The Experts below are selected from a list of 91986 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ray Hilborn - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effective Fisheries Management instrumental in improving fish stock status
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020Co-Authors: Ray Hilborn, Ricardo O Amoroso, Christopher M Anderson, Julia K Baum, Trevor A Branch, Christopher Costello, Carryn L De Moor, Abdelmalek Faraj, Daniel J Hively, Olaf P JensenAbstract:Marine fish stocks are an important part of the world food system and are particularly important for many of the poorest people of the world. Most existing analyses suggest overfishing is increasing, and there is widespread concern that fish stocks are decreasing throughout most of the world. We assembled trends in abundance and harvest rate of stocks that are scientifically assessed, constituting half of the reported global marine fish catch. For these stocks, on average, abundance is increasing and is at proposed target levels. Compared with regions that are intensively managed, regions with less-developed Fisheries Management have, on average, 3-fold greater harvest rates and half the abundance as assessed stocks. Available evidence suggests that the regions without assessments of abundance have little Fisheries Management, and stocks are in poor shape. Increased application of area-appropriate Fisheries science recommendations and Management tools are still needed for sustaining Fisheries in places where they are lacking.
-
ecosystem based Fisheries Management perception on definitions implementations and aspirations
PLOS ONE, 2018Co-Authors: John T Trochta, Maite Pons, Merrill B Rudd, Melissa Krigbaum, Alexander Tanz, Ray HilbornAbstract:Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management (EBFM) was developed to move beyond single species Management by incorporating ecosystem considerations for the sustainable utilization of marine resources. Due to the wide range of fishery characteristics, including different goals of Fisheries Management across regions and species, theoretical best practices for EBFM vary greatly. Here we highlight the lack of consensus in the interpretation of EBFM amongst professionals in marine science and its implementation. Fisheries policy-makers and managers, stock assessment scientists, conservationists, and ecologists had very different opinions on the degree to which certain Management strategies would be considered EBFM. We then assess the variability of the implementation of EBFM, where we created a checklist of characteristics typifying EBFM and scored Fisheries across different regions, species, ecosystems, and fishery size and capacity. Our assessments show Fisheries are unlikely to meet all the criteria on the EBFM checklist. Consequentially, it is unnecessary for Management to practice all the traits of EBFM, as some may be disparate from the ecosystem attributes or fishery goals. Instead, incorporating some ecosystem-based considerations to Fisheries Management that are context-specific is a more realistic and useful way for EBFM to occur in practice.
-
Fisheries Management impacts on target species status
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017Co-Authors: Michael C Melnychuk, Emily A Peterson, Matthew Elliott, Ray HilbornAbstract:Fisheries Management systems around the world are highly diverse in their design, operation, and effectiveness at meeting objectives. A variety of Management institutions, strategies, and tactics are used across disparate regions, fishing fleets, and taxonomic groups. At a global level, it is unclear which particular Management attributes have greatest influence on the status of fished populations, and also unclear which external factors affect the overall success of Fisheries Management systems. We used expert surveys to characterize the Management systems by species of 28 major fishing nations and examined influences of economic, geographic, and fishery-related factors. A Fisheries Management Index, which integrated research, Management, enforcement, and socioeconomic attributes, showed wide variation among countries and was strongly affected by per capita gross domestic product (positively) and capacity-enhancing subsidies (negatively). Among 13 Management attributes considered, three were particularly influential in whether stock size and fishing mortality are currently in or trending toward desirable states: extensiveness of stock assessments, strength of fishing pressure limits, and comprehensiveness of enforcement programs. These results support arguments that the key to successful Fisheries Management is the implementation and enforcement of science-based catch or effort limits, and that monetary investment into Fisheries can help achieve Management objectives if used to limit fishing pressure rather than enhance fishing capacity. Countries with currently less-effective Management systems have the greatest potential for improving long-term stock status outcomes and should be the focus of efforts to improve Fisheries Management globally.
-
when can marine reserves improve Fisheries Management
Ocean & Coastal Management, 2004Co-Authors: Ray Hilborn, Kevin Stokes, Jeanjacques Maguire, Tony Smith, Louis W Botsford, Marc Mangel, Jose Maria Orensanz, Ana M Parma, Jake Rice, Johann D BellAbstract:Marine reserves are a promising tool for Fisheries Management and conservation of biodiversity, but they are not a panacea for Fisheries Management problems. For Fisheries that target highly mobile single species with little or no by-catch or habitat impact, marine reserves provide few benefits compared to conventional fishery Management tools. For Fisheries that are multi-species or on more sedentary stocks, or for which broader ecological impacts of fishing are an issue, marine reserves have some potential advantages. Their successful use requires a case-by-case understanding of the spatial structure of impacted Fisheries, ecosystems and human communities. Marine reserves, together with other fishery Management tools, can help achieve broad fishery and biodiversity objectives, but their use will require careful planning and evaluation. Mistakes will be made, and without planning, monitoring and evaluation, we will not learn what worked, what did not, and why. If marine reserves are implemented without case by case evaluation and appropriate monitoring programs, there is a risk of unfulfilled expectations, the creation of disincentives, and a loss of credibility of what potentially is a valuable Management tool.
