International Fisheries Agreements with a Shifting Stock

Spatial Renewable Resource Extraction under Possible Regime Shift

“…4 And recognizing the deterioration of future conditions, country B would, intuitively, increase its current extraction. These intuitive predictions of countries' behaviors are consistent with results in Hannesson (2007) and Diekert and Nieminen (2015), but they turn out to be vulnerable to strategic interactions across players. This stylized example illustrates our key inquiry: How will the presence of a possible future regime shift alter strategic interactions of private property owners who extract a mobile natural resource?…”

Improved fisheries management could offset many negative effects of climate change

“…By contrast, changes in species distributions ( 3 , 9 , 10 ) can move stocks into and out of management jurisdictions, such as countries’ exclusive economic zones (EEZs), altering management jurisdiction and incentives for those stocks. A perceived or anticipated decline of a stock due to a range shift out of one country creates an incentive to overharvest before it leaves the nation’s waters ( 11 ). In contrast, as a stock enters a new EEZ or the high seas, a new and potentially unmanaged fishery emerges.…”

Transboundary fisheries, climate change, and the ecosystem approach: taking stock of the international law and policy seascape

“…The institutionalization of cooperation and the complex structure of RFMOs (Harrison 2019) already facilitates an adaptive decision-making process based on the results of regular scientific assessments. Assuming that climate drivers of oceanic change are integrated in the assessment process, gradual changes can be accommodated within existing management practices (Diekert and Nieminen 2017). Abrupt changes (either as anomalies or regime shifts) will require different responses.…”

“…An EAFM is likely to require lowering exploitation rates and total allowable catch (Tudela and Short 2005). Managing for ecosystem resilience to climate change will require reducing other anthropogenic stressors, including fisheries (McIlgorm et al 2010, Craig 2017, Diekert and Nieminen 2017, and the protection of significant ocean areas through marine protected areas or marine reserves as an adaptation measure (Grafton 2010.…”

“…Challenges to sharing agreements can also result from reductions of exploitable biomass. Gradual changes in abundance are more likely to be accommodated within existing assessment and management processes (Diekert and Nieminen 2017), although reductions in TACs are usually resisted. Agreements to share metric tonnes rather than a percentage of TAC are inherently less resilient.…”