feel they have no say. It was believed by
informants that environmentalists were trying to ‘protect’ natural assets from the islanders’
creativity and innovations that has been crucial to sustain the islands over the centuries and
keep them worthy of such designations.
Case study 3 - Ullapool, Highlands
Ullapool is the most north-western town of any size in the Highland region of Scotland and a
travel gateway to the Western Isles with daily ferries operating from the town harbour. It is a
landing site for large north-east vessels targeting nephrops and whitefish as well as local
trawlers and creel boats. The harbour has recently upgraded its services to cater for an
increasing number of visiting yachts.
Table 7: Overview of Ullapool and key data relating to the fishing sector from KI interviews
Local vessels
7 nephrops trawlers
7 creel boats targeting nephrops
Landings by foreign vessels Anglo-Spanish fleet (~ 150 landings per year)
East Coast vessels, 3 twin rigged trawlers catching nephrops for
whitefish 80-100 landings per yr, but number of boats not known
Processing
None
Salmon farming
Wester Ross Fisheries - biggest local employer (38 personnel) –
Renowned for high quality husbandry and higher than average
employment
Salmon processing
Small salmon smokehouse
Other fish related services
“What Marine” – Inventor of marine technology – local and export
Other important industries Tourism (range of small hotels and B&Bs)
Transportation - ferry (gateway to the Western Isles)
Potential industries
Marine tourism (sheltered bay, so potential for a marina)
Expansion in services for displaced fishers from renewables
High value products – live nephrops and quality salmon – labour
intensive, small-scale production
High end tourism – upgrade to attract new custom
Beautifully situated, Ullapool is also a tourist attraction in it own right with wildlife tours and
diving offered for visitors as well as an attractive location for retirees. Out of the four case
30
studies Ullapool was the only location that had a direct link between local fisheries and local
consumption with 30% of fish consumed in the town coming from local vessels and local
fishing grounds.
Fishing vessels landed around £12 million of marine species into Ullapool in 2012 which is a
decrease of 37% from 2000 at £20.2 million. Ullapool has experienced clear decline in both
the volume and value of fish coming into the port through the period under investigation,
with small peaks in 2006, again most probably due to the introduction of the Buyers and
Sellers register and then in 2009. Volumes have declined from a peak of 10,000 tonnes in
2001 to around 6000 tonnes in 2012 (Fig. 10).
Figure 10: Landings by
weight and value from
all vessels. Values at
2012 prices
The majority of Ullapool landings are from boats targeting demersal species. Almost all local
boats target nephrops, so Ullapool appears to be more dependent on northeast and foreign
vessels for landings. Demersal landings have declined by about 30% over the past decade
which is less marked than some other west coast ports dependent on whitefish. Crustacean
landings have increased in both volume and value between 2005 and 2007, with high
variability in price. Molluscs have also increased with a notable spike in 2008. Overall vessel
numbers have remained stable in all species types apart from a decline in vessels landing
demersal species.
Deprivation and Community Well-being - Ullapool has an overall deprivation ranking of 3344
and 3952, which is at the middle to higher end of the index. Ullapool is ranked high on income
and employment, due to low rates of unemployment. However, it was stated by key
informants that most jobs available are low income or minimum wage with very few middle
to high income earners living in the area. Whilst income ranked high, much of this wealth was
felt to be in the retired population. Ullapool is highly dependent on tourism which puts
pressure on seasonal earnings that are needed to maintain businesses outside the peak
season. It was stated that visitor numbers are decreasing due to the recession in southern
Europe and businesses are still charging 2008 prices to maintain custom. It was felt that
Ullapool can no longer depend on tourism as the season is not sufficiently long or profitable.
Income and employment deprivation averaged at 12% of households and 7.5% respectively,
much lower than the Scottish average of 15% for income and 12% for employment. Due to
the dependency on northeast and foreign vessels, it would appear local employment in the
fisheries is limited to a small number of creeling and trawling vessels.
31
The identity of fishing in Ullapool was often raised during the key informant interviews. It was
readily stated that the Western Isles ferry was the most important service as people would not
come to the town without the ferry. Key informants felt that Ullapool is considered too remote to
make the trip worthwhile if not transiting to the Outer Hebrides, but one of the main attractions
for people when here was the hustle and bustle of an active port. It was stated that the port is
very important in maintaining what Ullapool is. People enjoy Ullapool because they see the
‘ordinary’ (fishing activity) in the harbour which gives it a unique identity and make it an added
day visit on people’s tours of the Highlands and Islands.
