the massachusetts economic developmentmvezrub.massbenchmarks.org/publications/studies/... · the...

THE MASSACHUSETTS MARINE ECONOMY

Economic Development

Daniel Georgianna

Center for Policy AnalysisUniversity of MassachusettsDartmouth

U N I V E R S I T Y O F M A S S A C H U S E T T S

Amherst Boston Dartmouth Lowell Worcester

Daniel Georgianna is

Chancellor Professor of Economics

at the University of Massachusetts

in Dartmouth, a research fellow

at the Center for Policy Analysis,

and a member of the

Social Science Advisory Committee

of the New England

Fishery Management Council.

The author gratefully acknowledges

the assistance of researchers Peter Amaral

and Keith Brough, and wishes to thank

John Bullard, Peter Doeringer,

and David Terkla for

their valuable suggestions.

Copyright 2000 University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute

The contents of this publication may be reproduced only with

permission of the author.

Managing editor: Christina PetersenCopy editor: Paula Noonan

Cover illustration: Naomi Shea

The Massachusetts Marine Economy

Dr. Daniel Georgianna

Center for Policy AnalysisUniversity of Massachusetts Dartmouth

With special assistance from Peter Amaral, Student Research Assistant

ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Economic Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1Industry Characteristics and Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Commercial Fisheries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5Water Transportation and Shipbuilding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7New Sectors of the Marine Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

OVERVIEW OF EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

COMMERCIAL SEAFOOD INDUSTRIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12Commercial Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13Commercial Fishing Supplies and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16Marine Aquaculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Fresh Fish Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18Frozen Fish Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20Employment and Earnings in Processing and Wholesaling . . . . . . . . . . . . .21Retail and Food Service Sales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

MARINE TRANSPORTATION, TOURISM, AND RECREATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23Transportation and Shipbuilding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23Coastal Tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24Recreational Fishing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25Recreational Boating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

MARINE TECHNOLOGY AND EDUCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28Environmental Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31

COASTAL POPULATION AND CONSTRUCTION GROWTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35

CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38Commercial Seafood Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39Transportation, Tourism, and Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Marine Technology and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40

APPENDIX A. COASTAL AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41

APPENDIX B, INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42

ENDNOTES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43Overview of Employment and Earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43Commercial Seafood Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43Marine Transportation, Tourism, and Recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44Marine Technology and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44Coastal Population and Construction Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46

1The Massachusetts Marine Economy

This report summarizes employment and earnings, and identifies important characteris-tics and trends within various sectors of the Massachusetts marine economy in 1997.

The marine economy includes commercial seafood industries; marine transportation,tourism, and recreation; marine technology and education; and coastal constructionand real estate.

ECONOMICIMPACTSIn 1997, the Massachu-setts marine economy gen-erated 81,808 jobs andnearly $1.9 billion in earn-ings (wages and salaries).The average annual wage orsalary was about $23,000,significantly less than thecommonwealth’s overall av-erage wage of $36,000.Like most sectors of theMassachusetts economy, themarine industry has high-paying jobs — mostly inmarine technology and edu-cation — and low-payingjobs in food services andtourism, the industry’s ma-jor employers.

Executive Summary Findings and Recommendations

Employment and Earnings for Major Sectors of the Marine Economy

Average Sector Employment Earnings Earnings

(in millions)

Commercial Seafood IndustryCommercial Fishing 3,086 $93 $30,136Commercial Fishing Supplies

and Services 1,073 $25 $23,299Marine Aquaculture 232 $4 $15,000Processing and

Wholesaling Employment 5,219 $181 $34,681Retail and Food Service Sales 27,975 $356 $12,726

Commercial Seafood Industry Total 37,585 $659 $17,520

Marine Transportation, Tourism, and Recreation

Transportation and Shipbuilding 2,469 $81 $32,807Tourism and Recreation 28,002 $548 $19,570

Marine Transportation, Tourism, and Recreation Total 30,471 $629 $26,188

Marine Technology and Education Instrumentation 4,627 $239 $51,653Environmental Services 1,967 $63 $32,027Research and Education 2,646 $118 $44,596

Marine Technology and Education Total 9,240 $420 $42,758

Coastal Construction and Real Estate 4,512 $177 $39,229

Total 81,808 $1,885 $23,036

2 UMass Donahue Institute

Although the quantity and value of seafood landed in Massachusetts has de-clined, the commercial seafood industry, which includes processing and retailsales, grew slightly more than the Massachusetts economy in number of jobs andearnings between 1988 and 1997.

Seafood industries employed about one-half of the people working in the ma-rine economy (about 40,000 jobs) but paid only about one-third of total earn-ings (about $660 million). Employment in commercial seafood industries in-creased about one percent per year between 1989 and 1997. This increase wasslightly more than the growth of employment in the overall Massachusetts econ-omy. Earnings increased by four percent per year, which was also slightly morethan the growth of wages and salaries in the Massachusetts economy.

Marine tourism and recreation continue to be major economicactivities.

Combined with marine transportation, this sector of the economy employedabout 30,000 people, who earned roughly $630 million, accounting for one-third of the marine economy in both employment and earnings. This was secondonly to commercial seafood industries

In 1996 nearly 1 million people paid $21 million to firms offering whale watch-ing, mostly in Plymouth and Provincetown. This estimate does not includespending for travel, overnight stays, and other expenses. About one-half of totalemployment and earnings from coastal tourism was on Cape Cod, Martha’sVineyard, and Nantucket; tourists visiting Cape Cod and the islands generated11,750 jobs with a payroll of over $200 million.

The most recent National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife AssociatedRecreation, conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, estimates that429,000 saltwater anglers spent roughly 4 million days fishing in Massachusetts in1996, spending $222 million. The National Marine Manufacturing Association(NMMA) estimates that recreational boaters in Massachusetts spent $120 millionin 1996 on boats, motors, trailers, and accessories. The authors estimate that retailand service expenditures for boating totaled approximately $300 million.

Growing population, housing starts, and

income levels in coastal areas contribute

to the marine economy.

Coastal communities (excluding Boston) grewby 10 percent between 1980 and 1997. From1980 to 1997, median household income grewby 21 percent in coastal counties, compared to14 percent in non-coastal counties.

The authors estimate that 2,315 permits issuedin 1997 for $329 million worth of single-familyhouses can be attributed to demand for coastalliving. Total Massachusetts employment in theconstruction of these houses was 4,212 jobs,with total earnings of $166 million. The hous-ing activity also contributes to higher employ-ment and earnings for real estate agents.

Percent Population Growth by County, 1980 – 1997

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Bar

nsta

ble

Duk

es

Nan

tuck

et

Cape

Cod

&

Bri

stol

Esse

x

Nor

folk

Plym

outh

Suffo

lk

Mas

sach

uset

ts

INDUSTRY CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDSThe seafood industry is a vital commercial and cultural component ofmany coastal towns and cities.

Composed of commercial fishing, suppliers that service commercial fishing, ma-rine aquaculture, fish processing and wholesaling, and retail and food servicesales, the seafood industry covers many activities in the commonwealth’s coastalcities and towns. The seafood industry accounts for less than two percent of thecommonwealth’s labor force, but is an important component of coastal commu-nities such as New Bedford, Gloucester, and some of the towns on Cape Cod.Fishing was the state’s first industry, and it retains important links to tourism andthe appeal of coastal life.

Over the past 15 years, commercial fishing and fish processing have declined sig-nificantly in the commonwealth. The collapse of many stocks and government ef-forts to restrict fishing to preserve those stocks have reduced fish landings bymore than one-third since 1982 in both pounds and real value. This decline incatch has forced processors, wholesalers, retailers and ultimately consumers tobuy more imported fish or products from other parts of the United States. It hasalso adversely affected businesses that service the fleet of fishing vessels.

The recent success of aquaculture in commercial production of catfish, oysters, andsalmon in other parts of the United States hasn’t been felt in Massachusetts. This isdue mainly to more valuable uses of the commonwealth’s seacoast for other activi-ties. According to the highest estimate of production, aquaculture supplies less thanthree percent of the catch in Massachusetts. Aquaculture supplies seed for quahogsand bay scallops in many coastal towns, but in general, aquacultured seed and fishfry have had little effect in increasing native stocks of other species.

Like most new industries, there have been more failures than successes in thecommonwealth’s aquaculture. Marine aquaculture may be financially successfulin the future, at least where demand for competing uses are low, and if land ten-ancy and other problems can be resolved.

The commonwealth’s reputation for excellence in research andeducation includes work in the marine environment.

Massachusetts leads the nation in marine research, which is mostly located in and around Woods Hole. The National Marine Fisheries Service, Woods HoleOceanographic Institution, U.S. Geological Survey’s Coastal and Marine Geology Program, and the Woods Hole Research Center are located in Falmouth. Otherpublic and private marine research, education, and policy organizations dot theMassachusetts coastline.

Marine education services and organizations in Massachusetts are many and var-ied. Museums, centers, and aquariums throughout the commonwealth provideeducation and information on marine and coastal topics, such as marine wildlife,maritime history, whaling and fishing, and coastal ecology.

Massachusetts is also a leader in marine technology.

Of the 75 manufacturers listed in a recent study of marine instrumentation, 16were located in the commonwealth. Some of these businesses are represented bythe Massachusetts Ocean Technology Network (MOTN), a trade associationfounded in 1994 to share information and marketing costs among its members.


Over the past 15 years,

commercial fishingand fish processing

have declined significantly in

the commonwealth.The collapse of

many stocks andgovernment efforts

to restrict fishing to preserve those

stocks have reducedfish landings by more

than one-third since 1982.

Massachusetts leads the nation in

marine research,which is mostly

located in and around

Woods Hole.


In 1999 MOTN received the Export Achievement Award from the Alliance forthe Commonwealth and the Massachusetts Port Authority for promoting tradeand international marketing.

Increasing popular and legal interests in conserving and regenerating the environ-ment stimulate a growing marine environmental service industry. These activitiesinclude managing wetlands, fisheries, and other coastal resources; preservingcoastal resources; and reducing pollutants. Government agencies, nonprofit corpo-rations, and private companies provide environmental services in Massachusetts.

RECOMMENDATIONSStocks continue to decline, but new policies show promise.

The individual vessel days at sea (DAS) system allocates fewer fishing days to ves-sel owners (approximately half), but vessel owners or captains may choose thedays. The DAS system allows vessel owners to fish when demand and prices arehigh, because fishing days are too valuable to use when prices are low.

Rotating areas to fish in order to allow stocks to rebuild, also shows promise. In1999, large stocks of mature scallops were discovered in areas on Georges Bankthat had been closed to scallop and groundfishing vessels since 1994, so the areawas opened to scallop vessels. Due to high prices and increased landings, thevalue of the catch rebounded. After six months the areas were closed again be-cause catch limits were reached. The success of the plan has led to proposals torotate other areas fished.

Recreational boaters are a potential source of tourism dollars.

Thousands of recreational boats are moored in dozens of harbors along the Massa-chusetts coastline. Dockside support services including ship repair, marine sup-plies, engine repair, and other businesses are flourishing. An increase in expend-able income has generated demand for all sizes of recreational vessels, includinglarge pleasure craft. Gloucester, Boston, and New Bedford have deepwater portsnear city centers to moor and service these vessels. Easy access to downtown at-tractions should be improved to entice boaters ashore.

There is real growth potential in marine technology and education.

Massachusetts remains among the world leaders in marine instrumentation, re-search, and education. The author’s conservative estimate is that 10,000 peopleearning almost $500 million worked in this sector in 1997. This is the only sec-tor of the marine economy with average yearly salaries significantly above thestate average.

Marine technology has received little attention from state policymakers. The sizeand scope of this sector is poorly defined, and even the definition of marine tech-nology has not been resolved. The Ocean Resources Branch of Hawaii’s Depart-ment of Business would be a useful model for promoting and developing marinetechnology in Massachusetts. This organization publishes industry reports anddistributes a directory of ocean research and development businesses, organiza-tions, academic institutions, and government agencies in the state.

Increasing popularand legal interests

in conserving and regenerating the environment

stimulate a growingmarine environmental

service industry.These activities

include managingwetlands, fisheries,

and other coastalresources;

preserving coastalresources; and

reducing pollutants.


COMMERCIAL FISHERIES“Pestered by cod”

In 1602, Bartholomew Gosnold of England ex-plored Cape Cod and the nearby islands. He wasprobably not the first European to visit Massachu-setts. British, French, Portuguese, and Basquefishermen had used the shores of the New Worldto dry, salt, and prepare cod and other fish priorto shipment back to Europe. Most of their voy-ages were farther north, to the Grand Banks offNewfoundland, but some had probably visitedthe rich fishing grounds of Georges Bank. Beforethem, Norsemen and others, including NativeAmericans, had sailed and explored the coastalareas of New England’s shores.

Gosnold and his crew found the land inhabited bynative people who had settled the area thousandsand perhaps tens of thousands of years before.Few lived on or near the coast year-round becausethe coast lacked shelter. Some established summercamps on the shore, however, fishing and gather-ing shellfish before moving farther inland for bet-ter protection from the harsh coastal weather dur-ing winter months. These tribes had establishedtheir own marine economy mixed with enjoymentof summer life on the seacoast. They fished, stored

what they could for later, and collected shells andother items for trade with interior groups.

Captain Gosnold was searching for sassafras, high-ly prized as a medicine, when he landed on CapeCod, and when he returned to England, he re-ported that he had been “pestered” by cod. Hisreports encouraged several profitable expeditionsto New England shores by English fishing boats,including a voyage by Captain John Smith in1614, when he named both Massachusetts andNew England. When English colonists, who hadlittle experience in either farming or fishing, land-ed here, coastal Indian tribes showed them howto gather shellfish and fish in coastal waters.

The permanent settlements established by reli-gious dissidents in 1620 at Plymouth and in 1630at Boston changed life along the coastal areas ofMassachusetts. After a difficult start, when theydepended upon Native Americans for food andsustenance, the Pilgrims in Plymouth and themore populous Puritans in Boston established asubsistence and trading economy based on the re-sources they found near the shore. Within a fewyears of their arrival, colonists were fishing for codand other species from boats they had built, salt-ing them for preservation, and shipping themwith furs and other goods to England.

A Historical Overview

“After longbeatings at sea

they fell withthat land which

is called CapeCod; that whichbeing made andcertainly known

to be it, theywere not a

little joyful … A word or twoby the way of

this Cape. It wasthus first named

by CaptainGosnold and

his company,Anno 1602,

because theytook much of

that fish there.”

WILLIAM

BRADFORD,

Of Plymouth

Plantation


The industry is marked by a century ofsuccess…

During the nineteenth and early twentieth cen-turies, Provincetown and Gloucester were homeports for the schooner fleets that fished for codfrom dories using long hooked lines on Canada’sGrand Banks. Trips lasted two or three monthsuntil the hold was filled with salted cod. Smallervessels fished offshore and on Georges Bank fromother Massachusetts ports for herring, halibut,and haddock. These trips were shorter, from oneto three days, and the catch was brought backfresh for immediate use. Around the turn of thecentury, larger vessels, mostly from Boston, usedotter trawls and beam trawls, large nets draggedfrom the side or stern, to catch large quantities ofcod and haddock for Boston’s fresh fish market.Increasingly, these vessels used gasoline and laterdiesel engines to drag nets and power vessels intreacherous weather amid the dangerous shoalsoff Nantucket and on Georges Bank.

During the early twentieth century, consumers de-manded processed food for easier home prepara-tion. In Gloucester, Clarence Birdseye experi-mented with freezing fish and vegetables, and hefounded General Seafood Company, which laterbecame General Foods. In Boston and later inNew Bedford, onshore processors filleted the localcatch of groundfish (cod, haddock, and flounder)for easier consumer preparation. The Boston FishPier was built in 1913 as a state-of-the-art fish un-loading, processing, and storage center. The freshfish business in Boston reached its peak during the1930s when 300 million pounds of fresh fish werelanded per year on the Fish Pier.

…followed by an alarming drop in landings.

World War II interrupted fishing in the North-west Atlantic. After the war, the industry revital-ized, and Massachusetts landed its record catch of650 million pounds in 1948. The success of theNew England fishing industry attracted foreignfleets looking for cheap protein. Spanish, Polish,and Russian fleets fished Georges Bank like com-bines harvesting wheat. Between 1960 and 1972,the commonwealth’s catch dropped by half, from500 million pounds to 250 million pounds. Had-dock landings, the major moneymaker for the

local fleet, declined by over 90 percent. Fishingfamilies watched their earnings drop and blamedthe foreign fleets for reduced catches, claimingthey were fishing out stocks that had long sup-ported local fishing communities.

