IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/10036.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Efficiency of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs) when Fishers are able to Choose Vessel Sizes: An experimental approach

Author

Listed:
  • HIGASHIDA Keisaku
  • MANAGI Shunsuke

Abstract

Employing an experimental approach, this paper examines whether the efficiency of fishery management can be achieved under Individual Transferable Quotas regimes. We analyze the situation in which subjects can choose from one of two vessel types: large-scale or small-scale. The fixed cost for large-scale vessels is higher than that for their small-scale counterparts, whereas the variable cost for large-scale vessels is lower. We find that the average trading price (ATP) converges to the theoretical equilibrium price (EQP). We also find that vessels are chosen rationally in the sense that, the greater the ATP, minus the EQP in past periods, the less incentive subjects have to invest in large-scale vessels. Moreover, quota prices in the first period could influence both the quota prices and the numbers of both types of vessels in the ensuing periods, and initial allocation could affect the rational choice of vessels.

Suggested Citation

  • HIGASHIDA Keisaku & MANAGI Shunsuke, 2010. "Efficiency of Individual Transferable Quotas (ITQs) when Fishers are able to Choose Vessel Sizes: An experimental approach," Discussion papers 10036, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:10036
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/10e036.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Van Boening, Mark V & Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1996. "Avoidable Cost: Ride a Double Auction Roller Coaster," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 461-477, 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. Zafer Kanik & Serkan Kucuksenel, 2013. "The Promise of Transferable Fishing Concessions on EU Fisheries," ERC Working Papers 1312, ERC - Economic Research Center, Middle East Technical University, revised Dec 2013.
    2. Pueboobpaphan, Suthatip & Indra-Payoong, Nakorn & Opasanon, Sathaporn, 2019. "Experimental analysis of variable surcharge policy of taxi service auction," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 134-148.
    3. Kanik, Zafer & Kucuksenel, Serkan, 2014. "Transferable Fishing Concessions and EU Fisheries," 2014 International Congress, August 26-29, 2014, Ljubljana, Slovenia 183092, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    4. Keisaku Higashida & Kenta Tanaka & Shunsuke Managi, 2024. "Who pays and who should pay for the uncertain conservation cost in biodiversity banking programs: evidence from a laboratory experiment," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(9), pages 22473-22498, September.
    5. Higashida, Keisaku & Tanaka, Kenta & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "The efficiency of conservation banking schemes with inter-regionally tradable credits and the role of mediators," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 175-186.

    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. Araoz, Veronica & Jörnsten, Kurt, 2011. "Semi-Lagrangean approach for price discovery in markets with non-convexities," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 411-417, October.
    2. Elmaghraby, Wedad J. & Larson, Nathan, 2012. "Explaining deviations from equilibrium in auctions with avoidable fixed costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 131-159.
    3. Kyle Hampton & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2012. "Demand shocks, capacity coordination, and industry performance: lessons from an economic laboratory," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 43(1), pages 139-166, March.
    4. Cason, Timothy N. & Gangadharan, Lata & Duke, Charlotte, 2003. "Market power in tradable emission markets: a laboratory testbed for emission trading in Port Phillip Bay, Victoria," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 469-491, October.
    5. Koji Kotani & Kenta Tanaka & Shunsuke Managi, 2019. "Which performs better under trader settings, double auction or uniform price auction?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 247-267, March.
    6. Abbink, Klaus & Brandts, Jordi & McDaniel, Tanga, 2003. "Asymmetric Demand Information in Uniform and Discriminatory Call Auctions: An Experimental Analysis Motivated by Electricity Markets," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 125-144, March.
    7. Vernon Smith, 2002. "Method in Experiment: Rhetoric and Reality," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 91-110, October.
    8. Andrew Austin & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2002. "What Students Expect and What They See: Ideology, Identity and the Double Auction Classroom Experiment," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp194, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    9. Larson, Nathan & Elmaghraby, Wedad, 2008. "Procurement auctions with avoidable fixed costs: an experimental approach," MPRA Paper 32163, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2011.
    10. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel, 1996. "Price formation in double auction markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 1307-1337, August.
    11. Micola, Augusto Ruperez & Bunn, Derek W., 2008. "Crossholdings, concentration and information in capacity-constrained sealed bid-offer auctions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(3-4), pages 748-766, June.
    12. Noussair, Charles & Robin, Stephane & Ruffieux, Bernard, 1998. "The effect of transaction costs on double auction markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 221-233, August.
    13. Noussair, C.N. & van Soest, D.P., 2014. "Economic Experiments and Environmental Policy : A Review," Other publications TiSEM 5ccc4032-fc1e-453c-9a96-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Crowley, Steve & Sade, Orly, 2004. "Does the option to cancel an order in a double auction market matter?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 89-97, April.
    15. Vivian Lei & Charles N. Noussair, 2007. "Equilibrium Selection in an Experimental Macroeconomy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(2), pages 448-482, October.
    16. Nathaniel T. Wilcox & Mark V. Van Boening, 2003. "Distribution and Dynamics in a Simple Tax Regime Transition," Working Papers 2003-02 Classification-C9, Department of Economics, University of Houston.
    17. Davis, Douglas D. & Williams, Arlington W., 1997. "The effects of nonstationarities on performance in call markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 39-54, January.
    18. Durham, Yvonne & McCabe, Kevin & Olson, Mark A. & Rassenti, Stephen & Smith, Vernon, 2004. "Oligopoly competition in fixed cost environments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 147-162, February.
    19. Higashida, Keisaku & Tanaka, Kenta & Managi, Shunsuke, 2019. "The efficiency of conservation banking schemes with inter-regionally tradable credits and the role of mediators," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 175-186.
    20. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • 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

    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:eti:dpaper:10036. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.