Advertisement

Potential Economic Consequences of the Landing Obligation

  • Ayoe HoffEmail author
  • Hans Frost
  • Peder Andersen
  • Raul Prellezo
  • Lucía Rueda
  • George Triantaphyllidis
  • Ioanna Argyrou
  • Athanassios Tsikliras
  • Arina Motova
  • Sigrid Lehuta
  • Hazel Curtis
  • Gonzalo Rodríguez-Rodríguez
  • Hugo M. Ballesteros
  • Julio Valeiras
  • José María Bellido

Abstract

To assess the likely economic outcomes to fishing fleets of the Landing Obligation (LO), bioeconomic models covering seven European fisheries, ranging from the North East Atlantic to the Mediterranean, have been applied to estimate the economic performance of fleets before and after implementing the LO. It is shown that for most of the analysed fisheries, their economic outcome will be negatively affected in the long term by the LO, when compared to the expected outcome with no LO. Efficient mitigation strategies (exemptions, quota uplifts, improved selectivity, effort reallocation and others) may, for some of the analysed fisheries, reduce the negative economic effect of the LO. Moreover, the possibility to trade quotas, both nationally and internationally, may also reduce the economic losses caused by the LO. However, even with mitigation strategies and/or quota trade in place, most of the analysed fisheries are worse off under the LO than what could be expected if the LO was not implemented.