The federal government began to assume a moreimportant role in the management of fisheries.The Fishery Conservation and Management Actwas passed in 1976. This law designated up to200 miles offshore as an extended fishing zonewhere foreign vessels could not fish, except onthose stocks that were not caught by U.S. vessels.The act claimed these waters as U.S. territory andgave the federal government the responsibility “toprovide for the conservation and management ofthe fisheries.” The act established fishery manage-ment councils responsible for management plans“necessary to prevent overfishing, to rebuild overfished stocks, to ensure conservation, to facilitatelong-term protection of essential fish habitats,and to realize the full potential of the Nation’sfishery resources.”

The elimination of foreign boats from some ofthe richest fishing grounds in the world and ex-clusive ownership by U.S. fishermen caused large-scale investment in fishing vessels and in indus-tries associated with fishing. A gold rush tookover fishing communities as fish landings in-creased sharply and fishermen and capital flowedinto the major and minor ports throughout thecommonwealth. The boom extended to shore-side businesses. More welders, electricians, ship’scarpenters, and other related craftspeople wereneeded on the docks. Lumping, ship supply, boatrepair, and other marine services thrived. Process-ing plants called for more fish cutters, packers,floor men, and other processing workers.

The boom ended almost as quickly as it hadbegun. By the early 1980s, the catch of most com-mercial species had begun to decline. By 1991, thecommercial catch fell below what it had been be-fore the 200-mile limit, and it continued to falluntil 1994. This depletion of most of the valuablefish stocks in New England waters caused the NewEngland Fishery Management Council to passmanagement plans limiting catches of most com-mercial species through quotas. When this failed,

During the early twentieth

century, consumersdemanded processed

food for easier home preparation.

In Gloucester,Clarence Birdseyeexperimented with

freezing fish andvegetables, and he

founded GeneralSeafood Company,

which later becameGeneral Foods.

The FisheryConservation and

Management Act of1976 established

fishery managementcouncils responsible

for managementplans that were

“necessary toprevent overfishing,

to rebuild over fishedstocks, to ensureconservation, to

facilitate long-termprotection ofessential fish

habitats, and torealize the full

potential of theNation’s fishery

resources.”

the Management Council tried to limit the catchby restricting fishing gear and eventually restrict-ing the number of days per year boats can fish.

WATER TRANSPORTATIONAND SHIPBUILDINGWater transportation and shipbuilding, especiallyfor the seafaring merchant trade, were the secondand third pillars of the Massachusetts colonial ma-rine economy. During the Colonial era, ships leav-ing Massachusetts with salt fish returned with salt,iron, foodstuffs, molasses, and wine. By 1700,Massachusetts had about 500 seagoing vessels,which traded mostly with the West Indies and Eu-rope. In 1710, Long Wharf was built 2,000 feetinto the deep water of Boston Harbor. Merchan-dise for trade was gathered from the cities andtowns along the rivers, canals, and tidal basins thatfed the port cities of Boston, Salem, Marblehead,New Bedford, and others.

Trade declined after the Revolutionary War, whenEngland, Spain, and France restricted Americantrade in the West Indies and points south. Thecommonwealth recovered quickly, however, andsought other ports for trade. Merchants aroundthe world thought that Salem, Marblehead, New-buryport, New Bedford, and Boston were sepa-rate countries because so many merchant shipshailed from these ports.

New York surpassed Massachusetts in shipping in1850 because New York City was growing so fast.Tonnage shipped declined in Massachusetts, espe-cially during the Great Depression and after WorldWar II. New York now ships more than 15 timesthe cargo shipped in and out of Boston, which ba-sically supplies the local area.

Shipbuilding becomes a leading industry.

Soon after they landed and established them-selves, they began building boats. In 1631, theybuilt their first ship, Blessing of the Bay. By 1660,aided by the English Navigation Act that restrict-ed colonial shipping to English and colonial-builtvessels, shipbuilding became the leading industryin Boston and most other seaside settlements.Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth cen-turies, Massachusetts was the primary supplier of

ships and boats for the colonies. During the mid-nineteenth century, shipyards in Massachusettsbuilt clipper ships that dominated maritime ship-ping. Built mostly for the East Coast–West Coasttrade around Cape Horn, a trip of 15,000 miles,these ships were the largest and fastest sailingships ever built.

Clipper ships were not the cheapest way to carryfreight, though, and Massachusetts delayed thetransition to steam and steel, favored by NewYork merchants. During the glorious decades ofthe clipper ship era, New York passed Massachu-setts for the lead among states in shipping. For-eign ships were also carrying more freight. Asearly as 1880, only one-sixth of U.S. exports andimports were carried on U.S. ships, down fromover two-thirds before the Civil War. Shipbuild-ing followed the merchant trade out of Massachu-setts to New York and foreign countries.

A short-term boom-and-bust cycle operated with-in the general decline of shipbuilding in the com-monwealth. World Wars I and II revived ship-building in the United States, and the oil crisis ofthe 1970s led to construction of large tankers tocarry liquefied natural gas.

Quincy shipyard, the largest in Massachusetts, wasbuilt in 1884 in the same location where boats hadbeen built since the 1600s. During World War II, itemployed 32,000 people, including James Kilroy,an inspector who signed ship parts and other equip-ment “Kilroy was here,” which became a sloganduring World War II and again during the counter-culture of the 1960s and 1970s. The yard almostclosed in 1963, but General Dynamics bought it for$5 million. Foreign competition eliminated com-mercial shipbuilding, which the shipyard replacedwith Defense Department contracts. When GeneralDynamics couldn’t secure enough naval contracts,it closed the shipyard in 1985, and more than6,000 employees were laid off. The most recent ef-fort to revive the shipyard was in 1997 when agroup of MIT professors and graduates projectedhigher demand for new ships and proposed moreautomated production there.

Even during the decline of shipbuilding in thetwentieth century, Massachusetts firms continuedto build small commercial fishing boats and recre-


By 1700,Massachusetts hadabout 500 seagoing

vessels, whichtraded mostly with

the West Indies andEurope. Merchants

around the worldthought that Salem,

Marblehead,Newburyport, New

Bedford, and Bostonwere separate

countries because somany merchant

ships hailed from these ports.

During the mid-nineteenth

century, shipyards in Massachusettsbuilt clipper ships

that dominatedmaritime shipping.Built mostly for the

East Coast–WestCoast trade aroundCape Horn, a trip of15,000 miles, these

ships were thelargest and fastest

sailing ships ever built.


ational vessels. During the 1980s, however, boatbuilding followed other manufacturing out of thecommonwealth. Boston Whaler left Massachu-setts in the early 1990s for Florida, where de-mand for recreational boats was higher and pro-duction costs probably cheaper.

NEW SECTORS OF THEMARINE ECONOMY New sectors of the marine economy include ma-rine research, technology, and education; coastaltourism; marine recreation; and marine environ-mental services. Some organizations and businesseswithin these sectors, especially the research institu-tions in Woods Hole, have become world leadersin marine research and technology.

When Spencer Baird established the U.S. Commis-sion of Fish and Fisheries in 1871 and later becameits first director, he established a laboratory inWoods Hole to study fish stocks. The commission

became the National Marine Fisheries Service,which still operates that laboratory. In 1888, theMarine Biological Laboratory, a nonprofit institu-tion established by a group of scientists to studymolecular biology, joined the government marinelaboratory in Woods Hole. In 1930, Woods HoleOceanographic Institution (WHOI), another pri-vate, non-profit organization, was established tostudy deepwater oceanography and other aspects ofthe marine ecosystem. In 1962, the U.S. GeologicalSurvey (USGS) established a field office in WoodsHole, which became the Coastal and Marine Geol-ogy Program in 1974. The program investigatesunderwater terrain, geophysics, and global climatechange and history of the coastal areas of the At-lantic, the Gulf of Mexico, and Caribbean areas.The Woods Hole Research Center, another private,nonprofit institution, was established in 1985 tostudy and advise on global warming and other is-sues concerning the global environment.

Some organizationsand businesses

within these sectors,especially the

research institutionsin Woods Hole, have

become worldleaders in marine

research andtechnology.

The marine economy is composed of commer-cial activities related to the sea. Massachusetts

has about 2,000 miles of coastline, depending onhow much its coastal inlets and rivers are consid-ered coastline. Fall River, for example, is consid-ered a coastal city because it lies along the TauntonRiver, a tidal river that empties into NarragansettBay. For this study, coastal areas include the coun-ties of Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Nantuck-et, Norfolk, Plymouth, and Suffolk because thesecounties border the coastline. When data permits,coastal areas are further defined to include only thecoastal towns and cities within these counties. In afew instances, we exclude coastal cities from thismeasure of coastal areas. Coastal areas are listed inAppendix A and are shown on the inside backcover of this publication.

The marine economy is divided into the follow-ing sectors with their associated subsectors,roughly based on Standard Industrial Classifica-tion (SIC) divisions.

Seafood IndustryCommercial FishingCommercial Fishing SuppliesMarine AquacultureSeafood Processing and WholesalingRetail and Food Service Seafood Sales

Water Transportation, Tourism, and Recreation

Transportation and ShipbuildingCoastal TourismRecreational FishingRecreational Boating

Marine Technology and EducationInstrumentation Environmental ServicesResearch Education

College and University Marine Degree Programs

K-12 Marine Educational ProgramsOther Marine Educational Institutions

Coastal Population and Construction Growth

Although most marine activities are located incoastal communities, the marine economy ofMassachusetts extends beyond coastal areas. Forexample, households across the commonwealthorder seafood in restaurants and buy seafood insupermarkets. Data limitation, which is explainedlater in the text, restricted some employment ana-lysis for coastal areas.

This report estimates employment and earnings in the various sectors of the marine economy in 1997, identifies important characteristics andtrends within each marine industry, and summa-

Methodology



rizes employment, earnings, and trends for theentire marine economy of Massachusetts. In mostcases, employment data report the number of jobsand do not differentiate between full-time andpart-time jobs. Nor do the data indicate the num-ber of people employed, because many peoplehold more than one job. For this reason, earnings(that is, wages and salaries) are a better measureof the marine economy than employment. Theyear 1997 is studied because it was the most re-cent year for which data in all sectors of the ma-rine economy are available. Data for later years arenot considered, except to observe trends.

Finding accurate data on employment and earn-ings in the various sectors of the marine economyprovided many challenges. The Massachusetts Di-visions of Employment and Training (DET) dataon employment and earnings by SIC code provid-ed primary data. In many cases, however, DETcategories included businesses outside the marineeconomy, and data on marine activities were inex-tricably combined with non-marine data. This wasespecially troublesome in marine instrumentation.The Guidance Systems category, SIC 381, for ex-ample, covers aeronautical as well as nautical sys-tems. Using DET employment and earnings data,therefore, would lead to overestimates of the ma-rine economy. Data from iMarket supply employ-ment estimates based upon finer categories than4-digit SIC codes, but they do not estimate earn-ings. For many sectors, iMarket data were usedfor employment, and DET data were used to esti-

mate earnings. Data from other governmentagencies and primary data from firms and organi-zations were used occasionally.

To estimate the size of the marine economy, theauthors summarized employment and earnings(wages and salaries) rather than sales or productrevenue. This eliminated double counting thatwould result, for example, from adding wholesaleseafood sales to retail seafood sales, which wouldcount the wholesale value twice. Multipliers werenot considered, nor were the effects from pur-chases of marine goods and services and marineearnings on other sectors of the economy. Therewas no justification for a single multiplier for themarine economy, and using multipliers for eachcategory of transaction would prove too compli-cated and increase the probability for error. Sec-ondary effects were considered when they werecontained within the marine economy. For exam-ple, the purchase of fishing gear by vessel ownerswas included; the production of steel to manufac-ture that gear was not.

Activities are divided into primary and secondaryactivities in many commercial or industrial stud-ies. In the marine economy, commercial fishingwould be considered a primary activity, and busi-nesses that service commercial fishing (e.g., boatrepair) would constitute secondary activities. Thisapproach was rejected because it complicated theorganization of the study without improving theanalysis. Furthermore, the choice of primary orsecondary marine activity is often arbitrary.

To estimate the sizeof the marineeconomy, the

authors summarizedemployment andearnings (wages

and salaries) ratherthan sales or

product revenue.This eliminated

double counting that would result, for example, fromadding wholesale

seafood sales toretail seafood sales,which would count

the wholesale value twice.


While the commonwealth’s marine economyhas declined in importance over the long

run, employment and payroll remain substantial.It employed more than 80,000 people and gener-ated almost $2 billion in payroll in 1997, ac-counting for about 3 percent of the 3 million jobsin the commonwealth and about 2 percent of the$100 billion in total earnings in 1997. Average

annual earnings in the marine economy were$23,000 per person, significantly lower than theaverage for the commonwealth, which was$35,000. Much of this difference was due to lowearnings in food services and tourism, the majoremployers in the marine economy.

The largest sector in the marine economy, com-mercial seafood, employed almost 40,000 peo-ple, who earned $659 million. Marine trans-portation, tourism, and recreation employedabout 30,000 people, with a total payroll of$629 million. Average wages and salaries werehigher in transportation, tourism, and recreationthan in commercial seafood industries. Marinetechnology and education employed over 9,000people, who earned about $420 million. Averagewages and salaries in technology and educationwere almost $50,000 per year, more than doublethose in the other sectors.

In 1997, about 4,500 people were employed inconstruction and real estate, due to the high de-mand for coastal living. They earned about$180 million.

Overview of Employment and Earnings

Employment and Earnings in the Marine Economy, 1997Total employment = 81,808 Total earnings = $1.9 billion

Fishing andSeafood Sales($659 million,

37,585employees)

Transportation, Tourism,and Recreation

($629 million, 30,471 employees)

Technologyand Education($420 million,

9,240employees)

Construction andReal Estate

($177 million,4,512 employees)

The marine economyof Massachusetts

employed more than80,000 people andgenerated almost

$2 billion in payroll in 1997.


The commercial seafood industry covers manyactivities in the commonwealth’s coastal

cities and towns, including commercial fishing,suppliers that service commercial fishing, marineaquaculture, fish processing and wholesaling, andretail and food service sales. The seafood industryemploys less than 2 percent of the common-wealth’s labor force but is an important compo-nent of coastal communities like New Bedford,Gloucester, and some of the towns on Cape Cod.Fishing was the state’s first industry, and it retainsimportant links to tourism and the appeal of thethe state’s coastal life.

Most firms in the seafood industry are small andspecialize in a single or small set of products or ser-vices. Fishing boats are usually owned by individualfamilies, who fish for a particular species or groupof species. Fish processing is also highly specialized.Firms process either fresh or frozen seafood prod-ucts, but not both. Most participants in the indus-try, however, will cross lines to make a profitabledeal. Fishermen will change gear or species, and fishprocessors will take a chance with a new product.

Products sometimes flow through many firms be-fore reaching consumers. Cod, haddock, andflounder are caught by Massachusetts fishermenand sold to processors in one of the ports.

Processors cut the fish into fillets and sell them towholesalers, restaurants, and other retailers.Other products take shortcuts. Fishermen or bro-kers who buy directly from fishermen may selllobsters and other shellfish directly to consumers.Imported products are sold in supermarkets,sometimes without further processing.

While firms in the industry are keenly competitiveand decentralized, they depend on one another tosupply their consumers. As in most supply chains,one firm’s expenses are another firm’s revenues.Dollars flow from retailers to wholesalers, toprocessors, to vessel owners, to suppliers that ser-vice vessels, with wages and salaries generated ateach stage. But seafood firms, especially in thefresh fish business, are more interdependent thanin most industries. The short time firms have tosell fresh product forces them to work together toquickly find product when they need it and disposeof it when they don’t.

A declining industry affects all players.

Over the past 15 years, commercial fishing andfish processing have declined significantly in thecommonwealth. The collapse of many stocks, andgovernment efforts to restrict fishing to preservethose stocks have reduced fish landings by more

Commercial Seafood Industries

Fishing was the state’s firstindustry, and it

retains importantlinks to tourism and

the appeal of thecommonwealth’s

coastal life.

The collapse of many stocks and

government efforts torestrict fishing to

preserve thosestocks have reducedfish landings by morethan one-third since1982 in both pounds

and real value.


than one-third since 1982 in both pounds and realvalue. This decline in catch forced processors,wholesalers, retailers, and ultimately consumers tobuy more imported fish or products from otherparts of the United States. Suppliers that servicethe fishing fleets have also followed fishing in thisdownward spiral. Fresh fish processors, who usedto depend on local or New England landings, haveeither left the industry or import seafood prod-ucts. Frozen fish processors have suffered morelosses than fresh fish processors because of fallingdemand for their products.

The peaks this industry reached in the early1980s were probably not sustainable, becausethey depended on a rate of catch that depletedstocks. There is widespread agreement that cur-rent catch is below the long-term potential of theindustry, given better man-agement of fish stocks.

