IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v93y2013icp363-373.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application

Author

Listed:
  • Kanchanaroek, Yingluk
  • Termansen, Mette
  • Quinn, Claire

Abstract

The Tonle Sap wetland fishery was previously divided into 3 different management zones for conservation, open access fishing and private fishing. Rights to the private fishing zone involved auctions for exclusive rights to temporarily designated plots. This paper aims to explore the auction-based system by investigating how this fishery management system affects different groups of small scale fishermen and how different characteristics of the fishing lots affect the bidding. A choice experiment approach was used to model fishermen's choices in a hypothetical auction market by offering fishermen the choice between purchasing different potential fishing lots and a no purchase option, implying fishing only in the communal fishing grounds. The preferred latent class model with two segments of fishermen showed that the bidding behavior of the more privileged group out-competes the other group irrespective of the lot characteristics. This result suggests that it is unlikely that the redesign of the auction system itself would be an effective way of securing access to fishing resources for the two observed groups of fishermen. This implies that open access fishing grounds and/or other regulations may also be needed in future management as they serve an important role for the poorer segments.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanchanaroek, Yingluk & Termansen, Mette & Quinn, Claire, 2013. "Property rights regimes in complex fishery management systems: A choice experiment application," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 363-373.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:93:y:2013:i:c:p:363-373
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.05.014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800913001924
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.05.014?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Do, Thang Nam & Bennett, Jeff, 2009. "Estimating wetland biodiversity values: a choice modelling application in Vietnam's Mekong River Delta," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 163-186, April.
    2. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    3. McFadden, Daniel L., 1984. "Econometric analysis of qualitative response models," Handbook of Econometrics, in: Z. Griliches† & M. D. Intriligator (ed.), Handbook of Econometrics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 24, pages 1395-1457, Elsevier.
    4. Leones, Julie P. & Rozelle, Scott, 1991. "Rural Household Data Collection in Developing Countries: Designing Instruments and Methods for Collecting Off-Farm Income Data," Working Papers 128160, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    5. Beck, Tony & Nesmith, Cathy, 2001. "Building on Poor People's Capacities: The Case of Common Property Resources in India and West Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 119-133, January.
    6. Bockstael, Nancy E & McConnell, Kenneth E, 1983. "Welfare Measurement in the Household Production Framework," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 806-814, September.
    7. Laura O. Taylor & Ronald G. Cummings, 1999. "Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 649-665, June.
    8. Edella Schlager & Elinor Ostrom, 1992. "Property-Rights Regimes and Natural Resources: A Conceptual Analysis," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 249-262.
    9. Nick Hanley & Susana Mourato & Robert E. Wright, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuatioin?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    10. Carlsson, Fredrik & Frykblom, Peter & Johan Lagerkvist, Carl, 2005. "Using cheap talk as a test of validity in choice experiments," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 147-152, November.
    11. Mike Burton & Dan Rigby, 2009. "Hurdle and Latent Class Approaches to Serial Non-Participation in Choice Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 42(2), pages 211-226, February.
    12. Hausman, Jerry & McFadden, Daniel, 1984. "Specification Tests for the Multinomial Logit Model," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(5), pages 1219-1240, September.
    13. Hanley, Nick & Mourato, Susana & Wright, Robert E, 2001. "Choice Modelling Approaches: A Superior Alternative for Environmental Valuation?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 435-462, July.
    14. McFadden, Daniel, 1980. "Econometric Models for Probabilistic Choice among Products," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 53(3), pages 13-29, July.
    15. Baran, E. & Jantunen, T. & Chong, C.K., 2007. "Values of inland fisheries in the Mekong river basin," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 37641, April.
    16. Marinesque, Sophie & Kaplan, David M. & Rodwell, Lynda D., 2012. "Global implementation of marine protected areas: Is the developing world being left behind?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 727-737.
    17. Aadland, David & Caplan, Arthur J., 2006. "Cheap talk reconsidered: New evidence from CVM," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 562-578, August.
