Conflicts between Fisheries and Offshore Wind Power in Taiwan: Legal and Administrative Prospects

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I  am attaching an edited file of the paper with comments to help the authors fix issues with English.

My ethical concern regarding this paper is simply that I feel that issues concerning the conservation of fisheries (environmental conservation) are not adequately addressed.  The paper just seems to be almost 100% pro wind-power.  Yes, that would be a good enjoyed by the people of Taiwan, but so are the revenues and food production of the fisheries. Typically, government policies favour power generation over fisheries, and this paper feeds into a strong existing narrative, to the detriment of fisheries.  The authors do mention that the bases for wind-power installations would form new fish habitat, but I am not sure, being unfamiliar with the fisheries of the area under consideration, what the tradeoff would be in terms of fisheries.     

I am also concerned, since this is a policy paper, that the drawbacks of windpower, including intermittency; pollution involved in making the motors; and short life-span, with possible pollution when the structures fail and are abandoned; are not addressed.  The authors did draw attention to the issue of noise pollution during construction permanently driving away certain species - I felt more footnotes were needed here - but did not address any other substantial aspects of problematic consequences. 

I think a more recent citation is needed from a reliable, neutral source, on so-called climate refugees - a source on Tuvalu from 2006 is not adequate and actually highlights the fact that this is not a real problem. Had people fled Tuvalu in droves since then, purely for supposed sea-level rise, then there would be non-partisan, non-activist articles on this topic. 

In its favour, the authors do look at policy alternatives governing the fisheries, and bring up many good points, including comparisons with other nations' fisheries governance.  The private ownership of what should be considered a public national good is problematic and the authors do a decent job of highlighting the problems and proposing a solution to the issues of Taiwanese ocean governance.  

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

1. This manuscript discussed conflicts between fisheries and offshore wind power (OWP) developments in Taiwan, which is an interesting and value topic that meets with this special issue.

2. Generally speaking, this manuscript is well-organized, including the status of OWP developments in Taiwan, relevant legislations to the maritime zones, references from Japan and UK, and policy recommendations. 

3. I would also have some suggestions for the authors to further improve the quality of this manuscript. 

(1) Since Japan and Taiwan have many similarities in their nature regarding fisheries and OWP developments, I would like to suggest to further elaborate the experience of Japan’s OWP developments that Taiwan can learn in the near future.  Particularly, for the authors’ references I know that most wind turbines in Japan in the coastal areas are not in the waters but on the shoreline of ports.  This could be another lesson that Taiwan may learn.

(2) In addition, Japan installed its first fixed offshore wind turbine off the coast of Chōshi City several years, which should be a break through to its restriction of fishing rights.  I would suggest the authors to elaborate more on how Japan did it in this regard for Taiwan’s future references when addressing the fishing rights with fishermen.

(3) The title of Section 3.2 should be “The CZM Act,” not “The CAM Act.”  I would suggest the authors to revise it.

4. Upon these improvement, I would like to suggest the acceptance of this manuscript.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx