NEAFC request on Ecosystem Approaches to Fisheries Management

ICES advises that approaches to implement an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), and methods within approaches, are selected based on available evidence and data, resources to support development and implementation, understanding of stakeholder and management priorities, and strength of links to management actions.Implementation of an EAFM may be incremental, for example through restricting initial scope and expanding to more EAFM issues and/or initially screening many EAFM issues with less resource‑demanding approaches to identify priorities for additional assessment.

ICES advises that operational ecological objectives for an EAFM should be considered for the range of ecological issues described in the FAO Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Implementation Monitoring Tool (FAO, 2021). Clarifying the interpretation of NEAFC higher-level objectives and creating operational objectives will help identify and prioritize management issues to address. Processes for setting operational objectives for an EAFM are generally most successful when they are inclusive, consultative, informed by evidence, and based on shared understanding between managers, scientists, and stakeholders. Operational objectives should be linked to existing and potential management actions within the competence of the managing authority or authorities.

Five approaches for implementing an EAFM are described.These range from risk assessments suitable for application in data‑limited circumstances to approaches reliant on collection and processing of a wide range of fisheries and ecosystem data. The approaches, approximately ordered from low to high in terms of complexity and data needs, are: Qualitative Risk Assessment (Qualitative RA), Semi-quantitative Risk Assessment (Semi-quantitative RA), Ecosystem Status Indicators Framing Fisheries Decision-making (ESI), The Northwest Atlantic Fisheries (NAFO) Organization Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (NAFO EAF), and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). Approaches and associated methods and elements overlap, so this is not a strictly categorical ordering. Qualitative RA and Semi-quantitative RA are groupings of many methods applied in many jurisdictions by governmental and non-governmental organizations. ESI comprises a set of similar methods used in some jurisdictions by governmental organizations. NAFO EAF and MSFD are each used in single jurisdictions.

Systematic comparisons of the five approaches are made. These reveal similarities and differences in the range and scope of operational objectives, the definition of reference points, monitoring and assessment requirements, timelines and resources for development and implementation, maturity of underpinning science, the extent to which objectives are met through fisheries management actions, the contribution of the approaches to an EAFM, and the benefits and drawbacks of the approaches.

Qualitative RA is usually applied when the evidence base is sparse or has varied characteristics and uncertainties. Methods of Qualitative RA provide risk assessments to support general guidance on management actions and highlight EAFM issues for additional investigation. Semi-quantitative RA is applied when some quantitative data are available. Many methods of Semi-quantitative RA are available, with their selection depending on available data. The methods can lead to precise advice on management actions. ESI makes use of a broad range of data types and supplements existing management decision-making processes with EAFM information to provide context to decisions. The information provides a stronger link to management decision‑making when delivered via risk tables. NAFO EAF addresses EAFM issues related to fisheries production and the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems (VME). The approach is relatively resource‑intensive. The MSFD is the most data and resource‑intensive approach addressing some EAFM issues within wider consideration of the pressures and impacts of human activities. Both development and implementation are ongoing.

Qualitative RA and semi-quantitative RA include methods to identify risks to achieving operational objectives, providing a basis for defining a smaller set of issues to address with more resource-demanding approaches and methods. As such, each of the approaches described may have elements that would support the development of EAFM in NEAFC.