scholarly journals Integrating management strategy evaluation into fisheries management: advancing best practices for stakeholder inclusion based on an MSE for Northeast US Atlantic herring,

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (7) ◽  
pp. 1103-1111 ◽  
Author(s):  
R.G. Feeney ◽  
D.V. Boelke ◽  
J.J. Deroba ◽  
S. Gaichas ◽  
B.J. Irwin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
New England ◽  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Fishery Management ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Clupea Harengus ◽  
Atlantic Herring ◽  
Management Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Strategy Evaluation

The New England Fishery Management Council used management strategy evaluation (MSE) to evaluate possible harvest control rules for Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), the first MSE in the US and perhaps globally to use open-invitation, public workshops for input. Stakeholder inclusion can increase both realism and likelihood of use by managers, but inclusivity is not achieved easily. Here, self-selected participants had diverse backgrounds and differing levels of interest and preparedness. We describe some challenges with directly engaging the public in MSE and offer broader insights for obtaining effective public participation during a decision-making process. Conducting an open MSE aligns well with publicly driven management but requires clear goals and communication. Investment in effective organizers, impartial facilitators, and knowledgeable analysts can improve communication and understanding of MSE to the betterment of fisheries management. We aim to further MSE best practices on integrating stakeholders and hope that our lessons learned on communication, engagement, and integration of MSE into an existing management arena will be useful to other practitioners.

Closing the feedback loop: on stakeholder participation in management strategy evaluation

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (10) ◽  
pp. 1895-1913 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel R. Goethel ◽  
Sean M. Lucey ◽  
Aaron M. Berger ◽  
Sarah K. Gaichas ◽  
Melissa A. Karp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Management Strategy ◽  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Clupea Harengus ◽  
Implementation Barriers ◽  
Modeling Framework ◽  
Management Options ◽  
Management Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Goals And Objectives

Management strategy evaluation (MSE) is a simulation-based approach to examine the efficacy of management options in achieving fishery-, ecosystem-, and socioeconomic-related objectives while integrating over system uncertainties. As a form of structured decision analysis, MSE is amenable to stakeholder involvement, which can reduce implementation barriers associated with nontransparent decision-making procedures. Based on analysis of three MSE processes (Atlantic tunas (Thunnus spp.), Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), and eastern oysters (Crassostrea virginica)), we provide suggestions for improving stakeholder engagement in MSE. By assembling a workgroup and modeling team with diverse backgrounds, including professional facilitators, communication liaisons, and social scientists, dialogue can be improved and an atmosphere of mutual learning fostered. Communication further benefits from clearly defining roles, responsibilities, and terms of engagement for all involved; explicitly and transparently identifying goals and objectives of the MSE before modeling has begun; and, when appropriate, revisiting goals and objectives throughout the MSE process. Although MSEs are not without limitations, the participatory modeling framework, wherein stakeholders are actively engaged at each stage of MSE development, provides a useful mechanism to support fisheries management.

Management strategy evaluation of a multi-indicator adaptive framework for data-limited fisheries management

2016 ◽  
Vol 92 (4) ◽  
pp. 423-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
WJ Harford ◽  
T Gedamke ◽  
EA Babcock ◽  
R Carcamo ◽  
G McDonald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Management Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Adaptive Framework

scholarly journals Fisheries management for regime-based ecosystems: a management strategy evaluation for the snow crab fishery in the eastern Bering Sea

2012 ◽  
Vol 70 (5) ◽  
pp. 955-967 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cody S. Szuwalski ◽  
André E. Punt
Keyword(s):  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Bering Sea ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Regime Shifts ◽  
Snow Crab ◽  
Management Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Eastern Bering Sea ◽  
Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Spawning Biomass

Abstract Szuwalski, C., and Punt A. E. 2013. Fisheries management for regime-based ecosystems: a management strategy evaluation for the snow crab fishery in the eastern Bering Sea. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 70: 955–967. Regime shifts are a prominent feature of the physical environment of some ecosystems and have the potential to influence stock productivity. However, few management strategies or harvest control rules (HCRs) consider the possibility of changes in stock productivity. A management strategy evaluation is conducted for the snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) fishery in the eastern Bering Sea, an ecosystem influenced by regime shifts. Operating models that project recruitment as a single average (i.e. the current basis for management advice), regime-based with no relationship between recruitment and spawning biomass, and regime-based with control of recruitment oscillating between environmental conditions and spawning biomass are considered. An HCR that accounts for shifts in recruitment regime is compared with the status quo HCR for each operating model. The regime-based HCR increases yield and decreases variability in yield at the cost of a higher probability of overfishing in regime-based systems. However, the regime-based HCR slightly decreases yield (no change in variability) and increases the probability of overfishing in non-regime-based systems. Identifying changes in productivity that are definitely driven by environmental regime rather than fishing pressure is the largest difficulty in implementing these rules.

Management strategy evaluation: best practices

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 303-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
André E Punt ◽  
Doug S Butterworth ◽  
Carryn L de Moor ◽  
José A A De Oliveira ◽  
Malcolm Haddon
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Management Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Strategy Evaluation

scholarly journals Purported flaws in management strategy evaluation: basic problems or misinterpretations?

2010 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 567-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas S. Butterworth ◽  
Nokome Bentley ◽  
José A. A. De Oliveira ◽  
Gregory P. Donovan ◽  
Laurence T. Kell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Management Strategy ◽  
Sampling Method ◽  
Parametric Bootstrap ◽  
Need For Care ◽  
Tail Probabilities ◽  
Management Level ◽  
Management Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Strategy Evaluation ◽  
Management Procedures

Abstract Butterworth, D. S., Bentley, N., De Oliveira, J. A. A., Donovan, G. P., Kell, L. T., Parma, A. M., Punt, A. E., Sainsbury, K. J., Smith, A. D. M., and Stokes, T. K. 2010. Purported flaws in management strategy evaluation: basic problems or misinterpretations? – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 67: 567–574. Rochet and Rice, while recognizing management strategy evaluation (MSE) as an important step forward in fisheries management, level a number of criticisms at its implementation. Some of their points are sound, such as the need for care in representing uncertainties and for thorough documentation of the process. However, others evidence important misunderstandings. Although the difficulties in estimating tail probabilities and risks, as discussed by Rochet and Rice, are well known, their arguments that Efron's non-parametric bootstrap re-sampling method underestimates the probabilities of low values are flawed. In any case, though, the focus of MSEs is primarily on comparing performance and robustness across alternative management procedures (MPs), rather than on estimating absolute levels of risk. Qualitative methods can augment MSE, but their limitations also need to be recognized. Intelligence certainly needs to play a role in fisheries management, but not at the level of tinkering in the provision of annual advice, which Rochet and Rice apparently advocate, inter alia because this runs the risk of advice following noise rather than signal. Instead, intelligence should come into play in the exercise of oversight through the process of multiannual reviews of MSE and associated MPs. A number of examples are given of the process of interaction with stakeholders which should characterize MSE.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document