IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rug/rugwps/08-540.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effect of restrictive policy instruments on Belgian fishing fleet dynamics

Author

Listed:
  • H. STOUTEN
  • A. HEENE
  • X. GELLYNCK
  • H. POLET

Abstract

Even with the rapid changes in the level of complexity and the uncertainty of the environment in which Belgian sea fisheries operate, fisheries management in Belgium is still mainly based on restrictive policy instruments founded in the biological approach of fisheries management science. Since they will continue to play an important role, this paper evaluated changes in three restrictive policy instruments and their effect on future fleet performance and dynamics, i.e. maximum fishing days, total quota-restrictions and licences. These effects are tested through scenarios in a microeconomic simulation model, including sensitivity analysis. This study opts for a dynamic simulation model based on a microeconomic approach of fleet dynamics using system dynamics as a modelling technique (operational base: Vensim®DSS). The results indicated that changes in maximum fishing days and total quota resulted in higher fluctuations in fleet performance and dynamics compared to changes in licences. Furthermore, changes in maximum fishing days and total quota had a direct impact on fleet performance, though not always as expected, whereas licences only affected fleet performance indirectly since they only limit the entry of new vessels to the fleet and they can block the growth of successful sub fleets. The outcomes of this study are translated into practical recommendations for improving fisheries management. Firstly, policy makers need to be more aware of misperceptions of feedback. Secondly, the results proved that altering only one type of restrictive policy instrument at a time often fails to meet desired outcomes. Therefore, policy makers need to find a balance in combining policy instruments. Finally, this paper opens the discussion on the future value of restrictive policy instruments in the rapidly changing, complex and uncertain fisheries environment. It suggests rethinking their use from “preserving a status quo and social peace” toward a driving factor in “stimulating fleet dynamics.”

Suggested Citation

  • H. Stouten & A. Heene & X. Gellynck & H. Polet, 2008. "The effect of restrictive policy instruments on Belgian fishing fleet dynamics," Working Papers of Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent University, Belgium 08/540, Ghent University, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
    • Handle: RePEc:rug:rugwps:08/540
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wps-feb.ugent.be/Papers/wp_08_540.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erling Moxnes, 1998. "Not Only the Tragedy of the Commons: Misperceptions of Bioeconomics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1234-1248, September.
    2. Ruseski, Gorazd, 1998. "International Fish Wars: The Strategic Roles for Fleet Licensing and Effort Subsidies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 70-88, July.
    3. Boude, Jean-Pierre & Boncoeur, Jean & Bailly, Denis, 2001. "Regulating the access to fisheries: learning from European experiences," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 313-322, July.
    4. Diehl, Ernst & Sterman, John D., 1995. "Effects of Feedback Complexity on Dynamic Decision Making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 198-215, May.
    5. Sterman, John D., 1989. "Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 301-335, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Moxnes, Erling, 1998. "Overexploitation of renewable resources: The role of misperceptions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 107-127, September.
    8. Moxnes, Erling, 2003. "Uncertain measurements of renewable resources: approximations, harvesting policies and value of accuracy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 85-108, January.
    9. 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.
    10. John D. Sterman, 1989. "Modeling Managerial Behavior: Misperceptions of Feedback in a Dynamic Decision Making Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(3), pages 321-339, March.
    11. Healey, MC & Hennessey, T, 1998. "The paradox of fairness: The impact of escalating complexity on fishery management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 109-118, March.
    12. Anthony Scott, 1955. "The Fishery: The Objectives of Sole Ownership," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63, pages 116-116.
    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. Johanna Jacomina Heymans & Steven Mackinson & Ussif Rashid Sumaila & Andrew Dyck & Alyson Little, 2011. "The Impact of Subsidies on the Ecological Sustainability and Future Profits from North Sea Fisheries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(5), pages 1-13, May.

    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. John Hey & Tibor Neugebauer & Abdolkarim Sadrieh, 2009. "An Experimental Analysis of Optimal Renewable Resource Management: The Fishery," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 44(2), pages 263-285, October.
    2. Schnier, Kurt E. & Anderson, Christopher M., 2006. "Decision making in patchy resource environments: Spatial misperception of bioeconomic models," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 234-254, October.
    3. Moxnes, Erling, 1998. "Overexploitation of renewable resources: The role of misperceptions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 107-127, September.
    4. M H Kunc & J D W Morecroft, 2007. "Competitive dynamics and gaming simulation: lessons from a fishing industry simulator," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 58(9), pages 1146-1155, September.
    5. Arango, Santiago & Moxnes, Erling, 2012. "Commodity cycles, a function of market complexity? Extending the cobweb experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 321-334.
    6. David C. Lane & Birgit Kopainsky & Ali Kerem Saysel, 2017. "Role of Information Feedback in Soil Nitrogen Management: Results from a Dynamic Simulation Game," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 424-439, July.
    7. Strohhecker, Jürgen & Größler, Andreas, 2013. "Do personal traits influence inventory management performance?—The case of intelligence, personality, interest and knowledge," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(1), pages 37-50.
    8. Carsten Lynge Jensen, 1999. "A Critical Review of the Common Fisheries Policy," Working Papers 6/99, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    9. Schnier, Kurt Erik, 2009. "Spatial externalities and the common-pool resource mechanism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 402-415, May.
    10. Richard Schwindt & Aidan R. Vining & David Weimer, 2003. "A Policy Analysis of the BC Salmon Fishery," Canadian Public Policy, University of Toronto Press, vol. 29(1), pages 73-93, March.
    11. Pedro Pintassilgo & Lone Kronbak & Marko Lindroos, 2015. "International Fisheries Agreements: A Game Theoretical Approach," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 62(4), pages 689-709, December.
    12. Vincent de Gooyert, 2019. "Developing dynamic organizational theories; three system dynamics based research strategies," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 653-666, March.
    13. Erling Moxnes, 1998. "Not Only the Tragedy of the Commons: Misperceptions of Bioeconomics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(9), pages 1234-1248, September.
    14. McCloskey Deirdre Nansen, 2018. "The Two Movements in Economic Thought, 1700–2000: Empty Economic Boxes Revisited," Man and the Economy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(2), pages 1-20, December.
    15. De Alessi, Michael & Sullivan, Joseph M. & Hilborn, Ray, 2014. "The legal, regulatory, and institutional evolution of fishing cooperatives in Alaska and the West Coast of the United States," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 217-225.
    16. Catherine J. Morrison Paul & Ronald G. Felthoven & Marcelo de O. Torres, 2010. "Productive performance in fisheries: modeling, measurement, and management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 343-360, July.
    17. Anne Sophie Crépin, 2003. "Threshold Effects in Coral Reef Fisheries," Working Papers 2003.107, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. van Dijk, Diana & Hendrix, Eligius M.T. & Haijema, Rene & Groeneveld, Rolf A. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2014. "On solving a bi-level stochastic dynamic programming model for analyzing fisheries policies: Fishermen behavior and optimal fish quota," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 272(C), pages 68-75.
    19. Holm, Petter & Raakjær, Jesper & Becker Jacobsen, Rikke & Henriksen, Edgar, 2015. "Contesting the social contracts underpinning fisheries—Lessons from Norway, Iceland and Greenland," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 64-72.
    20. Pies, Ingo, 2012. "Optimierung versus Koordinierung: Zur ordonomischen Klärung des wirtschaftsethischen Problems," Discussion Papers 2012-21, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Fisheries management; restrictive policy instruments; sensitivity simulation; system dynamics; fleet performance; fleet dynamics.;
    All these keywords.

    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:rug:rugwps:08/540. 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: Nathalie Verhaeghe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugbe.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.