Nearly 40,000 people wereemployed in the Massachu-setts seafood industry in1997, and they earned al-most $700 million. Retailand food service providedabout three-fourths of thisemployment and about one-half of earnings. Fishing,supplies and services, pro-cessing, and wholesalingprovided about 10,000 jobsin Massachusetts, which paidroughly $300 million inwages and salaries. Jobs inthe retail seafood sector paidless than jobs in other linksof the supply chain.

Employment in commercial seafood industries in-creased about one percent per year between 1989(the benchmark from the author’s previous study,Hogan, et al, 1991) and 1997. This increase wasslightly more than the growth of employment inthe overall Massachusetts economy. Earnings in-creased by four percent per year, which was alsoslightly more than the growth of wages andsalaries in the Massachusetts economy.

COMMERCIAL FISHINGSeveral types of fishing boats currently operate offMassachusetts shores. Draggers pull a net, calledan otter trawl, across the ocean floor. Large drag-gers, from 70 to 100 feet long, fish in federal wa-ters from three to 200 miles offshore, generallyon Georges Bank. Smaller draggers fish in statewaters, within three miles of shore, and occasion-ally in federal waters. Scallopers, large vessels from80 to 120 feet long, pull 14- to 15-foot rakes,called dredges, across the ocean floor. They gen-erally fish far offshore but within the 200-milelimit. Lobster boats, usually smaller vessels, setand retrieve traps on the ocean floor marked bybuoys on the surface. Hook boats, similar in de-sign to lobster boats, set lines of hooks ratherthan lobster traps. A small number of vessels setpurse seines and gill nets.

New Bedford (which includes Fairhaven), thecommonwealth’s leading port, has benefited themost from the 200-mile limit. New Bedford liesclosest to the rich scallop and yellowtail flounderfishing grounds on Georges Bank and to thesouth. Considerable public funds were invested inthe port before the 200-mile limit was estab-lished. A seawall was built to protect the harbor;fish piers were remodeled; and new processingplants, each with its own dock space, were builtwithin a few minutes’ steam from fish piers. From

There is widespreadagreement that

current catch is below the

long-term potential of the industry, given

better managementof fish stocks.

’77’76 ’96’95’83’82 ’94’92 ’93’91’90’89’87 ’88’86’84 ’85’81’80’79’78

350

0

Mill

ions

of 1

997

dolla

rs

Value of Landings by Port, 1976 – 1997

50

100

150

200

250

300

400Gloucester Real ValueOther Ports Real ValueNew Bedford Real Value


1983 to 1991, New Bedford was the leading portin the United States in value of the catch, mostlydue to scallop landings. The value of the catchhas since declined in New Bedford, but it remainsabout 50 percent higher than it was in 1977, thefirst year of the 200-mile limit.

Gloucester (which includes Rockport) has suf-fered the most from the recent decline in thecommercial catch. The value of Gloucester’s catchhas declined about 50 percent from its peak in1986. A decline in Boston landings began withWorld War II and has not been reversed by the200-mile limit. Haddock landings, once theport’s major product, dropped from more than100 million pounds per year as recently as the1950s to less than 1 million pounds per year dur-ing the 1990s. Boston no longer ranks among thetop 60 ports in the United States and can be con-sidered only a minor port, even within the region.

Other Massachusetts ports have shown the leastdecline in landings. Smaller boats from these portsbring in fresh product daily because they are closerto fishing grounds. The 1990s saw a resurgence ofhook fishing for cod, especially from Cape Codports, due to low capital entry costs, improved portfacilities, and high prices at the dock for hookedcod, which is generally fresher than netted fish.

Declines in landings call for regulations.

These overall declines in landings and values werecaused by the sharp decline in fish stocks, as wellas management efforts by the federal governmentto reduce fishing. In 1991, the Conservation LawFoundation sued the federal government over itsfailure to maintain fish stocks. The New EnglandFishery Management Council responded with se-vere restrictions in days at sea (DAS) for vesselsfishing for groundfish and scallops. For the typicallarge dragger, DAS declined from unlimited in1993, to 190 days in 1994, to 88 days in 1997.

The U.S. Department of Commerce initiated a pro-gram to buy and destroy fishing vessels in 1997.The program spent about $25 million between1997 and 1999, buying and scrapping 55 largeMassachusetts draggers, which had caught 20percent of the groundfish catch in 1996. The re-sulting reduction in total catch for subsequentyears was probably less, because some of this capi-

tal and the fishermen associated with these boatsmoved to other vessels. In 1998, a similar pro-gram was proposed for scallop vessels, but has notbeen enacted.

Fishing fewer days for depleted stocks led vesselowners, especially those in New Bedford, toswitch to other, less utilized species, such asmonkfish (anglerfish), skate, and dogfish. Marketshave existed in the Orient and Europe for prod-ucts from these species, but fishermen had nottaken advantage of them. Even though the catchof these species rose sharply, prices on the dockincreased as other products became increasinglydifficult to supply to demanding customers. Theseproducts brought significant revenues to NewEngland fishermen. Between 1992 and 1997, thetotal landed value for monkfish, skate, and dogfishaveraged around $15 million per year.

Currently, a wide assortment of species makes upthe commonwealth’s commercial catch, whichwas worth $225 million in 1997. Lobster was theleading species landed in 1997, with a total valueof $62 million, followed by scallops, flatfish,groundfish, and other species. The lobster fisheryhas not followed the same pattern of decline asother commercial fisheries in the commonwealth,probably because lobster traps are more selectivethan other fishing gear, releasing juveniles alive.

Since 1984, about 15 million pounds have beenlanded every year in Massachusetts. Due to risinglobster prices, the lobster catch has increased sig-

Value of Landings by Species, 1997Total value = $225 million

Cod, Haddock, and Pollock$24 million

Lobsters$62 million

Scallops$47 million

Flatfish$30 million

Other$62 million

The lobster fisheryhas not followed the

same pattern ofdecline as other

commercial fisheries in the

commonwealth,probably because

lobster traps aremore selective than

other fishing gear in releasing

juveniles alive.

The New EnglandFishery Management

Council respondedwith severe

restrictions in days at sea (DAS) for

vessels fishing forgroundfish and

scallops. For thetypical large dragger,

DAS declined fromunlimited in 1993, to190 days in 1994, to

88 days in 1997.


nificantly both in current value and after account-ing for inflation. The number of traps and areasfished have increased sharply, which may lead tohigher catches from declining stocks and cause re-duced landings in the future.

Estimated numbers of commercialfishermen vary.

Estimating the number of commercial fishermenin the state is difficult. Thousands of people selltheir catches, ranging from those who make anoccasional fishing trip in a small boat to thosewho make their living working year-round onlarger boats. The authors estimated the numberof full-time or nearly full-time fishermen, becauseincluding part-time fishermen would give an inac-curate measure of significance to this industry.

Massachusetts DET reported 1,379 commercialfishermen in Massachusetts in 1997. This figure islow, because self-employed people and independentcontractors are not included in DET data. Ownersusually skipper their own small commercial fishingboats. Family members and others, who are oftenconsidered independent contractors, make up therest of the crew. Neither skipper nor crewmembersof small boats are usually considered employees inDET data. Furthermore, in mid-1980, scallop crewsand vessel owners agreed to designate crewmembers(probably more than 1,000 fishermen) on scallopvessels as self-employed.

The authors estimate that 3,100 commercial fish-ermen fished full time in federal waters in 1997.This estimate was arrived at by using the numberof commercial fishing vessels that reported Massa-

chusetts as their home state and that landed theircatches in the commonwealth, and by using theaverage crew size per vessel type recorded by theNational Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). TheMassachusetts Division of Marine Fisheries regu-lates commercial fishing in state waters (threemiles offshore).

In 1997, approximately 5,000 fishermen had per-mits to fish commercially with rod and reel instate waters; 2,000 had permits to use lobsterpots in state waters; and another 2,000 had per-mits to gather shellfish. About half of state lob-ster-permit holders and a few rod and reel permitholders had federal permits to fish offshore. Somefishermen also had multiple state permits.

The Massachusetts Division of Marine Fisheriesestimates that about two-thirds of the permitswere used for commercial fishing. Assuming that20 percent of these active permits were used fulltime, we estimate that 1,000 commercial fisher-men fished in state waters as their main occupa-tion in 1997. Four thousand to five thousandother people fish commercially part time in Mass-achusetts state waters.

New Bedford was the leading port in fishing em-ployment in 1997. There are dozens of otherports on Cape Cod and in other coastal areas thatharbor anywhere from a few to several dozensmall commercial fishing boats, employing fisher-men and small cottage industries of net menders,baiters, engine repair mechanics, ship’s carpenters,and other services.

The share or lay system, where owner, captain,and crew are paid shares of the catch, has beenused for hundreds of years in commercial fishing.There are two types of lay systems: clear lay,where the gross stock (total value of the catch) issplit among the owner, captain, and crew beforeexpenses are paid; and broken lay, where expensesare paid from the gross stock (leaving the netstock) before shares are paid. Larger vessels usual-ly operate under a clear lay system and smallervessels under a broken lay system, but there areexceptions. In New Bedford scallop vessels use aclear lay and draggers use a broken lay system.Few vessels switch between clear and broken lays.The percentage split between boat owner andcrew differs by port and type of fishery.

Employment and Earnings of Commercial Fishermen, 1997Total employment = 3,086 Total earnings = $93 million

Other Ports($39 million,

1,725 employees)

Gloucester($12 million, 379 employees)

New Bedford($42 million,

982 employees)

The authors estimate that

3,100 commercialfishermen fished

full time in federalwaters in 1997.

Four thousand to five thousand other people

fish commercially part time in

Massachusetts state waters.


Recently NMFS has surveyed vessel owners to es-timate costs of fishing for draggers, scallopers,and hook vessels. The authors used these costand revenue figures for scallopers and large drag-gers in New Bedford, for large draggers in Glou-cester, and for hook vessels and small draggers inthe other ports to estimate fishermen’s earningsafter expenses.

New Bedford led Massachusetts ports with $42million paid to skippers and crew. Scalloping isNew Bedford’s main fishing activity. Scallopinguses more fuel and requires more repairs to vesselsand gear than other types of fishing. It also yieldsthe most revenue per vessel. Crewmembers (in-cluding the skipper) pay many of the costs of scal-loping, and net about one-third of the value ofthe catch.

Gloucester fishermen received a total of $12 mil-lion, and fishermen in Boston and the other portsreceived a total of $39 million. On average, crewsin these ports earned a larger share of the catchafter expenses were paid, but the value of the catchwas lower than in New Bedford. Total earningsfor fishermen in Massachusetts in 1997 were $93million. Average income per fisherman was$43,000 in New Bedford, $31,000 in Gloucester,and $23,000 in Boston and the other ports.

Average income in fishing may be misleadingbecause fishermen’s incomes vary directly with thequantity and prices paid for the catch. The value ofthe catch varies widely depending on luck, efficiencyof the vessel, the experience of the skipper, andprices that fluctuate daily. Skippers receive from 50percent to 100 percent more than crewmembers,depending on the fishery. Lobstering yields thelargest total revenue in the commonwealth butprobably pays little per fisherman or per vessel.There are so many vessels and fishermen that thecatch per trap or per vessel is quite low.

COMMERCIAL FISHINGSUPPLIES AND SERVICESCommercial fishing vessels pay out most of theirrevenues to fishermen and shore-side suppliers.Under complex arrangements, which vary byport, vessel owners or their crews buy fuel, ice,bait, and food for the trip; repair gear and main-

tain the engine and equipment; pay insurancepremiums; and pay the mortgage and other loanson the vessel and gear. In a typical clear lay, thecrewmembers pay for fuel, ice, food, and waterfrom their share, and the vessel owner paysmaintenance, insurance, and mortgage from theboat share. While these payments are expenses tovessel owners and crew, they generate revenueand employment for dockside firms that sell thesegoods and services.

The commercial fishing fleet spent $31 million in1997 for fuel, which was the largest expenditureother than payments to captains and crews. Otheroperating expenditures of $45 million includedfood, water, ice, bait, lubricants, unloading costs,minor gear repair, and other gear costs, such aslines, hooks, twine, and chain links. Repairs gener-ated $25 million of expenditures in 1997, loanpayments totaled $8 million, and other overhead,including financial services and business services,generated $23 million. Other overhead includedinsurance, which was about one-half of total over-head, office expenses, settlement costs, profession-al fees, and other typical overhead costs of smallbusiness. Total expenditures other than labor costsfor commercial fishing were $132 million in 1997.

The authors used output/labor ratios for fuel, re-tail sales, services, repairs, overhead, insurance,and financial services from various 1992 censusreports to convert expenditures to employmentand earnings. Dockside commercial fishing ser-vices employed 494 people in New Bedford, 89

Payments for Commercial Fishing Services, 1997Total payments = $132 million

LoanPayments$8 million

OtherOperating Costs

$45 million

Fuel$31 millionRepair and

Maintenance$25 million

Other Overhead$23 million

New Bedford ledMassachusett portswith $42 million paid

to skippers and crew.Scalloping is New

Bedford’s mainfishing activity, and

this fishery yields themost revenue

per vessel.


people in Gloucester, and 490 people in the com-bined other ports in 1997. These jobs paid a totalof $25 million in wages and salaries.

MARINE AQUACULTUREMarine aquaculture, or mariculture, includes thegrowing of marine finfish and shellfish in con-trolled environments, in open seas, bays, estuar-ies, or tanks. In Massachusetts, almost all com-mercial marine aquaculture takes place in thesoutheastern part of the state, and almost allproducts are shellfish, mainly quahogs and oys-ters, as well as bay scallops, soft-shell clams, bluemussels, and sea scallops. There have been a fewattempts to farm summer flounder (fluke), hybridstriped bass, and tilapia, but these have been ex-perimental, with very few commercial sales.

Acres under cultivation and the number of leaseshave increased in Massachusetts. According to theDivision of Marine Fisheries, the number of acresincreased from 645 in 1994 to 1,009 in 1997,with 232 separate leases in 1997.

Revenue, employment, and earnings are more dif-ficult to estimate. Using survey data, the most re-cent Aquaculture Industry Situation and OutlookReport estimates that sale of marine aquacultureproducts in Massachusetts in 1995 was about $7million. Quahogs generated about $4.5 million ofthat total. The Massachusetts Division of MarineFisheries generates a lower estimate of $1.5 mil-

lion in 1997. The Aquaculture White Paper &Strategic Plan for Massachusetts estimates revenueat maximum production of $30,000 per acre, or$30 million. This indicates that either estimate isfar below maximum production for the amountof acres currently in production.

There have been no completed surveys of employ-ment and earnings in marine aquaculture. TheStrategic Plan uses a rough rule of thumb of oneperson working full time for each license or 232full-time jobs in 1997. Industry sources indicatethat few people are employed in aquaculture fulltime. Using one-half the average per-person earn-ings in fish harvesting as a measure of earnings($15,000 per year) in aquaculture yields totalearnings of about $4 million in 1997.

World aquaculture has grown at a rapid rate. Be-tween 1987 and 1996 (the last year for whichdata are available) world aquaculture productionmore than tripled and in 1996 supplied morethan 20 percent of the world’s fishery products.Between 1987 and 1996, U.S. production in-creased by 40 percent, but currently aquacultureproduction supplies only about 5 percent of totaldomestic supply.

The recent success of aquaculture in the commer-cial production of catfish, oysters, and salmon inother parts of the United States has not takenplace in Massachusetts because there are morevaluable uses of the commonwealth’s seacoast.Currently aquaculture supplies less than three per-cent of the catch in Massachusetts. Aquaculturesupplies seed for quahogs and bay scallops inmany coastal towns, but in general aquaculturedseed and fish fry have had little effect in increasingnative stocks of other species.

While it is tempting to compare aquaculture tofarming, three important differences from farmingrestrict aquaculture’s potential. The first is thecontrol that farmers have over their environment.Farmers increase the productivity of crops andlivestock by controlling moisture, nutrients, anddisease. As more crops are raised in greenhouses,farmers can even control temperature and sun-light. That level of control is almost impossible inthe ocean and in estuaries. Controlling the envi-ronment in tanks is easier, but the expenses associ-

The recent successof aquaculture inother parts of theUnited States has

not taken place in Massachusetts

because there are more valuable

uses of thecommonwealth’s

seacoast. Currentlyaquaculture supplies

less than threepercent of the catch

in Massachusetts.

Employment and Earnings in Commercial FishingServices, 1997Total employment = 1,073 Total earnings = $25 million

Gloucester($2 million,

89 employees)


494 employees)


490employees)

ated with raising fish and shellfish in this mannerare often prohibitive. Significant environmentalproblems can also arise when aquaculturists try tocontrol the environment. Aquaculture producesfish waste and introduces diseases, and aquaculturerestricts the gene pool when farmed animals es-cape or are released into natural habitats.