    18. Rozelle, Scott, 1991. "Rural Household Data Collection In Developing Countries: Designing Instruments And Methods For Collecting Farm Production Data," Working Papers 7267, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    19. Paul S. Davies & Michael J. Greenwood & Haizheng Li, 2001. "A Conditional Logit Approach to U.S. State‐to‐State Migration," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 337-360, May.
    20. Marko Keskinen & Mira Käkönen & Prom Tola & Olli Varis, 2007. "The Tonle Sap Lake, Cambodia: Water-related conflicts with abundance of water," Economics of Peace and Security Journal, EPS Publishing, vol. 2(2), pages 49-59, June.
    21. 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.
    22. Wattage, Premachandra & Mardle, Simon & Pascoe, Sean, 2005. "Evaluation of the importance of fisheries management objectives using choice-experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 85-95, October.
    23. Agimass, Fitalew & Mekonnen, Alemu, 2011. "Low-income fishermen's willingness-to-pay for fisheries and watershed management: An application of choice experiment to Lake Tana, Ethiopia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 162-170.
    24. Coulthard, Sarah, 2011. "More than just access to fish: The pros and cons of fisher participation in a customary marine tenure (Padu) system under pressure," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 405-412, May.
    25. Jeff Bennett & Ekin Birol (ed.), 2010. "Choice Experiments in Developing Countries," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13208.
    26. R. Quentin Grafton & Ragnar Arnason & Trond Bjorndal & David Campbell & Harry F. Campbell & Colin W. Clark & Robin Connor & Diane P. Dupont & Rognvaldur Hannesson & Ray Hilborn & James E. Kirkley & To, 2005. "Incentive-based approaches to sustainable fisheries," Economics and Environment Network Working Papers 0508, Australian National University, Economics and Environment Network.
    27. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387.
    28. Peter Boxall & Wiktor Adamowicz, 2002. "Understanding Heterogeneous Preferences in Random Utility Models: A Latent Class Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 23(4), pages 421-446, December.
    29. Birol, Ekin & Karousakis, Katia & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2006. "Using a choice experiment to account for preference heterogeneity in wetland attributes: The case of Cheimaditida wetland in Greece," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 145-156, November.
    30. Parzival Copes, 1986. "A Critical Review of the Individual Quota as a Device in Fisheries Management," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 62(3), pages 278-291.
    31. Greene, William H. & Hensher, David A., 2003. "A latent class model for discrete choice analysis: contrasts with mixed logit," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 681-698, September.
    32. Heckman, James J. & Singer, Burton, 1984. "Econometric duration analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1-2), pages 63-132.
    33. Morgan, GR, 1995. "Optimal fisheries quota allocation under a transferable quota (TQ) management system," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 379-390, September.
    34. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74, pages 132-132.
    35. Milon, J. Walter & Scrogin, David, 2006. "Latent preferences and valuation of wetland ecosystem restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 162-175, February.
    36. Ekin Birol & Victoria Cox, 2007. "Using choice experiments to design wetland management programmes: The case of Severn Estuary Wetland, UK," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(3), pages 363-380.
    37. Feder, Gershon & Feeny, David, 1991. "Land Tenure and Property Rights: Theory and Implications for Development Policy," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 5(1), pages 135-153, January.
    38. Turner, Matthew A., 1997. "Quota-Induced Discarding in Heterogeneous Fisheries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 186-195, June.
    39. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62, pages 124-124.
    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. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Do, Truong Lam & Halkos, George & Wilson, Clevo, 2020. "Health shocks and natural resource extraction: A Cambodian case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    3. Barreiro-Hurle, Jesus & Espinosa-Goded, Maria & Martinez-Paz, Jose Miguel & Perni, Angel, 2018. "Choosing not to choose: A meta-analysis of status quo effects in environmental valuations using choice experiments," Economia Agraria y Recursos Naturales, Spanish Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 18(01), June.
    4. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Do, Truong Lam & Bühler, Dorothee & Hartje, Rebecca & Grote, Ulrike, 2015. "Rural livelihoods and environmental resource dependence in Cambodia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 282-295.
    5. Kanchanaroek, Yingluck & Aslam, Uzma, 2018. "Policy schemes for the transition to sustainable agriculture—Farmer preferences and spatial heterogeneity in northern Thailand," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 227-235.

