IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/96938.html

Optimization of tuna shing logistic routes through information sharing policies: A game theory-based approach

Author

Listed:
  • Groba, Carlos
  • Sartal, Antonio
  • Bergantiños, Gustavo

Abstract

The tuna fishing industry's increasing regulatory restrictions on the number of FADs per vessel is forcing companies to rethink their fishing practices to ensure their continued profitability. Despite these expanding constraints, and although many studies have been published on the use of FADs and their implications, to date there has been little research on how to help the tuna fishing industry optimize its procedures. Based on real data and using the game theory approach, we suggest a new collaborative method of employing FADs that involves their use between vessels, and we demonstrate that sharing FADs optimizes the use of fuel and time for entire fleets. Our findings show that, with the correct incentives, all stakeholders, including the company, the skipper, and even the environment, can achieve mutually improved results by sharing information.

Suggested Citation

  • Groba, Carlos & Sartal, Antonio & Bergantiños, Gustavo, 2019. "Optimization of tuna shing logistic routes through information sharing policies: A game theory-based approach," MPRA Paper 96938, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:96938
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/96938/1/MPRA_paper_96938.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrice Guillotreau & Frédéric Salladarré & Patrice Dewals & Laurent Dagorn, 2011. "Fishing tuna around Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) vs free swimming schools: Skipper decision and other determining factors," Post-Print halshs-00632070, HAL.
    2. John C. Harsanyi, 1967. "Games with Incomplete Information Played by "Bayesian" Players, I-III Part I. The Basic Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 159-182, November.
    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. Andrés Perea & Elias Tsakas, 2019. "Limited focus in dynamic games," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 48(2), pages 571-607, June.
    2. Simai He & Jay Sethuraman & Xuan Wang & Jiawei Zhang, 2017. "A NonCooperative Approach to Cost Allocation in Joint Replenishment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 65(6), pages 1562-1573, December.
    3. Bommer, Rolf, 1995. "Environmental policy and industrial competitiveness: The pollution haven hypothesis reconsidered," Discussion Papers, Series II 262, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
    4. Martin Shubik, 1980. "Perfect or Robust Noncooperative Equilibrium: A Search for the Philosophers Stone?," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 559, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    5. Martin Meier & Burkhard Schipper, 2014. "Bayesian games with unawareness and unawareness perfection," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 219-249, June.
    6. Chris Fields & James F. Glazebrook, 2024. "Nash Equilibria and Undecidability in Generic Physical Interactions—A Free Energy Perspective," Games, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-22, August.
    7. Ming Chen & Sareh Nabi & Marciano Siniscalchi, 2023. "Advancing Ad Auction Realism: Practical Insights & Modeling Implications," Papers 2307.11732, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2024.
    8. Melkonyan, Tigran A. & Johnson, Stanley R., 1998. "State Trading Companies, Time Inconsistency, Imperfect Enforceability and Reputation," Hebrew University of Jerusalem Archive 18432, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
    9. Huseyin Cavusoglu & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2004. "Configuration of Detection Software: A Comparison of Decision and Game Theory Approaches," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 131-148, September.
    10. Jacobovic, Royi & Levy, Yehuda John & Solan, Eilon, 2026. "Bayesian games with nested information," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 21(1), January.
    11. Schaefer, Alexander, 2021. "Rationality, uncertainty, and unanimity: an epistemic critique of contractarianism," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 82-117, March.
    12. Kaufmann, Lutz & Roessing, Soenke, 2005. "Managing conflict of interests between headquarters and their subsidiaries regarding technology transfer to emerging markets--a framework," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 235-253, August.
    13. Giovanni Paolo Crespi & Davide Radi & Matteo Rocca, 2017. "Robust games: theory and application to a Cournot duopoly model," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 40(1), pages 177-198, November.
    14. Drouvelis, M. & Müller, W. & Possajennikov, A., 2009. "Signaling Without Common Prior : An Experiment," Discussion Paper 2009-28, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    15. Agnieszka Wiszniewska-Matyszkiel, 2016. "Belief distorted Nash equilibria: introduction of a new kind of equilibrium in dynamic games with distorted information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 243(1), pages 147-177, August.
    16. Andrew M. Colman & Briony D. Pulford, 2015. "Psychology of Game Playing: Introduction to a Special Issue," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-8, December.
    17. Daniel Lacker & Kavita Ramanan, 2019. "Rare Nash Equilibria and the Price of Anarchy in Large Static Games," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 44(2), pages 400-422, May.
    18. Ardakani, Omid M., 2025. "Strategic information asymmetry in tail-risk markets," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    19. Hendrik Vollmer, 2013. "What kind of game is everyday interaction?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 25(3), pages 370-404, August.
    20. Hausken, Kjell & Levitin, Gregory, 2009. "Minmax defense strategy for complex multi-state systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 577-587.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games

    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:pra:mprapa:96938. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.