Walking a Tight Line:Management of a New Arctic Fishery in the Presence of Spatially Differentiated Ecological Economic Externalities
This paper focuses on bioeconomic modelling of the invasive Red King Crab (RKC) in the Barents Sea. The RKC was introduced into the Barents Sea by Russia for marine cultivation and spread westward to Norwegian waters. We investigate the impact of harvesting management decisions pursued jointly and i...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Conference Object |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Washington
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://portal.findresearcher.sdu.dk/da/publications/61a2b528-d9ec-459b-bf17-0d8ff5854565 http://www.xcdsystem.com/iifet/files/IIFET_Abstracts_Author.pdf |
| Summary: | This paper focuses on bioeconomic modelling of the invasive Red King Crab (RKC) in the Barents Sea. The RKC was introduced into the Barents Sea by Russia for marine cultivation and spread westward to Norwegian waters. We investigate the impact of harvesting management decisions pursued jointly and independently by Russia and Norway. While previous RKC literature models focus on one jurisdiction, we analyze an international setting and account for the management changes that have occurred over time. Historical management of RKC in the Barents by the two nations reflects different output market choices (Russia’s large scale offshore fishing versus Norway’s small scale frozen and live crab fishery) and assumptions about the costs to the benthic ecosystem from the invasion. Since costs of invasion are quantitatively uncertain, the model uses stochastic specification along with ecological parameters from the literature and nonmarket valuation studies. We examine changes in RKC harvest from asymmetric incentives between Russia and Norway for managing the fishery under cooperation and noncooperation that has evolved over time. The asymmetric incentives include a diversified RKC stock supply for Russia away from the Barents, varied harvesting costs, and preferences for ecological amenities between the two countries. We discuss the potential impact of spatial containment of RKC in Norway along with the comparison of noncooperation and cooperation between Russia and Norway. This research sheds light on the economic and ecological tradeoffs faced in rapidly changing Arctic waters and the challenges presented by transboundary resources with differing net benefits to difference groups. |
|---|