IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ipewps/122012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effects of EU fisheries partnership agreements on fish stocks and fishermen: The case of Cape Verde

Author

Listed:
  • Mundt, Matthias

Abstract

The viewpoints of 30 Cape Verdean fishermen are used together with an analysis of the state of tuna stocks in the Atlantic Ocean to question the EU's claim that their fleet only targets surplus species. Additionally, local marine catches of the artisanal and semi-industrial fleet are evaluated and the importance of the fisheries sector for the inhabitants of Cape Verde is shown. It is argued that even though the EU condemns illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUU); their approach to stop IUU fails. In order to support this hypothesis, monitoring of the European fleet, movements of tuna fish and coverage of recent Fisheries Partnership Agreements (FPAs) are analysed. Finally, the prevalence of fisheries subsidies is discussed. Here, the focus is set on those subsidies embedded in two FPAs between the EU and Cape Verde. It is concluded that the subsidies provided by the EU to their fleet increase the problem of overfishing in Cape Verde. A theoretical solution is discussed and it is proposed that the external component of the European fisheries policy, namely Fisheries Partnership Agreements, has to change toward an association that deserves the name partnership.

Suggested Citation

  • Mundt, Matthias, 2012. "The effects of EU fisheries partnership agreements on fish stocks and fishermen: The case of Cape Verde," IPE Working Papers 12/2012, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ipewps:122012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/59310/1/718106679.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Polacheck, Tom, 2006. "Tuna longline catch rates in the Indian Ocean: Did industrial fishing result in a 90% rapid decline in the abundance of large predatory species?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 470-482, September.
    2. Kaczynski, Vlad M. & Fluharty, David L., 2002. "European policies in West Africa: who benefits from fisheries agreements?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 75-93, March.
    3. Ransom A. Myers & Boris Worm, 2003. "Rapid worldwide depletion of predatory fish communities," Nature, Nature, vol. 423(6937), pages 280-283, May.
    4. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(2), pages 124-124.
    5. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Chennat Gopalakrishnan (ed.), Classic Papers in Natural Resource Economics, chapter 9, pages 178-203, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. U. Sumaila & Ahmed Khan & Andrew Dyck & Reg Watson & Gordon Munro & Peter Tydemers & Daniel Pauly, 2010. "A bottom-up re-estimation of global fisheries subsidies," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 201-225, October.
    7. Tony Pitcher & Daniela Kalikoski & Ganapathiraju Pramod & Katherine Short, 2009. "Not honouring the code," Nature, Nature, vol. 457(7230), pages 658-659, February.
    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. Andrés Cisneros-Montemayor & U. Sumaila, 2010. "A global estimate of benefits from ecosystem-based marine recreation: potential impacts and implications for management," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 245-268, October.
    2. David A Carozza & Daniele Bianchi & Eric D Galbraith, 2017. "Formulation, General Features and Global Calibration of a Bioenergetically-Constrained Fishery Model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-28, January.
    3. Naoto Jinji, 2011. "Fisheries Subsidies and Management in Open Economies," Discussion papers e-11-004, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    4. Yi Zhang & Yao Xu & Hao Kong & Gang Zhou, 2022. "Spatial-Temporal Evolution of Coupling Coordination between Green Transformation and the Quality of Economic Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Sethi, Gautam & Costello, Christopher & Fisher, Anthony & Hanemann, Michael & Karp, Larry, 2005. "Fishery management under multiple uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 300-318, September.
    6. Eisenack, K. & Welsch, H. & Kropp, J.P., 2006. "A qualitative dynamical modelling approach to capital accumulation in unregulated fisheries," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 2613-2636, December.
    7. Christian Mullon & Charles Mullon, 2016. "A constraint-based framework to study rationality, competition and cooperation in fisheries," Papers 1605.08166, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2017.
    8. Libecap, Gary D., 2007. "The Assignment of Property Rights on the Western Frontier: Lessons for Contemporary Environmental and Resource Policy," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(2), pages 257-291, June.
    9. Edwards, Steven F. & Link, Jason S. & Rountree, Barbara P., 2004. "Portfolio management of wild fish stocks," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 317-329, July.
    10. Costello, Christopher & Polasky, Stephen, 2008. "Optimal harvesting of stochastic spatial resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2017. "Environmental and resource economics: A Canadian retrospective," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 50(5), pages 1381-1413, December.
    12. Wilen, Christopher D. & Wilen, James E., 2012. "Fishing down the food chain revisited: Modeling exploited trophic systems," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 80-88.
    13. Ragnar Arnason, 2011. "Loss of economic rents in the global fishery," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 213-232, October.
    14. Gary D. Libecap, 2018. "Douglass C. North: Transaction Costs, Property Rights, and Economic Outcomes," NBER Working Papers 24585, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Sabau, Gabriela & Boksh, F.I.M. Muktadir, 2017. "Fish Trade Liberalization Under 21st Century Trade Agreements: The CETA and Newfoundland and Labrador Fish and Seafood Industry," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 222-233.
    16. Crow White & Christopher Costello, 2014. "Close the High Seas to Fishing?," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-5, March.
    17. Manning, Dale T. & Uchida, Hirotsugu, 2014. "Are Two Rents Better than None? When Monopoly Harvester Co-ops are Preferred to a Rent Dissipated Resource Sector," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 171628, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Tim Cashion & Santiago de la Puente & Dyhia Belhabib & Daniel Pauly & Dirk Zeller & U Rashid Sumaila, 2018. "Establishing company level fishing revenue and profit losses from fisheries: A bottom-up approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, November.
    19. Brian R. Copeland & M. Scott Taylor, 2017. "Environmental and resource economics: A Canadian retrospective," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1381-1413, December.
    20. Ahmed S. Khan, 2012. "Understanding Global Supply Chains and Seafood Markets for the Rebuilding Prospects of Northern Gulf Cod Fisheries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(11), pages 1-24, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cape Verde; artisanal fishing; overfishing; Fisheries Partnership Agreement; IUU; fisheries subsidies; Yellowin tuna; Bluefin tuna; Skipjack; European fishing policy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • Q5 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics
    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:ipewps:122012. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iphwrde.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.