Martin Aranda - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Precautionary approach to Fisheries Management: How this is taken into account by Tuna regional Fisheries Management organisations (RFMOs)
Marine Policy, 2013Co-Authors: Paul De Bruyn, Hilario Murua, Martin ArandaAbstract:Abstract For several decades it has been acknowledged that there is an urgent need for new approaches to Fisheries Management, embracing conservation and environmental considerations. The voluntary Code of Conduct on Responsible Fishing and the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement provide the formal basis for the Precautionary Approach to Fisheries Management. Some tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organisations such as the WCPFC and IATTC make explicit mention of these codes in their conventions, whilst others, whose conventions do not explicitly address the Precautionary Approach, are searching for ways in which to take these codes into consideration. In practical terms, the scientific obligations to Precautionary Approaches are to determine the status of the stock(s) relative to limit and target reference points, to predict outcomes of Management alternatives for reaching the targets and avoiding the limits, and to characterise the uncertainty in both cases. A convenient framework to conduct Management evaluations is through the use of harvest control rules, for which managers agree on specific Management actions under their control which are evoked according to levels of stock status relative to predefined reference points. These pre-agreed Management actions are then simulated for a range of scenarios. This paper presents the ways in which tuna RFMOs are currently incorporating the precautionary approach in their Fisheries Management as well as suggestions for possible best practice.
Hilario Murua - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
report card on ecosystem based Fisheries Management in tuna regional Fisheries Management organizations
Fish and Fisheries, 2018Co-Authors: Maria Jose Juanjorda, Hilario Murua, Haritz Arrizabalaga, Nicholas K Dulvy, Victor RestrepoAbstract:International instruments of Fisheries governance have set the core principles for the Management of highly migratory fishes. We evaluated the progress of tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (tRFMOs) in implementing the ecological component of ecosystem‐based Fisheries Management (EBFM). We first developed a best case tRFMO for EBFM implementation. Second, we developed criteria to evaluate progress in applying EBFM against this best case tRFMO. We assessed progress of the following four ecological components: target species, bycatch species, ecosystem properties and trophic relationships, and habitats. We found that many of the elements necessary for an operational EBFM are already present, yet they have been implemented in an ad hoc way, without a long‐term vision and a formalized plan. Overall, tRFMOs have made considerable progress monitoring the impacts of Fisheries on target species, moderate progress for bycatch species, and little progress for ecosystem properties and trophic relationships and habitats. The tRFMOs appear to be halfway towards implementing the ecological component of EBFM, yet it is clear that the “low‐hanging fruit” has been plucked and the more difficult, but surmountable, issues remain, notably the sustainable Management of bycatch. All tRFMOs share the same challenge of developing a formal mechanism to better integrate ecosystem science and advice into Management decisions. We hope to further discussion across the tRFMOs to inform the development of operational EBFM plans.
-
The Precautionary approach to Fisheries Management: How this is taken into account by Tuna regional Fisheries Management organisations (RFMOs)
Marine Policy, 2013Co-Authors: Paul De Bruyn, Hilario Murua, Martin ArandaAbstract:Abstract For several decades it has been acknowledged that there is an urgent need for new approaches to Fisheries Management, embracing conservation and environmental considerations. The voluntary Code of Conduct on Responsible Fishing and the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement provide the formal basis for the Precautionary Approach to Fisheries Management. Some tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organisations such as the WCPFC and IATTC make explicit mention of these codes in their conventions, whilst others, whose conventions do not explicitly address the Precautionary Approach, are searching for ways in which to take these codes into consideration. In practical terms, the scientific obligations to Precautionary Approaches are to determine the status of the stock(s) relative to limit and target reference points, to predict outcomes of Management alternatives for reaching the targets and avoiding the limits, and to characterise the uncertainty in both cases. A convenient framework to conduct Management evaluations is through the use of harvest control rules, for which managers agree on specific Management actions under their control which are evoked according to levels of stock status relative to predefined reference points. These pre-agreed Management actions are then simulated for a range of scenarios. This paper presents the ways in which tuna RFMOs are currently incorporating the precautionary approach in their Fisheries Management as well as suggestions for possible best practice.
