Procedural justice in fishery resource allocations

Demands on scarce fishery resources have resulted in the need for allocation decisions, These decisions often entail choosing among various groups; some receive the resources they desire, others do not. Dissatisfaction with such allocation decisions and procedures is problematic for allocators, recipients, and nonrecipients. Thus, allocators should develop decision-making processes that minimize or prevent conflict yet continue to allocate resources wisely. Research on distributive justice, defined as ''the fairness of the actual distribution of resources,'' provides insight into how those affected by proposed allocations are Likely to react. A second approach is procedural justice, or ''the fairness of the decision-making process that leads to a distribution of resources.'' An understanding of procedural justice can help resource managers determine whether perceptions of fairness or satisfaction arise from the final allocation decision, the manner in which a decision was made, or a combination of the two. This paper introduces the concept of procedural justice as it relates to fishery resource decisionmaking and management, describes its potential for understanding what causes or increases dissatisfaction with allocation decisions, and suggests procedures to minimize or prevent conflict. A case study involving sport-fishery management in East Matagorda Bay, Texas, is analyzed from a procedural justice perspective.