FN Archimer Export Format
PT J
TI Electronic monitoring in fisheries: Lessons from global experiences and future opportunities
BT 
AF Helmond, Aloysius T.M.
   Mortensen, Lars O.
   Plet‐Hansen, Kristian S.
   Ulrich, Clara
   Needle, Coby L.
   Oesterwind, Daniel
   Kindt‐Larsen, Lotte
   Catchpole, Thomas
   Mangi, Stephen
   Zimmermann, Christopher
   Olesen, Hans Jakob
   Bailey, Nick
   Bergsson, Heidrikur
   Dalskov, Jørgen
   Elson, Jon
   Hosken, Malo
   Peterson, Lisa
   McElderry, Howard
   Ruiz, Jon
   Pierre, Johanna P
   Dykstra, Claude
   Jaap Poos, Jan
AS 1:1;2:2;3:2;4:2;5:3;6:4;7:2;8:5;9:5;10:4;11:2;12:3;13:6;14:2;15:5;16:7;17:8;18:9;19:10;20:11;21:12;22:1,13;
FF 1:;2:;3:;4:;5:;6:;7:;8:;9:;10:;11:;12:;13:;14:;15:;16:;17:;18:;19:;20:;21:;22:;
C1 Wageningen Marine Research Wageningen University & Research IJmuiden, The Netherlands
   National Institute of Aquatic Resources Technical University of Denmark Kgs. Lyngby ,Denmark
   Marine Laboratory Marine Scotland Aberdeen, UK
   Thünen Institute of Baltic Sea Fisheries Rostock ,Germany
   Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science Lowestoft ,UK
   Department of Biology Copenhagen University Helsingør ,Denmark
   The Pacific Community Oceanic Fisheries Program Noumea, New Caledonia
   NOAA NMFS Office of Science and Technology Silver Spring MA, USA
   Archipelago Marine Research Victoria BC ,Canada
   AZTI Tecnalia Sukarrieta Bizkaia, Spain
   JPEC Environmental Consulting Lower Hutt, New Zealand
   International Pacific Halibut Commission Seattle WA, USA
   Aquaculture and Fisheries Group Wageningen University Wageningen, The Netherlands
C2 UNIV WAGENINGEN, NETHERLANDS
   UNIV TECH DENMARK (DTU AQUA), DENMARK
   MARINE SCOTLAND SCI (NRL), UK
   THUENEN INST SEA FISHERIES, GERMANY
   CEFAS, UK
   UNIV HELSINGOR, DENMARK
   SPC, FRANCE
   NOAA, USA
   ARCHIPELAGO MARINE RES, CANADA
   AZTI, SPAIN
   JPEC, NEW ZEALAND
   IPHC, USA
   UNIV WAGENINGEN, NETHERLANDS
IF 7.218
TC 75
UR https://archimer.ifremer.fr/doc/00591/70331/68384.pdf
LA English
DT Article
DE ;catch documentation;discard monitoring;electronic monitoring;fully documented fisheries;video-based monitoring
AB Since the beginning of the 21st century, electronic monitoring (EM) has emerged as a cost‐efficient supplement to existing catch monitoring programmes in fisheries. An EM system consists of various activity sensors and cameras positioned on vessels to remotely record fishing activity and catches. The first objective of this review was to describe the state of play of EM in fisheries worldwide and to present the insights gained on this technology based on 100 EM trials and 12 fully implemented programmes. Despite its advantages, and its global use for monitoring, progresses in implementation in some important fishing regions are slow. Within this context, the second objective was to discuss more specifically the European experiences gained through 16 trials. Findings show that the three major benefits of EM were as follows: (a) cost‐efficiency, (b) the potential to provide more representative coverage of the fleet than any observer programme and (c) the enhanced registration of fishing activity and location. Electronic monitoring can incentivize better compliance and discard reduction, but the fishing managers and industry are often reluctant to its uptake. Improved understanding of the fisher's concerns, for example intrusion of privacy, liability and costs, and better exploration of EM benefits, for example increased traceability, sustainability claims and market access, may enhance implementation on a larger scale. In conclusion, EM as a monitoring tool embodies various solid strengths that are not diminished by its weaknesses. Electronic monitoring has the opportunity to be a powerful tool in the future monitoring of fisheries, particularly when integrated within existing monitoring programmes. 
PY 2020
PD JAN
SO Fish And Fisheries
SN 1467-2960
PU Wiley
VL 21
IS 1
UT 000496282600001
BP 162
EP 189
DI 10.1111/faf.12425
ID 70331
ER

EF