Environmental and Resource Economics

, Volume 66, Issue 4, pp 749–764 | Cite as

Fewer Fish for Higher Profits? Price Response and Economic Incentives in Global Tuna Fisheries Management

  • Chin-Hwa Jenny Sun
  • Fu-Sung Chiang
  • Patrice Guillotreau
  • Dale Squires
  • D. G. Webster
  • Matt Owens
Article

Abstract

This paper evaluates industry-wide economic incentives arising from changes in product prices in an industry exploiting a common renewable resource (tropical tunas) that is regulated via output limits. Changes in prices alter economic incentives by affecting revenues, profits, conservation, and nonmarket public benefits. Economic incentives in industries exploiting common resources have been examined from multiple angles. However, industry level variation in market prices arising from changes in public regulation has not been explored. We analyse the impact on economic incentives due to changes in output limits and market prices through estimation of ex-vessel price and scale flexibilities for imported skipjack and yellowfin in Thailand’s cannery market. The unitary scale flexibility, estimated from the General Synthetic Inverse Demand Systems, indicates no loss in revenue and even potential profit increases resulting from lower harvest levels that could arise from lower catch limits. However, for a revenue neutral or positive outcome to be achieved, the three inter-governmental tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations, which manage the majority of the yellowfin and skipjack tuna in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, would have to coordinate multilaterally to set the catch limits for both species.

Keywords

Economic incentives Conservation policy General synthetic inverse demand systems Global tuna fisheries 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This material is partly based upon work supported by the National Marine Fisheries Service, National Science Foundation under Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems Program “Fishscape: Complex dynamics of the eastern Pacific tuna fishery” Grant No. CNH-1010280, the National Science Council Grant No. NSC90-2621-Z-019-001 and Grant No. NSC95WFA2000217, the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) under grant CEP (changements environnementaux planétaires) MACROES: MACROoscope for Oceanic Earth System (ANR-09-CEP-003), and the international projects MADE (Mitigating the Adverse Ecological Impact of Fishing funded by the European Commission under the 7th Research Framework Programme). We also acknowledge the community-building support of CLIOTOP (Climate Impact on Oceanic Top Predators) and IMBER (Integrated Marine Biogeochemistry and Ecosystem Research). The results are not necessarily expressing the views of the authors’ organizations, countries, or sectors, and any remaining errors are the authors’ responsibility.