Second, farmers supply products to large-scalecommodity markets for which there is widespreaddemand, or they supply high-quality produce toniche markets, where demand is growing. To payhigh development and production costs, aquacul-turists would have to develop markets for highvalue-added products. This is risky because thesemarkets are susceptible to sudden increases insupply that quickly depress prices. Payment foraquaculture products is also risky. Buyers areoften financially unreliable or haggle over pricesafter they receive delivery, when it is too late toreclaim live or fresh fishery products.

Third, aquaculturists face problems of land andsea tenancy. Farmers own or rent their land;aquaculturists do not. Rights in land tenancy, al-though increasingly subject to dispute, are crystalclear compared to licenses or other tenancy in-struments that aquaculturists typically hold. Whileaquaculturists own their products, they do notown the estuaries, tidal flats, or other environ-ments used to grow their products. The marineaquaculture industry of the commonwealth isbased on leases granted by towns, which allocatesmall plots of coastal shore or the sea bottom toshellfish aquaculturists. There are several lawsuitscurrently in the Massachusetts judicial system thathave been filed by upland residents who object toaquaculture operations in their backyards.

Murky ownership rights that are subject to localpolitics restrict investment because banks andother venture capital sources are less willing towrite loans in this environment. This shortage ofcapital causes aquaculture to lose land-use con-flicts with competing shore-side uses like residen-tial housing, recreation, and tourism. Product de-mand will probably never be high enough to paythe high cost of seashore rights. In addition, localcontrol of aquaculture licenses restricts large-scaleplanning and coordination and other economiesof scale necessary for economic growth.

Marine aquaculture may be financially successfulin the future, at least where demand for compet-ing uses are low, and if land tenancy and otherproblems can be resolved. Prices for native speciesand their products will likely remain high becausemost commercial fish stocks will not recoversoon. High-valued products such as oysters, bayscallops, flounders, and sea bass are more likely tobe successful in Massachusetts, where coastal landand sea costs are high.

An example of successful public-private coopera-tion is the Martha’s Vineyard Shellfish Group, aconsortium of shellfish offices in the towns. Rais-ing shellfish from seed to plant in public waterswas their original goal. A few years ago, it securedpublic funds to help fishermen receive shellfish li-censes from the various towns in order to switchfrom fishing to aquaculture. Most of these smalloperations have raised sufficient crops of shellfish,mostly oysters, to sell to local fish markets andrestaurants. The Group participates in an eventevery summer, called “Taste of the Vineyard,”where they serve aquaculture products and ex-plain aquaculture to shore-side property owners.

FRESH FISH PROCESSING Fresh fish processing and frozen fish processing aretwo separate industries in Massachusetts, each withits own customers, firms, and industrial organiza-tions. While both face declining revenues, each hasbeen subject to different market pressures.

Fresh fish processors buy whole fresh suppliesfrom fishermen locally and at other New Englandports, and import fresh supplies from other partsof the U.S. and other countries. They process theproduct (for example, cutting fish into fillets) andsell these products to wholesalers, retailers, restau-rants, and other final users. When landings wereplentiful in the past, most processing firms special-ized in specific products, but a few firms, mostly inBoston and New Bedford, processed a wider as-sortment of fishery products to serve as a kind ofone-stop shopping point for their customers.

Supply of fresh fishery products is highly volatilebecause most fish and shellfish are essentially cap-tured in the wild. Farmed fishery products, amuch less important source of supply, are alsosubject to far more variability than domestic live-


Marine aquaculturemay be financially

successful in thefuture, at least

where demand forcompeting uses are

low, and if landtenancy and other

problems can be resolved.


stock, fruit, or vegetables. Prices that processorspay at the dock and the prices they receive fortheir products, therefore, vary daily and sometimeshourly. Haggling defines the fresh fish business.

The fish business is also risky. Fresh fishery prod-ucts are marketed under extreme time pressureand with incomplete information. The productsmust be sold within a week to 10 days to finalusers, who are very concerned about productquality. Yet wholesalers and others who buy fromprocessors do not generally know product qualitybecause most sales are made over the telephoneand the product arrives after the sale has beenagreed on. Buyers take serious risks with theirsuppliers, expecting high-quality product deliv-ered on time. Processors and wholesalers sellingin this market also take risks with their customersbecause they can’t reclaim the product for baddebts. To avoid risk, customer loyalty developsbetween processors, their suppliers, and their buy-ers. Product quality and financial responsibilityare the ties that bind fresh fish processors to theirgood customers and vice versa.

The expansion of the fishing industry that fol-lowed the 200-mile limit carried over into thefresh fish processing industry. Established firms inBoston, New Bedford, and Gloucester hired fishcutters, trimmers, packers, and other specializedtradespeople, and they paid good wages to pre-pare fresh fillets for the market. New firms sprangup in these ports. In the smaller ports, especiallyon Cape Cod, new firms and fishing cooperativestried their hand at cutting and marketing fresh fil-lets. Fresh fish was available on the docks, andfresh product was easy to sell at high prices tohealth-conscious consumers. Fishermen increasedtheir catch of other products such as sea scallops,which are almost always shucked at sea; otherhigh-valued species, such as lobster; and lesser-valued products like herring and squid. Shore-sideprocessors bought and processed or simplyrepackaged whatever fishermen landed and quick-ly sold the products on the wholesale market forhigh prices. Business was good.

When fishing began its downward spiral in theearly 1980s, the fresh fish-processing sector fol-lowed. Rising prices pushed revenues higher, but

not for long, because higher prices generatedconsumer demand for substitute products. Pricesfor fishery products were limited by the prices ofthese substitutes.

The value of fresh processed products in Massa-chusetts reached its peak in 1986 at $261 million,but fell to $150 million by 1995, before reco-vering somewhat to $173 million in 1997. Whenadjusting the value of fresh and frozen seafoodprocessing for inflation by converting to 1997dollars, there is a more dramatic decline. Freshproduct values fell by more than 50 percent fromits peak in 1986. Almost all the decline in freshproduct value was in fresh fillets caused by thecollapse of groundfish landings in New England.About 40 firms have left the processing sectorsince 1992, more than one-third of the firms inbusiness then.

Surviving firms adopted a wide assortment ofstrategies to stay in business. They intensified buy-ing within New England to maintain their share ofdwindling landings. They went farther afield fromtheir home ports to establish new buying relation-ships. Processors attended display auctions in NewBedford and Gloucester. These auctions are mod-eled on the Portland Fish Exchange, which hadsuccess in modernizing Maine’s fishing industry. Assupply continued to shrink, the surviving proces-sors scoured the smaller ports for product, buyingwherever they could, often in very small lots.

Surviving processors also imported more wholeand processed fish. However, Canada, the tradi-tional supplier of groundfish to the United States,has also suffered a sharp decline in landings. In1991, Canada closed the Grand Banks to fishingfor cod. This area was once the richest codgrounds in the world. Imports of groundfish fromCanada have largely been replaced by importsfrom Iceland and elsewhere. Fresh fish processorsalso brought in more fresh and frozen Pacific codto process as fresh fillets.

Processors switched to different species and products because they couldn’t find enough tradi-tional products to satisfy their customers. Theysuccessfully persuaded their customers to buysubstitutes, even though New England consumerswere reputed to have an indissoluble attachmentto traditional species. Processors and wholesalers

Prices thatprocessors pay at the

dock and the pricesthey receive for their

products vary dailyand sometimes

hourly. Hagglingdefines the fresh

fish business.

Fresh product valuesfell by more than

50 percent from itspeak in 1986. Almost

all the decline infresh product value

was in fresh filletscaused by the

collapse ofgroundfish landings

in New England.


imported farmed salmon, shark, tilapia, mahi-mahi, and orange roughy, and they brought prod-ucts from other parts of the country, such as catfishfrom the South, to supply restaurants and retailfish counters in New England and elsewhere.

Some fresh fish processors exploited niche mar-kets, like the sale of high-quality product directlyto customers for catered business cocktail parties,promotions, trade shows, and even private parties.Some processors stopped cutting fillets in order tosave expenses and concentrated instead on usingtheir business contacts and inside information towholesale products without processing them.

All surviving processors paid more attention tothe bottom line. Shortage of supply of raw mater-ial intensified competition in buying wholegroundfish among fresh groundfish processors.Other costs also increased. Substantial new invest-ment in both equipment and training was neces-sary to conform to new health regulations. Pricesat the retail level, however, didn’t rise as much;competition from substitutes such as chicken se-verely limited price increases for fishery products.Supermarkets improved their handling and mar-keting of fresh fish products, attracting customersrebelling against higher prices in specialized fishmarkets. Processors sold less product to fish mar-

kets, where they had developed personal relations,sometimes over several generations, and moreproduct to supermarkets, which operated on nar-row margins of their own and traditionally drovehard bargains with their suppliers. Dozens ofsmall fish markets went out of business.

Most of these survival strategies favored Bostonfirms. Access to Logan Airport and to the NewEngland regional food wholesaling system inBoston gave them an advantage over processingfirms in other ports. Access to raw material gaveother ports an advantage during the boom inlandings, but this has disappeared with the declinein landings. New Bedford processors, who usedto truck whole fish into the city from other ports,now process only the fish that is landed locally.Processors in Gloucester and other Massachusettsports now process fillets for local customers andship the rest whole to Boston for processing.

FROZEN FISH PROCESSINGFew fresh groundfish processors produce frozenproduct, and those that do sell special orders toinstitutions, usually government agencies, whoare sometimes required to purchase U.S. product.Frozen groundfish processors buy frozen inputs,which are imported into the United States fromCanada, Iceland, Norway, and other countries.These frozen inputs, mostly frozen blocks of fil-lets, are processed into frozen portions, sticks,and nuggets for sale to supermarkets, restaurants,and institutions. Frozen products keep for a longtime and are not subject to the same time con-straints as fresh products. Prices are less volatile,markets more impersonal, and business relationsmore competitive. Frozen groundfish plants arealso much larger than fresh groundfish plants, andthey operate longer through the day and throughthe year.

Frozen fish processors, located mostly in Glou-cester and New Bedford, faced a different set ofproblems than the declining supply that limitedfresh fish processors. Consumer demand for fishsticks and portions, the major products of this sec-tor, has been declining since mid-1980, drivingdown prices and production. The combination offalling production and prices caused a sharp dropin revenues. Actual revenues for frozen fishery

’87 ’90 ’91 ’92 ’94 ’95 ’96’86’85’84’83’82’81’79 ’80

800

1000

1200

0

200

400

600

Wholesale Value of Processed Seafood Products, 1979 – 1997

Mill

ions

of 1

997

dolla

rs

*“Other products” refers to frozen and other products that are not fresh (e.g., dried, canned, etc.)

Source: National Marine Fisheries Service

Other Fresh ProductsFresh Fillets

Other Products*

’88 ’89 ’93

Processors sold less product to

fish markets, wherethey had developedpersonal relations,

sometimes overseveral generations,

and more product to supermarkets,

which operated onnarrow margins of

their own andtraditionally drove

hard bargains withtheir suppliers.

Dozens of small fishmarkets went

out of business.


products processed in Massachusetts droppedmore than 50 percent from their peak in 1986.After accounting for inflation, frozen processedproduct sales dropped by more than 60 percent.Fish canneries left Massachusetts long ago.

Upscale frozen and freeze-dried products for easypreparation in microwave ovens are high value-added products that are popular in Northern Eu-rope, but have never caught on in the U.S. In-creasing value-added through better product re-mains the main hope for an industry where thesource of supply is declining. However, raisingprices for higher quality has rarely worked in anysector of the U.S. fishing industry.

EMPLOYMENT ANDEARNINGS IN PROCESSINGAND WHOLESALINGWholesalers do not specialize in either fresh orfrozen product. They sell a wide assortment offishery products, and sometimes sell meat prod-ucts, vegetables, or fruit. While the fresh ground-fish business has been severely curtailed due to re-duced availability of groundfish, the fish whole-sale business has suffered fewer losses. Per capitaconsumption of commercial seafood has remainedaround 15 pounds per year for the last 10 years.The decline in availability of local product hasbeen filled by imports, which have increased 15-fold over the last 10 years and created new oppor-tunities for wholesalers.

It is difficult to estimate employment in this sectorof the industry. Some fish processing and whole-saling workers are self-employed and not includedin DET data. Fish processing and wholesalingfirms often use employment services to supplylabor, but do not report the employment toDET. Employment service companies probablyreport this employment, but the figures for fishprocessing are a very small percentage of employ-ment reported by service companies and are im-possible to extract from DET data. The authorsused employment estimates gathered by NMFSfor processing plants because plant managers re-port at least some of this contract labor to NMFS.

According to NMFS, the number of fish process-ing plants in Massachusetts dropped from 112 in

1988 to 73 in 1997. Employment dropped from3,600 employees to 2,600 employees over thesame period. Unfortunately, NMFS no longer col-lects data on the number and employment ofwholesale firms. DET data show that the numberof fish wholesaling firms in Massachusetts increasedfrom 250 to 300 firms between 1988 and 1997.Wholesaling employment, however, dropped from3,100 to 2,600 over the same period.

When considering processing and wholesalingemployment and earnings by port, New Bedford(1,752 employees) and Gloucester (1,581 em-ployees) have both fresh and frozen fish process-ing plants, while Boston (1,063 employees) spe-cializes in fresh fish production and wholesalemarketing. In Massachusetts, 5,219 employeesearned $181 million processing and wholesalingseafood products in 1997.

RETAIL AND FOODSERVICE SALESConsumers buy fish at supermarkets and otherretail outlets for home consumption, and theyorder seafood in restaurants and from other foodservices. Retail outlets in the United States, suchas supermarkets, bought about the same amountof seafood at the wholesale level as restaurantsand food services did in 1997. Because restau-rants and food services add value by preparing

Upscale frozen andfreeze-dried products

for easy preparationin microwave ovens

are high value-addedproducts that are

popular in NorthernEurope, but havenever caught on

in the U.S.

While the freshgroundfish business

has been severelycurtailed due to

reduced availabilityof groundfish, the fish

wholesale businesshas suffered

fewer losses.

Employment and Earnings in Seafood Processingand Wholesaling, 1997Total employment = 5,219 Total earnings = $181 million


823 employees)

Boston($40 million,

1,063employees)

Gloucester($53 million,

1,581 employees)


1,752employees)

meals, their value of sales to consumers wasroughly twice as high as the value of sales to con-sumers at supermarkets and other stores. In1997, according to an NMFS financial model,consumers in the United States bought $15 bil-lion of seafood at retail outlets and ordered $31billion of seafood at restaurants and other foodservices, for total consumption of $46 billion.This figure was up from $27 billion in 1991.There was a slight increase in the retail sales shareof the seafood market over this period.

Consumers are more likely to purchase seafood atsupermarkets than at fish markets and to orderseafood at ordinary restaurants instead of seafoodrestaurants. Because supermarkets and restaurantsare not required to report sales by product, retailfigures for revenues, employment, and earningsfrom seafood are estimated as small percentages ofrevenues, employment, and earnings reported bysupermarkets and restaurants.

During the 1980s most supermarkets establishedseafood departments. National industry sourcescomplained about high costs and low revenuesfrom fresh fish sales, but fish departments, com-plete with lobster tanks, became the industrystandard because they attracted customers to thedeli section. According to surveys by SupermarketBusiness, this trend has continued. Seafood de-partment sales in U.S. supermarkets rose 15 per-cent between 1993 and 1996. Average consumerpurchases rose from $5.70 to $6.30 over the

same period. In 1996, according to the supermar-ket survey, finfish accounted for 40 percent ofrevenue, shrimp for 31 percent, prepared entreesfor 23 percent, and 6 percent for the rest.

To estimate retail fish employment and earnings,we separated the sector into fish markets, fish de-partments in supermarkets, seafood restaurants,and seafood sales at other restaurants. We extract-ed much of these data from larger categories ofemployment in retail and food services, which re-quired some assumptions about shares of employ-ment attributed to seafood sales.

According to iMarket data (DET data do notseparate employment for fish markets), 1,757people worked full time in fish and seafood mar-kets in 1997. A manager of a large supermarketchain in Massachusetts estimates that four em-ployees per store generally work in seafood de-partments. Supermarkets range from 75 to 200employees, with an average of 108 in 1997.Therefore, roughly 4 percent of supermarket em-ployees worked in seafood departments. Employ-ment in Massachusetts supermarkets was 35,000,which would translate to 1,406 people workingin seafood departments. Therefore, approximate-ly 3,163 people worked full time in seafood re-tailing in 1997 at an average annual salary of$16,362 per year, which resulted in $52 millionin total earnings.

