1. The best environmental choice in seafood Disclaimer If any interpretive issues arise in relation to the issues covered in these presentations, the text of the MSC Scheme Documents will prevail in all instances. The MSC is not responsible for any issues arising to any parties as a result of consulting these presentations. If you are unsure of any details on any of the subjects covered, please consult the relevant MSC scheme documents or contact the MSC at standards@msc.org.standards@msc.org MSC Executive November 2011

2. The best environmental choice in seafood Fishery Certification Process and Scoring

3. The best environmental choice in seafood Challenge Arrange the steps of the fishery certification process in the correct order. Are there any you find difficult to place? Feedback

4. The best environmental choice in seafood Client decides to proceed Contract a CB Pre-assessment Decision to proceed Announcement Assembles Expert Team Consults on team & peer reviewers Consult on the Assessment Tree Announces a site visit Site visit and scoring Client ReviewPeer Review Public Comment Report Final Report and Determination Objections Period Decision to certify Surveillance Filtering Preparation Scoring Review MSC Fishery Assessment Process (5 stages)

5. The best environmental choice in seafood Learning Objectives To know each of the steps in the certification process To know the tools used in the scoring process To understand how the scoring process works and practically demonstrate this

6. The best environmental choice in seafood Certification Requirements Part C: Default Scoring Tree + Guidance Operational Interpretation of the Principles & Criteria Launched in August 2011 All new fisheries entering our program use Part C

7. The best environmental choice in seafood Principles Default assessment tree Scoring Guideposts Scoring elements and issues Principle 1 scoring case study Principle 2 and Principle 3 example requirements including multi-area fisheries Scoring a Fishery

8. The best environmental choice in seafood Marine Stewardship Council Standard Principles 1.Health of the target stock 2.Health of the ecosystem 3.Effective Management

9. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 1 - Stock Principle 2 - Impact Principle 3 - Management Unit of Certification = What is assessed

10. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 1 – Species / stock Principle 2 - Environment Principle 3 – Fishery management statusmanagementretained catch fish. specific mngt system governance & policy ETPecosystem 90 recovery & rebuilding stock status reference points assessment information / monitoring harvest control rule(s) & tools performance of harvest strategy monitoring & evaluation fishery specific objectives incentives long-term objectives & precaution consultation, roles & responsibilities legal / customary framework compliance & enforcement decision- making processes info mgmt status research plan info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status bycatchhabitat The Default Assessment Tree

11. The best environmental choice in seafood Scoring Guideposts in the Assessment Tree – 60, 80, 100 ComponentPIScoring issuesSG60SG80SG100 Outcome Stock status (C1) 1.1.1 The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing a. Stock status It is likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. It is highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. There is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. b. Stock status in relation to target reference point The stock is at or fluctuating around its target reference point. There is a high degree of certainty that the stock has been fluctuating around its target reference point, or has been above its target reference point, over recent years.

12. The best environmental choice in seafood Scoring Guidepost levels in each PI

13. The best environmental choice in seafood Scoring PIs and Principles Each PI must score >60 (automatic fail if not) Any PI that scores >60 but <80 is given a condition PIs Each MSC Principle must score >80 as the weighted average across all PIs Principles 020406080100 020406080100

14. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 1 – Species / stock Principle 3 – Fishery management Stock Status Reference points performance of harvest strategy Principle 2 - Environment statusmanagementretained catch fish. specific mngt system governance & policy ETPecosystem 90 recovery & rebuilding assessment information / monitoring harvest control rule(s) & tools monitoring & evaluation fishery specific objectives incentives long-term objectives & precaution consultation, roles & responsibilities legal / customary framework compliance & enforcement decision- making processes info mgmt status research plan info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status bycatchhabitat Standard Assessment Tree At or above 80 threshold Between 60-79 Below 60

15. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 1 – Species / stock Principle 2 - Environment Principle 3 – Fishery management statusmanagementretained catch fish. specific mngt system governance & policy ETPecosystem 90 recovery & rebuilding Stock Status Reference points assessment information / monitoring harvest control rule(s) & tools performance of harvest strategy monitoring & evaluation fishery specific objectives incentives long-term objectives & precaution consultation, roles & responsibilities legal / customary framework compliance & enforcement decision- making processes info mgmt status research plan info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status bycatchhabitat At or above 80 threshold Between 60-79 Below 60 Standard Assessment Tree

16. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 1 – Species / stock Principle 2 - Environment Principle 3 – Fishery management statusmanagementretained catch fish. specific mngt system governance & policy ETPecosystem 90 recovery & rebuilding Stock Status Reference points assessment information / monitoring harvest control rule(s) & tools performance of harvest strategy monitoring & evaluation fishery specific objectives incentives long-term objectives & precaution consultation, roles & responsibilities legal / customary framework compliance & enforcement decision- making processes info mgmt status research plan info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status info mgmt status bycatchhabitat At or above 80 threshold Between 60-79 Below 60 Standard Assessment Tree

17. The best environmental choice in seafood Scoring Elements & Issues Scoring Elements different species/stocks/sub-stocks or habitats within a component Scoring Issues different bullet points within a single performance indicator

18. The best environmental choice in seafood It is likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired It is highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired The stock is at or fluctuating around its target reference point. There is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. There is a high degree of certainty that the stock has been fluctuating around its target reference point over recent years SG 60: Conditional Pass SG 80: unconditional Pass SG 100: perfect fishery Scoring Issues

19. The best environmental choice in seafood It is likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired It is highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired The stock is at or fluctuating around its target reference point. There is a high degree of certainty that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired. There is a high degree of certainty that the stock has been fluctuating around its target reference point over recent years SG 60: Conditional Pass SG 80: unconditional Pass SG 100: perfect fishery 60 70 80 90 100 Scoring Issues

20. The best environmental choice in seafood Fishery Scoring Quiz Are the following: PIs, components, scoring issues, scoring guidepost levels or scoring elements? – Cod, haddock Elements – There is no systematic evidence of non-compliance. Scoring issues (at SG80 level) – 60, 80, 100 Scoring guidepost levels – ETP species Component – Information/monitoring PIs (in both P1 and P2)

21. The best environmental choice in seafood Guidance on P1 Indicators e.g. likely 70 % chance (stock is above limit) highly likely 80 % chance (stock is above limit) high degree of certainty 95 % chance (stock is above limit)

22. The best environmental choice in seafood 1.1.1: The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishingishing Principle 1 Scores: 60 It is highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired The stock is at or fluctuating around its target reference point. It is highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired The stock is at or fluctuating around its target reference point. SG 80: unconditional Pass Data It is likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired SG 60: Conditional Pass

23. The best environmental choice in seafood 1.1.1: The stock is at a level which maintains high productivity and has a low probability of recruitment overfishing Principle 1 Within four years it must be highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired and must be at or fluctuating around its target reference point. CONDITION CR Part C: 27.11.3 requires that CABs have to consult with all relevant entities when setting conditions to ensure they are achievable and realistic.

24. The best environmental choice in seafood Stock Status Principle 1 Within four years it must be highly likely that the stock is above the point where recruitment would be impaired and must be at or fluctuating around its target reference point. CONDITION Client Action Plan Client action plan Year One: The client group will agree with other fishers and fishery managers to define a rebuilding strategy to return the stocks to target levels within three years Year Two/Three/Four: Total Fishing effort will be reduced in line with the recovery plan. CR Part C: 27.11.4 requires CABs to find evidence that funding and/or resources are, or will be, in place to address conditions, otherwise certification shall not be awarded.

25. The best environmental choice in seafood P1. Target stock P2. Ecosystem impacts P3. Management 1. Outcome/ Status 2. Management, info etc 1. Retained species 2. Bycatch species 3. ETP species 4. Habitats 5. Ecosystem 1. Outcome/ Status 2. Management 3. Information 1. Governance and policy 2. Fishery specific management PIs 1-3 PIs 1-4 PIs 1-5 PrinciplesComponents Performance Indicators (31) Scoring Requirements for Principle 2

26. The best environmental choice in seafood MSC Requirements for Non Target P2 Species (other retained and bycatch) It is highly likely ( 70% probability) the stock is above the point where recruitment could be impaired …. … or if below, the fishery does not hinder recovery Focus at SG80 level on main species caught in the fishery (based on weight, value or vulnerability)