References

  1. Allen R (2010) International management of tuna fisheries: arrangements, challenges and a way forward. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 536, RomeGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson G, Blundell R (1983) Testing restrictions in a flexible dynamic demand system: an application to consumers’ expenditure in Canada. Rev Econ Stud 50(3):397–410. doi: 10.2307/2297672 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson RW (1980) Some theory of inverse demand for applied demand analysis. Eur Econ Rev 14(3):281–290. doi: 10.1016/S0014-2921(80)80001-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Asche F, Zhang D (2013) Testing structural changes in the U.S. whitefish import market: an inverse demand system approach. Agric Resour. Econ Rev 42(3):453–470Google Scholar
  5. Barkin JS, Shambaugh G (eds) (1999) Anarchy and the environment: the international relations of common pool resources. State University of New York Press, AlbanyGoogle Scholar
  6. Barten AP (1993) Consumer allocation models: choice of functional form. Empir Econ 18(1):129–158. doi: 10.1007/BF01238883 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barten AP, Bettendorf LJ (1989) Price formation of fish: an application of an inverse demand system. Eur Econ Rev 33(8):1509–1525. doi: 10.1016/0014-2921(89)90075-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berkes F, Hughes TP, Steneck RS et al (2006) Globalization, roving bandits, and marine resources. Science 311(5767):1557–1558. doi: 10.1126/science.1122804 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bertignac M, Campbell HF, Hampton J, Hand AJ (2000) Maximizing resource rent from the western and central Pacific tuna fisheries. Mar Resour Econ 15(3):151–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown MG, Lee JY, Seale JL Jr (1995) A family of inverse demand systems and choice of functional form. Empir Econ 20(3):519–530. doi: 10.1007/BF01180680 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Campbell HF (1998) Ocean-scale management of pelagic fisheries: economic and regulatory issues. Proceedings of an international workshop. In: Chakravorty U, Sibert J (eds) How many purse seiners should exploit the western Pacific tuna fishery?. Pelagic Fisheries Research Program, Joint Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, pp 29–40Google Scholar
  12. Chiang FS, Lee JY, Brown MG (2001) The impact of inventory on tuna prices: an application of scaling in the Rotterdam inverse demand system. J Agric Appl Econ 33(3):403–411Google Scholar
  13. Clark CW (1990) Mathematical bioeconomics: the optimal management of renewable resources, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Copeland BR, Taylor MS (2009) Trade, tragedy, and the commons. Am Econ Rev 99(3):725–749. doi: 10.1257/aer.99.3.725 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dagorn L, Holland KN, Restrepo V, Moreno G (2012) Is it good or bad to fish with FADs? What are the real impacts of the use of drifting FADs on pelagic marine ecosystems? Fish Fish 14(3):391–415. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-2979.2012.00478.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Eales J (1996) A further look at flexibilities and elasticities: comment. Am J Agric Econ 78(4):1125–1129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eales J, Durham C, Wessells CR (1997) Generalized models of Japanese demand for fish. Am J Agric Econ 79(4):1153–1163. doi: 10.2307/1244272 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Finus M, Schneider R (2012) Scope and compatibility of measures in international fisheries agreements, Working Paper. Department of Economics, University of Bath, BathGoogle Scholar
  19. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2012) FishstatJ database, Fisheries and Aquaculture Department, Rome. http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/software/fishstatj/en
  20. Gordon HS (1954) The economic theory of a common property resource: the fishery. J Polit Econ 62:124–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grafton RQ, Arnason R, Bjorndal T et al (2006) Incentive-based approaches to sustainable fisheries. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 63(3):699–710. doi: 10.1139/f05-247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Greene WH (2002) Econometric Analysis, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  23. Hall MA, Roman M (2013) Bycatch and non-tuna catch in the tropical tuna purse seine fisheries of the world. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 568, Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  24. Houck JP (1965) The relationship of direct price flexibilities to direct price elasticities. Am J Agric Econ 47(3):789–792. doi: 10.2307/1236288 Google Scholar
  25. Huang KS (1994) A further look at flexibilities and elasticities. Am J Agric Econ 76(2):313–317. doi: 10.2307/1243633 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jeon Y, Reid C, Squires D (2008) Is there a global market for tuna? Policy implications for tropical tuna fisheries. Ocean Dev Int Law 39(1):32–50. doi: 10.1080/00908320701641594 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jiménez-Toribio R, Guillotreau P, Mongruel R (2010) Global integration of European tuna markets. Prog Oceanogr 86(1–2):166–175. doi: 10.1016/j.pocean.2010.04.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Joseph JA, Squires D, Bayliff W et al (2010) Addressing the problem of excess fishing capacity in tuna fisheries. In: Allen R, Joseph JA, Squires D (eds) Conservation and management of transnational tuna fisheries. University of California at San Diego, San Diego, Department of Economics , pp 11–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Just RE, Hueth DL, Schmitz A (2004) The welfare economics of public policy: a practical approach to project and policy evaluation. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham 712 ppGoogle Scholar