Data from iMarket (DET data do not separate em-ployment for seafood restaurants) indicate that4,291 people worked in fish and chips and seafoodrestaurants in 1997. Other restaurants and food ser-vices, ranging from fast-food places such as Mc-Donald’s to white-tablecloth restaurants, however,probably serve the bulk of seafood meals. Food ser-vices prepare meals for schools, colleges, hospitals,factories, office buildings, nursing homes, and otherinstitutions. Marriott Food Services, which servesfood at schools and other institutions, probablyserves more fish meals than any other supplier in thecommonwealth. Multiplying seafood’s share of totalrestaurant and food service sales by Massachusettsemployment in eating and drinking places, and sub-tracting employment in seafood restaurants, pro-vides an estimate of 20,500 employees.


Employment and Earnings in Seafood Retailingand Food Service, 1997Total employment = 27,975 Total earnings = $356 million

Supermarkets($23 million,

1,406 employees) Fish Markets($29 million,

1,757 employees)

SeafoodRestaurants($53 million,

4,291employees)

Other Restaurants and Food Services


In 1997, consumers inthe United States

bought $15 billion ofseafood at retail

outlets and ordered$31 billion of seafood

at restaurants andother food services.


Marine transportation, tourism, and recreation are important sectors in the Massachusetts

marine economy. They comprise 34 percent of thetotal marine economy of the state, second only tocommercial seafood industries. In 1997, 30,471people worked in these sectors, earning $629 mil-lion. Coastal tourism employed the most peopleand generated the most earnings, followed by recre-ational fishing, transportation, recreational boating,and shipbuilding.

The growth in employment for this sector hasbeen modest. Marine transportation’s share ofthe Massachusetts economy declined steadily dur-ing the late 19th and early 20th centuries but hasstabilized more recently. Marine recreation andtourism have also grown at low rates. The au-thor’s 1991 study, which used roughly the samemethods for estimating employment and earningsin these sectors, reported employment of 28,300in 1989. This benchmark implies an averagegrowth rate for employment in this sector ofaround 1 percent per year, which was slightlyhigher than the state’s job growth over the sameperiod. The growth in earnings was much higher.Total earnings in 1989 were $380 million, which

implies a growth rate of about 6 percent per yearin earnings. This was higher than the 4 percentaverage growth of wages in the state’s economy.

TRANSPORTATION AND SHIPBUILDINGWater transportation and shipbuilding employedalmost 2,500 people and paid them $81 millionin 1997. Freight, which includes both foreign anddomestic water transport, employed nearly 600people with a total payroll close to $26 million.Water transportation of passengers employedabout 650 people, who earned almost $14 mil-lion. Other services, which included cargo andhandling, towing, and other water transport ser-vices, employed 700 people and paid them over$24 million. Finally, ship and boat building andrepair employed almost 600 people with a payrollof $17 million.

Between 1990 and 1997, seagoing freight em-ployed an average of 550 people per year, exceptin 1991, when employment climbed to 875.Earnings remained around $30 million per yearthroughout the period. Employment in water

Between 1985 and1990, employment in

ship- and boatbuilding and repairfell from more than6,000 jobs to fewer

than 1,000 jobs, withmost of the drop

immediately after1985, due to the

closing of the Quincy Shipyard.

Marine Transportation, Tourism, and Recreation

passenger transportation, however, increased from438 to 644, and total earnings rose from $8 mil-lion to $14 million.

Employment for water transport services, includ-ing cargo handling, tug and towing services, andother transport services, ranged from 500 to 800over this period, and total payroll varied from $15million to $21 million. These figures do not cap-ture all employment in these services becausesome people are self-employed, andsome of the employment is proba-bly included in firms’ home statesoutside of Massachusetts.

Between 1985 and 1990, employ-ment in ship and boat building andrepair fell from more than 6,000jobs to fewer than 1,000 jobs, withmost of the drop immediately after1985, due to the closing of theQuincy Shipyard. From 1990through 1997, employment variedfrom about 600 to 800 jobs. In1997, employment in this sectorincluded 572 people, who earned$17 million. Most employment inthis category is in boat buildingand repairs; shipbuilding and repairemployed only 130 people in 1996.

COASTAL TOURISMMarine tourism and recreation have always beenimportant social and economic activities in Massa-chusetts. Groups of Native Americans summeredon coastal shores to gather shellfish and to enjoycoastal living long before the Pilgrims arrived.Tourism continues as a major economic activity inthe commonwealth.

In a recent study of whale watching, the authorsconcluded that almost 1 million people paid $21million in 1996 to firms offering this service,mostly in Plymouth and Provincetown. Aboutthree-fourths of this revenue was paid out as wages,salaries, and profits to skippers, crews, owners, andassociated service employees. This estimate doesnot include spending for travel, overnight stays,and other expenses by whale watchers.

According to the Massachusetts Office of Traveland Tourism (MOTT), Massachusetts attracted26.7 million domestic (over one-half from NewEngland) and 1.9 million foreign travelers (aboutone-fourth from Canada) in 1997. Domestictourists paid $9.1 billion in direct expenditures,generating 110,640 jobs that paid a total of nearly$2.4 billion in wages and salaries. Massachusettsranked twenty-first among states in domestic


Employment and Earnings in Water Transportationand Shipbuilding, 1997Total employment = 2,469 Total earnings = $81 million �

Shipbuilding($17 million,

572employees)

Freight($26 million,

553 employees)

OtherServices

($24 million,700

employees) Passengers($14 million,

644employees)

Employment and Earnings from Coastal Tourism by County, 1997Total employment = 23,660 Total earnings = $439 million

Plymouth($60 million,

3,120employees)

Nantucket($32 million,

1,500employees)

Dukes($22 million,

1,240employees)

Essex($115 million,

6,180employees)

Barnstable($159 million,

9,010employees)

Bristol($50 million,

2,610 employees)


tourism. MOTT estimates economic impacts fromdomestic tourism by county. Data were not avail-able for international tourist visits to coastal areas.

In 1997, one-half of total employment and earn-ings from coastal tourism was located on CapeCod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket; touristsvisiting Cape Cod and the islands generated11,750 jobs with a payroll of over $200 million.

Boston is not included as a coastal community,because most tourists do not come to Boston formarine activities. Excluding Boston eliminates amajor share of tourism since Boston is the destina-tion of about one-half of tourists visiting the com-monwealth. Tourists often visit several locations,and analyzing specific spending among these mul-tiple destinations is a major problem in estimatingeconomic impacts of tourism. MOTT takes a con-servative approach to estimating economic im-pacts, which probably leads to an underestimate ofthe economic impact on the commonwealth frommarine tourism. Eliminating spending from inter-national tourists also leads to a conservative esti-mate of economic effects from coastal tourism.

Double counting is another major problem in es-timating employment and payroll from tourism.Economic impacts from recreational fishing over-lap with impacts from tourism. Fortunately,MOTT includes as tourists only people who trav-eled 100 miles one way or stayed overnight. Mostrecreational anglers travel less than this distanceand would therefore not be included in MOTT’stourist data.

According to a MOTT report “Travel & Tourismin Massachusetts,” which was used in the 1991baseline report, 26.8 million U.S. residents and1.3 million international travelers visited the statein 1988. The number of domestic travelers didnot increase between 1988 and 1997, and foreignvisitors increased by 600,000 over the nine-yearspan. Domestic travelers’ expenditures in 1988were $7.4 billion, which generated 112,727 jobsand a payroll of $1.9 billion.

Between 1988 and 1997 travelers’ expendituresincreased an average of 2 percent per year, em-ployment from tourism increased about 1 percentper year, and earnings increased about 4 percent

per year. These increases in jobs and earningsfrom tourism were roughly the same as the in-creases in the overall Massachusetts economy.

The increases in jobs and earnings from tourismin coastal counties in Massachusetts were alsoabout 1 percent per year and 4 percent per year,respectively, from 1988 to 1997, about the samerate of growth as in the Massachusetts economy.Employment and earnings from tourism on CapeCod, however, decreased over this period by 3percent per year and 1 percent per year, respec-tively, reflecting the decline in tourist spendingon Cape Cod of about 4 percent per year. Thedecrease in wages and salaries from tourism onCape Cod was especially significant because it was4 percent lower than the increase in earnings inthe economy as a whole. Cape Cod has evolvedfrom a seasonal tourist location into a year-roundresidential area complete with year-round em-ployment in local industries and businesses.

RECREATIONAL FISHINGRecreational fishing is a rapidly growing activity.Anglers travel to fresh- and saltwater fishing sites,pay license fees, buy or rent boats, buy fishinggear and associated equipment, eat in restaurants,and rent lodging or own vacation homes.Individually and through their organizations, theyhave also become a political force in competingwith the commercial fishing industry for theirshare of fishing stocks. In Florida, whererecreational fishing generated $6 trillion in directand indirect sales in 1996, recreational fishingassociations succeeded in banning commercialfishing in some areas.

According to the most recent National Survey ofFishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Associated Recre-ation by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 429,000saltwater anglers spent almost 4 million days fish-ing in Massachusetts in 1996, spending $222 mil-lion in direct expenditures related to saltwaterrecreational fishing. The American SportfishingAssociation (ASA) uses multipliers to estimate anoverall economic impact of $425 million, whichincludes both spending by recreational anglers andadditional spending induced by these direct ex-penditures. ASA estimates that total direct and in-duced spending generated 5,000 jobs, paying

In 1997, one-half oftotal employment and

earnings fromcoastal tourism was

located on Cape Cod,Martha’s Vineyard,

and Nantucket;tourists visiting Cape

Cod and the islandsgenerated 11,750 jobswith a payroll of over

$200 million.

Extractingemployment from

indirect expendituresused by ASA, the

authors estimate thatdirect expenditures

from saltwaterrecreational fishing

generated 2,600 jobs,paying wages

and salaries of $62 million in 1996.


$120 million in wages and salaries. Extracting em-ployment from indirect expenditures used by ASA,the authors estimate that direct expenditures fromsaltwater recreational fishing generated 2,600 jobs,paying wages and salaries of $62 million in 1996.Using the average increase in wages and salaries inmanufacturing for Massachusetts, these jobs paid$64 million in wages and salaries in 1997.

RECREATIONAL BOATINGThousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, ofpeople sail or use powerboats in Massachusettscoastal waters for recreation other than fishing.The National Marine Manufacturing Association

(NMMA) estimates that Massachusetts boatersspent $120 million in 1996 on boats, motors,trailers, and accessories. NMMA, however, makesno distinction between boats used for fishing andthose used for other purposes. Extrapolating fromtheir data on total expenditure, boaters in thecommonwealth spent about $300 million on allretail and service expenditures for boating.

The NMMA has issued a request for proposalsto estimate economic impacts by state fromboating, but the results from these analyses areat least a year away. There is currently no othereconomic impact analyses of recreational boatingin Massachusetts.


Massachusetts is a world leader in marine technology and education. The common-

wealth is home to dozens of marine research andeducational institutions that range in size from theWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution, which isthe world’s largest independent oceanographic lab-oratory and employs almost 1,000 people, to theMaritime Museum in Cohasset, which employsonly a few people. Some are private, nonprofit or-ganizations like the Marine Biological Laboratoryin Woods Hole, and some are public institutionslike UMass Dartmouth’s Center for Marine Sci-ence and Technology in New Bedford.

Funding for marine research and education comesfrom a variety of sources. Research laboratories, bothprivate and university based, compete for millions ofdollars in federal and private funding. Private andstate colleges and university academic marine pro-grams are funded through tuition and appropria-tions from the commonwealth. Entrance fees andprivate donations fund the various marine museumsand other educational centers.

Estimating employment and earnings in marinetechnology and education was extremely difficult.Defining the scope of marine technology was thefirst challenge. The narrowest definition is the

manufacture of marine instruments, and thewidest definition would incorporate all users ofthose instruments, including fishing vessels. Theauthors followed the definition used by the WoodsHole Oceanographic Institution in several studiesdating back to 1969, which defined marine tech-nology as marine instrumentation, environmentalservices, and research. For this report, marine edu-cation was included in this sector because of theoverlap between research and education.

Estimating employment and earnings providedthe second challenge because data for almost allaspects of marine technology and education areentangled with data from other sectors. Marineinstrumentation, research, and marine environ-mental services do not fit easily into their ownSIC categories. Nautical equipment, for example,is always combined with aeronautical equipment;the Commercial Physical and Biological Researchcategory makes no distinction between marineand other research, and none of the environmen-tal service SIC codes isolates marine environmen-tal services. Furthermore, marine instrumentation,research, environmental firms, and educationalorganizations are usually scattered across a wideassortment of SIC codes.

Marine Technology and Education

The authors estimate that

marine technologyand education in

Massachusettsemployed

9,240 people, whoearned $420 million,

in 1997.


In general, the geographic location of firms pro-ducing instrumentation or providing research andenvironmental services was used to identify thosefirms connected with marine technology. Em-ployment was estimated for specific firms, univer-sities, or research institutions that included ma-rine technology in World Wide Web sites. Websites and other directories were searched for uni-versities, institutions, and museums connected tomarine research and education. A questionnairewas mailed to these organizations, asking for em-ployment figures.

Given these limitations, the authors estimate thatmarine technology and education in Massachu-setts employed 9,240 people, who earned $420million, in 1997.

Trends in employment and earnings could not beestimated for this sector. Earlier studies of marinetechnology either did not estimate employmentand earnings or used different definitions of ma-rine technology. (See the conclusion section forfurther discussion of this issue.)

INSTRUMENTATION Marine instrumentation includes design, devel-opment, manufacture, application, and sales of instruments used to measure geological, seismic,biological, oceanographic, chemical, and meteoro-logical information in and around the ocean, bays,rivers, and lakes. Marine instruments are used to

navigate on and under the sea, monitor oceanprocesses and weather, and map the sea floor tokeep shipping channels open for trade and com-merce. Marine instruments also survey beneath theocean floor in search of oil, gas, and minerals, andmonitor the coasts for pollutants and naturally oc-curring events that affect coastal water quality.

Examples of the marine instruments includeocean bottom survey sonar equipment, acousticpositioning systems, underwater imaging systems,current measurement, data acquisition equip-ment, temperature sensors, weather buoys, navi-gation equipment, marine environmental sensinginstruments, remotely operated underwater vehi-cles, antisubmarine warfare equipment, weldingand machining services, composite materials forflotation, and mooring systems.

Marine technology also includes ocean-marineelectronic services that lease and rent ocean-ographic instruments, execute oceanographic surveys, perform underwater photography and inspection, process marine data, test marine instruments, and analyze marine information re-garding positioning, navigation, and other uses.The employment and earnings for users of marineinstruments in the various sectors of the marineeconomy are included in this report. These sectorsinclude commercial fishing, marine transportationand shipbuilding, marine environmental services,marine research, and marine education. Of the 75marine instrumentation manufacturers listed intheir 1988 study of marine instrumentation, researchers at the Woods Hole OceanographicInstitution located 16 in the commonwealth.

Major users of marine instrumentation include oiland gas exploration companies. Benthos, of NorthFalmouth, produces Remote Operated Vehiclesfor the exploration and production of oil and gas.Many marine instrumentation products are fundedand used by the U.S. Navy for strategic purposes.Industry experts indicate that the share of prod-ucts sold to the U.S. Navy is shrinking and theshare sold to scientific research laboratories andprivate firms is growing. Industry experts also esti-mate that more than one-half of the private sectorproducts and services are exported.

Employment and Earnings in Marine Technologyand Education, 1997Total employment = 9,240 Total earnings = $420 million

Education($41 million,

1,116 employees)

Research($77 million,

1,530employees)

EnvironmentalServices


MarineInstrumentation

($239 million,4,627

employees)


Universities, private research institutions, and gov-ernment-funded research institutions are also majorusers of marine instrumentation. Oceanographicdata are collected with buoys, beacons, and othermeasurement instruments created by marine in-strumentation firms. Webb Products Corp. of EastFalmouth produces small buoys that float in themid-ocean and not at the ocean surface, measuringcurrents that distribute heat throughout the world.Datasonics, Inc., a division of Benthos, is located inCataumet and creates beacons that find blackboxes of downed planes and geophysical systemsthat are mainly used to measure topographical dataand other information.

Marine instrumentation is a “high-tech” industry.These firms employ a higher percentage of profes-sionals and highly skilled workers (scientists andengineers) than other manufacturing industries,which accounts for the much higher wages of thissector of the marine economy. High-technologyindustries require higher-than-average investmentin research and development (R&D). For tech-nology industries in general, this R&D input isestimated to be between 7 and 10 percent ofsales. In some cases the R&D component is ashigh as 15 percent of sales. Because of the highlevels of scientific and engineering skills requiredfor marine electronic innovation, marine instru-mentation firms tend to be clustered in areas nearscientific institutions and universities specializingin marine research.

