Workshop on accounting for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice (WKAFPA)

The objective of the Workshop on accounting for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice (WKAFPA) was to identify where and how stake- holder information could be incorporated in the ICES fisheries advice process. It adopted an operational definition of the concept of perception, where perceptions result from observations, interpreted in light of experience, that can be supported by data, information and knowledge to generate evidence about them. Stakeholder information can be either structured (e.g. routinely collected information in a standardized format) or unstructured (e.g. experiential information) and either of those can inform decisions made during the production of ICES advice. Most notably, the group identified there was a need to engage with stakeholders earlier in the process, i.e. before benchmarks meetings take place and before preliminary assessment results are used as the basis to predict total allowable catches for upcoming advice (Figure 4.2). It was therefore recommended to include in the ICES process the organisation of pre-bench- mark/roadmap workshops where science and data needs of upcoming benchmarks can be iden- tified, followed by making arrangements how scientists and stakeholders can collaborate to ac- cess, prepare for use (where relevant) and document the structured and unstructured infor- mation well ahead of the benchmark meetings. It was also recommended to organise ‘sense-checking’ sessions with stakeholders when prelim- inary assessments are available but not yet used as the basis for advisory production. This would allow stakeholders and assessment scientists to verify available knowledge and data against stock perceptions and provide additional considerations relevant for the production of TAC ad- vice. Next to these two additional activities, it is recommended that communication on differ- ences in stakeholder perception or data derived perceptions are communicated within the ICES assessment reports as well as in the ICES advice in a transparent manner. Not only should dif- ferences or similarities be documented and communicated, in those cases where there are differ- ences in perception between ICES stock assessments and stakeholders, a working group, external to the assessment working groups, should evaluate these differences and describe whether these differences can be logically explained or require further investigation. This outcome of this pro- cess may potentially lead to new data collection or additional analyses suitable for input to benchmarks. Essential in this entire process is making sure the same language is spoken between scientists and stakeholders, that there are clear and transparent processes in place on how to deal with stakeholder information and communicate clearly how this information is used in the prepara- tion of ICES advice.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Global ensemble projections reveal trophic amplification of ocean biomass declines with climate change

While the physical dimensions of climate change are now routinely assessed through multimodel intercomparisons, projected impacts on the global ocean ecosystem generally rely on individual models with a specific set of assumptions. To address these single-model limitations, we present standardized ensemble projections from six global marine ecosystem models forced with two Earth system models and four emission scenarios with and without fishing. We derive average biomass trends and associated uncertainties across the marine food web. Without fishing, mean global animal biomass decreased by 5% (±4% SD) under low emissions and 17% (±11% SD) under high emissions by 2100, with an average 5% decline for every 1 °C of warming. Projected biomass declines were primarily driven by increasing temperature and decreasing primary production, and were more pronounced at higher trophic levels, a process known as trophic amplification. Fishing did not substantially alter the effects of climate change. Considerable regional variation featured strong biomass increases at high latitudes and decreases at middle to low latitudes, with good model agreement on the direction of change but variable magnitude. Uncertainties due to variations in marine ecosystem and Earth system models were similar. Ensemble projections performed well compared with empirical data, emphasizing the benefits of multimodel inference to project future outcomes. Our results indicate that global ocean animal biomass consistently declines with climate change, and that these impacts are amplified at higher trophic levels. Next steps for model development include dynamic scenarios of fishing, cumulative human impacts, and the effects of management measures on future ocean biomass trends

Towards the implementation of an integrated ecosystem fleet based management of European fisheries

Using the Celtic Sea and the North Sea as case studies, we show that a fleet-based approach is the pathway to implement an effective ecosystem approach to fisheries management (EAFM) in European seas. First, a diagnostic on the health of each ecosystem is proposed based on: the reconstruction of long time-series of catch, the analysis of mean indicators or stocks trajectories derived from ICES stock assessment results, and the analysis of ecosystem indicators. Then, we present a fleet-based synthesis using indicators of both the ecological impact and the economic performances of the major fleets operating within each ecosystem. In particular, assessment diagrams show whether each fleet segment, on average, sustainably exploits the stocks. Although results are preliminary due to the poor quality of available data, the analysis shows that simple indicators can be estimated and clearly highlight contrasts between fleet segments. Such an approach contributes to the evolution from a stock-based to a fleet based management, which reflects the ecological, economical and social pillars of the sustainable development of fisheries.JRC.G.4-Maritime affair

Can simple be useful and reliable? Using ecological indicators to represent and compare the states of marine ecosystems

Within the IndiSeas WG, the evaluation of exploited marine ecosystems has several steps, from simple binary categorization of ecosystems to a more-complex attempt to rank them and to evaluate their status using decision-tree analyses. With the intention of communicating scientific knowledge to the public and stakeholders, focus is on evaluating and comparing the status of exploited marine ecosystems using a set of six ecological indicators and a simple and transparent graphic representation of ecosystem state (pie charts). A question that arose was whether it was acceptable to compare different types of marine ecosystems using a generic set of indicators. To this end, an attempt is made to provide reference levels to which ecosystems can be objectively compared. Unacceptable thresholds for each indicator are determined based on ecological expertise derived from a questionnaire distributed to a group of scientific experts. Analysis of the questionnaires revealed no significant difference in the thresholds provided for different ecosystem types, suggesting that it was reasonable to compare states directly across different types of ecosystem using the set of indicators selected.JRC.G.4-Maritime affair

Report of the Working Group on Multispecies Assessment Methods (WGSAM), 9–13 November 2015, Woods Hole, USA

Three meetings were held between 2013 and 2015 (Stockholm, London and Woods Hole), with progress being made on all the Terms of Reference. WGSAM has been making significant contributions required to enable ICES to develop its capability to give advice on the ecosystem impacts of fishing and climate change. This is a priority area identified in the ICES strategic plan and is consistent with scientific needs to support implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy and Marine Strategy Framework Directive. This final report summarises the key progress made against each ToR. A particularly important area established during this period has been the discussions that have led to guidelines on quality assurance of ecosystem models in-tended for advice giving. WGSAM prepared a specific briefing on this issue and con-tinues to work on issues related to model review processes, model validation and developing methods for generating advice from multi-model ensembles. These are all important areas of work in the evolution toward giving integrated, ecosystem-based advice to ICES clients. We recommend that ICES supports continuation of WGSAM new ToRs and considers more specifically how to support WGSAM in developing advice relevant products