Re: Overfishing

[sartesian <sartesian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

But we know that in fact there was no "tragedy of the commons."  Didn't
occur.  Not at all.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Devine" <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2007 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Overfishing


> I asked, mostly rhetorically:
> > > ... overfishing is a  example of market failure that's well known
> > > even among neoclassicals (the "tragedy of the commons"). Why don't
> > > they respond?
>
> Louis quotes the Wikipedia:
> > Overfishing can be viewed as a case of the tragedy of the commons;
in
> > that sense, solutions would promote property rights, such as
> > privatization and fish farming. Daniel K. Benjamin, in Fisheries are
> > Classic Example of the "Tragedy of the Commons", cites research by
> > Grafton, Squires, and Fox to support the idea that privatization can
> > solve the overfishing problem[12]:
> >
> >      According to recent research on the British Columbia halibut
> > fishery, where the commons has been at least partly privatized,
> > substantial ecological and economic benefits have resulted. There is
> > less damage to fish stocks, the fishing is safer, and fewer
resources
> > are needed to achieve a given harvest.
>
> These days there are two main approaches to the common resource
> problem: (1) splitting up the resource to make them privately-owned
> property (what might be called "enclosure" or privatization) and (2)
> top-down government regulation. The usual argument against #1 is that
> it's often really expensive to break up common resources to make them
> private. Also, monopoly ownership might result, so that a
> profit-seeking firm plays the role of the government, combining #1 and
> #2, except that the "government" isn't responsive to voters.
>
> Another approach is that of Elinor Ostrom. In her _Governing the
> Commons_, she argues against this either/or approach. She talks a lot
> about intermediate-level organizations, e.g., coalitions of fishing
> companies that collectively regulate the fishing bank in order to
> avoid overfishing. This was the approach of peasant communities in
> England before the "Enclosure Movement" and many Native American
> communities in avoiding over-hunting before us white folks invaded.
>
> my rhetorical question had an answer: most economists don't give a
> shit about overfishing and the like.
> --
> Jim Devine / "The price one pays for pursuing any profession or
> calling is an intimate knowledge of its ugly side." -- James Baldwin
>