Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries: the FcubEcon model

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries : the FcubEcon model. / Hoff, Ayoe Gry; Frost, Hans Staby; Ulrich, Clara; Damalas, Dimitrios; Maracelias, Christos D.; Goti, Leyre; Santurtun, Marina.

In: I C E S Journal of Marine Science, Vol. 67, No. 8, 2010, p. 1802-1810.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Hoff, AG, Frost, HS, Ulrich, C, Damalas, D, Maracelias, CD, Goti, L & Santurtun, M 2010, 'Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries: the FcubEcon model', I C E S Journal of Marine Science, vol. 67, no. 8, pp. 1802-1810. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsq076

APA

Hoff, A. G., Frost, H. S., Ulrich, C., Damalas, D., Maracelias, C. D., Goti, L., & Santurtun, M. (2010). Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries: the FcubEcon model. I C E S Journal of Marine Science, 67(8), 1802-1810. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsq076

Vancouver

Hoff AG, Frost HS, Ulrich C, Damalas D, Maracelias CD, Goti L et al. Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries: the FcubEcon model. I C E S Journal of Marine Science. 2010;67(8):1802-1810. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsq076

Author

Hoff, Ayoe Gry ; Frost, Hans Staby ; Ulrich, Clara ; Damalas, Dimitrios ; Maracelias, Christos D. ; Goti, Leyre ; Santurtun, Marina. / Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries : the FcubEcon model. In: I C E S Journal of Marine Science. 2010 ; Vol. 67, No. 8. pp. 1802-1810.

Bibtex

@article{1da91355b99b4cd7b472c14da4401dca,
title = "Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries: the FcubEcon model",
abstract = "Applying single-species assessment and quotas in multispecies fisheries can lead to overfishing or quota underutilization, becauseadvice can be conflicting when different stocks are caught within the same fishery. During the past decade, increased focus onthis issue has resulted in the development of management tools based on fleets, fisheries, and areas, rather than on unit fishstocks. A natural consequence of this has been to consider effort rather than quota management, a final effort decision beingbased on fleet-harvest potential and fish-stock-preservation considerations. Effort allocation between fleets should not be based onbiological considerations alone, but also on the economic behaviour of fishers, because fisheries management has a significantimpact on human behaviour as well as on ecosystem development. The FcubEcon management framework for effort allocationbetween fleets and fisheries is presented, based on the economic optimization of a fishery{\textquoteright}s earnings while complying with stock-preservationcriteria. Through case studies of two European fisheries, it is shown how fishery earnings can be increased significantly byreallocating effort between fisheries in an economically optimal manner, in both effort-management and single-quota managementsettings.Applying single-species assessment and quotas in multispecies fisheries can lead to overfishing or quota underutilization, becauseadvice can be conflicting when different stocks are caught within the same fishery. During the past decade, increased focus onthis issue has resulted in the development of management tools based on fleets, fisheries, and areas, rather than on unit fishstocks. A natural consequence of this has been to consider effort rather than quota management, a final effort decision beingbased on fleet-harvest potential and fish-stock-preservation considerations. Effort allocation between fleets should not be based onbiological considerations alone, but also on the economic behaviour of fishers, because fisheries management has a significantimpact on human behaviour as well as on ecosystem development. The FcubEcon management framework for effort allocationbetween fleets and fisheries is presented, based on the economic optimization of a fishery{\textquoteright}s earnings while complying with stock-preservationcriteria. Through case studies of two European fisheries, it is shown how fishery earnings can be increased significantly byreallocating effort between fisheries in an economically optimal manner, in both effort-management and single-quota managementsettings.",
author = "Hoff, {Ayoe Gry} and Frost, {Hans Staby} and Clara Ulrich and Dimitrios Damalas and Maracelias, {Christos D.} and Leyre Goti and Marina Santurtun",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1093/icesjms/fsq076",
language = "English",
volume = "67",
pages = "1802--1810",
journal = "ICES Journal of Marine Science",
issn = "1054-3139",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Economic effort management in multispecies fisheries

T2 - the FcubEcon model

AU - Hoff, Ayoe Gry

AU - Frost, Hans Staby

AU - Ulrich, Clara

AU - Damalas, Dimitrios

AU - Maracelias, Christos D.

