IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/agraaa/25-en.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Management Strategy Evaluation and Management Procedures: Tools for Rebuilding and Sustaining Fisheries

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel S. Holland

    (Gulf of Maine Research Institute)

Abstract

Fisheries management is complicated in nearly all cases by a high degree of uncertainty about the current state and expected growth of fish stocks and about the economic and social factors that affect the desirable harvest levels. Even for fisheries with excellent data collection programs, scientific surveys and sophisticated assessments, the estimates of catch levels that will maintain healthy fisheries or rebuild depleted ones are often far from accurate. Consequently recommended catch levels often fluctuate more than necessary in response to error in assessments rather than true stock variability and frequently react too slowly due to lags in data collection, assessment and implementation. Overly optimistic estimates of stock size and future growth have often led to allowing catch levels that undermine rebuilding. Fishery management strategies also rarely include specific objectives developed with stakeholder involvement which can undermine stakeholders‘ support for conservation even when it may be in their best interest. In this paper I discuss an approach for evaluating and implementing fishery management strategies known as management strategy evaluation (MSE), also sometimes referred to as the management procedure (MP) approach that is designed to identify and operationalise strategies for managing fisheries that are robust to several types of uncertainty and capable of balancing multiple economic, social and biological objectives. When implemented correctly an MSE should result in clear and measurable objectives and a robust process for achieving them that fishery managers and stakeholders have jointly developed and agreed to. I review several examples of MSEs that have been used to evaluate, and in some cases implement, rebuilding strategies for overfished fisheries. These case studies demonstrate how the MSE approach has been applied and some of its advantages and limitations

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel S. Holland, 2010. "Management Strategy Evaluation and Management Procedures: Tools for Rebuilding and Sustaining Fisheries," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 25, OECD Publishing.
  • Handle: RePEc:oec:agraaa:25-en
    DOI: 10.1787/5kmd77jhvkjf-en
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1787/5kmd77jhvkjf-en
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1787/5kmd77jhvkjf-en?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sun, Ming & Li, Yunzhou & Ren, Yiping & Chen, Yong, 2019. "Developing and evaluating a management strategy evaluation framework for the Gulf of Maine cod (Gadus morhua)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 404(C), pages 27-35.
    2. P. Leith & E. Ogier & G. Pecl & E. Hoshino & J. Davidson & M. Haward, 2014. "Towards a diagnostic approach to climate adaptation for fisheries," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 55-66, January.
    3. Grüss, Arnaud & Harford, William J. & Schirripa, Michael J. & Velez, Laure & Sagarese, Skyler R. & Shin, Yunne-Jai & Verley, Philippe, 2016. "Management strategy evaluation using the individual-based, multispecies modeling approach OSMOSE," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 340(C), pages 86-105.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    fisheries economics; fisheries management; fisheries rebuilding; management strategy evaluation; New Zealand Rock Lobster; South African Hake;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oec:agraaa:25-en. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/tdoecfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.