51
Figure 14: Real and theoretical competitiveness vector of actors
Figure 15: Difference between the real, and theoretical competitiveness vector of actors.
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
ME MFFP MILGA MTH
MIM
MF EDA EDS
DFAA
DFAS
DTHA DTVE NCCA NCGS WA WS MER F ST TFO SFO P AF FPC MUPA FPE FPS FSA TO IO HTC BMUA OU FATC NCFA FA EPA NA M RF
MDII competitiveness vector (R i )
In theory
Real
-0,8
-0,6
-0,4
-0,2
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
ME MFFP MILGA MTH
MIM
MF EDA
EDS
DFAA DFAS
DTHA DTVE
NCCA NCGS WA WS
MER
F
ST TFO SFO P
AF
FPC MUPA
FPE
FPS FSA TO IO HTC BMUA OU FATC NCFA FA EPA NA M RF
R i in theory - Real R i
Ri
Actor‟s competitiveness ranges from 0.06 (RF) to 3.24 (M) in theory, and from 0.06 (RF) to
3.31 (M) in real MSP. The most competitive actors in both systems are M, NCGS, and MICLAT
meaning that their dependences, and retroactions are insignificant compared to their influences.
While the least competitive actors are recreational fishermen (RF), and small trades (ST) in both
systems along with the national coastal commission (NCAA), and nautical activities (NA) in
real MSP, which means that not only are they very influent, and dependent, but they also have
high retroaction on themselves.
As for the rest of the actors, we notice a lot of shifts in their R i rank as illustrated in figure 15.
Of the 40 actors, 19 are more competitive in real MSP than in theory, 19 others are more
competitive in theory than in real MSP, and the two remaining actors: department of fisheries,
and aquaculture of Annaba (DFAA), and RF show no difference of competitiveness. The most
relevant differences in competitiveness correspond to the ministry of tourism, and handicrafts (MTH),
the department of training, and vocational education (DTVE), and the ministry of industry, and mines
(MIM) who are more competitive in real MSP than in theory, and NCAA, F, and MER who on the
contrary are more competitive in theory than in real MSP.