AU - Goti, Leyre

AU - Santurtun, Marina

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Applying single-species assessment and quotas in multispecies fisheries can lead to overfishing or quota underutilization, becauseadvice can be conflicting when different stocks are caught within the same fishery. During the past decade, increased focus onthis issue has resulted in the development of management tools based on fleets, fisheries, and areas, rather than on unit fishstocks. A natural consequence of this has been to consider effort rather than quota management, a final effort decision beingbased on fleet-harvest potential and fish-stock-preservation considerations. Effort allocation between fleets should not be based onbiological considerations alone, but also on the economic behaviour of fishers, because fisheries management has a significantimpact on human behaviour as well as on ecosystem development. The FcubEcon management framework for effort allocationbetween fleets and fisheries is presented, based on the economic optimization of a fishery’s earnings while complying with stock-preservationcriteria. Through case studies of two European fisheries, it is shown how fishery earnings can be increased significantly byreallocating effort between fisheries in an economically optimal manner, in both effort-management and single-quota managementsettings.Applying single-species assessment and quotas in multispecies fisheries can lead to overfishing or quota underutilization, becauseadvice can be conflicting when different stocks are caught within the same fishery. During the past decade, increased focus onthis issue has resulted in the development of management tools based on fleets, fisheries, and areas, rather than on unit fishstocks. A natural consequence of this has been to consider effort rather than quota management, a final effort decision beingbased on fleet-harvest potential and fish-stock-preservation considerations. Effort allocation between fleets should not be based onbiological considerations alone, but also on the economic behaviour of fishers, because fisheries management has a significantimpact on human behaviour as well as on ecosystem development. The FcubEcon management framework for effort allocationbetween fleets and fisheries is presented, based on the economic optimization of a fishery’s earnings while complying with stock-preservationcriteria. Through case studies of two European fisheries, it is shown how fishery earnings can be increased significantly byreallocating effort between fisheries in an economically optimal manner, in both effort-management and single-quota managementsettings.

AB - Applying single-species assessment and quotas in multispecies fisheries can lead to overfishing or quota underutilization, becauseadvice can be conflicting when different stocks are caught within the same fishery. During the past decade, increased focus onthis issue has resulted in the development of management tools based on fleets, fisheries, and areas, rather than on unit fishstocks. A natural consequence of this has been to consider effort rather than quota management, a final effort decision beingbased on fleet-harvest potential and fish-stock-preservation considerations. Effort allocation between fleets should not be based onbiological considerations alone, but also on the economic behaviour of fishers, because fisheries management has a significantimpact on human behaviour as well as on ecosystem development. The FcubEcon management framework for effort allocationbetween fleets and fisheries is presented, based on the economic optimization of a fishery’s earnings while complying with stock-preservationcriteria. Through case studies of two European fisheries, it is shown how fishery earnings can be increased significantly byreallocating effort between fisheries in an economically optimal manner, in both effort-management and single-quota managementsettings.Applying single-species assessment and quotas in multispecies fisheries can lead to overfishing or quota underutilization, becauseadvice can be conflicting when different stocks are caught within the same fishery. During the past decade, increased focus onthis issue has resulted in the development of management tools based on fleets, fisheries, and areas, rather than on unit fishstocks. A natural consequence of this has been to consider effort rather than quota management, a final effort decision beingbased on fleet-harvest potential and fish-stock-preservation considerations. Effort allocation between fleets should not be based onbiological considerations alone, but also on the economic behaviour of fishers, because fisheries management has a significantimpact on human behaviour as well as on ecosystem development. The FcubEcon management framework for effort allocationbetween fleets and fisheries is presented, based on the economic optimization of a fishery’s earnings while complying with stock-preservationcriteria. Through case studies of two European fisheries, it is shown how fishery earnings can be increased significantly byreallocating effort between fisheries in an economically optimal manner, in both effort-management and single-quota managementsettings.

U2 - 10.1093/icesjms/fsq076

DO - 10.1093/icesjms/fsq076

M3 - Journal article

VL - 67

SP - 1802

EP - 1810

JO - ICES Journal of Marine Science

JF - ICES Journal of Marine Science

SN - 1054-3139

IS - 8

ER -

ID: 32963611