IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/gzhm5.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Opportunities for agent-based modeling in human dimensions of fisheries

Author

Listed:
  • Burgess, Matthew G.
  • Carrella, Ernesto
  • Drexler, Michael
  • Axtell, Robert L.
  • Bailey, Richard M.
  • Watson, James R.
  • Cabral, Reniel B.
  • Clemence, Michaela
  • Costello, Christopher
  • Dorsett, Chris

Abstract

Models of human dimensions of fisheries are important to understanding and predicting how fishing industries respond to changes in marine ecosystems and management institutions. Advances in computation have made it possible to construct agent-based models (ABMs)—which explicitly describe the behaviour of individual people, firms, or vessels in order to understand and predict their aggregate behaviours. ABMs are widely used for both academic and applied purposes in many settings including finance, urban planning, and the military, but are not yet mainstream in fisheries science and management, despite a growing literature. ABMs are well suited to understanding emergent consequences of fisher interactions, heterogeneity, and bounded rationality, especially in complex ecological, social, and institutional contexts. For these reasons, we argue that ABMs of human behaviour can contribute significantly to human dimensions of fisheries in three areas: 1) understanding interactions between multiple management institutions; 2) incorporating cognitive and behavioural sciences into fisheries science and practice; and 3) understanding and projecting the social consequences of management institutions. We provide simple examples illustrating the potential for ABMs in each of these areas, using conceptual (‘toy’) versions of the POSEIDON model. We argue that salient strategic advances in these areas could pave the way for increased tactical use of ABMs in fishery management settings. We review common ABM development and application challenges, with the aim of providing guidance to beginning ABM developers and users studying human dimensions of fisheries.