Keywords

Costs and earnings Discards Economic repercussions Fisheries management Fleet adjustment 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work received funding from the Horizon 2020 Programme under grant agreement DiscardLess number 633680 and from the LIFE+Environmental Program of the European Union under grant agreement iSEAS project, Ref. LIFE13 ENV/ES/000131. This support is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. Abbott, J.K., & Wilen, J.E. (2009). Regulation of fisheries bycatch with common-pool output quotas. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 57, 195–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, L.G. (1994). An economic analysis of high grading in ITQ fisheries regulation programs. Marine Resource Economics 9(3), 209−226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnason, R. (1994). On catch discarding in fisheries. Marine Resource Economics, 9(3), 189−207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batsleer, J., Hamon, K.G., van Overzee, H.M.J, Rijnsdorp, A.D., Poos J.J. (2015). High-grading and over-quota discarding in mixed fisheries. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 25, 715–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boyce, J.R. (1996). An economic analysis of the fisheries bycatch problem. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 31, 314−336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christensen, S. (1996). Potential Bio-economic impact of reduced mortality of cod end escapees in the shrimp fishery in the Davis Strait. In A.V. Soldal (Ed.), Bidødelighed i nordiske trawlfiskerier. Volum 2: Konsekvensudredninger. Nord 1996:17. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  7. Condie, H.M., Catchpole, T.L., Grant, A. (2014) The short-term impacts of implementing catch quotas and a discard ban on English North Sea otter trawlers. ICES Journal of Marine Science 71, 1266–1276. doi:  https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fst187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clucas, I. (1997). A study of the options for utilization of bycatch and discards from Marine capture fisheries. FAO Fisheries Circular No. 928 FIIU/C928. FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
  9. DCF. (2016). On the Greek National Fisheries Data Collection Programme for 2015. Annual report, Directorate General for Fisheries, Ministry of Reconstruction of Production, Environment and Energy, Athens, Greece (p. 456).Google Scholar
  10. FAO. (1996a). A global assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards and the technical consultation on reduction of wastage in fisheries (Tokyo, Japan, 28 October – 1 November 1996). Fisheries technical paper 339, Rome.Google Scholar
  11. FAO. (1996b). Report of the technical consultation on reduction of wastage in fisheries. Tokyo, Japan, 28 October – 1 November 1996. FAO Fisheries report no. 547, Rome.Google Scholar
  12. Fitzpatrick M., Frangoudes K., Fauconnet L., Quetglas A. (this volume). Fishing industry’s perspectives on the EU Landing Obligation. In S.S. Uhlmann, C. Ulrich, S.J. Kennelly (Eds.), The European Landing Obligation – Reducing discards in complex, multi-species and multi-jurisdictional fisheries. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Flaaten, O., Larsen, N.-J. (1991). Sorting panels or normal trawl in cod fishery. An economic analysis. Working paper. University of Tromsø. (In Norwegian).Google Scholar
  14. Frost, H. (1996). Economic impact of changes in by-mortality. In A.V. Soldal (Ed), Bidødelighed i nordiske trawlfiskerier. Volum 2: Konsekvensudredninger. Nord 1996:17. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  15. Frost, H., Boom, J.T., Buisman, E., Innes, J., Metz, S., Rodgers, P., Taal, K. (2007). Economic impact assessment of changes in fishing gear. NECESSITY. FOI report no. 194. Institute of Food and Resource Economics, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  16. Frost, H. (2010). European Union Fisheries Management. In R. Quentin Grafton, R. Hilborn, D. Squires, M. Tait, M.J. Williams (Eds.), Handbook of marine fisheries conservation and management (Ch. 35). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Frost, H., Andersen, P., Hoff, A. (2013). Management of complex fisheries: Lessons learned from a simulation model. Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics, 6, 283–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Garcia, D., Sánchez, S., Prellezo, R., Urtizberea, A., Andrés, M. (2017). FLBEIA: A simulation model to conduct Bio-Economic evaluation of fisheries management strategies. SoftwareX, 6, 141–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. García-Negro, M.doC., Rodríguez-Rodríguez, G., Ballesteros, H.M., Sálamo Otero, P. (2016). Táboas Input-Output da Pesca-Conservas Galega 2011. Consellería do Medio Rural e do Mar. Xunta de Galicia, Santiago de Compostela.Google Scholar
  20. Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jensen, F., & Vestergaard, N. (2002). Moral hazard problems in fisheries regulation: The case of illegal landings and discard. Resource and Energy Economics, 24(4), 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kelleher, K. (2005). Discards in the world’s marine fisheries. An update. FAO fisheries technical paper no. 470. Rome, FAO (p. 131).Google Scholar
  23. Kraak, S.B.M, & Hart, P.J.B. (this volume). Creating a breeding ground for compliance and honest reporting under the Landing Obligation: Insights from behavioural science. In S.S. Uhlmann, C. Ulrich, S.J. Kennelly (Eds.), The European Landing Obligation – Reducing discards in complex, multi-species and multi-jurisdictional fisheries. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Lehuta, S., Youen, V., Marchal, P. (2015). A spatial model of the mixed demersal fisheries in the Eastern Channel. In Marine productivity: Perturbations and resilience of socio-ecosystems. Proceedings of 15’th French-Japanese Oceanographic symposium, pp. 187–195.Google Scholar
