1. North Sea RAC Socio-Economic Development Group Meeting Edinburg 15 April 2008 Presentation of EU IMAGE and MEFEPO projects by Sten Sverdrup-Jensen, IFM

2. IMAGE Indicators for Fisheries MAnaGement in Europe Funding:EU 6th FP Funding:EU 6th FP Duration: Nov 2006 – October 2009 Duration: Nov 2006 – October 2009 Partners: IMARES (lead), CEFAS, IFREmer,DIFRES, COISPA, EMI, IFM Partners: IMARES (lead), CEFAS, IFREmer,DIFRES, COISPA, EMI, IFM

3. IMAGE Objectives: Develop an operational framework of candidate indicators to support Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Develop an operational framework of candidate indicators to support Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management Elaborate indicators into comprehensive dashboards to support management decision making Elaborate indicators into comprehensive dashboards to support management decision making Develop methodology to integrate this information into tools suppporting the decision making process Develop methodology to integrate this information into tools suppporting the decision making process Develop a framework that can evaluate management strategies based on indicators Develop a framework that can evaluate management strategies based on indicators Test their applicability in regional case studies (in consultation with the RACs) Test their applicability in regional case studies (in consultation with the RACs)

4. IMAGE workpackages: 1. Design operational framework 2. Using ecological indicators in contxt 3. Selection of indicators for socio-economic objectives 4. Tools for decision support 5. Management strategy evaluation model 6. Case studies (Baltic Sea, Celtic Sea/Bay of Biscay,Mediterranean Sea, North Sea 7. Pan European synthesis

5. IMAGE Work Package 3: Selection of indicators for socio-economic objectives IMAGE Work Package 3: Selection of indicators for socio-economic objectives To develop an operational framework of socio-economic indicators to support ecosystem-based fisheries management in RAC regions; To develop an operational framework of socio-economic indicators to support ecosystem-based fisheries management in RAC regions; To identify shortcomings in availability of indicator data at the required scale and recommend on measures to provide such data; To identify shortcomings in availability of indicator data at the required scale and recommend on measures to provide such data; To contribute to the development of an evaluation framework for fisheries management strategies based on indicators; To contribute to the development of an evaluation framework for fisheries management strategies based on indicators; To advise on how indicators can be implemented in the NSRAC area. To advise on how indicators can be implemented in the NSRAC area.

6. WP 3 Actions 1. Develop a detailed “fisheries system” framework that specifies economic, social and other human “drivers” and how they combine in to/determine fishing practice (pressure) in various metiers and institutional settings 2. Specify how fishing practice (pressure) translates into landings and discards and identify indicators that can inform on 1) socio-economic pressure drivers, 2) management responses, and 3) state (metier/sector performance relative to CFP socio-economic objective: “To develop a viable, efficient, globally competitive fisheries and aquaculture industry”. 3. Identify data needs and availability 4. Develop and test indicator framework with research partners and North Sea RAC 5. Contribute to pan-European synthesis

7. WP 3 Actions 1. Develop a detailed “fisheries system” framework that specifies economic, social and other human “drivers” and how they combine in to/determine fishing practice (pressure) in various metiers and institutional settings 2. Specify how fishing practice (pressure) translates into landings and discards and identify indicators that can inform on 1) socio-economic pressure drivers, 2) management responses, and 3) state (metier/sector performance relative to CFP socio-economic objective: “To develop a viable, efficient, globally competitive fisheries and aquaculture industry”. 3. Identify data needs and availability 4. Develop and test indicator framework with research partners and North Sea RAC 5. Contribute to pan-European synthesis

8. Biological component Economic component

9. Socio-economic system

10. WP 3 Actions 1. Develop a detailed “fisheries system” framework that specifies economic, social and other human “drivers” and how they combine in to/determine fishing practice (pressure) in various metiers and institutional settings 2. Specify how fishing practice (pressure) translates into landings and discards and identify indicators that can inform on 1) socio-economic pressure drivers, 2) management responses, and 3) state (metier/sector performance relative to CFP socio-economic objective: “To develop a viable, efficient, globally competitive fisheries and aquaculture industry”. 3. Identify data needs and availability 4. Develop and test indicator framework with research partners and North Sea RAC 5. Contribute to pan-European synthesis

11. CFP objectives: LEVEL 1: “Precautionary approach shall be applied 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”

12. CFP objectives: LEVEL 2: EU operational objectives: 1. “To maintain fishing mortality at or below levels that are necessary to achieve maximum sustainable yield1 for all targeted stocks” 1. “To maintain fishing mortality at or below levels that are necessary to achieve maximum sustainable yield1 for all targeted stocks” 2. “To maintain or reduce fishing impact on the eco-system at or below sustainable levels”c 2. “To maintain or reduce fishing impact on the eco-system at or below sustainable levels”c 3. “To develop a viable, economically efficient and globally competitive European fisheries and aquaculture industry” 3. “To develop a viable, economically efficient and globally competitive European fisheries and aquaculture industry” LEVEL 3: RAC operational objectives: ?????

