IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_10567.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Property Rights to the World’s (Linear) Ocean Fisheries in Customary International Law

Author

Listed:
  • Scott Barrett

Abstract

I model the ocean as an array of lines set within a two-dimensional frame, and show how the Exclusive Economic Zone emerged as an equilibrium in customary international law. I find that custom codifies the efficient Nash equilibrium of enclosure for nearshore fisheries. For highly migratory and offshore fisheries, enclosure is inefficient, and customary law supports a more efficient “free sea” regime. The model also identifies the trigger for changes in property rights and the reason choice of a particular limit, like the current 200-mile zone, is arbitrary. In an asymmetric, regional sea, I find that the scope of the EEZ is determined by the relative power of coastal and distant water states, and need not be efficient. Finally, I find that proposals to nationalize the seas or ban fishing on the high seas are neither efficient nor supportable as equilibria in customary law.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Barrett, 2023. "Property Rights to the World’s (Linear) Ocean Fisheries in Customary International Law," CESifo Working Paper Series 10567, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_10567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp10567.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. By Michael Finus & Raoul Schneider, 2015. "Scope and compatibility of measures in international fisheries agreements," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 865-888.
    2. Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 2005. "Optimal spatial management of renewable resources: matching policy scope to ecosystem scale," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 23-46, July.
    3. 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.
    4. Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 1999. "Bioeconomics of Spatial Exploitation in a Patchy Environment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 129-150, March.
    5. Anthony Scott, 1955. "The Fishery: The Objectives of Sole Ownership," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(2), pages 116-116.
    6. Hannesson, Rögnvaldur, 2011. "Rights based fishing on the high seas: Is it possible?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 667-674, September.
    7. Gabriel Englander, 2019. "Property rights and the protection of global marine resources," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 981-987, October.
    8. H. Scott Gordon, 1954. "The Economic Theory of a Common-Property Resource: The Fishery," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 62(2), pages 124-124.
    9. Andrew K. Carlson & William W. Taylor & Daniel I. Rubenstein & Simon A. Levin & Jianguo Liu, 2020. "Global Marine Fishing across Space and Time," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-16, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Behringer, Stefan & Upmann, Thorsten, 2014. "Optimal harvesting of a spatial renewable resource," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 105-120.
    2. Costello, Christopher & Polasky, Stephen, 2008. "Optimal harvesting of stochastic spatial resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 1-18, July.
    3. Asche, Frank & Smith, Martin D., 2010. "Trade and fisheries: Key issues for the World Trade Organization," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2010-03, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    4. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    5. Gardner Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use Without Markets," Working Papers 0025, University of Washington, Department of Economics.
    6. 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.
    7. Smith, Martin D. & Sanchirico, James N. & Wilen, James E., 2009. "The economics of spatial-dynamic processes: Applications to renewable resources," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 104-121, January.
    8. 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.
    9. Wilen, James E., 2000. "Renewable Resource Economists and Policy: What Differences Have We Made?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 306-327, May.
    10. Gardner M. Brown, 2000. "Renewable Natural Resource Management and Use without Markets," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(4), pages 875-914, December.
    11. Thorsten Upmann & Stefan Behringer, 2017. "Harvesting a Remote Renewable Resource," CESifo Working Paper Series 6724, CESifo.
    12. Michael Finus & Raoul Schneider & Pedro Pintassilgo, 2019. "The Role of Social and Technical Excludability for the Success of Impure Public Good and Common Pool Agreements: The Case of International Fisheries," Graz Economics Papers 2019-12, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    13. Dale T. Manning & J. Edward Taylor & James E. Wilen, 2018. "General Equilibrium Tragedy of the Commons," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(1), pages 75-101, January.
    14. Diane P. Dupont, 2010. "Fisheries economics: cutting a broad swath in the field of scientific inquiry," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 54(3), pages 259-263, July.
    15. Michael Finus & Raoul Schneider & Pedro Pintassilgo, 2011. "The Incentive Structure of Impure Public Good Provision – The Case of International Fisheries," Discussion Papers 1103, University of Exeter, Department of Economics.
    16. Eggert, Håkan, 2006. "Fisheries Economics and 20 years with Marine Resource Economics: A Citation Analysis," Working Papers in Economics 203, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    17. Finus, Michael & Schneider, Raoul & Pintassilgo, Pedro, 2020. "The role of social and technical excludability for the success of impure public good and common pool agreements," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    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

    customary international law; exclusive economic zone; ocean fisheries; closure of high seas;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law
    • F55 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Institutional Arrangements
    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery

    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:ces:ceswps:_10567. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.