  25. Lleonart, J., Maynou, F., Recasens, L., Franquesa, R. (2003). A bioeconomic model for Mediterranean fisheries, the hake off Catalonia (western Mediterranean) as a case study. Scientia Marina, 67, 337–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mardle, S., Russel, J., Motova, A.. (2017). Seafish bioeconomic modelling – methodology report. Seafish Report No. SR702.Google Scholar
  27. Nordic Council of Ministers. (2003). Report from a Workshop on discarding in Nordic fisheries. Editor: John Willy Valdemarsen, Fangstseksjonen, Havforskningsinstituttet, Bergen. Sophienberg Slot, København, 18–20. november 2002. TemaNord 2003:537. Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  28. Nuevo, M., Morgado, C., Sala, A, (this volume). Monitoring the implementation of the Landing Obligation: Last Haul programme. In S.S. Uhlmann, C. Ulrich, S.J. Kennelly (Eds.), The European Landing Obligation – Reducing discards in complex, multi-species and multi-jurisdictional fisheries. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  29. Palmer, M., Quetglas, A., Guijarro, B., Moranta, J., Ordines, F. Massutí, E. (2009). Performance of artificial neural networks and discriminant analysis in predicting fishing tactics from multispecific fisheries. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 66(2), 224–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Pascoe, S. (1997). Bycatch management and the economics of discarding. FAO Fisheries technical paper 370. FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
  31. Pascoe, S., & Revill, A. (2004) Costs and benefits of bycatch reduction in European Brown Shrimp fisheries. Environmental and Resource Economics 27, 43–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pelletier, D., Mahevas, S., Drouineau, H., Vermard, Y., Thebaud, O., Guyader, O., Poussind, B. (2009). Evaluation of the Bioeconomic sustainability of multi-species multi-fleet fisheries under a wide range of policy options using ISIS-Fish. Ecological Modelling, 220, 1013–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Prellezo, R., Carmona, I., Garcia, D. (2016). The bad, the good and the very good of the landing obligation implementation in the Bay of Biscay: A case study of Basque trawlers. Fisheries Research, 181, 172–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Segerson, K. (2007). Reducing stochastic sea turtle bycatch: An efficiency analysis of alternative policies. Working paper, Department of Economics, University of Connecticut, Storrs.Google Scholar
  35. Stergiou, K.I., Somarakis, S., Triantafyllou, G., Tsiaras, K.P., Giannoulaki, M., Petihakis, G., et al. (2016). Trends in productivity and biomass yields in the Mediterranean Sea large marine ecosystem during climate change. Environmental Development, 17(1), 57–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sutinen, J.G., & Andersen, P. (1985). The economics of fisheries law and enforcement. Land Economics, 61(4), 387−397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sutinen, J.G., & Kuperan, K. (1999). A socio-economic theory of regulatory compliance. International Journal of Social Economics, 26, 174−193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tsagarakis, K., Palialexis, A., Vassilopoulou, V. (2014). ICES Journal of Marine Science 71, 1219–1234.Google Scholar
  39. Turner, M.A. (1996). Value-based ITQs. Marine Resource Economics 11, 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Turner, M.A. (1997). Quota-induced discarding in heterogeneous fisheries. Journal of Environmental Economics and management, 33, 186−195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ulrich, C., Reeves, S.A., Vermard, Y., Holmes, S.J., Vanhee, W. (2011). Reconciling single-species TACs in the North Sea demersal fisheries using the Fcube mixed-fisheries advice framework. ICES Journal of Marine Science, 68(7), 1535–1547.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. van Hoof L., Kraan M., Visser N.M., et al. (this volume). Muddying the waters of the Landing Obligation: How multi-level governance structures can obscure policy implementation. In S.S. Uhlmann, C. Ulrich, S.J. Kennelly (Eds.), The European Landing Obligation – Reducing discards in complex, multi-species and multi-jurisdictional fisheries. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  43. Vestergaard, N. (1996). Discard behavior, highgrading and regulation: The case of the Greenland shrimp fishery. Marine Resource Economics, 11(4), 247−266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Ward, J.M. (1994). The bioeconomic implications of bycatch reduction devise as a stock conservation management measure. Marine Resource Economics, 9(3), 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ward, J.M., Benaka L.R., Moore C.M., Meyers S. (2012). Bycatch in Marine fisheries, Marine Fisheries Review 74, No. 2. United States Department of Commerce.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ayoe Hoff
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hans Frost
    • 1
  • Peder Andersen
    • 1
  • Raul Prellezo
    • 2
  • Lucía Rueda
    • 3
  • George Triantaphyllidis
    • 4
  • Ioanna Argyrou
    • 4
  • Athanassios Tsikliras
    • 5
  • Arina Motova
    • 6
  • Sigrid Lehuta
    • 7
  • Hazel Curtis
    • 6
  • Gonzalo Rodríguez-Rodríguez
    • 8
  • Hugo M. Ballesteros
    • 8
  • Julio Valeiras
    • 9
  • José María Bellido
    • 10
  1. 1.Department of Food and Resource Economics (IFRO)University of CopenhagenFrederiksberg CDenmark
  2. 2.AZTISukarrietaSpain
  3. 3.Centro Oceanográfico de BalearesInstituto Español de OceanografÚaPalmaSpain
  4. 4.NAYS Ltd.KallitheaGreece
  5. 5.Laboratory of Ichthyology, School of BiologyAristotle University of Thessaloniki University CampusThessalonikiGreece
  6. 6.SeafishEdinburghUK
  7. 7.Ifremer, Fisheries Ecol & Modelling UnitNantesFrance
  8. 8.Fisheries Economics and Natural Resources Research Unit, Department of Applied Economics, Faculty of Economics and Business AdministrationUniversity of SantiagoSantiago de CompostelaSpain
  9. 9.Instituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO)Centro Oceanográfico de VigoVigoSpain
  10. 10.Instituto Español de OceanografíaCentro Oceanográfico de Murcia (IEO)San Pedro del PinatarSpain

Personalised recommendations