IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/otg/wpaper/1201.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Search and destroy: a bioeconomic analysis of orange roughy fisheries on seamounts in New Zealand

Author

Listed:
  • Viktoria Kahui

    (Department of Economics, University of Otago, New Zealand)

  • Claire W. Armstrong

    (University of Tromso, Norway)

Abstract

This paper develops a bioeconomic model that captures the underlying incentives driving the serial depletion of pristine seamounts. The determinants under New Zealand's Quota Management System relate to unit cost savings from bottom trawling for orange roughy on seamounts, where catch rates are high, for a constrained yearly catch, yielding superior rent and driving the continued search for pristine seamounts. Despite known patterns of seamount depletion, catch and effort data collected by the New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries lack information on the bathymetry of harvesting locations. We provide descriptive statistics of the Ministry's data on catch, effort and location between 2001 and 2010, which examine associations between high catch rates and pristine seamounts. The bioeconomic model formalises the expected gains of unit cost reductions and shows that bottom trawling activity on pristine seamounts ceases only when the expected reduction in harvest costs is equal to the search cost per unit of harvest. We contend that New Zealand's policies to date to protect seamounts do not address the spatial determinants of rent appropriation under the quota system and that the imposition of a 'seamount' fee levied on the bottom trawlers' harvest activities may provide a way to internalise the cost of seamount destruction more effectively. Such a policy has a number of advantages, the most important of which is that the fee ties the impacts of habitat destruction to the choice of fishing method, thereby providing an impetus to develop and adopt more selective fishing practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Viktoria Kahui & Claire W. Armstrong, 2012. "Search and destroy: a bioeconomic analysis of orange roughy fisheries on seamounts in New Zealand," Working Papers 1201, University of Otago, Department of Economics, revised Jun 2012.
    • Handle: RePEc:otg:wpaper:1201
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.otago.ac.nz/economics/research/otago076652.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2012
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Newell, Richard G. & Sanchirico, James N. & Kerr, Suzi, 2005. "Fishing quota markets," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 437-462, May.
    2. Curtin, Richard & Prellezo, Raúl, 2010. "Understanding marine ecosystem based management: A literature review," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 821-830, September.
    3. Jacquet, Jennifer L. & Pauly, Daniel, 2008. "Trade secrets: Renaming and mislabeling of seafood," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 309-318, May.
    4. Clark, Colin W. & Munro, Gordon R., 1975. "The economics of fishing and modern capital theory: A simplified approach," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 2(2), pages 92-106, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Nielsen, Max & Ravensbeck, Lars & Nielsen, Rasmus, 2014. "Green growth in fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 43-52.
    2. Squires, Dale & Vestergaard, Niels, 2013. "Technical change in fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 286-292.
    3. Stoeven, Max T. & Quaas, Martin F., 2012. "Privatizing renewable resources: Who gains, who loses?," Economics Working Papers 2012-02, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    4. Merrie, Andrew & Olsson, Per, 2014. "An innovation and agency perspective on the emergence and spread of Marine Spatial Planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 366-374.
    5. Anders Skonhoft, 1999. "On the Optimal Exploitation of Terrestrial Animal Species," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 13(1), pages 45-57, January.
    6. Dafna Eshel, 2005. "Optimal Allocation of Tradable Pollution Rights and Market Structures," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 205-223, September.
    7. Hutton, Trevor & Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, 2002. "Natural Resource Accounting And South African Fisheries: A Bio-Economic Assessment Of The West Coast Deep-Sea Hake Fishery With Reference To The Optimal Utilisation And Management Of The Resource," Discussion Papers 18018, University of Pretoria, Center for Environmental Economics and Policy in Africa.
    8. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    9. Olli Tahvonen, 1991. "On the dynamics of renewable resource harvesting and pollution control," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 1(1), pages 97-117, March.
    10. Christopher Costello & Corbett A. Grainger, 2018. "Property Rights, Regulatory Capture, and Exploitation of Natural Resources," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(2), pages 441-479.
    11. Clark, Colin W. & Munro, Gordon R. & Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, 2005. "Subsidies, buybacks, and sustainable fisheries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 47-58, July.
    12. Asproudis, Elias & Filippiadis, Eleftherios, 2021. "Bargaining for Community Fishing Quotas," MPRA Paper 107409, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Christian Elleby & Frank Jensen, 2018. "How Many Instruments Do We Really Need? A First-Best Optimal Solution to Multiple Objectives with Fisheries Regulation," IFRO Working Paper 2018/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
    14. Manuel Pacheco Coelho, 2011. "Hunting Rights and Conservation: The Portuguese Case," International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, International Journal of Finance, Insurance and Risk Management, vol. 1(4), pages 164-164.
    15. Simon Anastasiadis & Marie-Laure Nauleau & Suzi Kerr & Tim Cox & Kit Rutherford, 2011. "Does Complex Hydrology Require Complex Water Quality Policy? NManager Simulations for Lake Rotorua," Working Papers 11_14, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    16. McDermott, Shana M. & Finnoff, David C. & Shogren, Jason F. & Kennedy, Chris J., 2021. "When does natural science uncertainty translate into economic uncertainty?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    17. Porter, David & Rassenti, Stephen & Shobe, William & Smith, Vernon & Winn, Abel, 2009. "The design, testing and implementation of Virginia's NOx allowance auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 190-200, February.
    18. Arnason, Ragnar, 2009. "Conflicting uses of marine resources: can ITQs promote an efficient solution?," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 53(1), pages 1-30.
    19. Kailin Kroetz & James N. Sanchirico & Daniel K. Lew, 2015. "Efficiency Costs of Social Objectives in Tradable Permit Programs," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(3), pages 339-366.
    20. Vázquez-Rowe, Ian & Villanueva-Rey, Pedro & Moreira, Mª Teresa & Feijoo, Gumersindo, 2013. "The role of consumer purchase and post-purchase decision-making in sustainable seafood consumption. A Spanish case study using carbon footprinting," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 94-102.

    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:otg:wpaper:1201. 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: Janet Bryant (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/etotanz.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.