An Economic Analysis Of Restructuring The South African Hake Quota Market
Hake is the most valuable fisheries species in South Africa, with an estimated landed value of R658 million in 1997. The fishery is presently managed under an individual quota system, where total allowable catch (TAC) is set annually and divided up amongst quota holders according to past performance, without quota holders having to pay for it. Fundamental restructuring of the South African hake quota market is however due to take place in the near future as recommended by the White Paper on Marine Fisheries Policy (1997). Factor analysis of data collected from a postal survey of existing South African hake quota holders and rejected hake quota applicants suggests that distinct differences in attitudes towards restructuring exist amongst respondents. Four factors, representing groups of respondents defined as (1) applicants, (2) quota holders, (3) small scale respondents (comprising of both applicants and quota holders), and (4) larger, longer established quota holders, sharing similar attitudes towards restructuring were extracted. It was also calculated that a substantial annual rent of approximately R279 million is generated by the South African hake industry, which is presently harvested free of charge by those issued with quota. It is stated policy of the White Paper to capture these rents, however methods of accomplishing this have not been well accepted by the industry. This study aims at providing some solutions to these problems of restructuring.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Ragnar Arnason, 1990. "Minimum Information Management in Fisheries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 23(3), pages 630-53, August.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:54878. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.