As well as bringing in revenue from offshore vessels, Ullapool fisheries is one of the only
examples identified in the field-work of direct supply of seafood to local businesses, which is
dependent on west coast fisheries. A fish agent who supplies many local businesses stated that
his profit margins came from the west coast fisheries. Whilst he sells all manner of fish, most of
the whitefish from Peterhead (cod, haddock, whiting) are sold just above cost, whilst monks,
halibuts and shellfish all come from the west coast and are sold at a higher price which makes his
business viable. Without regular landings in Ullapool this link between fishing and local
consumption would be broken.
Case Study 4 - Lochinver, Highlands
Lochinver is a small community with a large commercial port in the North West Highlands. It
is the main landing port for the Anglo-Spanish and French fleets whom fish in the deep-waters
off the west coast of Scotland mainly for hake (Merluccius merluccius) and ling (Molva molva).
Spanish and French agents are based at the harbour to administer and transport the catch to
overseas markets. As with most local boats on the west coast, Scottish vessels target
nephrops. Lochinver harbour is the headquarters for Highland Harbours as well as the
location of the town’s leisure centre.
Table 8: Overview of Lochinver and key data relating to the fishing sector
Local vessels
4-5 creel boat (~10 employed fishers), 2-3 nephrop trawlers (69 employed fishers)
Landings by foreign vessels
Spanish fleet ~20 netting and long lining vessels, some trawlers.
French fleet - 4 large and 3 small trawlers
Around 550 landings per year from foreign fleet
Processing
No processing – a very small amount of grading from some
French boats
Salmon farming
No farming in area
Salmon processing
Salmon killing station (mobile unit)
Other fish related services
French and Spanish agents from administrating catches
Chandlers
HQ for Highland Harbours and compliance officers
Other important industries
Highland Stoneware (pottery – global exporters), Tourism (hill
walking, fishing, stalking and beaches), Army (no figures, but
seem to recruit from the area)
Potential industries
Marine tourism (but very exposed area - more interest in
Ullapool as harbour more sheltered)
Vessels landed around £31 million of marine species into Lochinver in 2012 which is a
decrease of around 60% since 2000. The volume of landings has decreased at a steady rate
from 2000 to 2005 and has since stabilised at around 20,000 tonnes per year. Value has
32
however decreased almost continuously throughout the past decade with a steep drop from
2005 to 2008 (Fig. 11). Value has recovered a little since 2008 with landing values averaging
at ~£32 million.
Figure 11: Landings by
weight and value from
all vessels. Values at
2012 prices
Landings at Lochinver are predominantly demersal species with almost 90% of landing from
this species type and from foreign vessels. Landings have decreased from this group from
both volume and value, but value has decreased at a steeper rate. Crustaceans and molluscs
are landed at comparative modest levels, though prices have held for these species.
Deprivation and Community Well-being - Lochinver is located in a very large data unit so the
social data presented below includes a number of small inland villages. Lochinver has an
overall deprivation ranking of 2779, which is in the low to middle end of the scale. The town
is ranked in the middle of the index on income and employment, and tourism is considered
the number one industry, mainly terrestrial based with hill walking, shooting, stalking and the
beaches as the main attractions. This sector (tourism) is believed to support many other
industries. The crime and health domains both score well for this area. Income and
employment deprivation averaged at 13% and 11% respectively, lower than the Scottish
average of 15% for income and 12% for employment. Due to the size of Lochinver, the
harbour is considered the heart of the community and important in supporting local tourism.
Much like Ullapool, visitors like to walk to the harbour and watch the daily landing and, whilst
considered a challenge because of health and safety, key informants felt it was important to
maintain an open facility to support this activity.
During the key informant interviews concerns raised included the potential deep-water ban
which would affect the foreign fleets and have a knock-on effect due to the loss of this sector.
