DEEPFISHMAN
Data and data availability
Stakeholder’s meeting
Bruxelles 29-30 June 2009
Institute of Economic Studies
Gunnar Haraldsson
Socio-economic aspects - What are we
looking at?
•
•
•
•
•
Sustainability (long-term)
Profitability/Social benefits
Employment
Markets
Cost of management
The data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Construct a general bio-economic model
applicable to each case study for which there
exist appropriate data. Data requirements
1. Stocks
2. Harvest
3. Costs
4. Revenue
5. Various macroeconomic data
6. Various microeconomic data
Basic characteristics
•
•
•
•
The model should be
1. Dynamic
2. Stochastic
3. Capable of incorporating various
management regimes (which?)
What data is ‘easily’ available
•
Macroeconomic data (economic and
social data)
– Unemployment rates
– Wage developments
– ...
What data is not so easily available?
•
Microeconomic data
– Cost data (fuel, labor, gear, effort indices)
– Prices
•
Soft data
– Institutional setting
– Fisheries management measures
(official/unofficial)
Case studies
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Case study 1 – Directed single species fisheries:Highly vulnerable - orange roughy in Namibian waters – NatMIRC
Highly vulnerable - orange roughy in ICES VI &VII – MI
Less vulnerable - blue ling (Molva dypterygia) in Vb,VI ,VII – Cefas
Case study 2 – Mixed demersal fishery:French trawl fishery for roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides rupestris), black
scabbardfish, deep-water sharks in Vb, VI and VII – IFREMER
Case study 3 – Artisanal fisheries :
Vulnerable :
-Fisheries for red (blackspot) seabream in the Gibraltar Strait and Bay of Biscay– IEO
-Fisheries for red (blackspot) seabream in the eastern Mediterranean– HCMR
Less vulnerable :
-Portuguese fishery for black scabbardfish in IX –IPIMAR
Case study 4 – Data rich stock – NE Atlantic redfish -IMR
Case study 5 – Data- rich stock - Greenland halibut stocks in the NAFO area – IEO
Case studies
•
•
•
•
We can do a socio-economic description
of each case
Bioeconomic modeling for selected cases
We rely heavily on receiving data from
case study leaders and on collaboration
with our colleagues in the scientific
community
Stakeholder’s participation is very
important
An example: Comparison between actual and
optimal harvest.
Actual harvest
Static optimal
1-d feedback
2-d feedback
1400
1200
Harvest
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004