ظرفیت و کارآیی اقتصادی در شیلات در مقیاس کوچک: شواهد از دریای مدیترانه

To design an effective capacity management plan for small-scale fisheries one must understand what one is measuring and define its capacity. As recognized by some authors, overcapacity is a problem that generally affects small-scale fisheries just as much as it does other types of fishing. This study aims to estimate fishing capacity, technical efficiency, scale efficiency and capacity utilization in a particular small-scale fishery in the Mediterranean, i.e., the Northwest Sardinian fleet in Italy. A non-parametric approach using a data envelopment analysis (DEA) model was applied to a sample of trawls in order to estimate their economic capacity, and related measurements were taken. The capacity and efficiency with reference to two different alternative scenarios were also calculated.

It is well known that the fishery resources of the world are currently overexploited and excess harvesting capacity is universally recognized as a major problem for fisheries throughout the world. Since the late 1990s—when the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations started treating the problem of capacity as a political priority—several institutional agreements and policies have been aimed at reducing overall fleet capacity. In order to manage fishing capacity and to reduce excess capacity, policy makers first need to evaluate the level of overcapacity in a fleet [1], [2], [3] and [4]. This means that information about the current and desired levels of capacity is of strategic relevance when designing rational management regulations. In the European Union (EU), a sustainable balance between resources and fishing capacity is today one of the main objectives of the common fisheries policy (CFP). In order to promote this, the EU introduced the multi-annual guidance programmes (MAGPs). In these capacity reduction goals are long-term and measured in terms of fishing-effort; i.e., the gross tonnage (GT) and engine kilowatt (kW) power of the vessels. In January 2005, the CFP removed subsidies for modernization and renewal of the fleet in order to discourage an increase in overcapacity. The newly established European Fisheries Fund (EFF) also grants more attractive premiums for the fishing vessel decommissioning scheme and provides financial assistance for new equipment and the modernization of vessels on condition that there is an overall reduction in capacity.1 Lindebo [5] and [6] and Frost and Andersen [7] provide more details about capacity policies in the CFP and their inefficiencies, but it is widely accepted that historically CFP measures designed to reduce or eliminate overcapacity have not achieve their goals because they are not precisely targeted. According to Vestergaard [8] and Lindebo [6], one important reason for this inefficiency is that since its establishment the CFP has focused its policies on capacity base reduction. In other words, capacity targets have been estimated by measuring certain relatively straightforward physical characteristics of a fleet (GT and kW). The rationale behind this is the supposed linear relationship between fish mortality and the size of different fleets. In reality in most fisheries this relationship is not linear due to presence of non-constant returns of scale [2]. In substance, the CFP does not make any distinction between capacity base—that is a physical measurement of capacity—and capacity output, i.e., the maximum potential harvest of a fully used fleet. Capacity output is a technical and economic concept that reflects the ability of vessels to catch fish. Not recognizing capacity output and capacity utilization as parameters for calibrating reduction capacity policies meant that programmed reductions in capacity (base) could not be targeted at those segments of the fishing fleet with the highest overcapacity. Given this, Vestergaard affirms that “… understanding the measurement and definitions of capacity are necessary conditions for designing an effective capacity management plan” [8; p. 323]. This means that more research in the field of capacity estimation would be useful in the CFP decision making process. On the other hand, assessment of capacity is not, of itself, an adequate policy guide when monitoring excess capacity. Other measurements can be also be useful when deciding on policy. In recent years, estimations of capacity utilization [9], [10], [11] and [12], technical efficiency [10], [13], [14] and [15], scale efficiency (SE) [16], productivity [17] and variable input utilization rates [18] have been becoming topics of research among fishery economists. For example, joint estimation of capacity utilization and technical efficiency enables one to separate two different effects that may contribute to not achieving the potential output: the presence of not fully used capacity and the ability of individual fishermen to use their available resources, respectively. An important research issue is capacity and efficiency estimation when dealing with multi-species and small-scale fisheries [9], [10], [12], [19], [20] and [21]. Since there are already many capacity analyses on multi-output fisheries in fisheries economics literature, we shall not discuss in-depth the management of multi-product situations. Our attention is specifically focused on the economic modelling of small-scale fishing capacity and efficiency. This study aims to estimate fishing capacity, technical efficiency, scale efficiency and capacity utilization in a particular segment of the Mediterranean small-scale fisheries, i.e., the Northwest Sardinian fleet in Italy. To be more precise, our analysis was focused on a sample of trawls that operate coastal waters of the National Park of Asinara (NPA). A data envelopment analysis (DEA) model was used to evaluate these measures. Capacity and efficiency outputs were also calculated, using a hypothetical scenario in which vessels would be at sea for the maximum number of days allowed by Sardinian regulations and by weather and other conditions not under fishermens’ control.

