IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/uwp/landec/v81y2005i4p518-529.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Landing Fees versus Fish Quotas

Author

Listed:
  • Rögnvaldur Hannesson
  • John Kenned

Abstract

The relative efficiency of landing fees versus quota controls to achieve given escapement levels is examined. The criterion is profit per year over a given time horizon. The model employed is a discrete version of the logistic model where growth is influenced by a random variable. Simulations are used to compare landing fees and quota controls under imprecise stock estimates, variable availability of fish, and random fish prices. While ecological uncertainty combined with imprecise stock estimates favors fee control, as shown byWeitzman, the opposite can be the case under uncertainty about the availability of fish or fish price.

Suggested Citation

  • Rögnvaldur Hannesson & John Kenned, 2005. "Landing Fees versus Fish Quotas," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(4).
  • Handle: RePEc:uwp:landec:v:81:y:2005:i:4:p518-529
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://le.uwpress.org/cgi/reprint/81/4/518
    Download Restriction: A subscripton is required to access pdf files. Pay per article is available.

    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. Martin L. Weitzman, 1974. "Prices vs. Quantities," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 477-491.
    2. Neher,Philip A., 1990. "Natural Resource Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521311748, October.
    3. Frank Jensen & Niels Vestergaard, 2003. "Prices versus Quantities in Fisheries Models," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(3), pages 415-425.
    4. Koenig, Evan F., 1984. "Controlling stock externalities in a common property fishery subject to uncertainty," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 124-138, June.
    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. repec:eee:resene:v:50:y:2017:i:c:p:164-177 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Vincent Martinet & Julio Peña-Torres & Michel Lara & Hector Ramírez C., 2016. "Risk and Sustainability: Assessing Fishery Management Strategies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(4), pages 683-707, August.
    3. Katarina Elofsson & Ing-Marie Gren, 2015. "Regulating invasive species with different life history," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 113-136, July.
    4. Jensen, Frank, 2008. "Uncertainty and asymmetric information: An overview," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 89-103, January.
    5. Hansen, Lars Gårn & Jensen, Frank & Russell, Clifford, 2013. "Instrument choice when regulators are concerned about resource extinction," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 135-147.
    6. repec:oup:renvpo:v:12:y:2018:i:1:p:92-112. is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Christian Elleby & Frank Jensen, 2018. "How Many Instruments Do We Really Need? A First-Best Optimal Solution to Multiple Objectives with Fisheries Regulation," IFRO Working Paper 2018/05, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery
    • Q28 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Government Policy

    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:uwp:landec:v:81:y:2005:i:4:p518-529. 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: (). General contact details of provider: http://le.uwpress.org/ .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.