R. A. Stevens - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
implementing effective Fisheries Management systems Management strategy evaluation and the australian partnership approach
Journal of Materials Science, 1999Co-Authors: Anthony D.m. Smith, Keith Sainsbury, R. A. StevensAbstract:Fisheries Management is characterized by multiple and conflicting objectives, multiple stakeholders with divergent interests and high levels of uncertainty about the dynamics of the resources being managed. This conjunction of issues can result in high levels of contention and poor outcomes in the Management process. Management strategy evaluation (MSE) can assist in the resolution of these issues. MSE involves assessing the consequences of a range of Management options and laying bare the trade-offs in performance across a range of Management objectives. Key steps in the approach involve turning broad objectives into specific and quantifiable performance indicators, identifying and incorporating key uncertainties in the evaluation, and communicating the results effectively to client groups and decision-makers. At a technical level, the framework facilitates dealing with multiple objectives and uncertainties in prediction. At the implementation level, it fails if it cannot accommodate effective stakeholder participation and acceptance. MSE shares many features with approaches such as adaptive Management and development of Management procedures. The principles for implementing the MSE approach are reviewed and practical aspects of its implementation under the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) partnership model to Fisheries Management are discussed. The model stresses stakeholder involvement in all key areas of Fisheries Management, from stock assessment and setting research priorities, to enforcement and decision-making. Stakeholder involvement, including industry, science, and conservation, extends from membership of the AFMA Board, through Management Advisory Committees to Fisheries Assessment Groups. The benefits and limitations of the AFMA partnership approach are reviewed, both for MSE, and, in a wider sense, in the development of an effective Fisheries Management system.
-
Implementing effective Fisheries-Management systems – Management strategy evaluation and the Australian partnership approach
ICES Journal of Marine Science, 1999Co-Authors: Anthony D.m. Smith, Keith Sainsbury, R. A. StevensAbstract:Fisheries Management is characterized by multiple and conflicting objectives, multiple stakeholders with divergent interests and high levels of uncertainty about the dynamics of the resources being managed. This conjunction of issues can result in high levels of contention and poor outcomes in the Management process. Management strategy evaluation (MSE) can assist in the resolution of these issues. MSE involves assessing the consequences of a range of Management options and laying bare the trade-offs in performance across a range of Management objectives. Key steps in the approach involve turning broad objectives into specific and quantifiable performance indicators, identifying and incorporating key uncertainties in the evaluation, and communicating the results effectively to client groups and decision-makers. At a technical level, the framework facilitates dealing with multiple objectives and uncertainties in prediction. At the implementation level, it fails if it cannot accommodate effective stakeholder participation and acceptance. MSE shares many features with approaches such as adaptive Management and development of Management procedures. The principles for implementing the MSE approach are reviewed and practical aspects of its implementation under the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) partnership model to Fisheries Management are discussed. The model stresses stakeholder involvement in all key areas of Fisheries Management, from stock assessment and setting research priorities, to enforcement and decision-making. Stakeholder involvement, including industry, science, and conservation, extends from membership of the AFMA Board, through Management Advisory Committees to Fisheries Assessment Groups. The benefits and limitations of the AFMA partnership approach are reviewed, both for MSE, and, in a wider sense, in the development of an effective Fisheries Management system.
Paul De Bruyn - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Precautionary approach to Fisheries Management: How this is taken into account by Tuna regional Fisheries Management organisations (RFMOs)
Marine Policy, 2013Co-Authors: Paul De Bruyn, Hilario Murua, Martin ArandaAbstract:Abstract For several decades it has been acknowledged that there is an urgent need for new approaches to Fisheries Management, embracing conservation and environmental considerations. The voluntary Code of Conduct on Responsible Fishing and the United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement provide the formal basis for the Precautionary Approach to Fisheries Management. Some tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organisations such as the WCPFC and IATTC make explicit mention of these codes in their conventions, whilst others, whose conventions do not explicitly address the Precautionary Approach, are searching for ways in which to take these codes into consideration. In practical terms, the scientific obligations to Precautionary Approaches are to determine the status of the stock(s) relative to limit and target reference points, to predict outcomes of Management alternatives for reaching the targets and avoiding the limits, and to characterise the uncertainty in both cases. A convenient framework to conduct Management evaluations is through the use of harvest control rules, for which managers agree on specific Management actions under their control which are evoked according to levels of stock status relative to predefined reference points. These pre-agreed Management actions are then simulated for a range of scenarios. This paper presents the ways in which tuna RFMOs are currently incorporating the precautionary approach in their Fisheries Management as well as suggestions for possible best practice.