Lochinver is a key landing port for the deepwater Anglo-Spanish and French fleets fishing off the
west coast of Scotland. A deep-water fishing ban is being considered by the European
Commission and this would affect a large majority of the foreign fleet (all French vessels and the
Spanish gillnetting vessels – only longliners are not included in the proposed ban). It is feared that
this would result in a closure of the fishing port and displacement of local boats to Kinlochbervie
or Ullapool and a loss of port side services. Port jobs would be lost which includes the foreign
agents and the ground workers involved in the loading and moving of fish. Whilst there is little
direct employment in the capture side of the fisheries beyond onshore handling and packing of
produce for transport to the continent, external interactions between the Spanish fleet and local
33
business was viewed as important. Local services, such as public houses, hotels and shops benefit
from the days when crew are onshore, and it was stated in Ullapool that the cessation of the
Eastern European ‘Klondykers’ was felt by many businesses in the town. This interaction was not
considered as common with the French fleet.
One further concern voiced was the role that the foreign fleets play in maintaining a steady fuel
price. The volume consumed by this fleet justified transportation by oil tankers, rather than by
road. This was stated by one key informant as an essential means of reducing a monopoly on
prices at neighbouring ports and keeping the price down for all requiring marine diesel in the
region. With the loss of this fishery, it is believed that marine fuel price will increase which will
also impact on the domestic fleet.
5. Discussion
5.1 Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation
The key question under investigation in this report is whether fishing communities are
suffering hardship or multiple deprivation because of a decline in fisheries. Primary analysis
of all Scottish fishing communities using the 2012 Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation
(SIMD) shows that they have similar incidence of severe deprivation to other coastal
communities, even though there has been a decline in fishing activity over the past two
decades. Analysis of the SIMD data reveals that there were fewer areas suffering from
multiple deprivation, or in the country’s bottom 15%, in areas associated with fishing in the
early 2000s, but this has increased to levels similar to other coastal areas by 2012.
Nevertheless, there are still questions to be raised about the levels of deprivation in fishing
areas, as further data analysis shows that around 57% of the communities are in the bottom
half of the index. Areas in the far north of the country appear to be performing worse, with
the Western Isles and northeast Highlands having units ranking low on the index.
The lack of a clear correlation between fisheries change and social conditions in fishing
communities is an interesting and important result, but it is worth considering possible
weaknesses in the analysis. The first issue to consider is whether the SIMD correctly identifies
deprivation in fishing areas. As previously mentioned the SIMD has been criticised for not
properly identifying deprivation in rural areas (Scottish Government, 2010), which is a
concern in this analysis. Whilst pockets in the urban fishing ports Peterhead, Fraserburgh and
Wick have been recognised as having severely deprived areas, no large data units showing
deprivation have been found in our study, which could be due to the dispersion of deprived
groups over such large geographical areas. It is true that in a countrywide study, the SIMD did
isolate large data units suffering from multiple deprivation (Scottish Government, 2010),
which suggests the tool is sensitive to these areas.
A second issue of concern is the way that income is measured in the SIMD. The number of
low-income benefit claims is used as a proxy for low-income households rather than, for
example, actual measures of income per household. The number of claimants of key benefits
may not be sensitive to the coping mechanism of fishing/rural communities because it is
difficult to measure deprivation if alternative employment status such as self-employed and
seasonal work contributes to household income as claims may not be made even if
34
households qualify. Annual household income would be a better, if a more challenging,
measure to collect.
Overall, we conclude that the SIMD is sufficiently sensitive to identify most cases of severe
deprivation while recognising the risk that it may miss odd cases particularly in large data
units where affects of deprivation are dispersed. We believe that the index is highlighting
large areas exposed to deprivation which can be used to focus attention on social conditions
linked to fisheries. We believe further analysis into deprivations could benefit from
collaborations with external organisations, for example; the Highlands and Islands Enterprise
and their Fragile Area index (HIE FAI) for expanding our understanding and measuring less
severe cases of deprivation in rural areas.
We further conclude that the SIMD analysis is providing a reasonable view of the social
conditions in coastal communities. The lack of a clear correlation between changes in fishing
activity and social conditions has a number of possible explanations: Firstly, fishing represents
a small proportion of overall economic activity in most such communities and other activities
provide alternative opportunities. Compared to fishing and related activities, the public sector
is a large contributor to economic activity in many remote coastal areas along with tourism
and to a lesser extent, traditional industries such as textiles and farming. While changes in
fishing are significant for those directly affected the impacts are small and often incremental
and may not be detectable in aggregated data analysis. The presence of other economic
activities may also enable transition from fisheries-related employment into other sectors. It
is sometimes claimed that there is a significant amount of occupational immobility, due to the
value that fishermen place on their communities (eg OECD, 2007). However, often referred
to in the interviews was the month-on month-off work patterns of many islanders, many of
whom were fishers or came from a fishing family, and because of their strong maritime links
are employed around the world in the oil and gas industry and well as in the armed forces.
