Advertisement

Journal of Bioeconomics

, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp 147–166 | Cite as

Measuring potential profits in a bioeconomic model of the mixed demersal fishery in the North Sea

  • Trond Bjørndal
  • Daniel V. GordonEmail author
  • Mintewab Bezabih
Article
  • 170 Downloads

Abstract

This paper measures for potential profit in the North Sea mixed demersal fishery for cod, haddock and whiting. Dynamic bioeconomic models for three UK fisheries are developed, incorporating both population dynamics and economic structure. Actual profit in 2006, for the three UK fleets included in the analysis, is estimated at £10.3 million. If the TAC remains unchanged but vessels are allowed to harvest at near efficient levels with fleet size reduced accordingly, potential profit is measured at £34.5 million. If demersal stocks are allowed to recover to near optimal levels potential UK profit exceeds £185 million. This indicates substantial profit dissipation due to overcapacity and stock depletion in the fishery. The results of the paper should be of policy interest and will add to the empirical literature on resource profits in mixed demersal fisheries.

Keywords

North Sea demersal fishery Bioeconomic model Potential profit 

JEL Classification

Q22 Q28 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Advisory Committee On Fishery Management (ACFM): (2003) Report of the cod assessment working group. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Copenhangen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson J., Curtis H., Stewart A., McShane H. (2006) The 2006 economic survey of the UK fishing fleet. Seafish Authority, Edinburgh, UKGoogle Scholar
  3. Asche F., Bjørndal T., Gordon D. V. (2009) Rents in an individual quota fishery. Land Economics 85(2): 280–292Google Scholar
  4. Bertignac M, Campbell H. F., Hampton J., Hand A. J. (2001) Maximizing resource rent from the Western and Central Pacific tuna fisheries. Marine Resource Economics 15: 151–177Google Scholar
  5. Bjørndal T., Gordon D., Bezabih M. (2010) Rents in the North Sea herring fishery area IV. University of Portsmouth, MimeoGoogle Scholar
  6. Bjørndal T., Gordon D. V. (2001) The economic structure of harvesting for three vessel types in the Norwegian spring spawning herring fishery. Marine Resource Economics 15: 281–292Google Scholar
  7. Bjørndal T. (1988) The optimal management of North Sea herring. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 15: 9–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark C. W. (1976) Mathematical bioeconomics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  9. Dupont D. (1990) Rent dissipation in restricted access fisheries. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 19(1): 26–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eggert H., Tveterås R. (2007) Potential rent and overcapacity in the Swedish Baltic Sea trawl fishery for cod (Gadus morhua). ICES Journal of Marine Science 64(3): 439–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Homans, F. R., & Wilen, J. E. (2000). Market rent dissipation in regulated open access fisheries. In 2000 Annual meeting, July 30–August 2, Tampa, FL. American Agricultural Economics Association.Google Scholar
  12. ICES. 2009. ICES Advice book 6. Copenhangen, Denmark: International Council for the Exploration of the Sea http://www.ices.dk/committe/acom/comwork/-report/asp/advice.asp?Region--1.
  13. Jensen C. L. (2002) Application of dual theory in fisheries: A survey. Marine Resource Economics 17: 309–334Google Scholar
  14. Kugarajh K., Sandal L.K., Berge G. (2006) Implementing a stochastic bioeconomic model for the North-East Arctic cod fishery. Journal of Bioeconomics 8(1): 35–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Matthiasson T. (1997) Consequences of local government involvement in the Icelandic ITQ market. Marine Resource Economics 12: 107–126Google Scholar
  16. Matulich S., Sever M. (1999) Reconsidering the initial allocation of ITQs: The search for a pareto-safe allocation between fishing and processing sectors. Land Economics, 75(2): 203–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nøstbakken L. (2006) Regime switching in a fishery with stochastic stock and price. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 51(2): 231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pascoe S., Burnett A. (2007) Recovering from overexploitation: The European fisheries of the North Sea. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues 7(2–3): 158–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ratz H.-J., Bethke E., Dorner H., Beare D., Groger J. (2007) Sustainable management of mixed demersal fisheries in the North Sea through fleet-based management—a proposal from a biological perspective. ICES Journal of Marine Science 64: 652–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Squires D., Kirkley J. (1995) Resource rents from single and multispecies individual transferable quota programmes. ICES Journal of Marine Science 52(2): 153–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Watson R., Pauly D. (2001) Systematic distortions in world fisheries catch trends. Nature 414: 534–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Weninger Q., Waters J. A. (2003) Economic benefits of management reform in the northern Gulf of Mexico reef Fishery. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 46(2): 207–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Weninger Q. (1999) Equilibrium prices in a vertically coordinated fishery. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 37(3): 290–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Weninger Q. (1998) Assessing efficiency gains from individual transferable quotas: An application to the mid-Atlantic surf clam and ocean quahog fishery. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 81(4): 750–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wilen J. E. (2000) Renewable resource economists and policy: What differences have we made?. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 39: 306–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Trond Bjørndal
    • 1
  • Daniel V. Gordon
    • 2
    Email author
  • Mintewab Bezabih
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.CEMAREUniversity of PortsmouthPortsmouthUK
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  3. 3.Department of EconomicsUniversity of SussexBrightonUK

Personalised recommendations