Table 2 presents the findings of empirical analysis. The results show that estimated capacity is 1.432 and 1.253 if measured under the CRS and VRS hypotheses, respectively. Since in this study capacity scores are calculated as an output-oriented measure, it suggests that vessels could increase catches by about 25.3% on average if they were operating at full capacity (under a VRS condition). This means that there is an appreciable room of unused capacity in the small-scale fleet that operates in the NPA. The unused capacity is 13.5% (unbiased CU=0.865).In the short term, this result suggests that the Northwest Sardinian small-scale fleet has a certain degree of overcapacity. Indeed, a CU of appreciably less than one indicates that small-scale fishermen could increase catches without investing new capital or increasing the capacities of their vessels. Estimated overcapacity may indicate presence of excess capacity in a long-run perspective. On the other hand lack of data on fishing stocks in the investigated area means that the significance of this risk cannot be evaluated. Technical efficiency is 1.163 (1.243) under the VRS (CRS) hypothesis, which indicates that fishermen could increase output by 16.3% (24.3%) at the present state of technology by using their disposable variable and fixed inputs more efficiently. Biased capacity utilization is close to full (CU′=0.964), which implies that only a small percentage of capacity (3.6%) would not be used when fishermen operate at full efficiency. The CU scores measured on the actual output and on the best practice output are appreciably different, which suggests that technical inefficiency significantly affects capacity. Thus improving efficiency would increase the percentage of utilized capacity. With regard to this problem, estimations of scale efficiency suggest that reaching an optimal scale would reduce technical inefficiency by about 10% (SE=0.901). Imposing a non-increasing return of scale (NIRS) condition in the DEA model—i.e., changing the convexity constraint in the VRS DEA model—we calculated that more that 40% of the vessels in the survey operate in the increasing return of scale area, while the scale would be optimal for 50% of the boats. The good number of vessels in the increasing return of scale area is to be expected in a small-scale fishery, but the SE score indicates that efficiency only depended weakly on this factor. Variable input use rate estimates give additional information about inefficiency. As reported in Table 3, both Ucrew and Ufuel are 0.933, which means that there is a 6.7% surplus of crew and fuel used. The surplus of nets is higher than that estimated for the former inputs (Unets=0.876). In other words, fishermen should reduce their use of all inputs to improve efficiency. Table 4 presents the capacity and efficiency scores for each single output. Our findings indicate that full use of capacity should increase the catches of each category. The margin varies from 18.7% for III Class fish to 53.1% for molluscs.Using these scores as a base, we calculated the capacity and efficiency outputs for a single day at sea from an economic point of view (Table 5). Empirical evidence suggests that the total value of the catches would increase from €€ 166.61 to €€ 185.41 per day at sea if small-scale fishermen used their available inputs efficiently. Full use of capacity would also increase catches to about €€ 200.00 per day.Our results show that small-scale fishermen should be able to increase their annual production by about €€ 2,000 on average (from €€ 17,661 to €€ 19,653) by using their resources efficiently and without increasing the number of days at sea.11 Annual capacity output is on average €€ 21,128, which means that there could be a possible increase of €€ 3,467 in the value of catches. Multiplying capacity and efficiency scores by the maximum estimated number of days at sea that fishermen can operate (170 days) we obtained values for capacity and efficiency output that assume that each vessel would be at sea for every day allowed by regional laws and takes into account days lost to weather and other unforeseen conditions. In this way we minimize the risk that measurement of output capacity may be affected by some external factors, not under the control of the fishermen, which at a particular time may prevent some fishermen from fishing [2].12 In this scenario observed output is on average €€ 28,323. Full efficiency could rise revenue to €€ 31,519, an increase of 11.2%, while full use of capacity would raise the value of €€ 33,884, an increase of 19.4%.