Identifying marine instrumentation firms fromeither the DET or iMarket data is difficult.Four-digit SIC codes, the most refined data re-ported by DET, do not correspond well withmarine technology. In most cases, marine instru-mentation firms are either small portions of 4-digit categories or are scattered across manydifferent 4-digit codes. Market data were usedbecause they include firms’ addresses, for several4- or 8-digit SIC codes containing marine in-strument producers, and include all firms incoastal cities and towns. Boston was not includ-ed since the city probably contains many firmswithin these SIC codes that are not marine in-strument producers.

Most firms that produce marine instrumentationare small. A few firms, including Sippican OceanSystems Inc. in Marion, which manufacturesoceanographic instrumentation for marine re-search labs and for the Navy, employ several hun-dred people. Some large firms have small divisionsthat produce marine instrumentation. For exam-ple, EG&G, Inc., is a large international corpora-tion with corporate headquarters in Wellesley anda plant in Salem that produces search and naviga-tion equipment. Distributors of marine instru-ments and consultants that specialize in the use ofmarine instrumentation also tend to have relative-ly few employees.

A few organizations represent the marine technol-ogy industry. The Marine Technology Society is aprofessional association with a chapter in NewEngland that is mainly concerned with technicaland professional rather than business issues. TheMassachusetts Ocean Technology Network(MOTN) is a trade association founded in 1994with a small grant from the Bay State Skills Cor-poration. MOTN, which now has about 40 ma-rine instrumentation firms and distributors asmembers, publishes Marine Technology Re-porter, a monthly newsletter, and shares informa-tion and marketing costs among its members. In1999, MOTN received the Export AchievementAward from the Alliance for the Commonwealthand the Massachusetts Port Authority for promot-ing trade and international marketing.

ENVIRONMENTALSERVICESThe growing popular and legal interest in con-serving and regenerating the environment has ledto diverse activities in marine environmental ser-vices. These activities include managing wetlands,fisheries, and other coastal resources; preservingcoastal resources; and reducing pollutants. Vari-ous state and federal laws, such as coastal zonemanagement and fishery regulations, requiresome of these services. In other cases, laws pre-scribe these activities after environmental acci-dents, such as cleaning oil spills. In a few cases,individuals and firms buy these services directly.

The growing popular and

legal interest in conserving

and regenerating the environment

has led to diverse activities

in marineenvironmental

services.

Marineinstrumentation is a

“high-tech” industry.These firms employ ahigher percentage of

professionals andhighly skilled workers

(scientists andengineers) than other

manufacturingindustries, whichaccounts for the

much higher wagesof this sector of the

marine economy.


Government agencies, nonprofit corporations, andprivate companies provide environmental servicesin Massachusetts. Federal government agencies in-clude the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Na-tional Marine Fisheries Service, and the NationalPark Service. The New England District of theU.S. Army Corps of Engineers oversees flood con-trol, shoreline protection, and navigation improve-ments and maintenance. The NMFS has severaloffices and laboratories in Gloucester, includingthe Northeast Regional headquarters. The Nation-al Park Service operates the Cape Cod NationalSeashore, visited by almost 5 million people in1998. The U.S. Congress created the New Eng-land Fishery Management Council in 1977 tomanage fish stocks in federal waters. This organi-zation recently moved to Newburyport.

State government agencies also providemarine environmental services. The De-partment of Fisheries, Wildlife & Envi-ronmental Law Enforcement managesfish stocks within three miles of shore.Massachusetts Coastal Zone Manage-ment, the Department of EnvironmentalManagement, and the Department ofEnvironmental Protection are interlock-ing agencies that manage and protectthe commonwealth’s wetlands andcoastal areas. Most coastal cities andtowns employ shellfish wardens and oth-ers who manage local government ma-rine resources. Finally, private companiessupply marine environmental services.

RESEARCH Massachusetts leads the nation in marine research;much of it located in and around Woods Hole.The Northeast Fisheries Science Center, the direct descendent of Spencer Baird’s marine labo-ratory founded in 1871, is the world’s oldest fisheries research facility. The center employs 180scientists and support staff who investigate fishabundance and other aspects of marine biologyand social science. The Marine Biological Labora-tory currently employs a staff of 200 full-time sci-entists and supporting personnel and hundreds ofvisiting scientists who study various aspects ofcell, marine, and coastal biology and ecology.

The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution(WHOI) is the largest research organization inWoods Hole, employing almost 800 scientistsand staff people, most of whom focus on deepwater oceanography. The U.S. Geological Surveyemploys about 100 people who investigate thecurrent and past underwater geography off theeast coasts of the U.S. and Central America. Thesmallest and most recent Woods Hole researchinstitution, the Woods Hole Research Center,employs 30 people to study global warming, de-forestation, and other issues concerning theglobal environment.

Other marine research and policy organizationsdot the Massachusetts coastline. Manomet Centerfor Conservation Sciences is a private, nonprofitcoastal zone laboratory near Plymouth that spe-cializes in science-based solutions to environmen-

Employment and Earning in Marine Environmental Services, 1997Total employment = 1,967 Total earnings = $63 million

Private($8 million,

129 employees)Local

($3 million,89 employees)

State($23 million,

559 employees)

Federal($29 million,

1,190employees)

Marine Research Laboratories in Massachusetts

Organization Location

Center for Oceanic Research and Education EssexConte Anadromous Fish Research Center Amherst

Manomet Center for Conservation Sciences ManometMarine Biological Laboratories Woods HoleNMFS Northeast Fishery Science Center Woods Hole

Northeast Regional Aquaculture Center DartmouthUMass Center For Marine Science and Technology New BedfordUMass Division of Marine Operations Boston

UMass Gloucester Marine Station GloucesterUMass Nantucket Field Station NantucketUMass Urban Harbors Institute Boston

U.S. Geological Survey Woods HoleWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution Woods HoleWoods Hole Research Center Woods Hole


tal problems. Manomet focuses on sustainableforestry, wetlands conservation, sustainable fish-eries, and avian biodiversity and is funded boththrough grants from government, conservation,and environmental organizations and throughbusiness partnerships.

The commonwealth’s marine technology and re-search capabilities were made famous by the discovery of the Titanic on the ocean floor in 1985.Robert Ballard, director of the Woods Hole Ocean-ographic Institution’s Deep Submergence Lab,used the manned submersible Alvin and unmannedvehicle Jason to explore the ship. The lab continuesits exploration program, using highly sophisticatedmarine electronic hardware and software.

The University of Massachusetts and private uni-versities operate marine research laboratories andfield stations that are usually connected with de-gree programs. Boston University and Massachu-setts Institute of Technology (MIT) have longbeen associated with the research institutions inWoods Hole. MIT and WHOI share the designa-tion of Sea Grant Institutions for Massachusettswithin this federal program. UMass Dartmouth’sCenter for Marine Science and Technology(CMAST) operates a marine science laboratory inNew Bedford, specializing in oceanography, ma-rine biology, and underwater acoustics. TheGloucester Marine Station, which specializes intesting fishery products, is under the direction ofUMass Amherst. The Nantucket Field Sta-tion, the Urban Harbors Institute, and theDivision of Marine Operations are three fa-cilities of UMass Boston, which join togetherfor education, research, and management ofthe coastal environment. The Conte Anadro-mous Fish Research Center is located atUMass Amherst and is funded by the U.S.Department of the Interior. Work at the cen-ter focuses on the habits of salmon and otherocean species in order to reestablish them inNew England rivers and streams. The North-east Regional Aquaculture Center, whichfunds research and pilot programs on aqua-culture, is located at UMass Dartmouth.

Some museums and other nonprofit organi-zations engage in marine research. The New

Bedford Whaling Museum researches the historyand current status of whales and whaling. TheNew England Aquarium has an extensive researchdepartment that investigates many aspects of ma-rine life. These organizations are included in thefollowing section on marine education becauseeducation in the form of permanent or temporarydisplays and educational programs for teachersand students are their major focus. The authorscould not separate their research from their edu-cational employment and earnings.

Some of the information on employees and totalbudgets can be found on public documents or onthe Internet. Some was gathered through confi-dential sources such as telephone conversations orpostcard questionnaires. The employment andpayroll for these institutions are not listed becausesome of these data are confidential. Adding figuresfrom public sources and private inquiries, and tak-ing the most conservative estimates, the authorsestimate that total employment for marine re-search facilities was around 1,500 employees andtheir total payroll was over $75 million in 1997.

EDUCATION Marine education services and organizations inMassachusetts are many and varied and are oftenoverlooked as a sector of the marine economy. Thecoastline evokes interest among many people. In-creasing numbers of educational services, which

Employment and Earnings in Marine Education, 1997Total employment = 1,100 Total earnings = $41 million

K-12 Education($9 million,

275 employees)

Other Education($16 million,

545 employees)

Higher Education($17 million,

296 employees)

The MarineBiological Laboratory

in Woods Holecurrently employs astaff of 200 full-time

scientists andsupporting personnel

and hundreds ofvisiting scientists

who study variousaspects of cell,

marine, and coastalbiology and ecology.


employ hundreds of staff, seek to satisfy this natur-al curiosity.

There is considerable overlap between marine education and research. Many marine science lab-oratories, such as Woods Hole OceanographicInstitution, offer courses and degree programs;academic departments on college campuses com-bine courses and degree programs with marineresearch, and museums specializing in marine ac-tivities usually have research departments.

Marine education also overlaps with tourism. TheNew England Aquarium, which provides bothmarine education and research, is one of the pri-mary tourist attractions in the commonwealth.

As with other sectors in marine technology, stan-dard sources of data on employment and earningswere not very useful. Marine educational organi-zations and attractions are embedded in largercategories. SIC codes do not distinguish betweenmarine and other types of museums, and theyalso combine museums with art galleries.

A wealth of college and university degreeprograms can be found across the state.

Almost all colleges and universities in the com-monwealth offer marine biology and other ma-rine science courses, as well as degree programsranging from bachelor degrees to Ph.D.s in thesefields. UMass Dartmouth separates marine bio-logy from other biology courses and programs.One-third of the 50 biology graduates specified

the marine option in 1997. The registrar thereidentified about 45 UMass Dartmouth graduatesin the sciences, social sciences, and engineeringwho specialized in marine studies in 1997. Fewcolleges and universities, however, separate ma-rine biology and marine science programs fromother biology and science programs, so there isnot an accurate count of numbers of students orfaculty and staff supporting those programs.

For over 100 years, Massachusetts Maritime Aca-demy, located in Buzzards Bay, has trained stu-dents for jobs at sea and in marine-related occupa-tions. About 800 students were enrolled full timethere in 1997. Mass Maritime offers college de-grees in marine engineering, marine transporta-tion, facilities and environmental engineering, andmarine safety and environmental protection.

Web sites of Massachusetts four-year colleges anduniversities list faculty connected with marine sci-ence. We excluded faculty and professional staffwho were listed in other marine research and edu-cation programs, to avoid double counting. Usingthis method, we estimate that 300 faculty taughtin higher education marine degree programs inthe commonwealth in 1998. Using the averagesalary for associate professors (the middle rankamong professors) in 1997, we estimate that totalearnings for these individuals was $17 million.

K-12 programs provide early preparation.

Many high schools and primary schools teachsome aspects of marine studies. Much of the com-monwealth’s population lives near the sea, and thecoastal environment offers teachers the opportuni-ty to connect to children’s natural curiosity abouttheir experiences. Marine biology, chemistry, ge-ology, geography, history, and literature are someof the curriculum fields related to marine studiescovered by K-12 teachers in the commonwealth.

The Massachusetts Marine Educators was formedby high school and higher education faculty whowere interested in sharing ideas and coordinatingtheir work in marine education. The group cur-rently has 300 members. About one-half are highschool teachers; the remainder are college facultyand other marine educators. Massachusetts MarineEducators publishes a newsletter, Flotsam & Jetsam,

Higher Education Marine Science Degree Programs

College or University Department, Program, or Center Location

Boston College Biology Department BostonBoston University Boston University Marine Program Boston

Hampshire College Five College Coastal and Marine Sciences Program AmherstHarvard University Department of Earth and Planetary Science BostonMass Maritime Academy Buzzards Bay

MIT Program for Atmospheres, Oceans, and Climate BostonMount Holyoke College Five College Coastal and Marine Sciences Program South HadleyNortheastern University Marine Science Center Nahant

Smith College Five College Coastal and Marine Sciences Program NorthamptonUMass Amherst Five College Coastal and Marine Sciences Program AmherstUMass Boston Graduate Department of Environmental, Coastal,

and Ocean Sciences Boston

UMass Dartmouth Center For Marine Science and Technology New BedfordUMass Lowell Center for Environmental Engineering, Science, Lowell

and Technology


and runs a High School Marine Science Sympo-sium every spring for high school students and fac-ulty. In 1999, about 600 students attended a totalof 28 workshops on marine topics, led by expertsin their fields.

Other educational programs offer

hands-on classes to the public.

Museums, centers, and aquariums throughoutMassachusetts provide education and informa-tion on marine and coastal topics, such as ma-rine wildlife, maritime history, whaling and fish-ing, and coastal ecology. These organizationsmake information on various aspects of marinelife and habitat easily accessible to the generalpublic. The commonwealth’s coastline and longconnection to the sea draw people to visit andjoin these organizations.

Massachusetts has a rich assortment of marine ed-ucational institutions. The New England Aquari-

um opened in 1969 on Central Wharf inBoston with a 180,000-gallon glass-enclosed,saltwater tank, one of the largest in the coun-try. The aquarium is home to more than6,000 marine animals, and over the years ithas expanded into education programs, publicforums, outreach programs, and marine re-search. The New England Aquarium has re-cently joined with a group in New Bedford toestablish a large aquarium in that city.

The New Bedford Whaling Museum offers ahistoric look at commercial whaling and theeffects that whaling had on the economicstructure of New Bedford and Massachusetts.The museum also offers educational programson whaling and other marine topics and re-searches a wide range of marine issues.

The Plimoth Plantation in Plymouth is aworld-famous re-creation of the Pilgrim vil-lage from the early 1600s. While most of thisliving museum is dedicated to life in the Pil-grim village, much attention is given to ma-rine education and tourism, including full-sizereplicas of the Mayflower and coastal shallopsthat carried trade goods among Colonialports. The authors estimate that 10 percent of

employment at Plimoth Plantation was devotedto marine research and education in 1997.

Many centers along the commonwealth’s coastthat are not directly connected to high schoolsand colleges offer marine education to students,teachers, and other interested groups and indi-viduals. The Sea Education Association in WoodsHole uses large sailing ships as classrooms for“semesters at sea” and “summers at sea” for highschool and college students. The Lloyd Centerfor Environmental Studies in Dartmouth offerscourses and programs for K-12 students andteachers on marine biology, the coastal environ-ment, and the teaching of science to K-12 stu-dents. The Lloyd Center also studies and moni-tors coastal birds and endangered species. TheCenter for Coastal Studies in Provincetown offersone-week courses on coastal ecology, geology,and biology to college students, teachers, andothers. The center also studies whales and theirhabitat around Cape Cod.

For the last five to 10 years, Durfee High School

in Fall River has offered a course in marine

aquaculture. Students in the course taught by

Greg Medeiros and Jack Scammels, both

commercial and recreational fishermen, raise

saltwater and freshwater fish in tanks. Students

study the behavior of the fish, test various feeds

and environmental changes, and analyze market

conditions for products from these species.

Rick Brown, Coordinator of Aquaculture and

Service Occupation Trades at Greater New

Bedford Regional Vocational and Technical

High School, teaches students to breed and

raise tilapia and other aquaculture species and

to grow plants in a hydroponic environment

using waste water from the fish tanks. These

students have constructed dozens of closed

aquaculture and hydroponics systems, which

they give to primary and middle schools

throughout the commonwealth for teachers and

students to use in their classrooms. Students in

culinary arts, under Chef Paul Amaral, prepare,

cook, and serve these fish at school functions.

They have also created recipes for tilapia and

other aquaculture and nontraditional species.


Several large sailing ships offer educa-tion on sailing and marine life. Theschooner Ernestina, which has servedas a Gloucester fishing schooner, Arc-tic explorer, WWII supply ship, andpacket ship between Cape Verde andthe United States, was given by CapeVerde to the people of the UnitedStates in 1982. The Ernestina offersmarine educational programs to K-12students. The fishing schooner Ad-venturer is currently being restored inGloucester to join the Ernestina as anopen-air classroom.

About 550 employees provided educa-tional services to 3 million visitors in1998, indicating that museums, cen-ters, and other public institutions dedi-cated to marine education are an im-portant sector of the marine economyin Massachusetts.

