Get access

COMPARING PROACTIVE AND REACTIVE MANAGEMENT: MANAGING A TRANSBOUNDARY FISH STOCK UNDER CHANGING ENVIRONMENT

Authors

  • XIAOZI LIU,

    Corresponding author
    1. Norwegian School of Economics, N-5045 Bergen, Norway
    Current affiliation:
    1. Greenpeace International, 1066 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands
    • Corresponding author. Xiaozi Liu, Greenpeace International, Ottho Heldringstraat 5, 1066 AZ Amsterdam, the Netherlands, e-mail: xiaoziliu@yahoo.com

    Search for more papers by this author
  • MIKKO HEINO

    1. Department of Biology, University of Bergen, N-5020 Bergen, Norway
    2. Institute of Marine Research, Nordnes, N-5817 Bergen, Norway
    3. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), A-2361 Laxenburg, Austria
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Environmental change in general, and climate change in particular, can lead to changes in distribution of fish stocks. When such changes involve transboundary fish stocks, the countries sharing the stock need to reconsider their harvesting policies. We investigate the effects of changing stock distribution on the optimal fishing policies in a two players’ noncooperative game. We compare reactive management, under which the manager ignores future distributional shifts (knowingly or unknowingly), with proactive management where the manager considers such shifts in his decisions. A dynamic programming model is developed to identify closed-loop Nash strategies. We show that the role of two players is symmetric under reactive management but asymmetric under proactive management where managers anticipate future changes in stock ownership. The player losing the stock tends to harvest more aggressively compared to the player gaining the stock who acts more conservatively. Strategic interactions show tendency for complementary actions that can change abruptly during the ownership transition. The differences between management regimes vary from quantitative to qualitative; differences are minimal for stocks with little or no schooling, whereas highly schooling stocks may avoid collapse only under proactive management.

Ancillary