global sea food trade

8/8/2019 Global sea food trade

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/global-sea-food-trade 1/20

VAMNICOM , Pune

1

AN ASSIGNMENT ON

GLOBAL AGRICULTURAL TRADE IN SEA FOOD

INDUSTRY

SUBMITTED TO:

SUBMITTED BY: ROLL NO 0934, 0935, 0936, 0937, 0938, 0939,

0941

CENTRE FOR MANAGEMENT EDUCATION

VAIKUNTH MEHTA NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CO-

OPERATIVE MANAGEMENT



VAMNICOM , Pune

2

CONTENTS

SERIAL NUMBER TOPIC PAGE NUMBER 1. Introduction 1-42. MSY 5-83. International

markets9

4. Institutional

influences in

International trade

in fishery product

10-12

5. Trade Barriers 13-146. Impacts of trade and

domestic policy

reforms

15-17

7. Impacts of trade

liberalization in

aquaculture

18-19



VAMNICOM , Pune

3

INTRODUCTION

The fishing industry includes any industry or activity concerned with taking, culturing,

processing, preserving, storing, transporting, marketing or selling fish or fish products.

It is defined by the FAO as including recreational, subsistence and commercial fishing, and the

harvesting, processing, and marketing sectors. The commercial activity is aimed at the delivery

of fish and other seafood products for human consumption or as input factors in other industrial

processes. Directly or indirectly, the livelihood of over 500 million people in developing

countries depends on fisheries and aquaculture.

There are three principal industry sectors:

The commercial sector: comprises enterprises and individuals associated with wild-catch or

aquaculture resources and the various transf ormations of those resources into products f or sale.

It is also referred to as the "seaf ood industry", although non-f ood items such as pearls are

included among its products.

Th

e traditional sector: comprises enterprises and individuals associated with fisheries resources from which aboriginal people derive products in accordance with their traditions.

The recreational sector: comprises enterprises and individuals associated f or the purpose of

recreation, sport or sustenance with fisheries resources from which products are derived that

are not f or sale.

The commercial sector of the fishing industry comprises the f ollowing chain:

1. Commercial fishing and fish f arming which produce the fish

2. Fish processing which produce the fish products

3. Marketing of the fish products



VAMNICOM , Pune

4

Wild Marine Pelagic Predator Tuna

Billfish

Shark

Forage Herring

Sardine

Anchovy

Menhaden

Demersal Cod

Flatfish

Freshwater

Farmed Carp

Salmon

Tilapia

The seaf ood world market has doubled within the last decade reaching US$49.32 billion. Indias share in

the world seaf ood market is 2.4 per cent. The growth of fish production in India has been labeled the

Blue Revolution by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research since fish production increased from

0.75 million metric tons in 1951 to 6.1 million metric tons in 2003. In 200203, marine product exports

increased to all time highs in volume and value, with actual export of 467,297 metric tons valued at Rs.

68,810 million or US$1.43 billion, representing a unit value increase of 3.4 per cent over the previous

year. Frozen shrimp continued to be the major item, contributing 66.97 per cent of Indias totalmarine

product export.

The share of frozen fish (comprising of ribbonfish, pomfret, tuna, fish loins and

steaks) in 200203 was 42.01 per cent in volume and 12.23 per cent in value. In 2001 02, it was 41.22

per cent in volume and 11.97 per cent in value. In 200203, export of cephalopods, especially cuttlefish,

grew to 35.37 per cent in volume and 48.92 per cent in value. The export of frozen squid also registered

a growth of 16.59 per cent in value over the previous year. However, there was a shortf all of 4.91

percent in volume.

The global seaf ood market is a complex system of trade and sustainability issues. Exporters must deal

with over-fishing; environmentally-harmful fishing practices; capacity management; international fishery

resources management; trade in endangered species; non-tariff barriers; interlinking of the domains of



VAMNICOM , Pune

5

the World Trade Organization; domestic regulations; and the UN and other international treaties. Indian

seaf ood exporters f ace several hurdles due to the changing regulations in different countries.

YearQuantityin Tonnes

ValueinRs.

Crore

Average

Unit

valueRealizati

on (Rs. /

Kg)

Average

Exchange Rate

US $

Valuein US $

Million

Average

UnitValueRealiz

ation US $ /

Kg.

Growth rate %

Q uantity

Rupe

e

Value

Dollar

Value

1970

-71

35883 35.07 9.77 7.5578 46.40 1.29 13.21 4.81 NA

1975

-76

54463 124.53 22.87 8.6825 143.43 2.63 20.76 82.03 66.48



VAMNICOM , Pune

6

GROWTH IN EXPORT OF INDIAN MARINE PRODUCTS (1961- 62 to 2008 ± 2009)

The export of marine products has steadily grown over the years - from a mere Rs.3.92 crore in 1961-62

to Rs. 8607.94 crore in 2008-09. Marine products account f or approximately 1.1 % of the total exports

from India.

1980

-81

75591 234.84 31.07 7.9092 296.92 3.93 -12.51 -5.62 -3.37

1985

-86

83651 398.00 47.58 12.2349 325.30 3.89 -2.94 3.57 0.64

1990

-91

139419 893.37 64.08 17.9428 497.90 3.57 25.78 40.69 30.55

1995

-96

296277 3501.1 118.17 31.5000 1111.4 3.75 -3.60 -2.07 -2.39

2000

-01

440473 6443.8 146.29 45.4975 1416.3 3.22 28.41 25.94 19.11

2005

-06

512164 7245.3 141.46 44.0655 1644.2 3.21 11.02 9.05 11.21

2008

-09

602835 8607.9 145.79 45.99 1908.6 3.17 11.29 12.95 00.50



VAMNICOM , Pune

7

MSY

Definition:

The highest theoretical equilibrium yield that can be continuously taken (on avg) from a stock under

existing (average) environmental conditions without affecting significantly the reproduction process.

Also referred to sometimes as potential yield.

MSY or YS:

The largest average catch or yield that can continuously be taken from a stock under existing

environmental conditions. For species with f luctuating recruitment, the maximum might be obtained by

taking fewer fish in some years in others.

This logistic model of growth is produced by a population introduced to a new habitat or with very poor

numbers going through a lag phase of slow growth at first. Once it reaches a f oothold population it will

go through a rapid growth rate that will start to level off once the species approaches carrying capacity.

The idea of maximum sustained yield is to decrease population density to the point of highest growth

rate possible. This changes the number of the population, but the new number can be maintained

indefinitely, ideally.

In most fisheries, the population has been decreased so significantly from their native populations, that

the only way to increase production is to decrease production, and wait f or populations to recover.

MSY is extensively used f or fisheries management. Unlike Schaefer's logistic model, MSY in most modern

fisheries models occurs at around 30% of the unexploited population size. This fraction differs among

populations depending on the life history of the species and the age-specific selectivity of the fishing

method.

Unf ortunately errors in estimating the population dynamics of a species can lead to setting the

maximum sustainable yield too high (or too low). An example of this was the New Zealand Orange

roughy fishery. Early quotas were based on an assumption that the orange roughy had a f airly short

lifespan and bred relatively quickly. However, it was later discovered that the orange roughy lived a long

time and had bred slowly (~30 years). By this stage stocks had been largely depleted.



VAMNICOM , Pune

8

Equilibrium Yield:

For the equilibrium situation the productionof biomass per unit time, equals the removal by fishsing, the

yield per time unit plus the amount of fish dying of natural causes.

Equilibrium Yield: in theory, the yield or catch that could be taken every year by a fixed amount of

fishing eff ort, maintaining the stock at a constant level, assuming a steady-state situation at

equilibrium with the total fishing eff ort in the long term. The conceprt neglects inter-annual

environmentrally driven stock f luctuations and so it is not useful f or shrt term perdictins. It is however

useful f or guidance on long term stategy f ormulation.

MSY and Fisheries Management

A) Sustainable Yield & Stock Biomass



VAMNICOM , Pune

9

y Balancing a population at BMSY can be precarious.

y Changes in stock size can occur due to many factors many of which can not be

controlled.

y Targeting for population size greater than BMSY creates a ³reserve´ that reduces yieldslightly and protects against changes in stock status.

B) Fisheries mortality rate and sustainable yield:



VAMNICOM , Pune

10

y Balancing a population at FMSY can be precarious.

y Changes in fishing mortality can arise from several sources.

y Targeting for fishing mortality rates than FMSY leads to higher biomass a slight

reduction in yield and reduces the need for future reduction in effort.



VAMNICOM , Pune

11

INTERNATIONAL MARKETS

The seaf ood trade is one of the world's largest and f astest growing international commodity industries.

Worth more than $60 billion a year, it exceeds the world trade in all grains combined and represents

more than twice the combined world trade in all tea, coffee and cocoa. Almost 200 countries supply fish

and seaf ood products to the global marketplace, consisting of more than 800 commercially important

species of fish, crustaceans and mollusks, including 30 species of shrimp alone.

These products take hundreds of f orms, ranging from canned tuna to fresh boneless salmon fillets, from

salted herring roe to dried shark fins, frozen pollock block, individually quick frozen breaded cod

portions, smoked mackerel, clam juice, live lobster, fish meals and oil. The market is supplied by a global

network of hundreds of thousands of fishing vessels and marine and inland aquaculture establishments,

thousands of processors and tens of thousands of wholesalers and brokers.

Fish and fish products have not always been major internationally traded products. Several inf luences

led to the rapid expansion in international trade beginning in 1975. Certainly the passing of the

International Law of the Sea and the institution of the 200-mile EEZ in 1977 had a large impact.

The establishment of the EEZs effectively created importers out of countries, such as Japan, with very

large distant water f leets, and created exporters out of those countries, such as the United States, that

had large marine resources and relatively low domestic demand.

The most important trade commodities in order of their value in 2000 are shrimp ($10.8 billion),salmon

and trout ($5.2 billion), tuna ($4.8 billion), groundfish ($4.4 billion), crabs and lobsters($3.8 billion),

mollusks ($2.8 billion), cephalopods ($2.7 billion), fish meal ($2.1 billion), small pelagic ($1.6 billion),

large pelagics ($1.1 billion) and f latfish ($1.1 billion) (Anderson 2003).

Thailand is the worlds top exporter of f ood fish in the world, f ollowed by China, Norway, and the United

States. Seventy-f our percent of Africas exports are destined f or the European Union, while exports from

Central and South America go primarily to the United States, Canada, and the European Union.

The major importing nations are the European Union ($19.5 billion), Japan ($15.5 billion), and the

United States ($10.4 billion).Within the European Union, imports go to Spain ($3.35 billion), France ($3.0

billion), Italy ($2.5 billion), Germany ($2.3 billion), the United Kingdom ($2.2 billion), and Denmark ($1.8

billion)

INSTITUTIONAL INFLUENCES ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN FISHERY PRODUCT



VAMNICOM , Pune

12

Even though most caught, f armed, and traded fish are clearly f ood products, no fish is included in the

WTO Uruguay Round Agreement on Agriculture (URAA).Tariffs on fish products, in contrast to those on

agricultural products, have been reduced with every successive trade round. And international

agreements on sanitary and phytosanitary measures, technical barriers to trade, antidumping, rules of

origin, import licensing, and safeguards have all been applied to trade in fish. Subsidies in the fishing industry f all under the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) Agreement on Subsidies,

whereas in agriculture they f all under the URAA.

The domestic policy interventions

1-Fisheries Management Policies

The impacts of trade liberalization will differ depending on several f actors:

1-production method (capture or aquaculture)

2-domestic fisheries management policies.

Bef ore 1977 jurisdiction of most nations over fishing grounds extended only 12 nautical miles from

shore. Expansion to 200-mile EEZs was discussed and agreed to in 1977 by nations at the

Third Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS-III,19731982) . EEZs cover 40 percent

of the worlds oceans and 90 percent of its living marine resources .UNCLOS assigns the exclusive right

to coastal states to manage and exploit marine living resources and to regulate fisheries resources

through a comprehensive management system.

Management policies can be categorized as:

y Input controls

The oldest type of fishery management tool, are designed to limit either the number of people

fishing or the efficiency of fishing (National Research Council 1999). Input controls generally

lead to inefficient outcomes. They raise the cost of fishing but generally do not reduce eff ort or

capacity.

y Output controls

Output controls are designed to limit directly the volume of the catch from a given fishery. The critical

necessity f or this f orm of management is the ability to monitor the catch. In some fisheries, managers

may have personnel at the dockside to count the number (or weight) of fish caught as they are landed.



VAMNICOM , Pune

13

In other cases, on-board observers may monitor the catch. In either case, once the total allowable catch

(TAC) is reached, the fishery is generally closed f or the season.

Management by TAC has at least three shortcomings.:

1. It induces fishers to compete to catch as much as possible before the TAC is reached.

2. As fishers become more intensively capitalized, the TAC is reached in a shorter time,

leading to a backlog of fish for processors that pushes down fishermen¶s prices and

reduces product quality.

3. Idle vessels may move to fish in another fishery, leading to overcapitalization in yet

additional fisheries .

Because of poor management and other f actors, the status of fish stocks worldwide is alarming. The

implications of trade liberalization f or capture fisheries are many, but the most obvious implication is

that the current level of catches from capture fisheries is unsustainable.

2-Fishing Subsidies

Subsidies exist in the fishing sector globally and have come to be recognized as having a significant

impact on the quantities of fish traded, largely because they lead to unsustainable fishing practices At

the WTO High-Level Symposium on Trade and Environment in March 1999, five WTO member nations

(Australia, Iceland, New Zealand, the Philippines, and the United States) submitted a joint statement on

the need to eliminate environmentally damaging and trade-distorting subsidies in fisheries sector. at

the Fourth Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar. The Doha Declaration states that the need to clarify

and improve WTO disciplines on fisheries subsidies, taking into the account the importance of this

sector to developing countries

Three implications are noted:

(1) countries that do not subsidize and that restrain total catch to maintain the resource lose the extra

catch to countries that subsidize and do not restrain total catch

(2) competition from subsidized distant water f leets can make it economically unviable f or developing

countries to develop their own fisheries and theref ore to realize the benefits of their own 200-mile

zones of fishery jurisdiction

(3) subsidies can contribute to stock depletion, with negative economic, trade, and environmental

effects f or other countries that have an interest in the stock.

The greatest contrast to agricultural subsidies is the effect noted in first point. Fishing subsidies create

not only a trade distortion in the markets, but also, in the case of straddling or migratory fish stocks, a

negative externality on the nation competing to capture the fish.



VAMNICOM , Pune

14

TRADE BARRIERS

T ariffs

Tariffs remain a major barrier to future growth of the provinces seaf ood industry. Our producers f ace

very high tariffs in the European Union (EU) on groundfish, pelagics, shrimp and mussels. As well, some

competitors have preferential market access affecting our ability to compete. Also, the province f aces

high tariffs in China and Russia, two countries which offer significant growth potential

Tariffs in OECD member countries are important barriers to the developing nations that export to them.

Tariffs on seaf ood in developing countries are generally higher and more transparent than those in

OECD countries. Among the developing nations, Thailand has highest level of Tariff barriers f ollowed by

India. Chile and Malaysia have the lowest duty rates. But all developing nations have a detailed Tariff

Schedule and implement a transparent tariff structure.

Among the developed nations, The European Union and the Republic of Korea have the highest tariffs

whereas United Nations and Canada have the lowest. But, EU and Republic of Korea have transparent

structures with all the tariff duties applied to be ad valorem. Most industrial countries offer preferential

access to developing countries seaf ood exports.

The United States grants free access f or all developing countries f or all seaf ood products. Japan also

grants free access to some seaf ood imports from the least-developed countries and maintains only one

seaf ood tariff line f or other developing countries.

T echnical Barriers

In recent years, there has been a large increase in policies that could potentially come under the

heading of technical barriers to trade. Among them are labeling programs and the resultant tracing

capability they require. The programs are typically f ound in developed countries but can have

potentially large impacts on developing countries.

Among the labeling programs are ecolabeling, country-of-origin labeling, and other labeling related to

the production process, such as organic.



VAMNICOM , Pune

15

A great deal of regulatory activity concerning country-of-origin labels is occurring in the United States

and European Union. Ecolabeling and organic labeling are voluntary programs, but the WTO is

interested in whether such labels constitute a nontariff trade barrier. Currently, these labels are not

considered to be trade barriers as long as they are nondiscriminatory.

Sanitary and Phyto-sanitary measures

Import regulations based on hazard-analysis, critical-control-point (HACCP) principles, adopted by many

of the major importing nations, are regarded as nontariff barriers by many developing countries, as the

investment required to bring processing plants up to code can be substantial. The costs of exporting to

nations with strictquality controls are not trivial.

Antidumping and CountervailingMeasures

As tariff barriers have been relaxed and the aquaculture industry has boomed globally, more and more

fishing industries in the United States have f ound themselves competing with lower-priced imports.

Thus, the United States in particular has been quite active in pursuing antidumping and countervailing

duty suits against f oreign competitors.



VAMNICOM , Pune

16

IMPACTS OF TRADE AND DOMESTIC POLICY REFORMS

To analyze the impacts of trade liberalization on trade in seaf ood, particularly on seaf ood from

developing countries, one must distinguish between the impacts of trade liberalization on seaf ood

derived from capture fisheries and on seaf ood from aquaculture. This is because of their distinct

attributes. Capture fisheries are generally ill-managed. As such, changes in trade policies may create

changes in welf are that differ between the short and long run because of the sustainability of fish stocks. With respect to the effects of trade liberalization, aquaculture is more similar to agriculture.

However, to the extent that aquaculture is dependent on feed derived from capture fisheries or seed

stock from wild fisheries, trade liberalization may have a different effect on aquaculture than on

agriculture.

Whereas the research literature on markets f or fish is extensive, there has been little empirical analysis

of the impacts of trade liberalization through tariff reductions related to fish and fish products. This is

partly because of the complex nature of the global seaf ood market, partly because of a lack of data, and

partly because of a governmental

and academic f ocus diverted away from seaf ood markets toward the economics of management of

capture fisheries. In addition, although nongovernmental organizations and international development

agencies have produced many studies on trade liberalization and its impacts on the agricultural sector in

developing countries, there is a spectacular lack of quantitative inf ormation on the impacts of trade

liberalization f or developing countries with respect to fish.

Trade liberalization in APEC countries

These countries maintain a tariff and other trade barriers against fish and fish products. Under the 1994

Bogor Declaration, APEC made a commitment to fully liberalize all markets by 2020, with 2010 as the

deadline f or developed countries. This was f ollowed by early, voluntary sectoral-liberalization (EVSL)

proposals in which nine sectors, including fisheries, would accelerate tariff removals beyond the Bogor

Declaration. Rather than having 2010 and 2020 as deadlines f or developed and developing countries,

respectively, the timeline was moved to December31, 2005.



VAMNICOM , Pune

17

A study was conducted to find out the effect of the above regulations and it was f ound that there would

be significant increases in export volumes (and prices) under the Bogor Declaration and the ESVL relative

to the baseline. If only the developed countries removed their tariffs, the study shows that there would

be little difference from the baseline because developed-country tariffs are generally small. The greatest

change would occur under the EVSL scenario, at least initially. By 2020 the effects of the Bogor and EVSLagreements would be the same

Removing Subsidies in Capture fishes

To analyze the trade impacts of these subsidies, a logical place to begin may be to calculate producer

subsidy equivalents (PSEs).According to the OECD, the PSE is an indicator of the value of the transfers

from domestic consumers and taxpayers to the producers resulting from a given set of agricultural

policies at a point in time

The PSE also may be useful in assessing the advantages of producer subsidies in the fisheries sector. The

complicating f actor is management. In agriculture, it is assumed that subsidies are compared to a

subsidy-free world characterized by economically efficient allocation of goods at various prices.

However, if the fishery is managed under an open-access system, f or example, then the subsidy free

world is not economically efficient, because that system does not lead to efficient allocation. To be truly

efficient, the subsidies would not exist and there would be perfect management of fish stocks so that all

negative externalities were incorporated into the price of each fish. PSEs f or fisheries products have not

been calculated because fish are highly heterogeneous and reference prices to measure market-price

support are hard to pin down.

The impact of removing subsidies may be analyzed according to the type of subsidy. For subsidies that

lower the costs of production (such as government- paid fishing access fees, low-cost vessel

construction loans, and tax exemptions), removal will increase costs of production. A large portion of

the worlds subsidized fishing f leet is from the European Union, Japan, Russia, China, and other nations

that subsidize (Milazzo 1998). A reduction in these subsidies would almost certainly benefit fish stocks

as well as decreasing trade.

Subsidies that pay f or access arrangements support continued operations primarily by European and

East Asian distant-water f leets off Africa and in the Western Pacific. These subsidized operations reduce the fishing opportunities available to local fishermen. In most cases, the payments probably do not

compensate adequately f or the full economic value of theresources.

There is scattered evidence that subsidized access arrangements are beginning to compromise local

f ood needs.



VAMNICOM , Pune

18

The combination of developed countries subsidies to their distant-water f leets and to their domestic

(coastal) f leets minimizes to some extent trade opportunities that should be available to developing

countries.

Fishing subsidies are highly nontransparent in the sense that more than three-quarters of the subsidies are not budgeted, and a good share of budgeted subsidies are controlled by governmental agencies

other than those responsible f or fisheries.

Environmentally harmful subsidies outweigh the effect of subsidies that are environmentally benign or

positive.

IMPACTS OF TRADE LIBERALIZATION IN AQUACULTURE

"Globalization", a term used abundantly since the beginning of the 1990s has progressively developed

since World War Two. It is recognized through a number of trends such as growing economic

integration and liberalization; trade deregulation; convergence of macroeconomic policies;

modification of the role and concept of nation state; proliferation of supranational agreements and

regulatory bodies; and globalization of information systems. These trends are associated with both

positive and negative impacts on human well-being, the use and conservation of the environment,

equity within countries and between developing and developed countries, participation and democratic

decision-making, f ood security, poverty alleviation and others.

Some hold very strong views that globalization has resulted in increasing inequity and poverty; reduced

and diluted responsibility of capital owners to national and local communities dislocating local

employment systems; and increased threats to sustainability of natural resources use where effective

Commercial Shrimp f arming expanded rapidly af ter trade liberalization initiatives were introduced in

1990s. The results suggest that macro level policies are successful at national level but at local level they

can create imbalanced growth.While globalization is clearly not an issue specific to fisheries, there are

very few aspects of fisheries and aquaculture that are not affected i.e. through, inter alia, the expansion

of long-range f leets until the end of the 1980s; the increased market f lows of fish and fishery products

from the developing to the developed world and vice versa since the mid 1970s; the transfers of

technology and fishing capacity from the developed to the developing countries during the same period,

through modernization of fish capture and processing technologies and introduction of more efficient

means of production; vastly improved and expanded inf ormation f low on all aspects of fisheries including markets and prices; eff orts to further liberalize trade in fish and fishery product with potential

impact on f ood security in exporting countries; pressure to reduce or eliminate subsidies; increased

awareness of environmental impacts; demands f or decentralisation of and participation in decision-

making; identification of clear property or use rights; new international instruments not specific to

fisheries (e.g. WTO agreements, Convention on Biological Diversity) as well as unilaterally adopted



VAMNICOM , Pune

19

policies on deregulation and structural ad justment of national economies that affect, inter alia, the

fisheries sector.

Globalization may have a number of positive or negative effects on the economic, social and nutritional

roles and perf ormance of the fisheries sector.

Positive impacts include:

y access to and diversification of overseas markets with a resulting increase in incomes in

the fisheries sector, including the artisanal sector;

y increase in intra-regional trade;

y access to technological improvements;

y increased demand for fish and fishery products because of higher per capita income and

population growth;;

y increase in the contribution of the fisheries sector to foreign currency earnings and to

GDP through added value of fishery products;

y presence in local markets of improved quality fish products;

y increased competitiveness in international markets of some local fishing companies

through better organisation of production and management as well as an overall increase

of fishers' well-being provided that increased wealth is equitably distributed.

Negative impacts include:

y increased production costs to meet quality and sanitation standards applicable in main

foreign markets;

y higher prices for tradable fish products in domestic markets and potential reduction of

fish supply from local fisheries to domestic markets;

y increased pressure on fully or overexploited fish stocks and potential risk of depletion if

adequate management systems are not in place;

y increasing impact of indirect effects of globalization that add additional pressures to fish

stocks;

EXPORTER IMPORTER

Fisheries managed by TAC set

without reference to economic

factors

Increase price, no change in

quantity

Decrease price, no change in

quantity

Open access



VAMNICOM , Pune

20

stock above MSY

stock at MSY

stock less than MSY

Increase in price and qtty

Increase price, decrease qtty

Increase price, decrease qtty

Decrease price and qtty

Decrease price and qtty

Decrease price, increase qtty

Aquaculture

Feed available without

significant price rise

Managed fishery for captured

feed fish

Open access fishery for

captured feed fish

Increase price and qtty

Increase price and increase or

leave unchanged qtty

Same as open access above

Decrease price and decrease

qtty

Decrease price and decrease or

leave unchanged qtty

Same as open access above

EFFECTS ON PRICE AND QUANTITIES OF MARKET LIBERALIZATION

global sea food trade

Documents