Subsidies and Small-Scale Fisheries: Who Gains, Who Loses?

Abstract

Fisheries subsidies are widely assessed for their ecological and economic effects, yet their social implications remain poorly understood. Existing research relies heavily on income and employment indicators, with limited attention to well-being, equity, access, or community dynamics. Evidence on these broader dimensions is sparse, fragmented, and often anecdotal. This study presents a global qualitative literature review of how subsidies affect small-scale fishers (SSF), combined with qualitative content analysis of 69 documents. Using inductive and deductive text coding, we classify social outcomes into positive, negative and mixed effects. Our findings show that subsidies generate uneven social outcomes shaped by both subsidy category and by access conditions, beneficiary profiles, and fishers’ positions along the value chain. Welfare-oriented subsidies, including social security and assistance programs, are more frequently associated with positive social outcomes such as reduced income volatility and improved household stability. Conversely, capacity-enhancing subsidies are commonly linked to declining fish stocks, rising operational costs, and intensified competition, disproportionately burdening subsistence fishers, informal labourers, and women. Gendered effects are evident but under-documented, with women often excluded from subsidy benefits while bearing increased livelihood, care, and nutritional risks. The review identifies persistent gaps in beneficiary-level and gender-disaggregated data, weak attention to the mechanisms through which subsidies are allocated and accessed. We argue that without transparency on who receives subsidies and under what conditions, subsidy reform risks shifting conservation burdens onto marginalised SSF. Embedding equity and justice considerations into fisheries subsidy frameworks is therefore essential for socially sustainable reform.

View Paper