Suggested Citation

  • Burgess, Matthew G. & Carrella, Ernesto & Drexler, Michael & Axtell, Robert L. & Bailey, Richard M. & Watson, James R. & Cabral, Reniel B. & Clemence, Michaela & Costello, Christopher & Dorsett, Chris, 2018. "Opportunities for agent-based modeling in human dimensions of fisheries," SocArXiv gzhm5, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:gzhm5
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/gzhm5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5beda87c7ef59f0019f38c60/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/gzhm5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charness, Gary & Rabin, Matthew, 2001. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4qz9k8vg, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    2. Joseph E Fargione & Clarence Lehman & Stephen Polasky, 2011. "Entrepreneurs, Chance, and the Deterministic Concentration of Wealth," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    3. Clark, Colin W. & Munro, Gordon R. & Sumaila, Ussif Rashid, 2005. "Subsidies, buybacks, and sustainable fisheries," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 47-58, July.
    4. Keith Evans & Quinn Weninger, 2014. "Information Sharing and Cooperative Search in Fisheries," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 58(3), pages 353-372, July.
    5. R. H. Strotz, 1955. "Myopia and Inconsistency in Dynamic Utility Maximization," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 23(3), pages 165-180.
    6. McDonald, A.D. & Little, L.R. & Gray, R. & Fulton, E. & Sainsbury, K.J. & Lyne, V.D., 2008. "An agent-based modelling approach to evaluation of multiple-use management strategies for coastal marine ecosystems," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 401-411.
    7. John Geanakoplos & Robert Axtell & J. Doyne Farmer & Peter Howitt & Benjamin Conlee & Jonathan Goldstein & Matthew Hendrey & Nathan M. Palmer & Chun-Yi Yang, 2012. "Getting at Systemic Risk via an Agent-Based Model of the Housing Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 53-58, May.
    8. Haapasaari, Päivi & Karjalainen, Timo P., 2010. "Formalizing expert knowledge to compare alternative management plans: Sociological perspective to the future management of Baltic salmon stocks," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 477-486, May.
    9. Little, L.R. & McDonald, A.D., 2007. "Simulations of agents in social networks harvesting a resource," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 204(3), pages 379-386.
    10. Railsback, Steven F. & Johnson, Matthew D., 2011. "Pattern-oriented modeling of bird foraging and pest control in coffee farms," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(18), pages 3305-3319.
    11. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    12. Steve J. Miller & Robert T. Deacon, 2017. "Protecting Marine Ecosystems: Regulation Versus Market Incentives," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 83-107.
    13. Beecham, J.A. & Engelhard, G.H., 2007. "Ideal free distribution or dynamic game? An agent-based simulation study of trawling strategies with varying information," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 384(2), pages 628-646.
    14. Yu, Lean & Wang, Shouyang & Lai, Kin Keung, 2009. "An intelligent-agent-based fuzzy group decision making model for financial multicriteria decision support: The case of credit scoring," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 195(3), pages 942-959, June.
    15. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    16. Cederman, Lars-Erik, 2003. "Modeling the Size of Wars: From Billiard Balls to Sandpiles," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 97(1), pages 135-150, February.
    17. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    18. Gary Charness & Matthew Rabin, 2002. "Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 817-869.
    19. Emery, Timothy J. & Green, Bridget S. & Gardner, Caleb & Tisdell, John, 2012. "Are input controls required in individual transferable quota fisheries to address ecosystem based fisheries management objectives?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 122-131, January.
    20. Ragnar Arnason, 2012. "Property Rights in Fisheries: How Much Can Individual Transferable Quotas Accomplish?," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 6(2), pages 217-236, July.
    21. Pas, Eric I. & Principio, Shari L., 1997. "Braess' paradox: Some new insights," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 265-276, June.
    22. Aaron Hatcher & Shabbar Jaffry & Olivier Thébaud & Elizabeth Bennett, 2000. "Normative and Social Influences Affecting Compliance with Fishery Regulations," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 76(3), pages 448-461.
    23. Little, L. Richard & Punt, André E. & Mapstone, Bruce D. & Begg, Gavin A. & Goldman, Barry & Williams, Ashley J., 2009. "An agent-based model for simulating trading of multi-species fisheries quota," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 220(23), pages 3404-3412.
    24. Matthieu Barbier & James R Watson, 2016. "The Spatial Dynamics of Predators and the Benefits and Costs of Sharing Information," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-22, October.
    25. Nguyen, Quang & Leung, Pingsun, 2013. "Revenue targeting in fisheries," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(5), pages 559-575, October.
    26. Robert T. Deacon & Dominic P. Parker & Christopher Costello, 2013. "Reforming Fisheries: Lessons from a Self-Selected Cooperative," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(1), pages 83-125.
    27. Arnason, Ragnar & Hannesson, Rögnvaldur & Schrank, William E., 2000. "Costs of fisheries management: the cases of Iceland, Norway and Newfoundland," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 233-243, May.
    28. Lucas, Robert Jr, 1976. "Econometric policy evaluation: A critique," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 19-46, January.
    29. Cabral, Reniel B. & Geronimo, Rollan C. & Lim, May T. & Aliño, Porfirio M., 2010. "Effect of variable fishing strategy on fisheries under changing effort and pressure: An agent-based model application," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(2), pages 362-369.
    30. George A. Akerlof & Robert J. Shiller, 2010. "Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why It Matters for Global Capitalism," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9163.
    31. Lee G. Anderson, 2015. "The Application of Basic Economic Principles to Real-World Fisheries Management and Regulation," Marine Resource Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(3), pages 235-249.
    32. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    33. Richard Bookstaber, 2012. "Using Agent-Based Models for Analyzing Threats to Financial Stability," Working Papers 12-03, Office of Financial Research, US Department of the Treasury.
    34. Costello, Christopher J & Deacon, Robert T, 2007. "The Efficiency Gains from Fully Delineating Rights in an ITQ Fishery," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt56n8x9qb, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    35. Kydland, Finn E & Prescott, Edward C, 1977. "Rules Rather Than Discretion: The Inconsistency of Optimal Plans," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 473-491, 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. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    2. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    3. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    4. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    5. V. I. Yukalov & D. Sornette, 2012. "Quantum decision making by social agents," Papers 1202.4918, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2015.
    6. Ghosal, Sayantan & Dalton, Patricio, 2013. "Characterizing Behavioral Decisions with Choice Data," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 107, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    7. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    8. Michelle Baddeley, 2019. "Behavioural Macroeconomic Policy: New perspectives on time inconsistency," Papers 1907.07858, arXiv.org.
    9. Đula, Ivan & Größler, Andreas, 2021. "Inequity aversion in dynamically complex supply chains," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(1), pages 309-322.
    10. Teck H. Ho & Noah Lim & Colin Camerer, 2005. "Modeling the Psychology of Consumer and Firm Behavior with Behavioral Economics," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000476, UCLA Department of Economics.
    11. Andrew Ellis & Yusufcan Masatlioglu, 2022. "Choice with Endogenous Categorization," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(1), pages 240-278.
    12. Ritxar Arlegi & Miriam Teschl, 2012. "A Theory of Choice under Internal Conflict," Documentos de Trabajo - Lan Gaiak Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra 1208, Departamento de Economía - Universidad Pública de Navarra.
    13. V. P. Crawford, 2014. "Boundedly rational versus optimization-based models of strategic thinking and learning in games," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 5.
    14. Cooper, Rachel & Jarre, Astrid, 2017. "An Agent-based Model of the South African Offshore Hake Trawl Industry: Part I Model Description and Validation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 268-281.
    15. Persichina, Marco, 2016. "Other-regarding Preferences and Social Norms in the Intergenerational Transfer of Renewable Resources when Agent has Present-Biased Preferences," MPRA Paper 84277, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 30 Nov 2017.
    16. Upravitelev, A., 2023. "Neoclassical roots of behavioral economics," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 58(1), pages 110-140.
    17. Persichina, Marco, 2016. "Cascading Defections from Cooperation Triggered by Present-Biased Behaviors in the Commons," MPRA Paper 83131, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 30 Nov 2017.
    18. Yariv, Leeat & Jackson, Matthew O., 2018. "The Non-Existence of Representative Agents," CEPR Discussion Papers 13397, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Jihyo Kim & Suhyeon Nam, 2021. "Do Household Time, Risk, and Social Preferences Affect Home Energy Retrofit Decisions in Korea?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-18, April.
    20. repec:cep:stitep:/2012/563 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Enrico Diecidue & Olivier l’Haridon, 2017. "Patience and time consistency in collective decisions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 181-208, March.

    More about this item

    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:osf:socarx:gzhm5. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.