Implications of differences in technical efficiency of fishing boats for capacity measurement and reduction

Marine Policy

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 301-307

  Pascoe, Sean ^a   Coglan, Louisa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PORTSMOUTH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Capacity reduction; Decommissioning; Multi annual guidance programme; Technical efficiency

Indexed keywords

FISHING EFFORT; FISHING VESSEL; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCY;

EUROPE;

EID: 0033949651     PISSN: 0308597X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0308-597X(00)00006-3     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. FAO. Report of the Technical Working Group on the Management of Fishing Capacity, La Jolla, California, United States, 15-18 April 1998. FAO Fisheries Report No. 586, FAO, Rome, 1998.
2. FAO. International plan of action on the measurement of fishing capacity. FAO Rome, 1999.
3. Wise M. The common fisheries policy of the European community. 1984;Methuen and Co, Cambridge.
4. Whitaker TK. (Chair), Review of common fisheries policy. Report of Advisory Group, July 1991, Brussels: EU, 1991.
5. Garrod BJ. An economic evaluation of fisheries policy in the United Kingdom. PhD Dissertation, University of Portsmouth, UK, 1993.
6. Holden M. The common fisheries policy: origin, evolution and future. 1994;Fishing News Books, Great Britain.
7. Wilson J. A critical analysis of the Common Fisheries Policy review and points for reform from the fishing industry perspective. MSc dissertation, University of Portsmouth, 1995.
8. Hatcher A.C. Producers' organisations and devolved fisheries management in the United Kingdom: collective and individual quota systems. Marine Policy. 21(6):1997;519-533.
9. CEMARE (Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources) Current economic policies and their impact on fisheries Over-exploitation. Report to the World Wide Fund for Nature (UK), Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources, University of Portsmouth, 1996.
10. Gwiazda A. The Common Fisheries Policy: economic aspects. Marine Policy, 17(4):1993;251-255.
11. Garrod B., Whitmarsh D. Overcapitalisation and structural adjustment: recent developments in UK fisheries. Marine Policy. 15(6):1991;289-296.
12. MacKay G.A. The UK fishing industry and EEC policy. Three Banks Review. 132:1981;59.
13. Hatcher, A., Cunningham, S., The development of fishing rights in UK fisheries policy (Research Paper 69). Centre for the Economics and Management of Aquatic Resources, University of Portsmouth, 1994.
14. Commission of the European Communities. Annual Report to the Council and to the European Parliament on the results of the Multi-Annual Guidance Programmes for the fishing fleets at the end of 1996 (COM(97) 352 final). Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, 1997.
15. Robson G. Sea fisheries management: the UK position. Marine Policy. 17(5):1993;347-349.
16. Nautilus Consultants. The economic evaluation of the fishing vessels (decommissioning) schemes. Report on behalf of The UK Fisheries Departments, Edinburgh, 1997.
17. UK Fisheries Departments. Measuring the catching capacity of fishing vessels. MAFF Consultation Document CER188F2. MAFF, London, 1988.
18. MAFF. Decommissioning of fishing vessels: details of 1997 scheme announced. News Release 232/97, 6 August 1997.
19. MAFF. Fishing vessel decommissioning scheme: 1997. News Release 383/97, 3 December 1997.
20. Greene WH. Frontier production functions, EC-93-20. Stern School of Business, New York University, 1993.
21. Wu Y. Technical efficiency in the Chinese iron and steel industry. International Review of Applied Economics. 10(2):1996;235-248.
22. Harris R.I.D. Measuring efficiency in New Zealand manufacturing in 1986/7 using a frontier production function approach. New Zealand Economic Papers. 27(1):1993;57-79.
23. Sheenan M. The evolution of technical efficiency in the Northern Ireland manufacturing sector, 1973-1985. Scottish Journal of Political Economy. 44(1):1997;59-81.
24. Battese E., Coelli T.J. Prediction of firm level technical inefficiencies with a generalised frontier production function and panel data. Journal of Econometrics. 38:1988;387-399.
25. Hallam D., Machado F. Efficiency analysis with panel data: a study of Portuguese dairy farms. European Review of Agricultural Economics. 23(1):1996;79-93.
26. Jaforullah M., Devlin N.J. Technical efficiency in the New Zealand dairy industry: a frontier production function approach. New Zealand Economic Papers. 30(1):1996;1-17.
27. Neff D.L., Garcia P., Nelson C.H. Technical efficiency: a comparison of production frontier methods. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 44(3):1993;479-489.
28. Heshmati A., Kumbhakar S.C. Estimation of technical efficiency in Swedish crop farms: a pseudo panel data approach. Journal of Agricultural Economics. 48(1):1997;22-37.
29. Schmidt P. Frontier production functions. Econometric Review. 4(2):1986;329-334.
30. Kirkley J.E., Squires D., Strand I.E. Assessing technical efficiency in commercial fisheries: the Mid-Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 77(3):1995;686-697.
31. Sharma K.R., Leung P. Technical efficiency of the longline fishery in Hawaii: an application of a stochastic production frontier. Marine Resource Economics. 13:1999;259-274.
32. Coglan L, Pascoe S, Harris RID. Measuring efficiency in demersal trawlers using a frontier production function approach. In: Salz P, editors. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the European Association of Fisheries Economists, The Hague, Netherlands, 1-4 April 1998. Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI): The Netherlands, 1999. p. 236-57.
33. Hilborn R., Ledbetter M. Determinants of catching power in the British Columbia salmon purse seine fleet. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science. 42:1985;51-56.