Key informants stated that due to the natural variability of the marine environment and island
life, maritime people are able to adapt and take on new opportunities, even if not
immediately desirable to them.
Secondly, pluri-activity within fishing areas may be masking the presence of deprivation. For
those not able to take advantage of external employment opportunities, pluriactivity, which
means having more than one job, often in different sectors (e.g. farming, fishing and tourism),
maybe staving off deprivation but masking hardship in these regions. Macro-level data often
conceals local dependence on natural resource utilisation and seasonal employment and
associated hardship which comes from being dependent on the accumulated income from
pluriactive (Symes, 2000 in Urquhart et al, 2011). Pluriactive economies has been identified
‘as a capital accumulation strategy’ where an individual will reinvest profits and accumulate
physical or productive assets (de Silva, 2010:3) with is believed to improve household income,
‘however, it has also been recognized as a survival strategy particularly in a resource
constrained environment’ (de Silva, 2010:3). Several west coast case studies have supported
this observation with many saying that there are very limited alternative employment
opportunities and others stating that only seasonal and low-waged opportunities were
available, which results in locals having a number of jobs in order to make ends meet. Middle
and high earning employment was considered almost non-existent in the Highland case
studies and much interest was expressed in the role that renewables could have in filling this
35
gap in the Western Isles. Anecdotal evidence from the case study interviews also indicated
that remittances of income from employment opportunities in the North Sea or overseas are
significant.
5.2 Spatial Dependency - a Shift in Crewing Profiles
Whilst healthy, sustainable fish stocks are the primary concern for European policy makers,
regional governments and fisheries science as well as for the industry, the renewal of human
capital is also of serious concern to the fishing industry. Locals often do not see fishing as a
viable career choice because of; 1) low wages as crew members and better wages offered
elsewhere; 2) discouragement from families who have experienced decline in their own
businesses and; 3) the hard work required on fishing vessels (OECD, 2007). Key informants
expressed concerns about the renewal of vessels and fishing teams to support inshore
fisheries as well as about the viability of all vessels when faced with rising fuel costs and fewer
options for getting good crew members.
When classifying crewing profiles we make a distinction between static and mobile fishing
gear. Due to the problem of local recruitment, skippers, mostly on trawler vessels, have been
recruiting foreign crews for a number of years, initially from Eastern Europe with mixed
experiences and more recently from South-east Asia, with very positive experiences with
acceptance of modest wage rates, willingness to work hard, and high quality of seamanship.
According to interviewees, many trawler skippers feel that local crews and, increasingly,
Eastern Europeans are less reliable and more prone to substance abuse which hinders the
smooth running of vessels and safety at sea. The occupation-based community is now
broadly based with mobile gear vessels recruiting from areas that have strong occupational
links to fishing, such as the Baltic and Pacific island communities. The anecdotal evidence and
the results of the key informant interviews clearly point to a significant and growing
dependence on foreign workers in both offshore and onshore activities. Further work to
establish the true composition of employment and to investigate the drivers of recruitment
choices is needed to provide the evidence required for policy making.
The trend toward greater use of foreign crew poses a challenge to the argument that coastal
communities are directly dependent on fishing activity at least from the point of view of
economic or income dependency. If most jobs in the processing sector and increasingly jobs
in capture fisheries are being taken by foreigners, the extent of (space-based) community
dependency becomes difficult to ascertain. Deprivation is linked to labour generation at the
unskilled end of the market (MMO, 2011), but, if most low wage employment is being
effectively outsourced, it may be that fisheries is now contributing little to directly relieving
deprivation although indirect effects, for example through knock on spending may still be
important. Although it use to be true that skippers would prefer to recruit from local
communities, in recent years the connections and networks within and between local
communities appears to be weakening as local maritime skills are lost or used in alternative
industries and the local crew-share wages system the less-preferred option now that the
contract-wage system for foreigners has become highly competitive.
