Technological change and institutional implications dag standal sintef fisheries and aquaculture
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 16

Technological change and institutional implications Dag Standal SINTEF Fisheries and aquaculture PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 62 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Technological change and institutional implications Dag Standal SINTEF Fisheries and aquaculture. The ”Norwegian model”. 1990-91: Rejected the introduction of a ITQ model 1991- : IVQ model - :Strong emphasis on: diverse ownership of quotas and vessels (rural policy)

Download Presentation

Technological change and institutional implications Dag Standal SINTEF Fisheries and aquaculture

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Technological change and institutional implications dag standal sintef fisheries and aquaculture

Technological change and institutional implicationsDag StandalSINTEF Fisheries and aquaculture


The norwegian model

The ”Norwegian model”

  • 1990-91: Rejected the introduction of a ITQ model

  • 1991- : IVQ model

  • - :Strong emphasis on:

  • diverse ownership of quotas and vessels (rural policy)

  • maintain a diverse fleet structure via the allocation policy (”the trawl ladder”)

  • IVQ model: integrates vessels and quotas in one system (market)

  • Input regulations (technology) and output (biology) are integrated.

  • Main challenge in terms of capacity: balancing input and output regulations

  • Cut down unprofitable overcapacity !


Table 1 number of vessels above 28 meters and change 1988 and 2003

Table 1Number of vessels above 28 meters and % change, 1988 and 2003.

  • Length group(m)19882003 %

  • 28 - 39,923293-60

  • 40 - 49,9125107-14

  • 50 - 59,97474 0

  • 60 - 4388 +105

  • Total :474362- 24

  • Reduction in number of vessels

  • Structural changes


Table 2 technical parameters for arctic trawlers built in 1988 2002 cod shrimp trawler

Table 2Technical parameters for arctic trawlers built in 1988 – 2002 (cod/shrimp trawler).

  • Building year:19882002 1988-2002

  • Lenght (m):61.5064.00 1.04

  • Breadth (m): 12.8016.60 1.30

  • Prod. cap (tons):2035 1.75

  • GRT:19052574 1.35

  • HP:33428046 2.41

  • Number of trawls1 3 2.00

  • Catch (tons)1000-15003000-4000 2-3

  • Trawl doors (tons): 4.57.0 1.56

  • Crew (number.):1414 1.00

  • Electronics:echo sounderecho sounder

    Catch sensorcatch sensor

    trawl sensor

    GPS


Table 3 development in size for different gears 1988 2003

Table 3Development in size for different gears, 1988 - 2003 .

  • Gear-GearGear

  • dimension dimensionfactor (R)

  • Gear 198820031998-2003

  • Shrimptrawl : 1682943.00

  • Cod trawl: 601202.00

  • Blue whiting trawl: 120024004.00

  • Purse seine: 105 280180 000 1.71

  • Long line: 20 000 35 0001.75

    Source: Norwegian gear producers and fishermen, 2004.


  • Tabell 4 formula estimating technical development

    Tabell 4Formula, estimating technical development


    Tabell 5 technical capacity development entire fleet above 28 meters 1988 og 2003

    Tabell 5Technical capacity development entire fleet above 28 meters, 1988 og 2003.


    Institutional boundaries and technological adaptations norway

    Institutional boundaries and technological adaptations, Norway.

    • Unregulated species in Norwegian fisheries, 2004 (tons):

    • Blue whiting: 852 000Total Nowegian catch: 2 549 000 tons.

    • Shrimp: 60 000

    • Tusk/ling: 27 000

    • Horse mackerel: 10 000

    • Other: 30 000

    • Total (unreg.): 979 000= 38. 40 % of total ctach.

    • Source, Fisheries Directorate, 2006.

    • ”Technology does not follow the institutional boundaries”

    • Combination of closed and restricted open access fisheries

    • Capacity expanding adaptations !


    Table 6 norwegian catches blue whiting 1988 and 2003

    Table 6Norwegian catches blue whiting, 1988 and 2003.


    Tabell 7 norwegian catches shrimp 1988 and 2003

    Tabell 7Norwegian catches shrimp, 1988 and 2003.


    Capacity feedback systems

    Capacity feedback systems

    Stock

    (border)

    TAC

    Cod, herring, mackerel, etc.

    Allocation policy (output)

    Institutional boundaries

    Institutional boundaries

    Structure policy (markets)

    Restricted open access /combined fisheries

    Restricted open access /combined fisheries

    Capacity (input)

    Capacity feedback

    Capacity feedback


    The unit quota system 1984 2006

    The Unit Quota System, 1984-2006.

    Year :No. of quotas DurationNo. of

    pr. vessel(years)quota-markets

    1984-1997:213 3

    1997-2003:318 3

    2004 -2005:3eternal 1

    2005- :320/25 1


    Developent number of vessels and average quotafactors cod trawlers 1991 2006

    Developent, number of vessels and average quotafactors, cod trawlers, 1991-2006.


    Distribution of quota factors cod trawlers 2006

    Distribution of quota factors, cod trawlers, 2006.


    Future challenges technological development

    Future challenges- technological development?

    • ”Stagnated technology” (path dependency and a predictable pattern)

    • No paradigmatic innovations sice the 70’s (excpept for electronics, GPS etc.).

    • Heavy fuel consumption, strong increase in fuel costs

    • Deep sea fleet towards a critical mass in regard to innovations?

      • No. Of vessels, 20082015

  • Cod / shrimp trawlers: 50decline

  • Herring/mackerel/blu whiting: 47decline

  • Long lining: 25decline

  • Loosing out of the national innovation system?

  • The deep sea fleet as future market for todays manufacturers of equipment ?

  • Further pressure on todays structural policy or a change towards ITQ.


  • Login