In fisheries management, decisions regarding access (which users can fish) and allocation (what share of the resource they can use) often raise issues of justice, fairness and equity. In Australia, ecologically sustainable development (ESD) has been prioritised in fisheries legislation, policy, and management. However, the desired optimal community outcomes arising from determination of access and allocation are difficult to ascertain as few metrics of economic or social benefits are available. Here, we interviewed fishery managers and other prominent stakeholders responsible for advising Australian state, territory, and Commonwealth governments on access and allocation. This information was augmented with reviews of available information and case study analyses. Whereas access and allocation are highly constrained for commercial fishers, this is much less so for recreational and Indigenous fishers. Relatively high participation rates for recreational fishers command high implicit social value reflected in political power and commercial fishing is prohibited near major population centres in most Australian jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions, such as South and Western Australia, have explicit access and allocation policies, with shares of popular species such as rock lobster, abalone, and snapper allocated to the recreational and Indigenous sectors. Allocations to the commercial sector and, when applicable to the recreational sector, generally reflect estimates of their catch history rather than an evaluation of optimal benefits. Furthermore, allocation among jurisdictions is inconsistent and seemingly reflective of political rather than economic decision making. Strategic intent exists in many jurisdictions to incorporate social value into allocation decision making. However, few social metrics exist in management plans and these factors are rarely considered in formal access and allocation decisions. Thus, determining the best use of fisheries resources remains elusive in Australia and the utility of ESD and its application to sustainable fishery management and optimal community benefit remains unresolved.

在渔业管理中，关于获取（哪些用户可以捕鱼）和分配（他们可以使用的资源份额）的决定通常会引起公正、公平和公平的问题。在澳大利亚，生态可持续发展 (ESD) 在渔业立法、政策和管理中处于优先地位。然而，由于可用的经济或社会效益指标很少，因此很难确定由确定获取和分配产生的理想社区结果。在这里，我们采访了负责就准入和分配向澳大利亚州、领地和联邦政府提供建议的渔业管理者和其他重要利益相关者。这些信息通过对可用信息的审查和案例研究分析得到了补充。鉴于商业渔民的获取和分配受到高度限制，对于休闲渔民和土著渔民来说，情况要少得多。休闲渔民的相对较高的参与率具有较高的隐性社会价值，反映在政治权力上，并且在澳大利亚大多数司法管辖区的主要人口中心附近禁止商业捕鱼。一些司法管辖区，例如南澳大利亚州和西澳大利亚州，制定了明确的准入和分配政策，将龙虾、鲍鱼和鲷鱼等流行物种的份额分配给了娱乐和土著部门。分配给商业部门，如果适用于娱乐部门，通常反映对其捕捞历史的估计，而不是对最佳效益的评估。此外，司法管辖区之间的分配不一致，似乎反映了政治而非经济决策。许多司法管辖区都存在将社会价值纳入分配决策的战略意图。然而，管理计划中几乎没有社会指标，而且在正式的访问和分配决策中很少考虑这些因素。因此，确定渔业资源的最佳利用在澳大利亚仍然难以捉摸，可持续发展教育的效用及其在可持续渔业管理和最佳社区利益中的应用仍未得到解决。