The distributional outcomes of rights-based management in fisheries

被引:14
|
作者
Abbott, Joshua K. [1 ]
Leonard, Bryan [1 ]
Garber-Yonts, Brian [2 ]
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ, Sch Sustainabil, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
[2] NOAA, Natl Marine Fisheries Serv, Alaska Fisheries Sci Ctr, Seattle, WA 98115 USA
基金
美国海洋和大气管理局;
关键词
rights-based management; distributional effects; catch shares; QUOTAS;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.2109154119
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Fisheries managers have increasingly adopted rights-based management (i.e., "catch shares" or "individual transferable quotas" [ITQs]) to address economic and biological management challenges under prior governance regimes. Despite their ability to resolve some of the symptoms of the tragedy of the commons and improve economic efficiency, catch shares remain controversial for their potentially disruptive social effects. One criticism is that the benefits of rights-based reforms are unequally distributed across vessels and between fishery participants (e.g., crew and hired captains) and that stakeholders that do not receive an allocation of harvest rights may see their remuneration decrease. Yet, empirically assessing these claims is difficult in almost all ITQs due to poor availability of longitudinal cost, earnings, and employment data. This paper evaluates these claims using vessel-level data to characterize impacts of a long-established ITQ program for Alaskan crab fisheries on the level and distribution of payments to claimant groups. We find that the share of vessel proceeds accruing to captains, crew, and vessel owners declined under the catch-share regime to make room for new payments to quota owners. Average daily payments to captains, crew, and vessel owners declined, albeit slightly, yet retained their pre-ITQ premia relative to compensation in other sectors. However, inequality in payments to workers and vessel owners declined after ITQs, as did the interseasonal volatility in compensation to workers, a measure of financial risk. Finally, we find that consolidationinduced increases in leasing costs have had little effect on workers' remuneration, but have reduced returns to vessel ownership.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Distributional issues in the operation of rights-based fisheries management systems
    Guyader, O
    Thébaud, O
    [J]. MARINE POLICY, 2001, 25 (02) : 103 - 112
  • [2] Introduction to the Symposium on Rights-Based Fisheries Management
    Costello, Christopher
    [J]. REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 2012, 6 (02) : 212 - 216
  • [3] Rights-based fisheries management: An environmentalist perspective
    Fujita, R
    Bonzon, K
    [J]. REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES, 2005, 15 (03) : 309 - 312
  • [4] Rights-based Fisheries Management: An Environmentalist Perspective
    Rod Fujita
    Kate Bonzon
    [J]. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 2005, 15 : 309 - 312
  • [5] Efficiency Advantages of Grandfathering in Rights-Based Fisheries Management
    Anderson, Terry
    Arnason, Ragnar
    Libecap, Gary D.
    [J]. ANNUAL REVIEW OF RESOURCE ECONOMICS, VOL 3, 2011, 3 : 159 - 179
  • [6] The use of spatial management tools in rights-based groundfish fisheries
    Liu, Owen R.
    Kleisner, Kristin M.
    Smith, Sarah L.
    Kritzer, Jacob P.
    [J]. FISH AND FISHERIES, 2018, 19 (05) : 821 - 838
  • [7] The effect of rights-based fisheries management on risk taking and fishing safety
    Pfeiffer, Lisa
    Gratz, Trevor
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2016, 113 (10) : 2615 - 2620
  • [8] Structural behavioral models for rights-based fisheries
    Reimer, Matthew N.
    Abbott, Joshua K.
    Haynie, Alan C.
    [J]. Resource and Energy Economics, 2022, 68
  • [9] Production Efficiency and Exit in Rights-Based Fisheries
    Schnier, Kurt E.
    Felthoven, Ronald G.
    [J]. LAND ECONOMICS, 2013, 89 (03) : 538 - 557
  • [10] Human rights for conservation: A rights-based approach to fisheries governance
    Zheng, Gina
    [J]. ALTERNATIVE LAW JOURNAL, 2018, 43 (01) : 55 - 59