21st century fisheries management: a spatio-temporally explicit tariff-based approach combining multiple drivers and incentivising responsible fishing

Abstract Kraak, S. B. M., Reid, D. G., Gerritsen, H. D., Kelly, C. J., Fitzpatrick, M., Codling, E. A., and Rogan, E. 2012. 21st century fisheries management: a spatio-temporally explicit tariff-based approach combining multiple drivers and incentivising responsible fishing. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 69: 590–601. Traditionally fisheries management has focused on biomass and mortality, expressed annually and across large management units. However, because fish abundance varies at much smaller spatio-temporal scales, fishing mortality can potentially be controlled more effectively if managed at finer scale. The ecosystem approach requires more indicators at finer scales as well. Incorporating ecosystem targets would need additional management tools with potentially conflicting results. We present a simple, integrated, management approach that provides incentives for “good behaviour”. Fishers would be given a number of fishing-impact credits, called real-time incentives (RTIs), to spend according to spatio-temporally varying tariffs per fishing day. RTI quotas and tariffs could be based on commercial stocks and ecosystem targets. Fishers could choose how to spend their RTIs, e.g. by limited fishing in high-catch or sensitive areas or by fishing longer in lower-catch or less sensitive areas. The RTI system does not prescribe and forbid, but instead allows fishers to fish wherever and whenever they want; ecosystem costs are internalized and fishers have to take them into account in their business decisions. We envisage no need for traditional landings or catch quotas for the fleets while operating under the scheme. The approach could facilitate further devolution of responsibility to industry.</jats:p

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)-authorized retailers received a low score using the Business Impact Assessment for Obesity and population-level nutrition (BIA-Obesity) tool

Background: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) supports Americans with lower income to purchase dietary products at authorized retailers. This research aimed to evaluate SNAP-authorized retailers’ public commitments in support of nutrition security and to examine differences between traditional grocers and nontraditional (e.g., convenience, drug, dollar) SNAP-authorized retailers’ public commitments. Methods: Prominent United States (U.S.) SNAP-authorized retailers nationally and in two U.S. states (California and Virginia) were identified based on number of store locations (n = 61). Public information available in grey literature were reviewed and scored using the Business Impact Assessment for Obesity and population-level nutrition (BIA-Obesity) tool. SNAP-authorized retailers were classified as traditional (e.g., grocery) or nontraditional (e.g., non-grocery) retailers. Total BIA-Obesity from 0 to 615, representing low to optimal support) and category scores were calculated for corporate strategy, relationships with external organizations, product formulation, nutrition labeling, product and brand promotion, and product accessibility. Descriptive statistics were used to describe BIA-Obesity scores overall and by category. Mann–Whitney U was used to test for potential differences in median BIA-Obesity total scores between traditional and nontraditional SNAP-authorized retailers (a priori, p \u3c 0.05). Results: Average total BIA-Obesity scores for SNAP-authorized retailers ranged from 0 to 112 (16.5 ± 23.3). Total BIA-Obesity scores for traditional SNAP-authorized retailers (32.7 ± 33.6; median 25) were higher than nontraditional SNAP-authorized retailer scores (11.2 ± 16; median 5) (p = 0.008). For BIA-Obesity categories, average scores were highest for the category relationships with external organizations (8.3 ± 10.3) and lowest for promotion practices (0.6 ± 2.1). Conclusions: Results of this research underscore a dearth of available evidence and substantial opportunity for improvement regarding SNAP-authorized retailer strategies to support nutrition security among Americans with lower income

Lessons for fisheries management from the EU cod recovery plan

The performance of the EU long-term management plan for cod stocks, in force since 2009, is analysed focusing on the human and institutional factors. The plan operates through landings quotas (TACs) and effort restrictions following a Harvest Control Rule, and deploys a novel instrument allowing Member States to ‘buy back’ or increase fishing effort for fleet segments engaged in cod-avoidance measures. The stipulated fishing mortality reductions have not been achieved. On the positive side, the ‘buy-back’ instrument has led to increased uptake of selective gear and implementation of permanent and real- time temporary closures. On the negative side, ignoring the dimension of fishers as reactive agents in the design, the impact assessment, and the annual implementation of the measures has contributed to the failure to adequately implement the plan and achieve its objectives.JRC.G.4-Maritime affair

Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) : 64th Plenary Report (PLEN-20-02)

The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries (STECF) held its 64th plenary as a virtual meeting from 6-10 July 2020.-- 128 pagesCommission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar discipline

Scientific, technical and economic committee for fisheries – 64th plenary report (PLEN-20-02)

Commission Decision of 25 February 2016 setting up a Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries, C(2016) 1084, OJ C 74, 26.2.2016, p. 4–10. The Commission may consult the group on any matter relating to marine and fisheries biology, fishing gear technology, fisheries economics, fisheries governance, ecosystem effects of fisheries, aquaculture or similar disciplines. The Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries held its 64th plenary as a virtual meeting from 6 to 10 July 2020

WORKSHOP ON GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT STRATEGY EVALUATIONS (WKGMSE2)

The purpose of the meeting was to bring up to date the methodologies and technical specifications that should be incorporated in Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) work in ICES. The workshop was tasked with reviewing recent methodological and practical MSE work conducted in ICES and around the world, as well as the guidelines provided by the 2013 ICES Workshop on Guidelines for Management Strategy Evaluations (WKGMSE). The Terms of Reference indicated that the revision should include all aspects involved in MSE, while paying specific attention to several issues that had been identified through ICES practice. The Terms of Reference also requested WKGMSE 2 to consider how best to disseminate the guidelines to experts within the ICES community and the need for training courses. The workshop addressed all its Terms of Reference. The main results of the workshop are the revised MSE guidelines, as well as recommendations in relation to the ICES criterion for defining a management strategy as precautionary and in relation to the evaluation and advice on rebuilding strategies.publishedVersio