Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T03:03:37.670Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Implications of human capital enhancement in fisheries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2007

Louisa Coglan
Affiliation:
School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Sean Pascoe
Affiliation:
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, Australia
Get access

Abstract

Decommissioning programmes have been used in many countries in an attempt to reduce the level of overexploitation in fisheries. The extent to which human capital enhancement may offset capacity reductions, however, has not been previously examined. The study uses a stochastic production frontier model to estimate the impact of differing skipper, vessel and technology characteristics on the productivity of a set of UK trawlers operating in the English Channel. The results suggest that productivity improvements resulting from increased education and training could exceed those from increased technological adoption. Increased investment in human capital enhancement could potentially offset, at least to some degree, the effects of decommissioning in the fishery. The study highlights an apparent oversight in fisheries policy analysis. Considerable attention is paid to the potential problem of technological creep and input substitution. However, enhancing human capital may have a greater impact on stocks than technological adoption in established fisheries.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© EDP Sciences, IFREMER, IRD, 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ali, F., Parikh, A., Shah, M.K., 1996, Measurement of economic efficiency using the behavioral and stochastic cost frontier approach. J. Policy Model. 18, 271-287. CrossRef
Arrow, K., 1962, The economic implications of learning by doing. Rev. Econ. Stud. 29, 155-73. CrossRef
Battese, G.E., Coelli, T.J., 1995, A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Empir. Econ. 20, 325-332. CrossRef
Clark, C.W., Munro, G.R., Sumaila, U.R., 2005, Subsidies, buybacks, and sustainable fisheries. J. Env. Econ. Manage. 50, 47-58. CrossRef
Coelli T., 1996, A guide to FRONTIER version 4.1, a computer program for frontier production function estimation, CEPA Working Paper 96/07, Department of Econometrics, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.
Connor, C.M., Son, S-H., Hindman, A.H., Morrison, F.J., 2005, Teacher qualifications, classroom practices, family characteristics, and preschool experience, Complex effects on first graders' vocabulary and early reading outcomes. J. Sch. Psychol. 43, 343-375. CrossRef
Holland, D., Gudmundsson, E., Gates, J., 1999, Do fishing vessel buyback programs work: A survey of the evidence. Mar. Policy 23, 47-69. CrossRef
Ingram, B.F., Neumann, G.R., 2006, The return to skill, Lab. Econ. 13, 35-59.
Kirkley, J.E., Squires, D., Strand, I.E., 1998, Characterizing managerial skill and technical efficiency in a fishery. J. Prod. Anal. 9, 145-160. CrossRef
Kodde, D.A., Palm, F.C., 1986, Wald criteria for jointly testing equality and inequality restrictions. Econometrica 54, 1243-1248. CrossRef
Maurer, T. J., 2000, Career-relevant learning and development, worker age, and beliefs about self-efficacy for development. J. Manage. 27, 123-140.
Pascoe, S., Coglan, L., 2000, Implications of differences in technical efficiency of fishing boats for capacity measures and reduction. Mar. Policy 24, 301-307. CrossRef
Pascoe, S., Coglan, L., 2002, Contribution of unmeasurable factors to the efficiency of fishing vessels. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 84, 45-57 CrossRef
Pascoe, S., Herrero, I., 2004, Estimation of a composite fish stock index using Data Envelopment Analysis. Fish. Res. 69, 91-105. CrossRef
Portela, M., 2001, Measuring skill, a multi-dimensional index. Econ. Lett. 72, 27-32. CrossRef
Ravn M.O., Sørensen J.R., 1999, Schooling, training, growth and minimum wages. Scand. J. Econ.101, 441-457.
Robins, C.M., Wang, Y-G., Die, D., 1998, The impact of global position systems and plotters on fishing powers in the northern prawn fishery, Australia. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55, 1645-1651. CrossRef
Sauer, J., Frohberg, K, Hockman, H., 2006, Stochastic efficiency measurement: the curse of theoretical consistency. J. Appl. Econ. 9, 139-165.
Seyoum, E.T., Battese, G.E., Fleming, E.M., 1998, Technical efficiency and productivity of maize producers in eastern Ethiopia, a study of farmers within and outside the Sasakawa-Global 2000 project. Agric. Econ. 19, 341-348. CrossRef
SFIA, 2005, Seafish Annual Report 2004-05, SFIA, Edinburgh.
Sharma, K.R, Leung, P., 1999, Technical Efficiency of the Longline Fishery in Hawaii, An application of a Stochastic Production Frontier. Mar. Resour. Econ. 13, 259-274. CrossRef
Squires, D., Kirkley, J., 1999, Skipper skill and panel data in fishing industries. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 56, 2011-2018. CrossRef
Temple, J., 1999, A positive effect of human capital on growth. Econ. Lett. 65, 131-134. CrossRef
Tingley, D., Pascoe, S., Coglan, L., 2005, Factors affecting technical efficiency in fisheries: stochastic production frontier versus data envelopment analysis approaches. Fish. Res. 73, 363-376. CrossRef
Weninger, Q., McConnell, K.E., 2000, Buyback Programs in Commercial Fisheries: Efficiency versus Transfers. Can. J. Econ. 33, 394-412. CrossRef
Wilson, P., Hadley, D. Ramsden, S., Kaltsas, I., 1998, Measuring and explaining technical efficiency in UK potato production. J. Agric. Econ. 49, 294-305. CrossRef
Young, A., 1991, Learning by doing and the dynamic effects of international trade. Q. J. Econ. 106, 369-405. CrossRef