Abstract Fisheries management in the USA, as governed by the Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), has been decidedly more successful at meeting its conservation goals than has fisheries management in the EU, as governed by the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). In an effort to explain the different outcomes in these two systems that share many management attributes, we evaluated them against a list of effective governance attributes gleaned from the literature. We also examined the distribution of rights and responsibilities within each system, and the resulting stewardship incentives. Five effective governance attributes are fully realized under the MSA but have historically been absent from the CFP system: adequate regulatory authority, effective enforcement mechanisms, science-based decision-making, conservation-oriented goals and clear objectives, and directives. These governance system gaps, along with uneven distributions of rights, responsibilities, and incentives, may be responsible for the observed difference in conservation outcomes.

中文翻译：

---

影响美国和欧盟保护成果的渔业治理

摘要 美国的渔业管理由马格努森-史蒂文斯渔业保护和管理法案 (MSA) 管辖，在实现其保护目标方面显然比欧盟的渔业管理更成功，后者由共同渔业政策 (CFP) 管辖。 ）。为了解释这两个共享许多管理属性的系统的不同结果，我们根据从文献中收集的有效治理属性列表对它们进行了评估。我们还检查了每个系统内的权利和责任分配，以及由此产生的管理激励。在 MSA 下完全实现了五个有效的治理属性，但 CFP 系统历来没有：足够的监管权力、有效的执法机制、基于科学的决策、节约导向的目标和明确的目标和指示。这些治理体系的差距，以及权利、责任和激励措施的分配不均，可能是造成观察到的保护结果差异的原因。