Marine Education Organizations

Organization Location

Battleship Cove Fall RiverCape Ann Historical Museum Gloucester

Cape Cod Museum of Natural History BrewsterCenter for Coastal Studies ProvincetownCustom House Maritime Museum Newburyport

Essex Shipbuilding Museum EssexExpedition Whydah Sea Lab ProvincetownFriendship Salem Maritime Historic Site Salem

Hull Lifesaving Museum HullLloyd Center for Environmental Studies DartmouthMarine Museum at Fall River Fall River

Maritime Museum CohassetNational Marine Life Center, Inc. BourneNew Bedford Whaling Museum New Bedford

New Bedford Whaling National Historical Park New BedfordNew England Aquarium BostonPeabody Essex Museum Salem

Plimoth Plantation PlymouthSandy Bay Historical Society and Museum RockportSchooner Adventurer Gloucester

Schooner Ernestina New BedfordSea Education Association Woods HoleSeaman’s Bethel New Bedford


Employment and earnings in coastal residen-tial construction and real estate are included

in this study because the coast is a marine re-source and an amenity that attracts people tomove there. Growth in coastal population, in-come, building, and real estate sales has increasedsignificantly in the past few decadesand has contributed greatly to themarine economy.

Between 1980 and 1997, the U.S.population grew more than twice asfast as the population in the com-monwealth. Coastal counties inMassachusetts grew much fasterthan the rest of the commonwealth.Between 1980 and 1997, the popu-lation in coastal counties (with theexception of Suffolk) grew by morethan 10 percent. This is more thanthree times faster than the rest of thecommonwealth. Cape Cod and theislands of Martha’s Vineyard andNantucket grew by 33 percent overthis period.

Income in most coastal counties also grew faster

than income in the rest of the commonwealth.

From 1980 to 1997, median household income

grew by 21 percent in coastal counties, compared

to 14 percent in non-coastal counties. While in-

come growth in coastal communities is less promi-

Percentage Growth of Median Household Income, by County,1989 –1995

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Bar

nsta

ble

Duk

es

Nan

tuck

et

Cape

Cod

& Is

land

s

Bri

stol

Esse

x

Nor

folk

Plym

outh

Suffo

lk

Tota

l Coa

stal

Mas

sach

uset

ts

Between 1980 and1997, the populationin coastal countiesgrew by more than

10 percent, morethan three times

faster than the rest ofthe commonwealth.

Cape Cod and theislands of Martha’s

Vineyard andNantucket grew by

33 percent over this period.

Coastal Population and Construction Growth


nent than increases in population, the common-wealth’s residents show a clear preference for lo-cating near the coast. In 1997, almost 4,000 per-mits to build single-family houses worth a total ofover $500 million were issued in Massachusettscoastal communities.

Except for Dukes and Bristol counties, whichboth had high rates of construction in 1990, con-struction of additional single-family houses incoastal counties has increased fasterthan average in Massachusetts. Thehighest increase was in Nantucket,followed by Norfolk, Barnstable,Essex, Plymouth, and Suffolk. Thestate’s overall increase in new single-family homes from 1990 to 1997was 56 percent.

To estimate new housing caused bydemand for coastal living, the nor-mal or expected rate of new housingconstruction was used. It was as-sumed that construction in excess ofthis was caused by demand forcoastal living. The authors estimatedthe expected number of new single-family housing permits and theirtotal value in coastal towns relative

to the state’s, based on their share of state popu-lation. Subtracting expected permits and housingvalues from the actual figures for coastal townsgave an estimate of housing generated by the de-mand for coastal living. Coastal cities were ex-cluded because population has declined or grownlittle in these cities.

Using this method of estimating housing con-struction generated by the demand for coastal liv-ing, the authors concluded that 2,315 permits in1997 for single-family houses worth $329 millioncould be attributed to demand for coastal living.

More than half of single-family construction at-tributed to coastal demand was in BarnstableCounty (Cape Cod), which had 1,271 new hous-es in 1997 that were assumed to be built to meetdemand for coastal living. The largest percentageincrease in construction of single-family homeswas in Nantucket. The total number of permitsgiven there for single family houses from 1990through 1997 equaled 25 percent of the island’shousing, more than five times the average in-crease in Massachusetts.

Total employment in the construction of thesehouses was 4,212 jobs with total earnings of $166million in 1997. Plymouth, Cape Cod, and the is-lands accounted for almost all of this employmentand earnings with more than one-half of this em-ployment in Barnstable County.

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percentage Change in Value of New Single Family Homes,1990–1997

Duke

s

Nan

tuck

et

Bris

tol

Esse

x

Nor

folk

Plym

outh

Suffo

lk

Mas

sach

uset

ts

Barn

stab

le

New Housing Value and Permits Due to Coastal Demand, 1997Total value=$329 million Total permits=2,315

Bristol($12 million,97 permits)

Dukes($26 million,193 permits)

Essex($12 million,98 permits)

Plymouth($51 million, 438 permits)

Nantucket($54 million,218 permits)

Barnstable($174 million,1,271 permits)


The demand for homes in these coastal commu-nities generates sales of existing houses leading toemployment of real estate agents and others. The

authors estimated the expected employment ofreal estate agents for each coastal county as a per-centage of state employment of real estate agentsbased on the county’s population. These esti-mates were subtracted from actual employmentreported to DET to estimate the number of realestate agents generated by coastal demand.Coastal demand generated employment of 300real estate agents with total earnings of $11 mil-lion in the commonwealth. Almost all real estateemployment generated by coastal demand was lo-cated in Plymouth, Cape Cod, and the islands.

Employment and earnings of construction work-ers and real estate agents due to coastal demandin 1997 were probably higher than these figuresindicate, because many construction workers,tradespeople, and real estate agents are self-employed and are therefore not included in theDET figures.

Employment and Earnings in Coastal Residential Construction, 1997Total employment = 4,212 Total earnings = $166 million

Dukes($13 million,

333 employees)

Nantucket($27 million,

691 employees)

Bristol($6 million,

154employees)

Essex($6 million,

154 employees)

Plymouth($26 million,

653 employees)

Barnstable($88 million,

2,227employees)

The marine economy in Massachusetts em-

ployed over 80,000 people who earned al-

most $2 billion in 1997. Roughly half of these

jobs were in commercial seafood industries.

About one-third were in transportation, tourism,

and recreation. Marine technology and education

employed about 10 percent of the total, and con-

struction and real estate due to the demand for

coastal living employed about 5 percent. The av-

erage annual wage in the marine economy was

about $23,000, less than two-thirds of the rough-

ly $36,000 average wage in the commonwealth.

Like most sectors of the Massachusetts economy,

the marine economy has high-paying jobs, mostly

in marine technology and education, and low-

paying jobs in food services and tourism, which

were the major employers in the industry.

In 1997, about 3 percent of the 3 million jobs in

the commonwealth and about 2 percent of the

$100 billion in total earnings in 1997 were generat-

ed by the marine economy. This was a small share

of the Massachusetts economy. State government

alone employed more people, and all government

(federal, state, and local) employed almost five

times as many people as the marine economy did.

The marine economy has declined relative toother sectors of the Massachusetts economy overthe long term. Fishing and other marine activitieswere the backbone of the economy from Colonialtimes through the nineteenth century, but othermanufacturing and services have eclipsed Massa-chusetts’ economic connections to the sea.

From 1988 to 1997, however, the marine econo-my grew slightly more than the Massachusettseconomy in number of jobs and about 2 percentmore than the overall economy in terms of earn-ings, using estimates from the author’s study(Hogan, et al., 1991). Rates of growth were estimated only for the seafood sector and trans-portation, tourism, and recreation. Growth inemployment and earnings in coastal residentialconstruction and marine technology could not beestimated using the benchmark study.

Parts of the marine economy attract significant in-terest from federal and state governments. Thispublic policy attention originates, in part, byrecognition of the commonwealth’s marine andindustrial heritage, needs for resource manage-ment, and public interest combined with recog-nized opportunities to seed private-sector eco-nomic growth.


Conclusions


COMMERCIAL SEAFOODINDUSTRIESDespite mitigation by the New England FisheriesManagement Council, the catch of most com-mercial species continues to fall or remain at lowlevels. The precipitous decline in the catch hasspread beyond fishermen to other sectors of thecommercial seafood industry. Most participantsand observers would agree that fishery manage-ment in New England has failed to either con-serve stocks or preserve the livelihood of peoplewho work in the industry. This is not simply acase of government interference; open access didnot work very well either.

Open access to fisheries generally causes stocks todecline because if one vessel does not catch thefish, another one will. Open access, called “theTragedy of the Commons” in the literature, oftenleads to overfishing, reduced fish stocks, fallingcatches, government subsidies to those harmed byfalling catches, and eventually to more overfish-ing. Few countries or regions have devised poli-cies to interrupt or reverse this cycle.

New regulations offer solutions.

Three options, either individually or in somecombination, offer potential solutions. None ofthese options is easy, and each runs counter todeeply held beliefs concerning open access to thesea and its riches. Each requires that some fisher-men leave the industry; programs to help dis-placed fishermen and onshore workers move intoalternative employment have not been successful.

The first option is to define a set of regulationsthat are supported by most in the industry and toleave these regulations in place long enough toassess their effectiveness. Since the 200-mile limit,the New England Fishery Management Councilhas operated in a crisis atmosphere, often causedby conflicting and inconsistent scientific assess-ments of fish stocks. Regulations governing fish-ing change frequently, causing mistrust amongpeople connected to the industry and loss of trustin the federal agencies governing fishing. Peopleand organizations in the industry have alsolearned to use political levers to influence thecouncil, adding another source of instability.

The second option is to establish some form ofrights to catch fish, such as individual vessel quo-tas, which would mitigate the race to catch asmuch fish as quickly as possible. Individual quotasgive vessel owners incentives to preserve fishingstocks, at least in theory. For individual quotas towork, many problems, including legal issues, haveto be worked out, but individual quotas haveproven successful in some fisheries in other partsof the world.

The third option is to restrict access or defineownership over specific fishing grounds to somefishing organization in order to instill incentivesto rebuild fishing stocks. This is the most radicaldeparture from current fishery management poli-cy, but it has roots in ancient systems of fishingtenancy where islands, villages, or tribes hadclaims over inland or coastal waters and managedthose waters successfully.

Days at sea and stock-recovery policieslook promising.

Individual vessel DAS regulations currently in ef-fect in the groundfish and scallop fisheries in NewEngland have several advantages for vessel owners.They allow owners to fish when they want ratherthan race to catch fish before other boats. Vesselsare allocated approximately half of the days theytraditionally fished, but they can fish those dayswhenever vessel owners or captains decide to.

For the most part, vessels can land whatever theycatch (under earlier regulations that set quotas forspecies, fishermen often had to discard fish, whichhad already died in the net, after the quota forthat species had been reached.) DAS regulationshave advantages to vessel owners who are market-conscious. They use their DAS when demand andprices are high, because fishing days have becometoo valuable to use when prices are low. Underthe DAS, captains and crew can take vacations be-cause they don’t lose days fishing, and also theydon’t have to fish in bad weather.

Rotating areas to fish in order to allow stocks to re-build is another policy that shows promise. In1999, large stocks of mature scallops were discov-ered in areas of Georges Bank that had been closed

to scallop and groundfishing vessels since 1994 toprotect groundfish spawning grounds. The scallopmanagement plan and the groundfish plan wereadjusted to allow scallop vessels to fish these areasas part of their DAS. Due to high prices and in-creased landings, the value of the catch has re-bounded. June 1999 was the first month that scal-lop vessels could fish in the closed areas. Duringthat month the value of scallop landings in NewBedford, the leading scallop port, exceeded $8 mil-lion. This was an increase of nearly $2 million overthe previous month’s landing value. In July 1999,the catch surpassed $9.5 million, near the monthlyrecord in New Bedford. After six months the areaswere closed again because catch limits werereached, and the success of the plan has led to pro-posals to rotate areas fished. The rich scallop catchin 1999 returned New Bedford to the leading fish-ing port in the U.S., a position that it held from1983 to 1991.

TRANSPORTATION,TOURISM, ANDRECREATIONMarine transportation, tourism, and recreationhave also long been connected with public policyranging over time from the construction of LongWharf in Boston in 1710 to the “Massachusetts,Take a Real Vacation” promotion currently onthe Massachusetts Office of Travel and TourismWeb site. Marine transportation, tourism, andrecreation are mature industries in Massachusetts.Employment in this sector has increased at aboutthe same rate as employment for the state, andearnings have increased about 2 percent more peryear than the state average.

Marine transportation has lain dormant for severaldecades. There is little reason to believe thatBoston and other ports in Massachusetts will re-gain the position in shipping that they held in thenineteenth century, and the commonwealth’sstanding in tourism among the states has slippedto twenty-first.

The most promise for this sector rests in thethousands of recreational boats moored in dozens

of harbors along the Massachusetts coastline. Thedockside support services: ship repair, marine sup-plies, engine repair, and other businesses thathave oriented themselves toward these recreation-al boats are flourishing. The stock market boomand general increase in wealth have generated de-mand for all sizes of recreational vessels, includinglarge pleasure craft. Gloucester, Boston, and NewBedford have deepwater ports near city centersthat can moor and service these vessels. Morewould be gained if attractions existed to bringthese boaters ashore and they could reach theseattractions easily. The infrastructure, especially ac-cess to downtown attractions, must be improvedto entice boaters ashore.

MARINE TECHNOLOGYAND EDUCATIONMarine technology and education may be themost promising sector of the marine economy.Massachusetts remains among the world leadersin marine instrumentation, research, and educa-tion. By conservative estimates, 10,000 peopleearning almost $500 million worked in this sectorin 1997. This is the only sector of the marineeconomy with average yearly salaries significantlyabove the state average.

Marine technology has received little attentionfrom state policy makers. Little is known aboutthe size and scope of this sector, and even the de-finition of marine technology has not been re-solved. The Ocean Resources Branch of Hawaii’sDepartment of Business would be a useful modelfor promoting and developing marine technologyin Massachusetts. They publish industry reportsand a directory of ocean research and develop-ment businesses, organizations, academic institu-tions, and government agencies in the state. Thissector of the Massachusetts marine economy,which includes marine instrumentation, research,environmental services, and education, merits itsown study, since a full and detailed investigationis beyond the scope of this study.



Appendix A

COASTAL AREAS Coastal areas are defined as counties, cities, and towns that have access to the ocean, either directly or through river connections, and whose local economies are substantially marine-oriented. Coastal cities and towns in Massachusetts include the following:

Barnstable County: Towns of Barnstable, Bourne, Brewster, Chatham, Dennis, Eastham, Falmouth,Harwich, Mashpee, Orleans, Provincetown, Sandwich, Truro, Wellfleet, Yarmouth

Dukes County: Towns of Chilmark, Edgartown, Gay Head, Gosnold, Oak Bluffs, Tisbury, West Tisbury

Nantucket County: Town of Nantucket

Cape Cod & Islands: Counties of Barnstable, Dukes, and Nantucket

Bristol County: (Partial)Cities and towns of Dartmouth, Fairhaven, Fall River, New Bedford, Somerset, Swansea,Westport

Essex County: (Partial)Cities and towns of Beverly, Essex, Gloucester, Ipswich, Lynn, Manchester, Marblehead,Nahant, Newbury, Newburyport, Rockport, Rowley, Salem, Salisbury, Swampscott

Norfolk County: (Partial)Cities and towns of Cohasset, Quincy, Weymouth

Plymouth County: (Partial)Towns of Duxbury, Hingham, Hull, Kingston, Marion, Marshfield, Mattapoisett,Plymouth, Scituate, Wareham

Suffolk County:Cities and towns of Boston, Chelsea, Revere, Winthrop

Total Coastal Areas: All of the above counties, cities, and towns

Appendix B

INDUSTRIAL CATEGORIESData for the number of employees and total payroll are available for Massachusetts from theDivision of Employment and Training (DET), ES202 file. Industries are classified in terms ofthe Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) code used by the U.S. Department of Commercein its various economic censuses and other reports.

The 2-digit classes are the most comprehensive and are made up of one or more 3-digit class-es. These 3-digit components are thus more detailed breakdowns of industries. In the sameway, the 4-digit industries are breakdowns of the 3-digit industries. Some of the marine in-dustries are adequately captured by 2-digit industries, (e.g., 44, Water Transportation). Othermarine industries are captured by 3-digit industries, (e.g., 091, Commercial Fishing). Othersare 4-digit industries, (e.g., 2092, Fresh and Frozen Fish Processing). Data for the 4-digit in-dustries are not always available in the DET files. Thus, for example, wholesale seafood firms,SIC 5146, are not separately identified from other 514 firms; engineering services, SIC 8711,are not separated from other 871 firms. In yet other cases, even a 4-digit industry breakdownmay not be sufficiently defined to separate out marine activities from non-marine activitieswithin the same category.

