Dissertation (MTech( Public Management))--Cape Technikon, Cape Town, 2004 / Marine resources play a major role in sustaining the economy and social development of the nation and contribute to national economy, to employment and security of the local community. The South African fisheries management was conducted largel)' with political default. This denied most fishers access to marine resources. Since the democratic election of 1994, the government was left with the challenge to re-allocate rights in a way that would ensure that the under-presentation of historical disadvantaged individuals (HDl's) in the fishing industry would be corrected. The laws and regulations related to marine fisheries were also revised. The Marine Living Resources Act, No. 18 of 1998 attempted transformation in the fishing industry but lacked clear guidelines which led to litigation and crises in the fishing industry as many fishers were unhappy with the whole process. Marine fisheries policy was established and published in 1997 to address those historical imbalances by introducing the fishing right system of allocating rights to represent the national demographics of the country. This report seeks to describe the theory of the South African fishing industry, policy developments and the current status of permit allocation in South Africa. It will also examine the effectiveness in the implementation of the marine fisheries policy for South Africa. It will focus on the distribution of marine resources for commercial fishing purposes.

The management of coastal resources in South Africa has come under review as a result of the degradation of environmental resources along the coast. The challenge being faced by resource managers is to achieve economic growth while sustaining South Africa’s coastal resource base (Nobel, 2000). The South African government (RSA, 2000) has developed a coastal management strategy to meet this challenge: The strategy involves the inclusion of all stakeholders in the formation of policy regarding the management of coastal resources, in a more integrated approach to coastal management. To effectively achieve this stakeholder inclusion, it has become necessary to decentralize the political, administrative and fiscal authority to conduct coastal management functions. With regard to the need for fiscal decentralisation this thesis considers the possibility of implementing localised environmental surcharges to finance coastal management initiatives. The ability of the White Paper for Sustainable Coastal Development (RSA, 2000) to provide theformal institutional structure necessary for the introduction of environmental surcharges is firstconsidered. It is shown that the decentralised management strategy has the potential to create a management style that is transparent and accountability orientated. In addition to this the style is capable of adapting to dynamic local coastal conditions and is therefore an appropriate direction in which to steer coastal management in South Africa. The effectiveness of coastal co-management as an informal institutional arrangement is then examined. Provided that local Coastal Management Fora are created to include all relevant stakeholders and that a source of long term financing is secured co-management has the potential to create the conditions necessary for effective coastal management. With regard to a source of long term financing, local environmental surcharges to finance coastal management initiatives are considered. The public’s willingness to contribute to such a surcharge is analysed in the context of Plettenberg Bay by probing their willingness to pay (WTP) for a Bay Management Plan. A survey instrument is developed to measure the public’s WTP. The design of the instrument is based on the Contingent Valuation (CV) method that is used to analyse the nonmarket benefits that environmental resources (such as Plettenberg Bay) provide the public. It is found that the resident population is willing to pay R15 per month toward a Bay Management Plan whilst domestic and foreign tourists respectively are willing to pay R6 and R22 daily. The aggregation of these WTP estimates yields a total passive use value of between R15 397 900 – R20330 500 annually. This nuclear value of the Bay should be included in the formation of local coastal management policy and provides guidance for the introduction of a local environmental surcharge. A budget for a Bay Management Plan is proposed and a progressive surcharge based on municipal property value is set. To finance the local residents’ share of the budget, a monthly surcharge of R1 would be required of the average valued property. To calculate the domestic and foreign tourist contribution to the budget a schedule of accommodation offering property will be required. However, to finance the entire budget a residential surcharge of approximately R10 would be required of the average valued property. This figure is well below the average resident population WTP of R15, highlighting the fact that an environmental surcharge in Plettenberg Bay is indeed feasible. The difference in reported WTP and the contribution required to finance the Bay Management Plan also highlights that there is scope for experimentation in the introduction of such a surcharge.