Accounting for Fleet Heterogeneity in Estimating the Impacts of Large-Scale Fishery Closures

Type Article
Date 2020-10
Language English
Author(s) Dépalle Maxime1, Thébaud OlivierORCID2, Sanchirico James N.3
Affiliation(s) 1 : Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California, Davis, 2116 Social Sciences and Humanities, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 USA
2 : Ifremer, UMR 6308, AMURE, Unité d’Economie Maritime, IUEM, Technopôle Brest-Iroise, Rue Dumont d’Urville, 29280 Plouzané, France
3 : Department of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California, Davis, 1023 Wickson Hall, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616 USA and Resources for the Future, 1616 P Street NW, Suite 600, Washington, DC 20036 USA
Source Marine Resource Economics (0738-1360) (University of Chicago Press), 2020-10 , Vol. 35 , N. 4 , P. 361-378
DOI 10.1086/710514
WOS© Times Cited 3
Keyword(s) Discrete choice model, spatial closures, spatial resolution, VMS, welfare analysis
Abstract

To date, the empirical literature on spatial closures has focused on specific fleets and/or areas, and relatively less attention has been paid to the evaluation of responses to large-scale spatial restrictions on ocean fishing. Where such restrictions occur, a broad range of fleets may be affected, with diverse response mechanisms determining the redistribution of fishing effort and the associated welfare impacts. We propose a methodological approach to address such situations. Using hypothetical scenarios regarding the closure of the UK exclusive economic zone (EEZ) to a diverse subset of French vessels as an example, we develop a spatial discrete choice model that incorporates the possibility to adjust the resolution of choice sets at the fleet level to account for heterogeneous behavioral patterns across fleets. We show how neglecting fleet diversity in the choice of the spatial resolution of analysis may bias the results of an impact study on large spatial closures.

Full Text
File Pages Size Access
18 5 MB Access on demand
26 2 MB Access on demand
Author's final draft 61 2 MB Open access
Top of the page