Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 165–188

Maritime trade and migratory species management to protect biodiversity

Article

Abstract

Invasive species threaten biodiversity worldwide. Ships inadvertently carry marine invasive species to vulnerable ports. An empirical game theoretic analysis is presented to explore this transboundary biological pollution topic. This analysis utilizes data on marine invasive species and maritime trade as a vector of impact on native species at different public port locations along the Pacific coast of the North American countries. Preventative and reactive abatement strategies are compared. The countries are not identical and a comparison of noncooperative game strategies and payoffs to the cooperative game is presented. With the asymmetry between countries, optimal sharing rules are quantified. Results show that cooperative and preventative abatement is optimal compared to all other strategies dealing with stock and flow pollution.

Keywords

Maritime trade Transboundary pollution Invasive species Empirical game 

JEL classification

C79 F13 Q25 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barbier E, Shogren J (2002) Growth with endogenous risk of biological invasion. Econ Inq 42(4): 587–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basar T, Olsder G (1982) Dynamic noncooperative game theory. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Baskin Y (1996) Curbing undesirable invaders. BioScience 46:732–736CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Caswell H (1989) Matrix population models. Sinaur Publishers, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
  5. Chander B, Tulkens R (1991) Strategically stable cost sharing in an economic ecological negotiation process. CORE Discussion Paper #9135, revised 1992, LouvainGoogle Scholar
  6. Commission of Environmental Cooperation (CEC) (2003) Closing the pathways of aquatic invasive species across North America. MontrealGoogle Scholar
  7. Conrad J, Clark C (1987) Natural resource economics. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Corbett K (1996) Double or nothing: the big stakes of hub ports. J Urban Techn 3(2):1–10Google Scholar
  9. Costello C, McAusland C (2003) Protectionisms, trade, and measures of damage from exotic species introductions. Am J Agric Econ 85:964–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dockner E, Long N (1993) International pollution control: cooperative versus noncooperative strategies. J Environ Econ Manage 25:13–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eiswerth M, Johnson W (2002) Managing nonindigenous invasive species: insights from dynamic analysis. Environ Resour Econ 23:319–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. E Paint Company (2002) Retail Price List, FalmouthGoogle Scholar
  13. Faulkner D (2000) Marine pharmacology. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 77:135–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Federal Reserve System (2002) Federal reserve bulletin monthly. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve SystemGoogle Scholar
  15. Fernandez L (2006) Marine shipping trade and invasive species management Strategies. Int Game Theo Rev 8(1):153–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fofonoff PW, Ruiz GM, Steves B, Carlton JT (2003) In ships or on ships? Mechanisms of transfer and invasion for nonnative species to the coasts of North America. In: Ruiz GM, Carlton JT (eds) Invasive species. Vectors and management strategies. Island Press, Washington, DC, USA, pp 152–182Google Scholar
  17. Freeman A (1993) The measurement of environmental and resource values, theory and methods. Resources for the Future, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. GAO (2002) Invasive species clearer focus and greater commitment needed to effectively manage the problem. GAO Report N. GAO-03-1, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  19. Hanley N, Folmer H (eds) (1998) Game theory and the environment. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  20. Hayes K, Sliwa C (2003) Identifying potential marine pests—a deductive approach applied to Australia. Mar Pollut Bull 46:91–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Haygood M (2000) Microbial symbionts of marine invertebrates: opportunities for microbial biotechnology. In: Bartlett D (eds) Molecular marine microbiology. Horizon Scientific Press, NorfolkGoogle Scholar
  22. Helling A, Poister T (2000) US maritime ports: trends, policy implications and research needs. Econ Dev Q 14(3):300–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Horan RD, Lupi F (2005) Tradeable risk permits to prevent future introductions of invasive alien species into the Great Lakes. Ecol Econ 52(3):289–304Google Scholar
  24. Horan RD, Perrings C, Lupi F, Bulte EH (2002) Biological pollution prevention strategies under ignorance: the case of invasive species. Am J Agric Econ 84(5):1303–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. International Maritime Organization (2001) International Convention on Hull Biofouling, Summaries: A.895(21), IMO Diplomatic Conference, October 1–5, 2001, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2002) International Ship and Port Facility Security (ISPS) Code. Conference of Contracting Governments to the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson L, Miller J (2003) Making dollars and sense of nontoxic antifouling strategies for boats. California Sea Grant College Program Technical Report No. T-052, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  28. Kaiser B, Roumasset J (2002) Valuing indirect ecosystem services: the case of tropical watersheds. Environ Dev Econ 7(4):701–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kaldor N (1939) Welfare propositions of economics and interpersonal comparisons of utility. Econ J 49:549–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Knowler D (2005) Reassessing the costs of biological invasion: mnemiopsis leidyi in the black sea. Ecol Econ 52(3):187–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knowler D, Barbier E (2000) The economics of an invading species: a theoretical model and case study application. In Perrings C, Williamson M, Dalmazzone S (eds) The economics of biological invasions. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  32. Kuris A (1992) A review of patterns and causes of crustacean brood mortality. In: Wenner A, Kuris A (eds) Crustacean egg production. Crustacean Issues 6. Balkema, RotterdamGoogle Scholar