Whether this is an issue purely for the mobile sector will require further investigation as key
informants stated that static gear vessels, which tend to fish inshore, still have high levels of
36
localised recruitment, because of good profit margins (key informant). The static sector
appears to be expanding with young local teams keen to take on vessels, as demonstrated
with the Western Isles Fisheries loan Scheme (see case study section). The success of this
scheme has prompted calls for further assistance and other attempts to recruit people into
fishing include a new course offered by Seafish with links to the whitefish sector for potential
work experience (fishingneweu.com, 29/08/2012) and the range of opportunities through the
University of the Highlands and Islands. We conclude that further research should be
undertaken to understand the diverse issues in each sector and assess the long-term
requirements for a sustainable industry. Further, institutional networks which can integrate
training and funding needs are required to renew national interest and build support for
reinvestment in a mobile sector that balances efficiency with equal access that meets the
needs of a diverse coastal line and its communities.
5.3 Challenging Identity
‘Fisheries-dependent’ communities, the evidence of this project suggests, are in fact little
dependent on fisheries for income and employment and increasingly dependent on other
industries. Munro’s (ESRC, 2009) work found that the ‘highly knowledgeable and skilful
people working on boats and in fishing-related industries’ are now part of an economically
diverse household with many having diversified into other marine industries and many family
members working in industries not related to fisheries. So what does this mean for ‘fishing
communities’? Whilst the fishing sector is clearly experiencing a shift in labour, much
employment in fishing communities is still connected with marine-based industries which
utilise the diverse range of skills that are gained from an active fishing sector.
The stepping-stone nature of local inshore vessels for giving local youths experience at sea
which can then increase their chances of employment in other maritime careers, such as the
Royal and Merchant Navy, marine research/engineering, the offshore oil and gas industry and
the marine renewable sector was highlighted as an important function in fishing communities.
One key informant talked about how youngsters crew for 6-12 months on a local vessel to get
their certifications and ‘sea legs’ to boost their CVs for the competitive selection process for
higher-paying careers at sea. Although this results in a rotation of crew which inshore
skippers find difficult compared to the comparative continuity of employment of foreign
workers, the system is considered invaluable for two reasons; 1) for helping local people
improve their livelihoods and support the diversification of opportunities in island and remote
communities, which respondents believed was essential to maintain their competiveness in
the wider marine sectors, and; 2) if local people want to return to fishing in later life, they
need some experience on vessels, even if just summers fishing, to have that connection with
the sea and sea-faring skills. Supporting a profitable inshore fishing fleet was seen as vital for
this role in the future of fishing communities and their continued contribution to Scotland’s
human skill base (key informant).
5.4 Diversification
As stated by a number of key informants, because of the squeeze placed on quota species,
the west coast is now almost completely dependent on nephrops which has resulted in many
vessels converting to single and twin prawn trawls and smaller vessels covering the inshore
37
seabed with thousands of creels. The increase in activity of larger offshore vessels believed to
be employing heavier gear is being blamed for damage to the seabed and resulting in
overturned rocky substrate in places never seen before. This has raised concern over the
future of the west coast prawn fisheries which some feel is going the same way as the pelagic
and whitefish sectors with small vessels being squeezed out by larger corporate ventures.
Freezer trawlers were quoted by west coast fishers as a particular threat although the precise
nature of the apparent threat was never elucidated. In interviews, this concern was raised in
the context of stock depletion and effort/days at sea allocations but it may also simply reflect
an undefined anxiety about change and modernity in general.
A pervasive sense of vulnerability and stress was reported amongst fishers. One key informant
talked about the fragility of the industry because of no ability to diversify. “The fact that it
seems on the surface to have been a relatively successful fishery [nephrops in the Western
Isles], hides the enormously fragile nature of the industry. By that I mean, because to
[maintain] fish sustainability, you need to be able to change from species to species as nature
allows you…the legislation has done the reverse, it requires boats to fish specific species and
not able to diversity on to the most natural species dependent on the season” (key informant
quote). This is said to have put sections of the inshore fleet on ‘a knife edge’. It was stated
that there is a fear that a squeeze on single quota areas may slowly eat into the size of fleet
and the ability to support profitable businesses onshore.
