Canada’s Strategic threat and risk assessment: An Intelligence Tool to Fight against iuu Yves Goulet Director, National Fisheries Intelligence Service Fisheries & Oceans Canada

The Conservation & Protection Branch C&P is the enforcement arm Has approximately 600 Fishery Officers Promotes and maintains compliance with legislation, regulations, policies and management measures implemented to achieve the conservation and sustainable use of Canada’s aquatic resources, and the protection of species at risk, fish habitat and oceans

Strategic Threat & Risk Assessment Standardized methodological process Identify, assess and prioritize the most significant threats and risks to conservation of fisheries Provides a national and regional understanding of the environmental, species, fishery and industry profiles Basis for to formulate an appropriate response evidence-based decision-making

Threat Risk Assessment STRA Methodology Combines both a Threat and Risk Assessment Probability & Impact   Threat Assessment CAPABILITY Risk Assessment INTENT HARM Knowledge & Resources Confidence & Desire VULNERABILITY Prioritized Threat Risk Assessment  

Key Definitions: Threats Assessments Threats: Individuals, groups or organisations whose activities are likely to cause damage, harm or loss to the resource Assessed by looking at the threat: Capabilities Intent

Key Definitions: Threats Assessments Intent Desire of a threat to engage in activities and the level of confidence of success Assessment will prioritize: 1-Those who have demonstrated intent 2-Those whose intent is unknown Capability Function of the resources and knowledge available to a threat Expressed in a series of capability attributes

Key Definitions: Threats Assessments Capability Attributes: Skills, methods or common practices that enable entities to gain a foothold in fishery or a geographic location. Included in our model: Corruption/Infiltration Private Sector Involvement Organized IUF, IUU, Criminal Links, collusion Unlawful Distribution / Laundering Sophistication Scope Unlawful enterprise Violence

Capability Attribute Weights: Ranked and arranged in order of their ability to create or add to an IUF group, maintain control or order over operations, and/or avoid detection or apprehension.

Capability Attribute Weights and Values Each of the 7 attributes has five possible values: High, Medium, Low, Nil, or Unknown Each value is weighted and defined, giving indicators that analysts use to compare different entities reliably VALUE SCORE DEFINITION High 4 Demonstrated ability to corrupt officials responsible for the management and control of fisheries, or parties working on behalf of the department. Medium 3 Has attempted to corrupt officials responsible for the management and control of fisheries or parties working on behalf of the department. Unknown 2 Unable to assess. Low 1 Has known associations with officials responsible for the management and control of fisheries or parties working on behalf of the department, but there are no indications of attempted corruption. Nil No ability or attempt to corrupt or infiltrate.

Threat Capability Score Threat Scale RCMP methodology customized for Fisheries & Oceans Canada First attempt at incorporating a mathematical model into the C&P categorization of organized entities IUF Attribute High Medium Unknown Low Nil Threat Capability Score Corruption/ Infiltration 16 12 8 4 Private Sector Involvement Infiltration Organized IUF, IUU, Criminal Links, Collusion 9 6 3 Unlawful Distribution/ Laundering 2 Sophistication Scope 1 Unlawful Enterprise Maximum Capability Score 68   Total Threat Capability Score 51 Overall Threat Score 75

Threat Results Presentation The entities are listed on one axis and the attributes on the other. The matrix is filled in with the respective values for each attribute for each group. The values are color-coded on the matrix.

Same logic applied to vulnerabilities on the risk side of the model Probability & Impact   Threat Assessment CAPABILITY Risk Assessment INTENT HARM Knowledge & Resources Confidence & Desire VULNERABILITY Prioritized Threat Risk Assessment Same logic applied to vulnerabilities on the risk side of the model

Key Definitions: Risks Assessments Vulnerability: Weakness or gaps in the protection of assets that can be exploited by threats. Used as indicators of Probability Included in our model: Stock Health Management Regime Enforcement Capacity

Key Definitions: Risks Assessments Harms: Type and magnitude of negative consequence that would occur should a vulnerability be exploited. Includes both direct and indirect Impacts Form part of the assessment’s narrative Included in our model: Environmental Economic Social Political

Threat, Risk and Harms Results Presentation C THREAT A HARMS = STRA B D VULNERABILITIES

Results from STRA 2.0 Second articulation of the threats to fisheries Demanding, but overall a solid, intelligence product which picked up traction in the regions and among senior management Better at using it Protects us against possible legal challenges and accusation of subjectivity in its target selection