    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. Houessionon, P. & Fonta, W. M. & Bossa, A. Y. & Sanfo, S. & Thiombiano, N. & Zahonogo, P. & Yameogo, T. B. & Balana, Bedru, "undated". "Economic valuation of ecosystem services from small-scale agricultural management interventions in Burkina Faso: a discrete choice experiment approach," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048370, International Water Management Institute.
    2. Nguyen, Thanh Cong & Robinson, Jackie & Kaneko, Shinji & Komatsu, Satoru, 2013. "Estimating the value of economic benefits associated with adaptation to climate change in a developing country: A case study of improvements in tropical cyclone warning services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 117-128.
    3. Prosper Houessionon & William M. Fonta & Aymar Y. Bossa & Safiétou Sanfo & Noel Thiombiano & Pam Zahonogo & Thomas B. Yameogo & Bedru Balana, 2017. "Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Services from Small-Scale Agricultural Management Interventions in Burkina Faso: A Discrete Choice Experiment Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, September.
    4. Hassan, Suziana & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2019. "Urban-rural divides in preferences for wetland conservation in Malaysia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 226-237.
    5. Danne, Michael & Mußhoff, Oliver, 2018. "Producers' valuation of animal welfare practices: Does herd size matter?," DARE Discussion Papers 1801, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    6. Julia Blasch & Robert W. Turner, 2016. "Environmental art, prior knowledge about climate change, and carbon offsets," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(4), pages 691-705, December.
    7. Haghani, Milad & Bliemer, Michiel C.J. & Hensher, David A., 2021. "The landscape of econometric discrete choice modelling research," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    8. Kloos, Julia & Tsegai, Daniel W., 2009. "Preferences for domestic water services in the Middle Olifants sub-basin of South Africa," Discussion Papers 49970, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    9. Araña, Jorge E. & León, Carmelo J., 2013. "Dynamic hypothetical bias in discrete choice experiments: Evidence from measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility on consumers demand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 53-61.
    10. Balaine, Lorraine & Gallai, Nicola & Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos, 2020. "Trading off environmental goods for compensations: Insights from traditional and deliberative valuation methods in the Ecuadorian Amazon," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    11. Haile, Kaleab K. & Tirivayi, Nyasha & Tesfaye, Wondimagegn, 2019. "Farmers’ willingness to accept payments for ecosystem services on agricultural land: The case of climate-smart agroforestry in Ethiopia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Catalina M. Torres & Sergio Colombo & Nick Hanley, 2014. "Incorrectly accounting for preference heterogeneity in choice experiments: what are the implications for welfare measurement?," DEA Working Papers 65, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    13. Hiselius, Lena Winslott, 2005. "Preferences regarding road transports of hazardous materials using choice experiments - any sign of biases?," Working Papers 2005:30, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    14. Richartz, P. Christoph & Abdulai, Awudu & Kornher, Lukas, 2020. "Attribute Non Attendance and Consumer Preferences for Online Food Products in Germany," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 69(1), March.
    15. Bui Bich Xuan & Erlend Dancke Sandorf, 2020. "Potential for Sustainable Aquaculture: Insights from Discrete Choice Experiments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 77(2), pages 401-421, October.
    16. Anastassiadis, Friederike & Liebe, Ulf & Musshoff, Oliver, 2012. "Finanzielle Flexibilität In Landwirtschaftlichen Investitionsentscheidungen: Ein Discrete Choice Experiment," 52nd Annual Conference, Stuttgart, Germany, September 26-28, 2012 137142, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA).
    17. Yu-Hui Chen & Kai-Han Qiu & Kang Ernest Liu & Chun-Yuan Chiang, 2020. "Are Consumers Willing to Pay a Premium for Pure Rice Noodles? A Study of Discrete Choice Experiments in Taiwan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-18, July.
    18. Hoyos, David, 2010. "The state of the art of environmental valuation with discrete choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1595-1603, June.
    19. Chiadmi, Ines & Traoré, Sidnoma Abdoul Aziz & Salles, Jean-Michel, 2020. "Asian tiger mosquito far from home: Assessing the impact of invasive mosquitoes on the French Mediterranean littoral," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    20. Kanchanaroek, Yingluck & Aslam, Uzma, 2018. "Policy schemes for the transition to sustainable agriculture—Farmer preferences and spatial heterogeneity in northern Thailand," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 227-235.

    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:eee:ecolec:v:93:y:2013:i:c:p:363-373. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    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.