As stated in the Independent Panel report;
“The benefits of a diverse fleet are more easily demonstrated in areas where there are
greater concentrations of activity. Ports such as Fraserburgh and Peterhead in
northeast Scotland and Lerwick in the Shetland Islands have served their local
communities well through a mix of mainly small businesses operating inshore,
shellfish, demersal or pelagic vessels…diversity has benefited these communities in the
past where a decline in one area of the industry… maybe compensated by growth in
fishing opportunities in other sectors”
(Independent Panel, 2010:23)
Key informants feel that ‘multi-nationals’ or large businesses are forcing out community’s
access to diverse species by buying up quota and that the remaining boats are getting
‘boxed in’ with limited access to species. “No boats around here are legally allowed to
fish mackerel and herring, there is no lack of these species in the sea, they are the
hereditary stable diet of these communities for centuries and we find ourselves in the
absolutely unforgivable situation that the law prevents us from fishing it” (key informant
quote). However, and while not reflected by the interviewees, any fishing operation
which wishes to fish mackerel, herring or any other species is free to purchase the
necessary fishing opportunities from the quota market. The fact that this does not appear
to be happening suggests that the current quota holders are able to secure a higher value
from the fishing opportunities or the uncompetitive nature of multi species fisheries is
resulting in small enterprises not being able to meet the purchase price. Underpinning
the sense of vulnerability then is a relative lack of competitiveness compared to other
parts of the industry.
38
As highlighted in the literature review, vulnerability is increased if there is a lack of
‘direction, leadership and self determination’ (Independent Panel, 2010: S12.4). Key
informants talked about a reduction in the ability to self-determine in fishing communities
and whilst single species fisheries may increase efficiency, resilience is reduced as groups
are unable to respond to ecological change as well as markets change (e.g. change in
consumer patterns, recession in the Spanish market).
Diversification between fisheries and other sectors is felt to be part of the life cycle of a
coastal community. Whilst there may be only a limited number of people involved in the
harvest, the links to onshore activity, which extends to other industries, such as tourism, are
many. It was felt that most fishing communities can no longer support other local industries
in the supply chain because of limited fishing opportunities. Ullapool was the only case in this
study where local fish is locally consumed as all other ports are dominated by a single species
to consigned markets. Key informants felt policy needed to incorporate, in an unspecified
way, the added value of selling local fish to local businesses to enrich the tourist/community
experience of eating local catch near the place it was caught.
Diversification includes gear types, where one key informant claimed over-capacity in the
creel sector has resulted in inshore fishing grounds covered in creels which prohibits small
trawlers from using the area. Catch per unit effort is decreasing (key informant) in the creel
fisheries and is further impacted by fishers deploying creels to hold ground rather than to fish
the ground. Diversification within fisheries was repeatedly mentioned when asked about
what would make fishing communities more resilient. As in many rural areas, job creation is
challenging and therefore traditional fisheries have an important role in supporting local job
opportunities even if they are no longer the dominant industry in the area. To make this a
viable option, interviewees suggested, access to a wider range of species is vital. But, again,
access to quota species already exists through the normal functioning of the quota market.
Access is only prevented, in a practical sense, where the quota is ‘unaffordable’ i.e. the costs
of purchasing the quota exceed the financial benefits of doing so. Or, to put it another way,
the financial benefits to the existing quota holder is greater than the expected financial
benefits to the prospective purchaser; underlying the question of access to fishing
opportunities is an issue of relative competitiveness.
While the likely financial, market-led outcome is reasonably straightforward, the judgements
that government must make are less clear cut. Economics, as defined by measures of social
wellbeing and not finance, is the proper benchmark for government decisions. Government
must consider external effects, for example, non-market socio-cultural benefits of broadly
dispersed fishing activity and the possibility of significant non-linear impacts. For example, the
quota price reflects the expected marginal benefits of the fishing opportunity to the quota
holder but does not incorporate external effects and thresholds. As clearly demonstrated in
the Barra case study, a small, productive factory such as Barratlantic requires a minimum
volume of landings and therefore a minimum threshold level of landings to remain viable. A
quota may have a high marginal financial value if fished by a pelagic vessel, but may have a
much higher marginal economic value if it sits at the factory’s threshold of viability and
minimum scale to maintain its business. This is a key challenge for government if it wants to
create a more successful fishery, with opportunities for all of Scottish fisheries-dependent
communities to flourish. Quota allocation would appear key in this issue.
39
6. Conclusion
The SIMD analysis shows that multiple deprivation is less of a problem in fishing communities
than in other coastal areas, however there are areas of concern in Wick, Fraserburgh,
Peterhead and Ayr. The increase in the number of units now in the bottom 15% most
deprived is a concern but does not appear to be because of a decline in these areas, but
rather due to improvements in non-coastal units which have resulted in this shift. Clearly
these unit are however balancing on the threshold which requires further investigation as this
does not appear to be correlated with fishing employment or fish landings. Understanding
employment patterns in coastal and island communities is important as other links between
industry and fishing were found in this study, which suggest fisheries support coastal
communities in more ways that just through landings. Getting more detailed research on
young people’s involvement and interest in the fishing industry would be beneficial for the
development of the sector.
One of the key themes which has emerged from this work is the tension between a
consolidated, modern and efficient fleet and a diverse, dispersed and localised fleet, between
economic growth on the one hand and the sustainability of widespread fishing activity on the
other. This tension is inherent in the Scottish Government’s high level purpose of ‘sustainable
economic growth’ which is to be underpinned both by increased productivity and
competitiveness and by greater equality and social cohesion. How this tension is to be
resolved in fisheries policy is unclear. Complexity and uncertainty, for example with respect to
external effects on other sectors and on communities more generally, and the possible
presence of wider thresholds of viability, eg with respect to ports and other facilities, makes
resolving this tension all the more challenging. The apparent presence of a significant pool of
foreign labour makes it all the more complicated; to what extent, if at all, does it matter to
policy decisions where people come from. It is largely irrelevant to economics, but perhaps
not to politics and the consideration of socio-cultural values.
It is increasingly difficult to argue that fisheries is ‘place-based’ as the industry has expanded
well beyond home ports with dependency on crew now global; town services often
dependent on visiting fleets; and fishing communities rarely dependent on one particular
industry but on a diverse range of industries to bring in revenue. This does not, however,
mean that communities do not benefit from an active fishing fleet, because increasing
demand from expanding maritime industries means that fishers sea-faring skills are perceived
to be widely sought after and should be studied further to evaluate this assertion.
This expansion of maritime industries is viewed as a healthy situation by most key informants
who feel that communities are evolving with the challenges and opportunities available, but
the diversity lost through the centralised fisheries management is impacting on local fisheries
and on what should be a viable career choice of those who wish to engage either long term or
at particular time in their lives. This impact particularly applies to inshore fishers and local
stocks. One key informant expressed his view on the concept of fisheries-dependent
communities. “it’s the description, I think its frightening…that we have made ourselves
dependent on this…where you carry out a function to the point where you have become
dependent on something, well balanced human beings should not be or made to be
dependent on any single thing, the most well balanced community are those that are
40
permitted and are free to benefit from the natural resources that surrounding them and
utilise, harvest and manage them in a way that is sustainable and ongoing”. Fishing is a
lifestyle as well as an industry and a skill set associated with coastal communities and valued
by all maritime industries. This should be supported to allow a continuation of seafaring
communities that have the skills to take into the future and contribute to the success of a
diverse Scotland.
7. References
Alison E et al (2006) Vulnerability reduction and social inclusion: strategies for reducing
poverty among small-scale fisherfolk. Paper presented at the Wetlands, Water and
Livelihoods workshops, Wetland International, 30 Jan-2 Fen, St Lucia, South Africa
Bene C,. (2003) When fishery rhymes with poverty: A first step beyond the old paradigm on
poverty in small-scale fisheries. World Development, 31 (6) 949-975
Bell S.E., (2010) Community Economic Identity: The Coal Industry and Ideology Construction in
West Virginia. Rural Sociology 75(1) pp. 111-143
Brown D,. (2010) Rethinking the OECD’s New Rural Demography. Centre for Rural Economy
Discussion Paper Series No. 26. Newcastle, UK
Brookfield K,. et al (2005) The concept of fisheries-dependent communities A comparative
analysis of four UK case studies: Shetland, Peterhead, north shields and Lowestoft. Fisheries
Research 72: 55-69
De Silva and Kodithuwakku (2010). Pluriactivity, Entrepreneurship and Socio-economic
Success of Rural Households. Manchester Business School Working Paper, Number 596,
available: http://www.mbs.ac.uk/research/workingpapers/
ESRC (2008) Change and continuity in Scotland’s fishing communities. ESRC Seminar Series
Mapping the public policy landscape.