  33. Kuris A, Blau S, Paul A, Shields J, Wickham D (1991) Infestation by brood sumbionts and their impact on egg mortality of the red king crab, Paralithodes camtschatica: geographic and temporal variation. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 48:559–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kuris A, Lafferty K (1992) Modeling crustacean fisheries: effects of parasites on management strategies. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 49:327–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lafferty K, Kuris A (1999) How environmental stress affects the impacts of parasites. Limnol Oceanogr 44(3):925–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lafferty K, Kuris A (1996) Biological control of marine pests. Ecology 77(7):1989–2000CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Langevin G (2003) Ballast water exchange. Shipping Federation of Canada, VancouverGoogle Scholar
  38. Levings C, Cordell J, Ong S, Piercey G (2004) The origin and identification of invertebrate organisms being transported to Canada’s Pacific coast by ballast water. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 61:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Maler K, De Zeeuw A (1998) The acid rain game. Environ Resour Econ 12:167–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Marsa L (2002) Oceans of hope. Los Angeles Times, Febuary 11, 2002Google Scholar
  41. McAusland C, Costello C (2004) Avoiding invasives: trade related policies for controlling unintentional exotic species introductions. J Environ Econ Manage 48(2):954–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McCausland C, Costello C (2002) Avoiding invasives: trade related policies for preventing introductions of exotic species. Conference Presentation, Second World Congress of Environmental and Resource Economists, June 24–27, 2002, MontereyGoogle Scholar
  43. Miranda M, Fackler P (2002) Applied computational economics and finance. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Nuijen B, Bouna M, Manada C, Jimeno J, Schellens J, Bult A, Beijnen J (2000) Pharmaceutical development of anticancer agents derived from marine sources. AntiCancer Drugs 11:793–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Olson LJ, Roy S (2002) The economics of controlling a stochastic biological invasion. Am J Agric Econ 84(5):1311–1316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. PACFIN (Pacific Fisheries Information Network) (2002) Data of shellfish market and associated wetfish market. Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, GladstoneGoogle Scholar
  47. PSARC (Pacific Scientific Advice Review Committee) (2002) Stock Status Reports for Invertebrates, North Coast License Area, wwwpac.dfo-wpo.gc.ca/sci/psarc/ssrs/invertGoogle Scholar
  48. Park S, Miller K (1988) Random number generators: good ones are hard to find. Common ACM 32(11):1192–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Perrings C (2005) Mitigation and adaptation strategies for the control of biological invasions. Ecol Econ 52(3):315–325Google Scholar
  50. Perrings C (2002) Biological invasions in aquatic systems: the economic problem. Bull Mar Sci 70(2):541–552Google Scholar
  51. Perrings C, Williamson M, Barbier EB, Delfino D, Dalmazzone S, Shogren J, Simmons P, Watkinson A (2002) Biological invasion risks and the public good: an economic perspective. Conserv Ecol 6(1):1 [online]. Available at http:l/www.consecol.org/vol6/issl/artlGoogle Scholar
  52. Pimentel D, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien invasive species in the US Ecol Econ 52(3):273–288Google Scholar
  53. Pimental D, Lach L, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2000) Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the united states. Bioscience 50(1):53–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ruiz G (2002) Ships as vectors: assessing the role of hull fouling in biological invasions. Conference Presentation at International Congress on Marine Corrosion and Fouling, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  55. Ruiz G, Carlton J (2003) Invasive species: vectors and management strategies. Island Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  56. Settle C, Shogren JF (2002) Modeling native-exotic species within yellowstone lake. Am J Agric Econ 84(5):1323–1328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shogren JF (2000) Risk reduction strategies against the ‘explosive invader. In: Perrings C, Williamson M, Dalmazzone S (eds) The economics of biological invasions. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 56–69Google Scholar
  58. Tamburri M, Wasson K, Matsuda M (2002) Ballast water deoxygenation can prevent aquatic introductions while reducing ship corrosion. Biol Conser 103:331–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Taylor A, Rigby G, Gollasch S, Voigt M, Hallegraeff G, McCollin T, Jelmert A (2002) Preventative treatment and control techniques for ballast water. In: Leppakoski E, Gollasch S, Olenin S (eds) Invasive aquatic species of Europe: distributions impacts and management Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  60. US Coast Guard (2004) Shipboard technology evaluation program (STEP): experimental ballast ballast water treatment systems. Coast Guard Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular 1Google Scholar
  61. US Maritime Administration (2002) 2000–2002 Waterborne TrafficStatistics, website: http://www. marad.dot.gov/MARAD statistics/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
  62. Van der Ploeg F, de Zeeuw A (1992) International aspects of pollution control. Environ Resour Econ 2(2):117–139Google Scholar
  63. Wilcove D, Rothstein D, Dubow J, Phillips A, Losos E (1998) Quantifying threats to imperiled species in the United States. Bioscience 48:607–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Williams M (1999) Invasions. Ecography 22:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Younqlood J, Andruzzi A, Senaratne W, Ober C, Callow J, Finlay J, Callow M (2003) New materials for marine biofouling resistance and release: semi-flourinated and pegylated block copolymer bilayer coatings. Polymeric Mater Sci Eng 88:608–609Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations