Can vessel buybacks pay off: An evaluation of an industry funded fishing vessel buyback

- Industry financing costs of vessel buyback are compared to benefits
- Whether benefits exceed financing cost depends on the measure of benefits used.
- The delay in implementing the IFQ probably reduced the net benefits of the buyback.
- There is asymmetry between beneficiaries and those paying for this buyback program.

Fishing vessel and permit buyback programs have been implemented to reduce excess capacity and improve profitability in a number of fisheries around the world. These programs are generally publicly funded, but in a few cases they have been financed by loans to be paid back by the remaining fleet. In 2003, a buyback permanently removed 91 vessels and 239 fishing permits from the Pacific groundfish trawl fishery and associated corollary fisheries of Dungeness crab and pink shrimp. The buyback was financed with $10 million in public funding and a $36 million loan to be repaid over 30 years with fees on landings. In the same year, a control date was set for catch share program in the groundfish trawl fishery. When the catch share program was implemented in 2011, the permit owners that remained in the fishery after the buyback were allocated the quota shares that would otherwise have been issued to the permits bought back in 2003. Estimates of the annual profits generated by this quota are compared to the cost of servicing the buyback loan. The results provide evidence that a buyback program, when implemented in conjunction with catch shares, can enable a sustained increase in profitability for the remaining vessels sufficient to justify its cost. However, using landings taxes as the mechanism to repay the loan may result in a mismatch between those who benefit from and pay for the buyback.