IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v31y2017i2p295-328..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Property Rights for Fishing Cooperatives: How (and How Well) Do They Work?

Author

Listed:
  • Octavio Aburto-Oropeza
  • Heather M. Leslie
  • Austen Mack-Crane
  • Sriniketh Nagavarapu
  • Sheila M.W. Reddy
  • Leila Sievanen

Abstract

Devolving property rights to local institutions has emerged as a compelling management strategy for natural resource management in developing countries. The use of property rights among fishing cooperatives operating in Mexico's Gulf of California provides a compelling setting for theoretical and empirical analysis. A dynamic theoretical model demonstrates how fishing cooperatives’ management choices are shaped by the presence of property rights, the mobility of resources, and predictable environmental fluctuations. More aggressive management comes in the form of the cooperative leadership paying lower prices to cooperative members for their catch, as lower prices disincentivize fishing effort. The model's implications are empirically tested using three years of daily logbook data on prices and catches for three cooperatives from the Gulf of California. One cooperative enjoys property rights while the other two do not. There is empirical evidence in support of the model: compared to the other cooperatives, the cooperative with strong property rights pays members a lower price, pays especially lower prices for less mobile species, and decreases prices when environmental fluctuations cause population growth rates to fall. The results from this case study demonstrate the viability of cooperative management of resources but also point toward quantitatively important limitations created by the mismatch between the scale of a property right and the scale of a resource.

Suggested Citation

  • Octavio Aburto-Oropeza & Heather M. Leslie & Austen Mack-Crane & Sriniketh Nagavarapu & Sheila M.W. Reddy & Leila Sievanen, 2017. "Property Rights for Fishing Cooperatives: How (and How Well) Do They Work?," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(2), pages 295-328.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:31:y:2017:i:2:p:295-328.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/wber/lhw001
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edmonds, Eric V., 2002. "Government-initiated community resource management and local resource extraction from Nepal's forests," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 89-115, June.
    2. Diansheng Dong & Brian W. Gould & Harry M. Kaiser, 2004. "Food Demand in Mexico: An Application of the Amemiya-Tobin Approach to the Estimation of a Censored Food System," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 86(4), pages 1094-1107.
    3. Basurto, Xavier & Coleman, Eric, 2010. "Institutional and ecological interplay for successful self-governance of community-based fisheries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1094-1103, March.
    4. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, April.
    5. Deacon, Robert T & Parker, Dominic P. & Costello, Christopher J, 2008. "Improving Efficiency by Assigning Harvest Rights to Fishery Cooperatives: Evidence From the Chignik Salmon Co-op," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt1cv9s0v9, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Quérou, Nicolas & Tomini, Agnes & Costello, Christopher, 2022. "Limited‐tenure concessions for collective goods," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Gabriel S. Sampson & James N. Sanchirico, 2019. "Exploitation of a Mobile Resource with Costly Cooperation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(4), pages 1135-1163, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aburto-Oropeza,Octavio & Leslie,Heather M. & Mack-Crane,Austen & Nagavarapu,Sriniketh Suryasesha & Reddy,Sheila M.W. & Sievanen,Leila, 2016. "Property rights for fishing cooperatives : how (and how well) do they work ?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7662, The World Bank.
    2. W. Saart, Patrick & Kim, Namhyun & Bateman, Ian, 2021. "Modeling and predicting agricultural land use in England based on spatially high-resolution data," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2021/7, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    3. W. Saart, Patrick & Kim, Namhyun & Bateman, Ian, 2021. "Understanding spatial heterogeneity in GB agricultural land-use for improved policy targeting," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2021/8, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    4. Chankrajang, Thanyaporn, 2019. "State-community property-rights sharing in forests and its contributions to environmental outcomes: Evidence from Thailand's community forestry," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 261-273.
    5. Diansheng Dong & Yuqing Zheng & Hayden Stewart, 2020. "The effects of food sales taxes on household food spending: An application of a censored cluster model," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 51(5), pages 669-684, September.
    6. Towa TACHIBANA & Sunit ADHIKARI, 2005. "Effects of Community and Co-management Systems on Forest Conditions: A Case of the Middle Hills in Nepal," GSICS Working Paper Series 3, Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies, Kobe University.
    7. Mengyuan Zhou, 2022. "Does the Source of Inheritance Matter in Bequest Attitudes? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 43(4), pages 867-887, December.
    8. Campbell, Randall C. & Nagel, Gregory L., 2016. "Private information and limitations of Heckman's estimator in banking and corporate finance research," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 186-195.
    9. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    10. Ilona Babenko & Benjamin Bennett & John M Bizjak & Jeffrey L Coles & Jason J Sandvik, 2023. "Clawback Provisions and Firm Risk," The Review of Corporate Finance Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 191-239.
    11. Şahan, Duygu & Tuna, Okan, 2018. "Environmental innovation of transportation sector in OECD countries," Chapters from the Proceedings of the Hamburg International Conference of Logistics (HICL), in: Kersten, Wolfgang & Blecker, Thorsten & Ringle, Christian M. (ed.), The Road to a Digitalized Supply Chain Management: Smart and Digital Solutions for Supply Chain Management. Proceedings of the Hamburg International C, volume 25, pages 157-170, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute of Business Logistics and General Management.
    12. Eric Fesselmeyer & Kiat Ying Seah, 2018. "Individual Payoffs and the Effect of Homeownership on Social Capital Investment," Journal of Housing Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 59-78, January.
    13. Ruomeng Cui & Dennis J. Zhang & Achal Bassamboo, 2019. "Learning from Inventory Availability Information: Evidence from Field Experiments on Amazon," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1216-1235, March.
    14. Luiz Paulo Fávero & Joseph F. Hair & Rafael de Freitas Souza & Matheus Albergaria & Talles V. Brugni, 2021. "Zero-Inflated Generalized Linear Mixed Models: A Better Way to Understand Data Relationships," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-28, May.
    15. Shaikh M. S. U. Eskander & Sam Fankhauser, 2022. "Income Diversification and Income Inequality: Household Responses to the 2013 Floods in Pakistan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, January.
    16. Iván Fernández-Val & Martin Weidner, 2018. "Fixed Effects Estimation of Large-TPanel Data Models," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 109-138, August.
    17. Peter Harasztosi & Attila Lindner, 2019. "Who Pays for the Minimum Wage?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2693-2727, August.
    18. Jinwon Kim & Jucheol Moon & Dongyun Yang, 2024. "Pigouvian Congestion Tolls and the Welfare Gain: Estimates for California Freeways," Working Papers 2402, Nam Duck-Woo Economic Research Institute, Sogang University (Former Research Institute for Market Economy).
    19. Cho, Seong-Hoon & Kim, Heeho & Roberts, Roland K. & Kim, Taeyoung & Lee, Daegoon, 2014. "Effects of changes in forestland ownership on deforestation and urbanization and the resulting effects on greenhouse gas emissions," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 93-109.
    20. Kazuki Onji & John P. Tang, 2015. "A nation without a corporate income tax: Evidence from nineteenth century Japan," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 15-12, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • Q20 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - General
    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:31:y:2017:i:2:p:295-328.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.