  30. King RM (1987) The US tuna market: a Pacific islands perspective. In: Doulman DJ (ed) The development of the tuna industry in the Pacific islands region: an analysis of options. East-West Fisheries Science Center, NOAA Fisheries, HonoluluGoogle Scholar
  31. Laitinen K, Theil H (1979) The Antonelli matrix and the reciprocal Slutsky matrix. Econ Lett 3:153–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. MacKinnon JG (1996) Numerical distribution functions for unit root and cointegration tests. J Appl Econ 11(6):601–618. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-1255(199611)11:6\(<\)3.0.CO;2-TGoogle Scholar
  33. Miyake MP, Guillotreau P, Sun CH, Ishimura G (2010) Recent developments in the tuna industry: stocks, fishery, management, processing, trade and markets. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper 543, Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/fishery/publications/technical-papers/en
  34. Morón J (2002) The WTPO and its significance in the world tuna purse-seine fishery. SCTB15 Working Paper FTWG-6, Honolulu, HawaiiGoogle Scholar
  35. Owen AD (2001) The Relationship between the world price for skipjack and yellowfin tuna raw material for canning and supply from the WCPO and FFA Member Countries EEZs. Forum Fisheries Agency, FFA Report 01/32, Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency, Honiara, Solomon Islands. http://www.spc.int/DigitalLibrary/Doc/FAME/FFA/Reports/FFA_2001_032.pdf
  36. Owen AD, Troedson DA (1994) The Japanese tuna industry and market. In: Campbell HF, Owen AD (eds) The economics of Papua New Guinea’s tuna fisheries. Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) Monograph, Canberra, pp 231–238Google Scholar
  37. Park H, Thurman WN (1999) On interpreting inverse demand systems: a primal comparison of scale flexibilities and income elasticities. Am J Agric Econ 81(4):950–958. doi: 10.2307/1244337 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Segerson K, Zhou R (2014) Individual vs. collective quotas in fisheries management under uncertainty, Working paper. Department of Economics, University of Connecticut StorrsGoogle Scholar
  39. Smith MD (2012) The new fisheries economics: incentives across many margins. Annu Rev Resour Econ 4:379–402. doi: 10.1146/annurev-resource-110811-114550 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stigler GJ, Sherwin RA (1985) The extent of the market. J Law Econ 28(3):555–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sun CH (1999) Analysis of the market structure and price cointegration of the tuna raw material markets for tuna canneries in the world. Agric Econ 22:51–72 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  42. Sun CH, Hsieh MC (2000) Analysis of the price response of Taiwan tuna purse seine fishery in the frozen tuna raw material market in Thailand. J Fish Soc Taiwan 27:45–58 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  43. Sun CH, Hsu WH (1998) Analysis of the price cointegration across different countries for the frozen tuna sashimi market in Japan. Selected Paper of the Ninth International Conference of the International Institute of Fisheries Economics and Trade, Tromsø, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  44. Sun CH, Maunder MN, Aires-da-Silva A, Bayliff WH (2010) Increasing the economic value of the eastern Pacific ocean tropical tuna fishery: tradeoffs between longline and purse seine fishing. International Workshop on Global Tuna Demand, Fisheries Dynamics and Fisheries Management in the Eastern Pacific Ocean, La Jolla, California, USA, May 13–14, 2010Google Scholar
  45. Vestergaard N (2010) Principal-agent problems in fisheries. In: Grafton RQ, Hilborn R, Squires D, Tait M, Williams M (eds) Handbook of marine fisheries conservation and management. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 563–571Google Scholar
  46. Webster DG (2015) Beyond the tragedy in global fisheries. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. Wessells CR, Wilen JE (1994) Seasonal patterns and regional preferences in Japanese household demand for seafood. Can J Agric Econ 42(1):87–103. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7976.1994.tb00008.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wilen JE (2000) Renewable resources economists and policy: What differences have we made? J Environ Econ Manag 39:306–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chin-Hwa Jenny Sun
    • 1
  • Fu-Sung Chiang
    • 2
  • Patrice Guillotreau
    • 3
  • Dale Squires
    • 4
  • D. G. Webster
    • 5
  • Matt Owens
    • 6
  1. 1.Gulf of Maine Research InstitutePortlandUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Applied EconomicsNational Taiwan Ocean UniversityKeelungTaiwan
  3. 3.LEMNA, University of NantesNantesFrance
  4. 4.Southwest Fisheries Science CenterNOAA FisheriesLa JollaUSA
  5. 5.Environmental StudiesDartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA
  6. 6.Environmental Policy and Social Responsibility Tri MarineBellevueUSA

Personalised recommendations