A framework for evaluating management plans comprehensively

Type Article
Date 2015-06
Language English
Author(s) Trenkel VerenaORCID1, Rochet Marie-Joelle1, Rice Jake C.2
Affiliation(s) 1 : IFREMER, F-44311 Nantes 03, France.
2 : Fisheries & Oceans Canada, Ecosyst Sci, Ottawa, ON K1A 0E, Canada.
Source Fish And Fisheries (1467-2960) (Wiley-blackwell), 2015-06 , Vol. 16 , N. 2 , P. 310-328
DOI 10.1111/faf.12058
WOS© Times Cited 4
Keyword(s) Loop analysis, management strategy, management strategy evaluation, qualitative modelling, stock rebuilding, sustainability
Abstract We present a framework for evaluating fisheries management plans comprehensively, both rebuilding plans and others. The framework includes a first rapid appraisal of the likelihood that the plan will result in management meeting its objectives, and guides subsequent quantitative analyses of potential weaknesses in the proposed plan. The framework includes four steps: (i) evaluating if a set of management objectives, if achieved, would result in a sustainable fishery, (ii) using qualitative analysis of a bio-economic model to evaluate whether the set of stock management tactics might be capable of achieving the specified fisheries objectives, (iii) using empirical criteria derived from the literature to evaluate if other management measures in the plan related to the ecological, social or economic context of the fishery actually contribute to sustainability, and (iv) carrying out quantitative simulations to compare alternative implementation options. Generally, several management measures have to be combined to increase stock size without sacrificing the economic benefits to the fishers remaining in the fishery. We demonstrate application of the framework for evaluating the stock rebuilding plan for plaice (Pleuronectes platessa) and sole (Solea solea) in the North Sea and, the management measures currently in place for the roundnose grenadier (Coryphaenoides rupestris) stock exploited to the west of the British Isles.
Full Text
File Pages Size Access
19 399 KB Access on demand
Author's final draft 28 506 KB Open access
Top of the page