European Commission DG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs Policy making on basis of knowledge – the...

European CommissionDG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs

Policy making on basis of knowledge – the challenge for

research integration

FAME workshop on Social and Natural Scientific aAdvice in Marine Renewable Resources

6 June 2007, Esbejrg

Poul DegnbolScientific adviser

DG Fisheries and Maritime AffairsEuropean Commission


Trailer

• Policy drivers and research – EU Common Fishery Policy case

• Example – management plans• Interdisciplinary research• Delivery of knowledge


Policy drivers– Common Fishery Policy case


The Common Fisheries Policy• A common policy for the management

of fisheries and aquaculture, foreseen in the Treaties

• Rationale: fish are a natural and mobile resource which is a common property

• First measures in 1970, CFP established 1983, reformed ~ every 10 years, most recently 2002

• The CFP is a heavily science-based policy area


The four policy areas of the CFP• Conservation and limitation of the environmental

impact of fishing• to protect fish resources by regulating the amount of

fish taken from the sea, by allowing young fish to reproduce, and by ensuring that measures are respected.

• Structures and fleet management• to help the fishing and aquaculture industries adapt

their equipment and organisations to the constraints imposed by scarce resources and the market; measures aimed at creating a balance between fishing effort and available fish resources are also in place;

• Markets• to maintain a common organisation of the market in fish

products and to match supply and demand for the benefit of both producers and consumers;

• Relations with the outside world• to set up fisheries partnerships agreements and to

negotiate at the international level within regional and international fisheries organisations for common conservation measures in deep-sea fisheries.


CFP objectives• 1. The Common Fisheries Policy shall ensure exploitation of

living aquatic resources that provides sustainable economic, environmental and social conditions.• For this purpose, the Community shall apply the precautionary approach in

taking measures designed to protect and conserve living aquatic resources, to provide for their sustainable exploitation and to minimise the impact of fishing activities on marine eco-systems. It shall aim at a progressive implementation of an eco-system-based approach to fisheries management.

• It shall aim to contribute to efficient fishing activities within an economically viable and competitive fisheries and aquaculture industry, providing a fair standard of living for those who depend on fishing activities and taking into account the interests of consumers.

• 2. The Common Fisheries Policy shall be guided by the following principles of good governance:• (a) clear definition of responsibilities at the Community, national and local

levels;• (b) a decision-making process based on sound scientific advice which

delivers timely results;• (c) broad involvement of stakeholders at all stages of the policy from

conception to implementation;• (d) consistence with other Community policies, in particular with

environmental, social, regional, development, health and consumer protection policies.


The research based advisory process

Council

ICESInternational Council for

Exploration of the Sea

STECFScientific, Technical and Economic Committee for

Fisheries

European Commission

European Parlament

Research Institutes

Policy decisions

Propo

sals

Data collectionResearch

Advice

Requests for advice

DataAnalysisResearch

results

“The CFP shall be guided by …a decision-making process based on sound scientific advice which delivers timely results”

FP7 DCR

Stakeholder groupsACFARACs


Policy directions• EC policies

• CFP objectives• Maritime Policy• Marine Strategy

• International agreements• UNCLOS – UN fish stocks agreement

• International soft law• FAO code of conduct for responsible fisheries• World Summit on Sustainable Development

• International agreements and soft law with important fisheries implications• Convention on Biological Diversity


Policy issues• Precautionary approach (UN stocks

agreement and CFP)• Ecosystem approach (WSSD and CFP)

• Consider both fisheries impact on ecosystem and ecosystem impacts on fisheries

• Restore/maintain stocks at MSY (WSSD)• Inclusion of societal impact considerations

(general EC policy)• Good governance (CFP)

• Change from short term decisions to long term management plans

• Transparency• Consultation and participation


Example: Management plans


Example – North Sea cod recovery plan• From 1991 the biological advice was

that seen in isolation cod should not be caught or a zero TAC

• TACs were set – to protect industry and to enable mixed fisheries to continue

• Indications of extensive black landings and high-grading as a response to reduced TACs

• The fishing mortality remained high – even increased – and the stock continued going down


Cod in the North Sea

Catch (Tonnes)

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

700000

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

SSB

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

250000

300000

1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Fbar(2 - 4)

0.000

0.200

0.400

0.600

0.800

1.000

1.200

1.400

1.600

1.800

2.000

1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005

Recruitment

Parent stock

Yield

Fishing mortality


EU Cod recovery plan 2004• 2. The TACs shall not exceed a level of catches which a

scientific evaluation, carried out by the STECF in the light of the most recent report of the ICES, has indicated will result in an increase of 30 % in the quantities of mature fish in the sea at the end of the year of their application, compared to the quantities estimated to have been in the sea at the start of that year.

• 3. The Council shall not adopt a TAC whose capture is predicted by the STECF, in the light of the most recent report of the ICES, to generate in its year of application a fishing mortality rate greater than the following values:• Cod in the Kattegat 0,60• Cod in the North Sea, Skagerrak and eastern Channel 0,65• Cod to the west of Scotland 0,60• Cod in the Irish Sea 0,72

• Question to research:• Which TAC will result in a 30% increase in SSB?• Which TAC will result in a specific F?


Cod recovery plan outcomes• BUT

• Due to implementation problems and fleet adaptations catches were not controlled by TAC’s

• Supplementary effort controls were introduced but were not sufficient to control catches T

• Therefore, actual catches (and even landings) became poorly known

• ICES and STECF could therefore not estimate the present stock size or F

• And quantitative advice on the TAC which would be compatible with a 30% increase or a specific F could not be given

• Good (but maybe not useful) answer from research advice: • we can’t give the number to implement your plan. (but the

plan is there)• Use effort management instead (but the CFP is based on

TAC’s)• Possible response: change the recovery plan

• so that it’s implementation is robust to lack of estimates of SSB or F

• Will generate questions for advice which can actually be answered


A chain is only as good as the weakest link• There are close linkages between

• The overall policy (the CFP)• The specific management instruments (the choice of

mix of TACs, days at sea, technical measures etc for a specific fishery)

• Implementation setup• The ability and incentives for the fleets to adapt• And the scientific advice required to support

decisions• The data required and the ability to produce

operational advice• The cost of producing the data and the advice• The institutional framework required to produce

the advice• The character and substance of the advice

• We must consider implications elsewhere in the system (including the research based advice) when we discuss policies and management measures


Cod recovery plan questions• Which TAC will result in a 30% increase in

SSB?• Which TAC will result in a specific F?• The linkage between a TAC and the resulting F or

SSB depends on• The biological dynamics of the fish population

• Starting population, recruitment, ecosystem environment

• All of which is only known with uncertainty• The adaptation of the fleet to management measures

• The character of the fishery• Incentives to comply or not• Knowledge and technological capacity for alternative

tactics• The control and enforcement regime


The fisheries management system

Monitoring,surveillance,control

Fishery

Managementmeasures

Management decision

Management decision system

Resource systemSocial system

Perceived system

Fishing decision and fishing

Adaptation system


Strategic decision system /Management strategy

Relevant KnowledgeImplementation

framework

ObjectivesPerformance criteria

Harvest control rule

If state=xx then do yy

Tactical decision system

Corrections to objectives(‘flexibility’)

Accept of knowledge

Management plan

Monitoring requirements

Sanctions

Society:Fleet adaptation

Nature:Variation within regimeRegime shifts

Fishery system


The normative string - Objectives and performance

• Achievement of explicit and implicit objectives• Sustainability

• Maintenance of reproductive capacity• Delivery of ecosystem services

• Societal benefits• High long term yields• Efficiency• Justice/Equity

• Performance criteria• Robustness• Cost efficiency• Transparency and legitimacy


The regulatory string – implementation means

• Implementation means – basic choice of main instruments• Output - TACs• Input – effort• Technical measures incl closed areas

• Allocation mechanisms – ownership and transferability

• The choice of implementation and allocation means defines distributions of societal benefits


The cognitive string – what is relevant, valid and sufficient knowledge?

