Advertisement

Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 53, Issue 2, pp 159–184 | Cite as

Transboundary Marine Resources and Trading Neighbours

  • Horatiu A. Rus
Article

Abstract

The importance of space in analyzing issues pertaining to renewable resources can hardly be overstated. Many such resources are mobile and spatially heterogeneous with respect to bio-economic variables, with important implications for both domestic management regimes and for international externalities and policy interactions. This paper uses a simple general-equilibrium framework to show that acknowledging the inter-jurisdictional mobility of a resource such as fish has the potential to alter or qualify some of the conservation and welfare results obtained in the canonical models. The previous literature on trade and renewable resources has focused on cases where national resource stocks are independent. Brander and Taylor (Can J Econ 30(3):526–552, 1997a; Resour Energy Econ 19(4):267–297, 1997b; J Int Econ, 1998a; Am Econ Rev, 1998b) find that trade leads to resource stock depletion for an open-access resource-exporting country, while the non-resource exporter is necessarily diversified. In contrast, we find that the country with a comparative advantage in the resource good may gain from a conservation standpoint, while its partner can specialize in the manufactured good and may incur conservation and even welfare losses from trade.

Keywords

Dispersion Renewable resources Environment International trade Open access 

JEL Classification

Q2 F18 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Armstrong CW, Skonhoft A (2006) Marine reserves: a bio-economic model with asymmetric density dependent migration. Ecol Econ 57(3): 466–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier EB, Schulz C-E (1997) Wildlife, biodiversity and trade. Environ Dev Econ 2(02): 145–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bjørndal T, Munro G (2003) The management of high seas fisheries resources and the implementation of the UN Fish Stock Agreement of 1995. ch. In: Folmer H, Tietenberg T (eds) The international yearbook of environmental and resource economics 2003/2004. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 1–35Google Scholar
  4. Brander JA, Taylor MS (1997a) International trade and open-access renewable resources: the small open economy case. Can J Econ 30(3): 526–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brander JA, Taylor MS (1997b) International trade between consumer and conservationist countries. Resour Energy Econ 19(4): 267–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brander JA, Taylor MS (1998a) Open access renewable resources: trade and trade policy in a two-country model. J Int Econ 44(2): 181–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brander JA, Taylor MS (1998b) The simple economics of easter island: a ricardo-malthus model of renewable resource use. Am Econ Rev. American Economic Association 88(1): 119–138Google Scholar
  8. Brock W, Xepapadeas A (2005) Optimal control and spatial heterogeneity: pattern formation in economic-ecological models. Working papers, Fondazione Eni Enrico MatteiGoogle Scholar
  9. Bulte E, Damania R (2005) A note on trade liberalization and common pool resources. Can J Econ 38(3): 883–899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chichilnisky G (1994) North-south trade and the global environment. Am Econ Rev 84(4): 851–874Google Scholar
  11. Clark C (1990) Mathematical bioeconomics: the optimal management of renewable resources. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2005) Free trade and global warming: a trade theory view of the kyoto protocol. J Environ Econ Manag 49(2): 205–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gordon DV, Klein K (1999) Sharing common property resources: the North Atlantic cod fishery. ch. 13. In: Dore M, Mount T (eds) Global environmental economics. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 285–300Google Scholar
  14. Maguire J-J, Sissenwine M, Csirke J, Grainger R, Garcia S (2006) The state of the world highly migratory and other high seas resources. FAO fisheries technical paper 495, RomeGoogle Scholar
  15. McAusland C, Costello C (2004) Avoiding invasives: trade-related policies for controlling unintentional exotic species introductions. J Environ Econ Manag 48(2): 954–977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Munro GR (1979) The optimal management of transboundary renewable resources. Can J Econ. Canadian Economics Association 12(3): 355–376Google Scholar
  17. Okubo A, Levin SA (2001) Diffusion and ecological problems: modern perspectives. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Rauscher M, Barbier EB (2010) Biodiversity and geography. Resour Energy Econ 32(2): 241–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sanchirico J, Albers H, Fischer C, Coleman C (2010) Spatial management of invasive species: pathways and policy options. Environ Resour Econ 45(4): 517–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sanchirico JN, Wilen JE (1999) Bioeconomics of spatial exploitation in a patchy environment. J Environ Econ Manag 37(2): 129–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sanchirico JN, Wilen JE (2001) Dynamics of spatial exploitation: a metapopulation approach. Nat Resour Model 14(3): 391–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sanchirico JN, Wilen JE (2005) Optimal spatial management of renewable resources: matching policy scope to ecosystem scale. J Environ Econ Manag 50(1): 23–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith MD, Sanchirico JN, Wilen JE (2009) The economics of spatial-dynamic processes: applications to renewable resources. J Environ Econ Manag 57(1): 104–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Wilen JE (2004) Spatial management of fisheries. Mar Resour Econ 19: 7–19Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departments of Economics and Political ScienceUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations