Quota discarding and distributive justice: The case of the under-10 m fishing fleet in Sussex, England Tim Gray a,n , R.C. Korda b , Selina Stead b , Estelle Jones b a School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, Newcastle on Tyne NE1 7RU, UK b School of Marine Science and Technology, Newcastle University, Newcastle on Tyne NE1 7RU, UK article info Article history: Received 21 August 2010 Received in revised form 22 August 2010 Accepted 25 August 2010 Keywords: Discards Fisheries quotas Under-10 m fleet Distributive justice Sussex abstract Marine fish discarding has become a contentious environmental issue, but little attention has been paid to the moral grievances that sometimes underlie discarding practices. This article explores such a moral grievance through a case study of the under-10 m fishery in Sussex, England, where discarding of cod (Gadus morhua) has become a highly charged issue, skippers blaming it on unjust quota allocations. The moral claim to a greater quota allocation is analysed using two conceptions of distributive justice, entitlement and desert. The conclusion reached is that the under-10 m fleet’s entitlement arguments for a higher quota are weaker than their desert arguments, but that entitlement arguments weigh more heavily than desert arguments with government when it allocates quota. & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Discarding is the disposal of marine life, caught alongside targeted species, returned to the sea predominantly dead or dying. It is a serious problem, as a large amount of edible fish is dumped at sea every year—7.3 million tonnes globally, according to Kelleher [1]. Much attention has been focused on public outrage at this waste of valuable protein [2]; on research into technical methods of reducing the level of unwanted catch [3]; on economic drivers of skippers engaged in discarding [4]; and on policy initiatives to provide carrots and/or sticks to persuade skippers to adopt discard reduction practices [5]. There has, however, been little research into skippers’ grievances against what they perceive to be unfair treatment by fisheries managers which causes discarding. Most fish is discarded because it falls below the minimum landing size (MLS); or has no market value; or holds less market value than other specimens (high grading); or exceeds the boat’s monthly quota allocation. It is the last category – quota discards – that is the focus of this paper, because of the allegedly heavy level of quota discarding amongst the under-10 m sector in Sussex on the southeast coast of England. The paper examines strongly held opinions on the issue of quota allocation expressed by under-10 m skippers, over-10 m skippers, and other stakeholders, most of which reflect two conceptions of distributive justice—entitlement and desert. Using interpreta- tions provided by two political theorists – Nozick [6] on entitle- ment and Sadurski [7] on desert – the paper evaluates these opinions in the light of the two conceptions of justice. In Section 2, the methodology and theoretical framework of the paper are explained. Section 3 outlines the case study of the quota discarding problem in the Sussex under-10 m fleet. In Section 4, proposed solutions to that problem are rehearsed. Section 5 interprets the opinions expressed by fishers’ and other stakeholders on the above problem and its solution in terms of two conceptions of distributive justice (entitlement and desert). Section 6 explains that an implication of the paper’s main finding – that the under-10 m sector’s case is weaker on the criterion of entitlement – is that it is unlikely to succeed in its aim of obtaining a redistribution of its quota allocation. 2. Methodology and theoretical framework Data for this paper is from interviews and newspaper archives. Both provided extensive statements from the main players in this controversy - skippers of under-10 m and over-10 m vessels, and fisheries ministers. Face-to-face interviews of twenty under-10 skippers were conducted during July–September 2009 in four of the Sussex fishing fleets at Brighton, Eastbourne, Hastings, and Rye. These interviews generated information about skippers’ opinions on the extent of cod discarding in the Sussex fleets; the effects and causes of that discarding; their motives for discarding; their Contents lists available at ScienceDirect journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol Marine Policy 0308-597X/$ - see front matter & 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2010.08.010 n Corresponding author. Tel.: + 44 1661 843325; fax: + 44 191 222 5069. E-mail addresses: t.s.gray@ncl.ac.uk (T. Gray), r.c.korda@ncl.ac.uk (R.C. Korda), selina.stead@ncl.ac.uk (S. Stead), estelle.jones@ncl.ac.uk (E. Jones). Marine Policy 35 (2011) 122–129