IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/foi/wpaper/2016_12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Implications for fisheries management by inclusion of marine ecosystem services

Author

Listed:
  • Lars Ravensbeck
  • Ayoe Hoff

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

  • Hans Frost

    (Department of Food and Resource Economics, University of Copenhagen)

Abstract

The application of ecosystem based management of the marine resources and focus on ecosystem services will influence the methodologies used for assessing the resources as well as the proposed regulation of the fisheries and other marine resources. The paper makes a review of ecosystem services and ecosystem based fishery management with the purpose of integrating these elements in a bioeconomic model. As a part of the model development, a logistic predator-prey model is examined thoroughly. On this basis, a numerical model is created. The model can include several species at different trophic layers, hence simulation a small food web. The key purpose of the numerical analysis is to develop a practical tool that can assess the management policies when a broader range of ecosystem services, species interactions and externalities are taken into account. The model can include several species at different trophic layers and, hence, simulate a small food web, while at the same time assess the economic effects of fishing on this food web. In general, the analyses indicate that species modelled with interaction may sustain less fishing pressure than if they are modelled without species interaction. Besides interaction, the numerical model assesses how the economic result is affected by the inclusion of ecosystem services. This is done through the damage cost functions, which depends on effort and reduces the net value, and a set of non-market values, which are functions that depend on the stock of the species. The inclusion of these tends to favour reduction in effort levels, in some cases quite significantly. Management policies based on conventional MEY targets may in many cases rather well accommodate the broader range of ecosystem-based policy goals, due to the lower effort levels. The paper shows the shortcomings of conventional qualitative analytical approaches because of the complexities of marine ecosystems. Numerical models also show shortcomings, in particular because specific functional forms are used and data are short in many areas. However, it is shown that much insight can be gained from using such relatively simple models.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars Ravensbeck & Ayoe Hoff & Hans Frost, 2016. "Implications for fisheries management by inclusion of marine ecosystem services," IFRO Working Paper 2016/12, University of Copenhagen, Department of Food and Resource Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:foi:wpaper:2016_12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://okonomi.foi.dk/workingpapers/WPpdf/WP2016/IFRO_WP_2016_12.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colin W. Clark & Gordon R. Munro & U. Rashid Sumaila, 2010. "Limits to the Privatization of Fishery Resources," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 86(2), pages 209-218.
    2. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2013. "On the environmental effectiveness of the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 25-40.
    3. David Pearce, 2008. "Do We Really Care About Biodiversity?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 611-611, August.
    4. Martin D. Smith & Larry B. Crowder, 2011. "Valuing Ecosystem Services with Fishery Rents: A Lumped-Parameter Approach to Hypoxia in the Neuse River Estuary," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(11), pages 1-39, November.
    5. Johannesen, Anne Borge & Skonhoft, Anders, 2005. "Tourism, poaching and wildlife conservation: what can integrated conservation and development projects accomplish?," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 208-226, October.
    6. John Tschirhart, 2009. "Integrated Ecological-Economic Models," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 381-407, September.
    7. Richerson, Kate & Levin, Phillip S. & Mangel, Marc, 2010. "Accounting for indirect effects and non-commensurate values in ecosystem based fishery management (EBFM)," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 114-119, January.
    8. Thomas Crocker & John Tschirhart, 1992. "Ecosystems, externalities, and economies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(6), pages 551-567, November.
    9. Ian Bateman & Georgina Mace & Carlo Fezzi & Giles Atkinson & Kerry Turner, 2011. "Economic Analysis for Ecosystem Service Assessments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 177-218, February.
    10. Hans Frost & Peder Andersen & Ayoe Hoff, 2013. "Management of Complex Fisheries: Lessons Learned from a Simulation Model," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 61(2), pages 283-307, June.
    11. Edward B. Barbier, 2007. "Valuing ecosystem services as productive inputs [‘Valuing groundwater recharge through agricultural production in the Hadejia-Jama’are wetlands in northern Nigeria’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 22(49), pages 178-229.
    12. Johannus Janmaat, 2012. "Fishing in a Shallow Lake: Exploring a Classic Fishery Model in a Habitat with Shallow Lake Dynamics," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 51(2), pages 215-239, February.