27. The best environmental choice in seafood … and for Habitats and Ecosystems P1. Target stock P2. Ecosystem impacts P3. Management 1. Outcome/ Status 2. Management, info etc 1. Retained species 2. Bycatch species 3. ETP species 4. Habitats 5. Ecosystem 1. Outcome/ Status 2. Management 3. Information 1. Governance and policy 2. Fishery specific management PIs 1-3 PIs 1-4 PIs 1-5 PrinciplesComponents Performance Indicators (31)

28. The best environmental choice in seafood Requirements for Habitats and Ecosystems components in P2 PI 2.4.1 Habitats outcome status SG80 level The fishery is highly unlikely (<30% probability) to reduce habitat structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm PI 2.5.1 Ecosystem outcome status SG80 level The fishery is highly unlikely (<30% probability) to disrupt the key elements underlying ecosystem structure and function to a point where there would be serious or irreversible harm

29. The best environmental choice in seafood Guidance on P2 Indicators likely 60 % chance highly likely 70 % chance high degree of certainty 80 % chance

30. The best environmental choice in seafood P1. Target stock P2. Ecosystem impacts P3. Management 1. Outcome/ Status 2. Management, info etc 1. Retained species 2. Bycatch species 3. ETP species 4. Habitats 5. Ecosystem 1. Outcome/ Status 2. Management 3. Information PIs 1-3 PIs 1-4 PIs 1-5 PrinciplesComponents Performance Indicators (31) Scoring Requirements for Principle 3 1. Governance and policy 2. Fishery specific management

31. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 3 – Management System PI 3.1.3 Long term objectives SG80 level Clear long-term objectives that guide decision-making, consistent with MSC Principles and Criteria and the precautionary approach, are explicit within management policy

32. The best environmental choice in seafood Principle 3 – Operational System PI 3.2.1 Fishery-specific objectives SG80 level Short and long term objectives which are consistent with achieving the outcomes expressed by MSCs Principles 1 and 2, are explicit within the fisherys management system

33. The best environmental choice in seafood Questions & Answers Questions?

34. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011)

35. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011) Policy Advisory 12 – Guidance on Scoring Reference Points in Principle 1 In the absence of explicit estimates of B MSY or other biomass reference points for many stocks, this advisory seeks to provide CBs with a clearer interpretation of guidance on scoring FAM PIs 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 or their equivalents in Pre-FAM PI, to ensure consistency with Principle 1 of the MSC Standard.

36. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011) Policy Advisory 18 – Revisions to FAM including RBF To contribute to the scoring of each PI, each scoring issue shall be fully and unambiguously met and rationale presented to support the assessments team conclusions. An exception is permitted only for those PIs with a single scoring issue at each SG level.

37. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011) TAB Directive 014 – Guidance on setting conditions The CAB shall specify conditions that closely follow the narrative or metric form of the performance indicators and scoring guideposts used in the assessment tree and also specify conditions in terms of measurable [quantitative] outcomes or results expected, the specific timeframe over which the condition must be met, and if interim milestones are specified, the outcome and score that shall be achieved at each milestone.

38. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011) TAB Directive 029 – Requirements for Stakeholder Consultation Designed to improve the quality and consistency of stakeholder consultation in the fishery assessment process, including: -identification of all relevant stakeholders, who are provided with adequate opportunities to feed into assessments at all relevant stages; -Issues raised by stakeholders are acknowledged and reported as early in the assessment process as possible, to provide maximum opportunity for resolution outside of the objections process;. -Explicit responses from certifiers are presented such that it is easy to see how, where, and why the comments have (or have not) been considered.

39. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011) FCM Appendix 4.4 – Documentation of the basis for decisions Each indicator shall contain commentary about the basis for the decision, and make reference to the relevant indicator or SG. For each indicator used in the evaluation the report shall contain a reference to the source of the information used to make a judgement about that indicator.

40. The best environmental choice in seafood TO comments (2010-2011) FCM Appendix 5.1 – Determination Each indicator shall enumerate and provide a detailed rationale which justifies the scores assigned to each of the performance indicators, and include a formal statement as to the final recommendation reached…