Rights Based Fishing: Use Rights versus Property Rights to Fish

The basic economic problem of commercial fisheries can be seen as the absence of property rights to the fish stocks. There are, however, both practical and principal obstacles to applying that solution. Instead, the preferable arrangement appears to be stock control by public agencies, combined with exclusive use rights granted, leased or sold to the fishing industry in order to achieve economic efficiency. Incentives to establish such rights can be found both in government circles and in the industry. Both have a vital role to play; plans to establish use rights such as ITQs have run aground on more than one occasion because of opposition from the industry. Use rights can be seen as a tool for government agencies to achieve economic efficiency in the industry. If desired, these gains can be distributed over a wider public through user fees of some kind. There are few examples, however, of substantial user fees, and the industry has been successful in getting such schemes abolished when they have been put into effect. The experience of Russia and, in particular, Estonia is discussed. The absence of user fees can be explained by the need to obtain support for use right schemes from the industry, and the windfall gains from gratis use rights are vehicles for this. Norway and Iceland are two countries which have put in place use rights, but they have done so in different ways. Iceland has an ITQ system while Norway has fishing concessions combined with individual vessel quotas. Some success appears to have been achieved in both countries with these systems.     

Culture and Rights after Culture and Rights

Building on a critical, theoretical approach outlined in Culture and Rights: Anthropological Perspectives (Cowan et al. 2001a), I posit rights processes as complex and contradictory: Both enabling and constraining, they produce new subjectivities and social relations and entail unintended consequences. To encourage interdisciplinary engagement on these themes, I explore selected texts that consider the relationship between culture and rights, addressing two literatures: (1) debates on culture, rights, and recognition in the context of multiculturalism among political philosophers and (2) an emerging literature by anthropologists, feminists, critical legal scholars, and engaged practitioners analyzing empirical cases. Although political philosophers elucidate ethical implications and clarify political projects, an outmoded arsenal of theoretical concepts of "culture,""society," and "the individual" has hampered their debates. When accounts are both theoretically informed and empirically grounded, contradictions, ambiguities, and impasses of culture and rights are more fully explored and the liberal model of rights and multiculturalism is more open to interrogation.     

Developing Indigenous Rights

Indigenous Peoples, Ethnic Groups and the State. David Maybury-Lewis. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1997.168 pp.
Malaysia and the Original People:. Case Study of the Impact of Development on Indigenous Peoples. Robert Knox Dentan. Kirk Endicott. Alberto G. Gomes. and M. B. Hooker. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1997. 175 pp.
Forest Dwellers, Forest Protectors: Indigenous Models for International Development. Richard Reed. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1997. 135 pp.     

Human Rights Texts: Converting Human Rights Primary Source Documents into Data

We introduce and make publicly available a large corpus of digitized primary source human rights documents which are published annually by monitoring agencies that include Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, and the United States Department of State. In addition to the digitized text, we also make available and describe document-term matrices, which are datasets that systematically organize the word counts from each unique document by each unique term within the corpus of human rights documents. To contextualize the importance of this corpus, we describe the development of coding procedures in the human rights community and several existing categorical indicators that have been created by human coding of the human rights documents contained in the corpus. We then discuss how the new human rights corpus and the existing human rights datasets can be used with a variety of statistical analyses and machine learning algorithms to help scholars understand how human rights practices and reporting have evolved over time. We close with a discussion of our plans for dataset maintenance, updating, and availability.     

Gay Rights One Baby-Step at a Time: Protecting Hospital Visitation Rights for Same-Sex Partners While the Lack of Surrogacy Rights Lingers

Recognizing that GLBTI individuals are often barred from visiting their partners in hospitals or from acting as health care surrogates for incapacitated partners, President Obama directed the Department of Health and Human Services to address these issues. In response, the department amended its rules to prohibit hospitals from restricting, limiting, or denying visitation privileges on the basis of gender identity or sexual orientation. But the changes do not affect the designation of a health care surrogate, a matter largely governed by state law. Therefore, subject to state law, same-sex partners can still be legally barred from making health care decisions for their incapacitated partners, and it remains essential that they execute advance directives and appoint one another as their health care proxies.     

Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights

Prenatal Testing and Disability Rights. Erik Parens and Adrienne Asch. eds. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2000.xvi. 371pp.     

An Overview of Fishing Rights

Coastal state management of marine harvests within 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zones was a new and innovative process during the period from the late 1970s through the 1980s. The spread of conservation-focused harvest management was a key step in the evolution of fishing rights, followed in some nations by a second step of creating more exclusive, individual or group fishing rights. The three main forms of more exclusive fishing rights – limited entry permits, individual fishing quotas (IFQs), and local community-based or co-operative harvesting – vary widely in content and detail. But, when successful, they all increase the economic efficiency of fisheries, and they reshape the economic and political landscape of fisheries. All three types, but particularly IFQs, may initiate radical changes in the economic organization of the fishery, ultimately changing who fishes, where and when they fish, the products sold, the balance of power among industry sectors, incentives to support conservation, the size of incomes from fishing, and the location of shore-side economic activity. Changes of this sort are bound to provoke controversy. The controversies over fishing rights take three forms: disagreements over the meaning and intent of fishing rights, disputes over the distribution of rights and associated economic gain, and concern for disruptions imposed on people who are dependent on the “old order”. This paper provides a short review of the underlying concepts, rights systems, and current controversies concerning fishing rights.     

Human Rights and Japanese Bioethics

The main contentions of this paper are twofold. First, there is a more than century-old Japanese tradition of human rights based on a fusion of Western concepts of natural rights and a radical reinterpretation of Confucianism, the major proponent of which was the Japanese thinker Nakae Chomin. Secondly, this tradition, although a minority view, is crucial for remedying the serious defects in the present Japanese medical system.
In the latter half of the nineteenth century, Nakae Chomin sought to reinterpret Chinese tradition, especially Confucianism, by injecting the concepts of popular sovereignty and democratic equality, drawn from Western sources. The resulting view maintained the Confucian commitment to a moral nexus for society, but replaced hierarchy with egalitarianism.
The pressing need for such an approach to patients' rights in present-day Japan is illustrated by two recent cases: the photographing and commercial exploitation of patients' genitals without serious response by authorities, and the attempt by physicians to manipulate the time of death and, possibly, to improperly pressure family members in order to transplant organs from the brain-dead victim of a criminal assault.
Such problems stem from hierarchy and paternalism, which seem to be a legacy of the rapid, state-sponsored introduction of Western medicine in the mid-nineteenth century, and in particular from the government's adoption of and support for German military medicine as a model for Japan.