Data from iMarket are broken down further than the 4-digit SIC codes used by the DET.Using the SIC code, iMarket adds 2- and 4-digit codes, ending up with 6- and 8-digit codes.This was useful in separating marine activities from non-marine activities, such as SIC 5812,Eating and Drinking Places. With just the DET figure, establishments like Red Lobster, Le-Page’s Seafood, and Long John Silver’s would be included, as well as Outback Steakhouse andMcDonald’s. With the iMarket codes, the list can be refined to seafood-related establishments.



Endnotes

Overview of Employment and Earnings

1. Sources for this section include Of PlymouthPlantation, 1620-1647, by William Bradford (Alfred E.Knopf, 1952), The Maritime History of Massachusetts,by Samuel Morison (Houghton Mifflin, 1921), TheNew England Fishing Industry, by Donald White(Harvard University Press, 1954), Down on T Wharf,by Andrew German (Mystic Seaport Museum, 1982),The Cod Fisheries, by Harold Innis (University ofToronto Press, 1940), Cod: A Biography of the Fishthat Changed the World, by Mark Kurlansky (Walkerand Co. 1997), and “Quincy Shipyard To Close” TheBoston Globe, July 25, 1985, p. 9.

2. Source for quotes from the Fishery Conservationand Management Act is http://www.wh.whoi.edu/magact/.

3. Data for Employment and Earnings in the MarineEconomy in 1997 were taken from other figures inthis report.

Commercial Seafood Industries

1. Sources for this section include The New EnglandFishing Economy, by Peter Doeringer, Philip Mossand David Terkla (University of Massachusetts Press,1986); Troubled Waters: Economic Structure,Regulatory Reform, and Fisheries Trade, by PeterDoeringer and David Terkla (University of TorontoPress, 1995); “Fisheries of the United States”(various years), by NMFS; “The Status of the FisheryResources off the Northeastern United States in1998,” by Northeast Fishery Science Center; Behinda Cape Cod Fish Pier, by Robert Carlisle and GordonG. Zellner (Oyster River Pub, 1996); “The Cost ofHook Fishing for Groundfish in Northeastern UnitedStates” (1998) and “The Cost of Fishing for SeaScallops in Northeastern United States” (1999), byDaniel Georgianna; “The Costs of Small Trawlers inthe Northeast” (1998) and “The Costs of LargeTrawlers in the Northeast” (1999), by PhilippeLallemand et al. (all from the NMFS); NortheastRegion Aquaculture Industry Situation and OutlookReport, 1994-1995, by Spatz, Anderson, and Jancat(1996); “Aquaculture White Paper & Strategic Plan,”by Massachusetts Coastal Zone Management (1995);“New England’s Marine Economy,” by H. Kite-Powellin Connection, Vol. 13.:1 (1998); “The Effects ofReduced Groundfish Landings on New England FreshFish Processors,” by Daniel Georgianna and JoelDirlam (NMFS, 1999); “Recent Adjustments in NewEngland Groundfish Processing,” by DanielGeorgianna and Joel Dirlam in Marine ResourceEconomics, (1994); “1998 Annual Report on the

United States Seafood Industry,” by H.M. Johnsonand Associates; and “The Massachusetts FishingIndustry,” by Daniel Georgianna in MassachusettsBenchmarks (1999).

2. Data for Employment and Earnings in the Seafood Industry, 1997, are from the detailed figuresin this section.

3. The increase in employment and earnings do notinclude fishing supplies and services, becauseemployment for this sector was not included in The Massachusetts Marine Economy, by Hogan,Georgianna, and Huff (1991).

4. Rates of growth in employment and earnings forMassachusetts are taken from the State andMetropolitan Area Data Book, Table A-22, athttp://www.census.gov/prod/ 3/98pubs/smadb-97.pdf.

5. Payments to fishermen by ports in this report differsomewhat from payments reported in “TheMassachusetts Fishing Industry” in MassachusettsBenchmarks. The studies of costs in scalloping andtrawling (see 1, above) which were completed after“The Massachusetts Fishing Industry,” show higherpayments to scallopers and draggers than wereestimated in that article.

6. An interview with a local supermarket personnelcoordinator provided the estimate of four seafoodemployees per supermarket in Massachusetts.

7. Source for Value of Landings by Port, 1976-1997, is Fisheries of the United States and NMFS Web site,http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1/.

8. Source for Value of Landings by Species, 1997, isNMFS, http://www.st.nmfs.gov/st1.

9. Source for Employment and Earnings ofCommercial Fishermen, 1997, is DET, SIC 091,Commercial Fishing (0912, Finfish; 0913, Shellfish)and correspondence from NMFS on the number offishing vessels in Massachusetts.

10. Sources for Payments for Commercial FishingServices, 1997, are “The Cost of Hook Fishing forGroundfish in Northeastern United States” (1998) and“The Cost of Fishing for Sea Scallops in NortheasternUnited States” (1999) by Daniel Georgianna, “TheCosts of Small Trawlers in the Northeast” (1998)”and “The Costs of Large Trawlers in the Northeast”(1999) by Philippe Lallemand et al.

11. Source for Employment and Earnings inCommercial Fishing Services, 1997, is DET: SIC 3731,Shipbuilding and Repairing; 5541, Gasoline ServiceStations; 5551, Boat Dealers; 6141, Personal CreditInstitutions; 6411, Insurance Agents, Brokers, andService; and 8721, Accounting, Auditing, andBookkeeping Services.

12. Source for Wholesale Value of Processed SeafoodProducts, 1979-1997, is NMFS and NortheastFisheries Science Center, http://www.wh.whoi.edu/noaa.html.

13. Sources for output/labor ratios were for 1992 andinclude Census of Retail Trade, Census of ServiceIndustries, Census of Manufactures, and Census ofFinancial, Insurance, and Real Estate Industries.

14. Source for Employment and Earnings in SeafoodProcessing and Wholesaling, 1997, is DET, SIC 209,Miscellaneous Food Preparations and KindredProducts (2091, Canned and Cured Fish and Seafoods;2092, Prepared Fresh or Frozen Fish and Seafoods),and 5146, Fish and Seafoods, Wholesale Distributors.

15. The sources for the descriptive information in the“Retail and Food Service Sales” section are theAnnual Report on the United States Seafood Industry,by H.M. Johnson, and several studies of fishprocessing by Georgianna et al.

16. Sources for Seafood Retailing and Food ServiceEmployment and Earnings, 1997, are iMarket, Inc.MarketPlace: 5411-01, Supermarkets; 5421-01, Fishand Seafood Markets; 5812-07, Eating and DrinkingPlaces, Seafood Restaurants, and DET, SIC 581,Easting and Drinking Places.

17. Employment for seafood departments in super-markets (four percent of total employment), fishmarkets, and seafood restaurants were taken fromiMarket, Inc. MarketPlace data. Employment in otherrestaurants and food services was estimated as (thepercent of sales from seafood in the U.S. eating anddrinking places) times (Massachusetts employmentfor eating and drinking places from DET) minus(employment in seafood restaurants.)

Marine Transportation, Tourism,

and Recreation

1. Sources for this section include The Demand forWhalewatching at Stellwagen Bank National MarineSanctuary, by P. Hoagland and A. Meeks, 1997.Mimeo, WHOI; The Economic Importance of SportFishing, by the American Sport Fishing Association,1998; and The Statistical Abstract of the UnitedStates, 1999.

2. Data for Employment and Earnings in MarineTransportation, Recreation, and Tourism, 1997 aretaken from other figures in this section.

3. Web sites are Northeast Fishery Science Center athttp://www.wh.whoi.edu/noaa.html; theMassachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism athttp://www.mass-vacation.com/ research.html;American Sport Fishing Association at

www.asafishing.org; the National Marine Manufac-turing Association at http://www.nmma.org/facts/boatingstats; Massachusetts DET at http://www.detma.org/lmi/es-202/202973d.txt; and MassachusettsInstitute for Social and Economic Research (MISER) athttp://www.umass.edu/miser/.

4. Sources for Employment and Earnings in WaterTransportation and Shipbuilding, 1997, are DET, SIC373, Ship and Boat Building and Repairing (3731, ShipBuilding and Repairing; 3732, Boat Building andRepairing); 44, Water Transportation [441, Deep SeaForeign Transportation of Freight, 442, Deep SeaTransportation of Freight, 443, Freight Transportationon the Great Lakes – St. Lawrence Seaway, 444,Water Transportation of Freight, NEC, 448, WaterTransportation of Passengers, 449, ServicesIncidental to Water Transportation (4491, MarineCargo Handling, 4492, Towing and Tugboat Services,4493, Marinas, 4499, Water Transportation Services)].

5. Source for Employment and Earnings from CoastalTourism by County, 1997, is Travel & Tourism inMassachusetts, MOTT report, 1989, and MOTT Webpage at http://www.mass-vacation.com/research. html.

Marine Technology and Education

1. Sources for this section include the Final Report ofthe Massachusetts Marine Science and TechnologyEducation Study, 1969, by Scott Daubin and JamesMavor (WHOI); Determining the Structure of theUnited States Marine Instrumentation Industry and ItsPosition in the World Industry, 1988, by James M.Broadus, Peter Hoagland, and Hauke Kite-Powell(WHOI); Developing a National Marine ElectronicsAgenda: Proceedings of the Marine InstrumentationPanel Meeting September 12–14, 1989 (WHOI); andMassachusetts Marine Sector Report, 1995,Committee on Marine Science and Technology,UMass Dartmouth.

2. Data for Employment and Earnings in MarineTechnology and Education, 1997, are taken from otherparts ot this section.

3. OSHA’s Web site at http://www.osha.gov/oshstats/sicser.html provided SIC codes connected withmarine instrumentation and technology. The followingcodes were determined to be relevant:

3812 Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance,Aeronautical, and Nautical

3822 Automatic Controls for Regulating Residential And Commercial

3823 Industrial Instruments for Measurement,Display, and Control

3824 Totalizing Fluid Meters and Counting Devices



3826 Laboratory Analytical Instruments

3829 Measuring and Controlling Devices, NotElsewhere Classified

3861 Photographic Equipment and Supplies

8731 Commercial Physical and Biological Research

4. Sources for Employment and Earnings in MarineEnvironmental Services, 1997, are Web sites and asurvey of environmental institutions.

5. Employment at Woods Hole research institutionstaken from http://www.whoi.edu/generalinfo/whsc/on history of marine research and educationalinstitutions in Woods Hole.

6. Employment for the research institutions camefrom surveys and Web sites.

7. The authors searched the Internet for everyuniversity and four-year college in Massachusetts tolocate marine programs. Only marine degreeprograms and not specific courses that relate tomarine studies were identified.

8. Most Web sites that list marine programs includefaculty in those programs. This count was used toidentify employment, after eliminating faculty listedelsewhere in other marine programs.

9. Salary for associate professors is taken from AAUPSalary Survey for 1997 to compute total payroll fordegree programs.

10. Hundreds and perhaps thousands of K-12 facultyteach various aspects of marine topics. The authorstried to identify teachers who specialize in marinestudies by using the membership in the Massachu-setts Marine Educators Association and estimatedthat one-half of the membership are K-12 faculty.

11. The Web site of the Massachusetts Office ofTravel and Tourism and its publicity pamphlets weresearched for names of marine museums and otherattractions. The Web site for that organization wasthen searched for information on activities andemployment.

12. Letters were sent explaining the project with anaddressed postcard asking for number of visitors,number of employees, and annual payroll, all for1998. The response rate was about 50 percent.

13. The average of employees and salaries from thepostcard survey (after eliminating a few largeorganizations) was used to estimate employment andsalary for those institutions for which the authors hadno data. These averages were five employees andsalary of $25,736.

14. Sources for Employment and Earnings in MarineEducation, 1997, are Web sites for colleges and

universities with marine science programs,membership in the Massachusetts Marine EducatorsAssociation, and the postcard survey of marinemuseums and other marine educational institutions.

Coastal Population and Construction

Growth

1. Sources for Percentage Growth of MedianHousehold Income by County, 1980-1995 are theU.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/population/www/index.html and http://www.census.gov/datamap/www/25.html.

2. This analysis of coastal versus non-coastal incomewas taken from a model developed by the U.S.Census Bureau and estimates household income,rather than income per person. Single people, whogenerally have lower income than multiple-personfamilies, are considered households by the census.Single-person households probably live in greaternumbers in Boston and in coastal communities andtherefore cause a downward bias in coastal householdincome. The use of median (middle household)income rather than average income caused additionalcomplications. For example, a higher-than-average-income family that experiences divorce would reducemedian household income more than averagehousehold income. The 2000 census, when available,will give us better estimates for income growth.

3. For Percentage Change in Value of New Single-Family Homes, 1990-1997, population for eachcounty was estimated by adding the populations forthe coastal towns of each county. For example,Barnstable County’s population was estimated byadding the populations of all the coastal towns inBarnstable. Source for this information is the officialCommonwealth of Massachusetts Web page, “At aGlance” Index of Cities and Towns, http://www.state.ma.us/dls/glance/aagindx.htm. The percentage ofresidential construction to total construction, 26percent, is taken from Statistical Abstract of theUnited States, for Massachusetts, Table 1196. Totalconstruction employment and average wage for totalconstruction is from the DET, http://www.detma.org/lmi/es-202/202973d.txt. Real (not expected) housingpermit distribution by town was supplied byMassachusetts Institute for Social and EconomicResearch (MISER).

4. Sources for New Housing Value and Permits dueto Coastal Demand, 1997, are the officialCommonwealth of Massachusetts Web page,http://www.state.ma.us/dls/glance/aagindx.htm, andthe DET Web site, http://www.detma./org/lmi/es-202/202973.

5. To estimate housing construction due to coastaldemand, the expected number of permits as thetown’s share (using population) of total state permits


was calculated. Coastal new housing is the differencebetween the actual number of permits minus thisexpected number of permits. Value was computed asthe number of permits times the average value of thetown’s new single-family houses.

6. All cities and Fairhaven, Somerset, Swansea,Manchester, Nahant, Newburyport, Swampscott,Cohasset, Hingham, Hull, Wareham, Chelsea, andWinthrop were excluded from the estimate for coastalconstruction because of their low rates of growth.

7. To estimate employment and payroll for residentialconstruction of the housing attributed to coastaldemand, the authors took the percentage of totalconstruction in Massachusetts that was residential(26 percent) from the Statistical Abstract of theUnited States, Table 1196. That number wasmultiplied by the share of total residentialconstruction in Massachusetts attributed to coastaldemand, and we multiplied that percentage by totalemployment and earnings from construction inMassachusetts from DET ES202 files.

8. When graphing employment of real estate agents,only five counties had more agents than was expected.Of these, Suffolk was excluded because of the size ofBoston’s population. Also, people do not tend to moveto Boston to live near the coast, but for other amenities.Therefore, only Barnstable, Dukes, Norfolk, andNantucket counties were graphed.

9. Source for Employment and Earnings in CoastalResidential Construction, 1997, is DET, SIC 1521,Residential Construction.

Conclusions

1. Source for total employment and earnings inMassachusetts is Massachusetts DET atwww.detma.org/lmi.htm.

2. Assessment of DAS from the vessel owners’perspective was provided by Barbara Stevenson in aJanuary 26, 2000, communication to Fishfolk, an e-mail list-serve.

0 10 20

MILES

MASSACHUSETTS PORTS

✫ International Ports

Truro

Wellfleet

Revere

Chelsea Winthrop

Ipswich

Swampscott

Marblehead

Manchester

GLOUCESTER

Rockport

Nahant

Lynn

Beverly

Essex

Rowley

Newbury

NewburyportSalisbury

SALEM

Quincy

BOSTON

Duxbury

Kingston

Eastham

Plymouth

Provincetown

Cohasset

Hull

HinghamWeymouth

Marshfield

Scituate

Gayhead

Oak Bluffs

Dartmouth

Marion

MattapoisettBarnstable

Tisbury

Chatham

Falmouth

Fairhaven

Nantucket

FALL RIVER

Wareham

Edgartown

BrewsterSwansea

Harwich

Chilmark

Somerset

NEW BEDFORDYarmouth

BourneSandwich Dennis

West Tisbury

Gosnold

Westport Mashpee

Orleans

✫

✫

✫

✫

✫

R

Creative Services provided by Plouffe Inc., Amherst, MA

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS DONAHUE INSTITUTESEPTEMBER 2000

the massachusetts economic developmentmvezrub.massbenchmarks.org/publications/studies/... · the...

Documents