But it was not 'the industry' that paid those extended recovery costs. 'The industry' was getting a free ride on the taxpayers of the location of the crash. In the same way that MH370 searches are being largely funded by Australian taxpayers.
Perhaps if 'the industry' or rather the airline and the manufacturer were billed for the costs of the recovery process, we would see a significant jump in the eagerness to get DFDR/CVR that could be rapidly recovered, as the cost to the Airline would be unsupportable. Attempts to insure against these recovery costs would result in the insurers demanding a better DFDR/CVR location system - or no insurance.
Just who decides the level of recovery and investigation and for what reason?
The answer is the public decides, that's why the funding should come from the pubic sector.
If it was the industry alone, their needs only need to satisfy the regulator along the lines of continued airworthiness of their part of the product, be it design/manufacture, operation or maintenence.
The major barrier has always been the inability or unwillingness of the public to pay for questions to be answered. If it was left to some portions of the public, nothing would be done and only speculation would result.
It's really neither black nor white, but only a gentlemens handshake in the end as to who pays.