Abstract

Integrated economic models have become popular for assessing climate change. In this paper we show how these methods can be used to assess the impact of a discard ban in a fishery. We state that a discard ban can be understood as a confiscatory tax equivalent to a value-added tax. Under this framework, we show that a discard ban improves the sustainability of the fishery in the short run and increases economic welfare in the long run. In particular, we show that consumption, capital and wages show an initial decrease just after the implementation of the discard ban then recover after some periods to reach their steady-sate values, which are 16–20% higher than the initial values, depending on the valuation of the landed discards. The discard ban also improves biological variables, increasing landings by 14% and reducing discards by 29% on the initial figures. These patterns highlight the two channels through which discard bans affect a fishery: the tax channel, which shows that the confiscation of landed discards reduces the incentive to invest in the fishery; and the productivity channel, which increases the abundance of the stock. Thus, during the first few years after the implementation of a discard ban, the negative effect from the tax channel dominates the positive effect from the productivity channel, because the stock needs time to recover. Once stock abundance improves, the productivity channel dominates the tax channel and the economic variables rise above their initial levels. Our results also show that a landed discards valorisation policy is optimal from the social welfare point of view provided that incentives to increase discards are not created.

Highlights

  • One fallout of fishery management is the bycatch problem, i.e., the unintended harvesting, discarding, and mortality of non-desired fish species

  • In the European Union (EU) a landing obligation was introduced in the last EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (EU 2013), along with the specific objective of achieving biomass levels capable of producing the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) at individual stock level

  • This paper extends the bioeconomic literature on discards by analysing discard bans from a different perspective: instead of using taxes as an economic instrument to reduce discards, we seek to analyse a discard ban as an implicit value-added tax

Read more

Summary

Introduction

One fallout of fishery management is the bycatch problem, i.e., the unintended harvesting, discarding, and mortality of non-desired fish species. Discards in fishing are understood as the portion of a catch which is not retained on board during commercial fishing. Discarding is a historical characteristic of fisheries around the world. According to the FAO (Pérez Roda et al 2019), discards per annum in global marine capture fisheries totalled 9.1 million tonnes (equivalent to 10.8% of the annual average catch) in 2010–2014. There are various reasons for discarding, including market (high grading) and regulatory reasons (quota exhaustion and minimum landing sizes). In this situation, governments and fishery management authorities have implemented discards bans in various forms, areas, and ranges. In the European Union (EU) a landing obligation was introduced in the last EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) (EU 2013), along with the specific objective of achieving biomass levels capable of producing the Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) at individual stock level

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call