    13. Heikinheimo, Outi, 2011. "Interactions between cod, herring and sprat in the changing environment of the Baltic Sea: A dynamic model analysis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(10), pages 1731-1742.
    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. Nielsen, Max & Ravensbeck, Lars & Nielsen, Rasmus, 2014. "Green growth in fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 43-52.
    2. Daniels, Silvie & Bellmore, J. Ryan & Benjamin, Joseph R. & Witters, Nele & Vangronsveld, Jaco & Van Passel, Steven, 2018. "Quantification of the Indirect Use Value of Functional Group Diversity Based on the Ecological Role of Species in the Ecosystem," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 181-194.
    3. Zijin Xie & Ayumi Onuma, 2021. "Biodiversity Conservation under ICDPs in a Bioeconomic Model: Nonprofit vs For-Profit National Parks," Keio-IES Discussion Paper Series 2021-001, Institute for Economics Studies, Keio University.
    4. Dmitry Gromov & Thorsten Upmann, 2021. "Dynamics and Economics of Shallow Lakes: A Survey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Melstrom, Richard T. & Horan, Richard D., 2012. "Managing Excessive Predation in a Predator-Prey Setting: The Case of Piping Plovers," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 123350, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Hussain, A.M. Tanvir & Tschirhart, John, 2013. "Economic/ecological tradeoffs among ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 116-127.
    7. Martinet, Vincent & Blanchard, Fabian, 2009. "Fishery externalities and biodiversity: Trade-offs between the viability of shrimp trawling and the conservation of Frigatebirds in French Guiana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2960-2968, October.
    8. Cavalletti, B. & Di Fabio, C. & Lagomarsino, E. & Ramassa, P., 2020. "Ecosystem accounting for marine protected areas: A proposed framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    9. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Buszko-Briggs, Malgorzata & Hanley, Nick, 2009. "Valuing changes in forest biodiversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2910-2917, October.
    10. Thanh Viet Nguyen & Lars Ravn-Jonsen & Niels Vestergaard, 2016. "Marginal Damage Cost of Nutrient Enrichment: The Case of the Baltic Sea," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 64(1), pages 109-129, May.
    11. Mohammad Nur Nobi & A. H. M. Raihan Sarker & Biswajit Nath & Eivin R{o}skaft & Ma Suza & Paul Kvinta, 2021. "Economic valuation of tourism of the Sundarban Mangroves, Bangladesh," Papers 2110.00182, arXiv.org.
    12. Capriolo, A. & Boschetto, R.G. & Mascolo, R.A. & Balbi, S. & Villa, F., 2020. "Biophysical and economic assessment of four ecosystem services for natural capital accounting in Italy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    13. Ian Bateman & Georgina Mace & Carlo Fezzi & Giles Atkinson & Kerry Turner, 2011. "Economic Analysis for Ecosystem Service Assessments," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 177-218, February.
    14. Ürge-Vorsatz, Diana & Kelemen, Agnes & Tirado-Herrero, Sergio & Thomas, Stefan & Thema, Johannes & Mzavanadze, Nora & Hauptstock, Dorothea & Suerkemper, Felix & Teubler, Jens & Gupta, Mukesh & Chatter, 2016. "Measuring multiple impacts of low-carbon energy options in a green economy context," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1409-1426.
    15. Ian Bateman & Amii Harwood & David Abson & Barnaby Andrews & Andrew Crowe & Steve Dugdale & Carlo Fezzi & Jo Foden & David Hadley & Roy Haines-Young & Mark Hulme & Andreas Kontoleon & Paul Munday & Un, 2014. "Economic Analysis for the UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Synthesis and Scenario Valuation of Changes in Ecosystem Services," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 57(2), pages 273-297, February.
    16. Finnoff, David & Gong, Min & Tschirhart, John, 2012. "Perspectives on Ecosystem Based Management for Delivering Ecosystem Services with an Example from an Eighteen-Species Marine Model," International Review of Environmental and Resource Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(1), pages 79-118, January.
    17. Yun, Seong Do & Hutniczak, Barbara & Fenichel, Eli P. & Abbott, Joshua K., 2016. "The Wealth of Ecosystems:Valuing Natural Capital in the Context of Ecosystem Based Management," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235737, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Melstrom, Richard T. & Horan, Richard D., 2013. "Managing excessive predation in a predator-endangered prey setting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 85-93.
    19. Melstrom, Richard T. & Salau, Kehinde Rilwan & Shanafelt, David W., 2019. "The Optimal Timing of Reintroducing Captive Populations Into the Wild," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 174-184.
    20. Skonhoft, Anders, 2007. "Economic modeling approaches for wildlife and species conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 223-231, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    bioeconomics; ecosystem modelling; ecosystem based fisheries management;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q22 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Renewable Resources and Conservation - - - Fishery
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    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:foi:wpaper:2016_12. 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: Geir Tveit (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/foikudk.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.