Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 54, Issue 2, pp 293–310 | Cite as

Does the Optimal Size of a Fish Stock Increase with Environmental Uncertainties?

  • Ute KapaunEmail author
  • Martin F. Quaas


We analyze the effect of environmental uncertainties on optimal fishery management in a bio-economic fishery model. Unlike most of the literature on resource economics, but in line with ecological models, we allow the different biological processes of survival and recruitment to be affected differently by environmental uncertainties. We show that the overall effect of uncertainty on the optimal size of a fish stock is ambiguous, depending on the prudence of the value function. For the case of a risk-neutral fishery manager, the overall effect depends on the relative magnitude of two opposing effects, the ‘convex-cost effect’ and the ‘gambling effect’. We apply the analysis to the Baltic cod and the North Sea herring fisheries, concluding that for risk neutral agents the net effect of environmental uncertainties on the optimal size of these fish stocks is negative, albeit small in absolute value. Under risk aversion, the effect on optimal stock size is positive for sufficiently high coefficients of constant relative risk aversion.


Fishery economics Environmental uncertainty Constant escapement Risk aversion Prudence 

JEL Classification

Q22 Q57 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

10640_2012_9606_MOESM1_ESM.mat (1 kb)
ESM 1 (MAT 1 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM2_ESM.mat (1 kb)
ESM 2 (MAT 1 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM3_ESM.m (1 kb)
ESM 3 (M 1 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM4_ESM.m (3 kb)
ESM 4 (M 3 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM5_ESM.m (1 kb)
ESM 5 (M 1 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM6_ESM.m (1 kb)
ESM 6 (M 1 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM7_ESM.m (3 kb)
ESM 7 (M 4 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM8_ESM.m (5 kb)
ESM 8 (M 5 kb)
10640_2012_9606_MOESM9_ESM.m (0 kb)
ESM 9 (M 1 kb)


  1. Andersen S, Harrison G, Lau M, Rutstrom E (2008) Eliciting risk and time preferences. Econometrica 76(3): 583–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beverton RJH, Holt SJ (1957) On the dynamics of exploited fish populations. Blackburn Press, CaldwellGoogle Scholar
  3. Clark CW (1990) Mathematical bioeconomics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Clark C, Kirkwood G (1986) On uncertain renewable resource stocks: optimal harvest policies and the value of stock surveys. J Environ Econ Manag 13: 235–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Costello C, Polasky S (2008) Optimal harvesting of stochastic spatial resources. J Environ Econ Manag 56(1): 1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Costello C, Polasky S, Solow A (2001) Renewable resource management with environmental prediction. Can J Econ 34(1): 196–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Zeeuw A, Zemel A (2012) Regime shifts and uncertainty in pollution control. J Econ Dyn Control 36(7): 939–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fiskeridirektoratet (2007) Fiskeristatistisk Årbog 2007 (yearbook of fishery statistics 2007). Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri, Kopenhavn, and previous editions from 2000 onwardsGoogle Scholar
  9. Fiskeriregnskabsstatistik (2007) Account statistics for fishery. Ministeriet for Fødevarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri, Statens Jordbrugs- og Fiskeriøkonomiske Institut, Kopenhavn, and previous editions from 2000 onwardsGoogle Scholar
  10. Harley S, Myers R, Dunn A (2001) Is catch-per-unit-effort proportional to abundance?. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 58(9): 1760–1772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hilborn R, Walters CJ (1992) Quantitative fisheries stock assessment—choice, dynamics and uncertainty. Kluwer, BostonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. ICES (1998) Report of the study group on stock-recruitment relationships for north sea autumn-spawning herring. ICES CM 1998/D:2, p 60Google Scholar
  13. ICES (2007) Report of the herring assessment working group for the area south of 62on. ICES CM 2007/ACFM:11, p 538Google Scholar
  14. ICES (2009) Report of the Baltic fisheries assessment working group (WGBFAS). ICES CM 2009/ACOM:07Google Scholar
  15. ICES (2010a) Ices advice 2010, book 6. International Council of the Exploration of the Sea, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  16. ICES (2010b) Ices advice 2010, book 8. International Council of the Exploration of the Sea, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  17. ICES (2011) Report of the Baltic fisheries assessment working group (WGBFAS). ICES CM 2011/ACOM:11Google Scholar
  18. Kimball M (1990) Precautionary saving in the small and in the large. Econometrica 58(1): 53–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kronbak LG (2002) The dynamics of an open access: the case of the Baltic Sea cod fishery—a strategic approach. Working Papers 31/02, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Environmental and Business EconomicsGoogle Scholar
  20. Kronbak LG (2005) The dynamics of an open-access fishery: Baltic Sea cod. Marine Resour Econ 19: 459–479Google Scholar
  21. Miranda M, Fackler P (2002) Applied computational economics and finance. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Nostbakken L (2008) Stochastic modelling of the North Sea herring fishery under alternative management regimes. Marine Resour Econ 22:63–84Google Scholar
  23. Pindyck RS (1984) Uncertainty in the theory of renewable resource markets. Rev Econ Stud LI, 289–303Google Scholar
  24. Polasky S, Zeeuw A, Wagener F (2011) Optimal management with potential regime shifts. J Environ Econ Manag 62: 229–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quaas M, Requate T, Ruckes K, Skonhoft A, Vestergaard N, Voss R (2010) Incentives for optimal management of age-structured fish populations. In: WCERE 2010; fourth world congress of environmental and resource economists; June 28 to July 2, 2010, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  26. Reed WJ (1979) Optimal escapement levels in stochastic and deterministic harvesting models. J Environ Econ Manag 6: 350–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rockmann C, Schneider UA, St. John MA, Tol RSJ (2007) Rebuilding the Eastern Baltic cod stock under environmental change—a preliminary approach using stock, environmental, and management constraints. Nat Resour Model 20(2): 223–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sethi G, Costello C, Fisher A, Hanemann M, Karp L (2005) Fishery management under multiple uncertainty. J Environ Econ Manag 50(2): 300–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Singh R, Weninger Q, Doyle M (2006) Fisheries management with stock growth uncertainty and costly capital adjustment. J Environ Econ Manag 52(2): 582–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Weitzman ML (2002) Landing fees vs harvest quotas with uncertain fish stocks. J Environ Econ Manag 43: 325–338CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EconomicsUniversity of KielKielGermany

Personalised recommendations