• The relevance of knowledge relates to objectives

• The validity of knowledge relates to acceptance by stakeholders

• Sufficiency of knowledge relates to the desired robustness of the management strategy


The cognitive string – learning institutions

• Uncertainty is here to stay!• Predict or learn by experience from implementation• Passive adaptivity: predict and correct through next years

prediction• Requires either that relevant reference points can be estimated

and that predictions make sense technically and operationally• Active adaptivity: explore a range of exploitation ranges and

adapt• Stocks for which data series short or only one state known: explore

production dynamics• Target reference points for stocks where biological interactions are

important or only low productivity seen• Regime shifts?• Stocks where we are uncertain about present state or stock

dynamics• Development of adaptive approaches

• Changes in types of knowledge used and the communication of knowledge

• Development of learning management institutions


Strategic decision system /Management strategy

Relevant KnowledgeImplementation

framework

ObjectivesPerformance criteria

Harvest control rule

If state=xx then do yy

Tactical decision system

Corrections to objectives(‘flexibility’)

Accept of knowledge

Management plan

Monitoring requirements

Sanctions

Society:Fleet adaptation

Nature:Variation within regimeRegime shifts

Fishery system


Future fisheries management science research

• Development of management strategies• Post- evaluation of management

strategies• Adaptation within strategies

• Re-evaluation of objectives trade off• Implementation adaptation• Learning and communication

• Fisheries systems performance• The details of management strategies

• Multi-objective development• Evaluation of implementation modalities -

instruments• Fleet adaptations• Knowledge interactions• Decision tactics (HCR etc)

Each of these areas require interdisciplinary research involving ecologists, fisheries biologists, economists and sociologists


Interdisciplinary research should be the norm rather than the exception


Interdisciplinary research


More than the sum of disciplines? • Interdisciplinary research is relevant for

research on the interactions between subjects studied by various disciplines

• Understanding interactions implies that the study of the interacting parts should be defined by their interaction - Contributions from each discipline in interdisciplinary research should be framed by the interactions

• Disciplinary integrity must be combined with openness to address interaction issues


The tunnel vision trap• The discipline frames the worldview

• Objectives:• Biological sustainability?• Efficiency?• Democracy and equity?

• Implementation• MPA’s ...• ITQ’s• Participation

• Knowledge requirement• More ecological research• More economic research• More social science research

• Leads to forming research questions which will be answered by this worldview

• Leads to selection of researchers with likeminded view


The methods trap• You look for areas where the methods you know may

be applied• You cooperate with what resonates with your

discourse• Selection of other disciplinary approaches on basis

of resonance with your own methods preferences leads to exclusion of subjects of study and perspectives

• The method defines what is relevant for study!


The method defines what is relevant to study and the research question

• It is nice to own a Rembrandt painting and a Stradivarious violin

• But to own an Rembrandt violin and a stradivarious painting?

• Maybe the sequence should be:• What is relevant to study, what is the policy

issue?• What is the research question?• What methods need we apply to address the

question?• What are the relevant disciplines?• How can they interact?


The existing knowledge trap• You study the issues you know about

– leads to selection of issues raised within your own discipline

• And exclusion of issues you don’t know about including issues raised in other disciplines

• Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

• Who raises the interactions issues?


Interdisciplinary research requires• Openness

• To the relevance of research questions raised outside your discipline

• to other disciplinary discourses• to very different methodologies

• Risk taking• High risk research – unsure what the products will be• High risk for your career

• You may be considered less qualified in your own discipline

• You may publish less• You may find fewer fora to present your work• You may loose the next grant because the last

produced less than hoped for• A lot of devotion to interactions before and during

implementation


Knowledge and advice delivery


Delivery mechanisms

• In Europe the ’Vatican model’ was ruling untill recently – black smoke from a black box

• Now the ’good patriarch model’ is ruling – we know best but we are prepared to help you understand

• Proceed to ’Socratic model’ – facilitate exploration of options


Exploratory and interactive delivery• Fisheries management has multiple objectives

• Very often incompatible in the short term• Sometimes incompatible in the long term

• There are many possible combinations of management measures which will lead to different trade-off between these objectives

• Research based knowledge cannot make the choices but can illuminate the expected trade off between various objectives for various solutions

• Research based advice should therefore be delivered in an interactive exploratory process

• Not easy!• Do we have th right institutional setup for it?• Transaction costs?• Are the researchers and stakeholders up to it?


A couple of refs• Degnbol, P., and McCay, B. J. 2007.

Unintended and perverse consequences of ignoring linkages in fisheries systems – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 64.

• Degnbol,_P, H. Gislason, S. Hanna, S. Jentoft, J. R. Nielsen, S. Sverdrup-Jensen, D. C. Wilson, 2006. Painting the floor with a hammer: Technical fixes in fisheries management. Marine Policy 30 (2006) 534–543

European Commission DG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs Policy making on basis of knowledge – the...

Documents

Transcript of European Commission DG Fisheries and Maritime Affairs Policy making on basis of knowledge – the...