Question

According to the 'persistent tendency towards depletion theory,' how could profits made from fishing stay the same but the fish stock be steadily diminished?How does this theory justify regulation of fishing by outsiders (e.g., scientists, policymakers, etc.)?

A) Profits remain the same due to increased prices, and outsiders regulate to maintain sustainability.
B) Profits are sustained by cutting costs, and outsiders regulate to prevent overexploitation.
C) Profits are unaffected, and outsiders regulate to ensure ecological balance.
D) Profits increase due to higher demand, and outsiders regulate to control resource depletion.

Answer 1

Profits from fishing can stay the same with diminishing fish stock due to increased scarcity and prices, but this is unsustainable, justifying regulation to maintain sustainability.

Step-by-step explanation:

According to the 'persistent tendency towards depletion theory,' profits made from fishing can stay the same while the fish stock is steadily diminished because even as the number of fish decreases, the remaining fish increase in scarcity and thus, in value, leading to higher prices. This can temporarily keep profits stable, despite the declining stock. However, this is an unsustainable practice as continued depletion will eventually collapse the fishery and cause long-term economic and ecological harm.

Therefore, regulation by outsiders, such as scientists and policymakers, is justified to maintain sustainability and prevent the overexploitation of the fish stock, which aligns with option A of the question which states profits remain the same due to increased prices, and outsiders regulate to maintain sustainability.