Fishing, food, and harbor community development in Massachusetts

• Published date: 01 August 2019
• Author: Carlos J. L. Balsas
• Date: 01 August 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1865

ACADEMIC PAPER

Fishing, food, and harbor community development in

Massachusetts

Carlos J. L. Balsas

Geography and Planning, AS 210, University at

Albany, Albany, New York

Correspondence

Carlos J. L. Balsas, Geography and Planning,

AS 210, University at Albany, 1400

Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12222.

Email: cbalsas@albany.edu

Fishing communities are highly dependent on fishing and maritime economies. Regu-

lations and techniques attempt to control quotas, types of fish caught, and the gear

utilized in the industry. Furthermore, societal preferences and markets dictate the

value of the fish transacted. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship

and recent changes between fishing and community development in two fishing com-

munities in Massachusetts: Gloucester and New Bedford. Moreover, I also discuss the

role that fish food plays in cities and their foodways. The research asks how these

communities have adapted to changes in fishing stocks, techniques, socioeconomic

trends and regulations during the last two decades. A resilience public affairs

approach centered on seven governance dimensions of fisheries is utilized to analyze

the case studies. It is argued that specializing in niche markets, developing adequate

industry facilities, and nurturing the cultural aspects endemic to each fishing commu-

nity has positively influenced the communities' capacity to withstand major societal

transformations. The harbor plans for Gloucester and New Bedford provide some

plausible directions toward future improvements in the fishing sector.

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day;

teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a lifetime!

‐immemorial proverb

1|INTRODUCTION

The central dilemma of this paper is that fishing communities are

highly dependent on fishing and maritime economies. Regulations

and techniques attempt to control quotas, types of fish caught, and

the gear utilized in the industry. Societal preferences and markets dic-

tate the value of the fish transacted. These various societal transfor-

mations leave many communities vulnerable to external forces; some

forces are social such as market demand and territorial transforma-

tions, and others are partially natural but also anthropogenic, for

example, ocean health and climate change. Nonetheless, the manage-

ment of marine resources is simultaneously a politically and culturally

driven process, which requires careful planning and civic participation

(Levine, Levine, Richmond, & Lopez‐Carr, 2015). Food security is a

very important matter, and healthy fish ought to be part of it.

This paper analyzes the relationship and recent changes between

fishing and community development in two fishing communities in

Massachusetts: Gloucester and New Bedford. The research investi-

gates how these communities have adapted to changes in fishing

stocks, techniques, socioeconomic trends and regulations during the

last two decades. We also discuss the role that fish plays in cities

and their foodways (Low & Ho, 2018; Lum & Vayer, 2016).

A resilience public affairs approach centered on seven governance

dimensions (socioeconomic characteristics, capital, labor, land, water,

supply, and demand) to sustainable fisheries is utilized to analyze the

case studies. These governance dimensions were conceptualized by

the author based on prior research and accumulated experience with

fishing communities on either side of the Atlantic Ocean in North

America and southern Europe. It is argued that specializing in niche

markets, developing adequate facilities, and nurturing the cultural

aspects endemic to each community has positively influenced their

capacity to withstand major societal transformations.

The research reported in this paper was inspired by prior aca-

demic and consulting work on these fishing communities. In the early

2000s, Balsas, Kotval, & Mullin (2000, 2002) studied how historic

preservation and brownfield redevelopments were being utilized to

Received: 3 April 2018 Revised: 15 August 2018 Accepted: 17 August 2018

DOI: 10.1002/pa.1865

J Public Affairs. 2019;19:e1865.

https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1865

© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa 1of8