European Commission (2009) Assessment of the status, development and diversification of
fisheries-dependent communities: Stornoway data collection report. Fish/2006/09
FAO (2012) The State of the World Fisheries and Aquaculture. Rome 2012
Fishingneweu.com (2012) Barra boys fight SAC. 27 August 2012. Download at
http://www.fishnewseu.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8835:coursefish-&catid=45:scottish&Itemid=54 on the 27 August 2012
Fishingneweu.com (2012) Course Fish. 29 August 2012. Download at
http://fishnewseu.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8823:barra-boysfight-sac&catid=45:scottish&Itemid=54 on the 29 August 2012
41
Fofana A,. (unpub) Measuring fishing dependency using Occupational Alternative Ratio – an
application in Shetland whitefish industry. Land Economy Working Paper Series
Gray T,. Korda R,. Stead S,. Jones E (2011) Quota discarding and distributive justice: The case
of the under-10m fishing fleet in Sussex, England. Marine Policy 35 (2011) 122–129
Greepeace (2011) SOS Oceans: Turning the Tide on European Overfishing. Brussels
http://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/Global/eu-unit/reportsbriefings/2011%20pubs/7/110713%20CFP%20booklet.pdf
Gallazioli G,. (unpub) A review of measures for fishermen and fishing community under the
Common Fisheries Policy. European Commission.
Independent Panel (2010) The Future of Fisheries Management in Scotland: Reports of a
Independent Panel. The Scottish Government
Jamieson L, Groves L,. (2008) Drivers of Youth Out-Migration from Rural Scotland: Key Issues
and Annotated Bibliography. Scottish Government Social Research
Jamieson L,. (2009) Social change in Scottish Fishing Communities: A brief literature review
and annotated Bibliography. Scottish Government Social Science
Jacob S, et al (2001) Landing a definition of fisheries dependent communities. Fisheries 26
(10) 16-22
Jentoft (2000) “The Community: a Missing Link in Fisheries Management”.. Marine Policy
24(1): 53-59
Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2011) Coastal typologies: detailed method and
output. Oxford Consultants for Social Inclusion and Roger Tyme and Partners
Marine Scotland (2010) Strategic Plan 2010-2013. Marine Scotland, The Scottish Government
National Statistics (2011) Rural Scotland key Facts 2011. The Scottish Government
ODPM – SEU (2004) The drivers of social exclusion - Review of the Literature for the Social
Exclusion Unit (29) states that typically, unemployment is found concentrated in lower skilled
individuals.
OECD (2007) Structural Change in Fisheries: Dealing with the Human Dimension. OECD
Publishing ISBN-92-64-037950
Parliament.uk (2011) Commons Debate.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm110330/halltext/110330
h0002.htm. Downloaded 23/08/2012
42
Phillipson J. Delimiting fisheries dependent regions: the problem of inadequate data. In:
Symes, D, ed. Fisheries Dependent Regions. Oxford: Fishing News Books, 2000, pp.17-28.
Piriz L,. (2000) Dependence, modernisation and the coastal fisheries in Sweden. In: Symes, D,
ed. Fisheries Dependent Regions. Oxford: Fishing News Books
Reed M,. et al (2012)Beyond fish as commodities: Understanding the socio-cultural role of the
inshore fisheries England. Marine Policy (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.04.009
Ross N,. (2012) Exploring concepts for fisheries ‘dependency and ‘community’ in Scotland.
Marine Policy ?
Scottish Government (2010) Socio-Economic Briefing on Rural Scotland: Identifying Fragile
Rural Areas, Paper 5 - Supporting Evidence Provided to the Rural Development Council
Working Group
Scottish Government (2011) The Government Economic Strategy. APS Group Scotland,
Edinburgh
SDRM (2003) Scottish Indices of Deprivation. Department of Social Policy and Social Work.
Oxford Downloaded at; http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/02/16377/18251
Symes D, Phillipson J,. (2009) Whatever became of social objectives in fisheries policy.
Fisheries Research 95: 1-5
Townsend, P (1987) ‘Deprivation’. Journal of Social Policy 16 (2): 125-46
The Telegraph (2010) BBC criticised for scientific 'cheap sensationalism'. The Telegraph Online.
02 Feb 2010. By Urmee Khan and Louise Gray
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7128624/BBC-criticised-forscientific-cheap-sensationalism.html
University of Aberdeen (2002) Scottish Coastal Socio-Economic Scoping Study. Scottish
Executive
Urquhart J,. et al (2011) Setting the agenda for social science research in fisheries policy in
Northern Europe. Fisheries Research, 108: 204-247
Urquhart J, Acott T,. (2012) Constructing ‘The Slade’: Fishers’ and non-fishers’ identity and
place attachment in Hasting, south-east England. Marine Policy (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.04.004
43