13. Economic viability and efficiency indicators DCR (1639/2001) minimum programme (Extended programme includes greater level of detail (e.g. regional differentiation ) FISHING ENTERPRISES: Income Income Production costs Production costs Fixed costs Fixed costs Financial position Financial position Investment Investment Prices per species Prices per species Employment Employment PROCESSING INDUSTRY: Raw material volume Raw material volume Income Income Production costs Production costs Financial position Financial position Investment Investment Product values Product values Employment Employment Capacity utilization Capacity utilization

14. Fleet short term performance (“Economic Performance of Selected European Fishing Fleets, Annual Report 2005”.

15. Fleet medium term performance

16. Medium and short term performance of 89 EU fishing fleet segments (metiers?) in 2004

17. Performance indicators of the EU fishing fleet by sea area in 2004.

18. North Sea fishing fleet, short and medium term performance (number of segments and value of landings), 2004

19. Social and cultural viability indicators Industry indicators: Industry indicators: - profitability of economic sectors - fisheries-related activity (no. of businesses, employm.) - economic importance of sectors Community indicators: Community indicators: - population (size, diversity, opportunities) - social well-being (satisfaction, identity) Institutional arrangement indicators: Institutional arrangement indicators: - social policy (advice, support, funds) - fisheries governance (participation, understanding etc.)

20. Global competitiveness Indicators: Absense of subsidies at EU/national levels (fuel and other inputs, fish prices) Absense of subsidies at EU/national levels (fuel and other inputs, fish prices) Absense of EU tariffs and duties on imported fish products Absense of EU tariffs and duties on imported fish products Absense of technical measures that hamper international trade in fish products Absense of technical measures that hamper international trade in fish products

21. WP 3 Actions 1.Develop a detailed “fisheries system” framework that specifies economic, social and other human “drivers” and how they combine in to/determine fishing practice (pressure) in various metiers and institutional settings 2. Specify how fishing practice (pressure) translates into landings and discards and identify indicators that can inform on 1) socio-economic pressure drivers, 2) management responses, and 3) state (metier/sector performance relative to CFP socio-economic objective: “To develop a viable, efficient, globally competitive fisheries and aquaculture industry”. 3. Identify data needs and availability 4. Develop and test indicator framework with research partners and North Sea RAC 5. Contribute to pan-European synthesis

22. Social and cultural viability performance indicators Socio-economic data frame Socio-economic data frame Fishing community profiles (baseline data) Fishing community profiles (baseline data) Data collection (revised DCR + soft data) Data collection (revised DCR + soft data) Recent work completed: 1) North Sea Women’s Network, Dataframe project 2) DG Fish SIA Study ”Profiles of Baltic Fishing Communities”

23. Indicator data discussion sources: DCR-Data Collection Review (Huntington et al. 2003); DCR-Data Collection Review (Huntington et al. 2003); STECF-SGRN DCR Review, 2006 STECF-SGRN DCR Review, 2006 ESPON Action 2.1.5: Territorial Impacts of European Fisheris Policy, Final Report (2006); ESPON Action 2.1.5: Territorial Impacts of European Fisheris Policy, Final Report (2006); INDECO WP6: Recommendations and Gaps for Uses of Socio- Economic Indicators on the Environmental Impact of Fishing Activities (D18); INDECO WP6: Recommendations and Gaps for Uses of Socio- Economic Indicators on the Environmental Impact of Fishing Activities (D18); NSRAC SEFG: A Social Assessment Framework for Fisheries building on Scoping Study (2006); NSRAC SEFG: A Social Assessment Framework for Fisheries building on Scoping Study (2006); North Sea Women’s Network: Developing a Socio-Economic Dataframe (2007) North Sea Women’s Network: Developing a Socio-Economic Dataframe (2007) DG Fish, Socio-Economic Analysis Unit "Framework for analyzing social and economic impacts of management proposals“ (2007); DG Fish, Socio-Economic Analysis Unit "Framework for analyzing social and economic impacts of management proposals“ (2007); DG Fish SIA study (2007) DG Fish SIA study (2007) Hatcher, Holmyard, and Hoof: A Social Assessment Framework for Fisheries (2006). Hatcher, Holmyard, and Hoof: A Social Assessment Framework for Fisheries (2006).

24. An institutional framework for designing and monitoring ecosystem-based fisheries policy experiments (Murray Rudd, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Ecol. Econ.cs 2003)

25. WP 3 Actions 4. Develop and test indicator framework with research partners and North Sea RAC 5. Contribute to pan-European synthesis

26. 4. Develop and test indicator framework with research partners and North Sea RAC Collaboration with NS RAC Socio-Economic Development Group: Socio-Economic Data Frame building on Scoping Study (2006) and Case Studies (2007); Collaboration with NS RAC Socio-Economic Development Group: Socio-Economic Data Frame building on Scoping Study (2006) and Case Studies (2007); Discussion with NS RAC (ExCom members and others) on socio- economic management objectives at RAC level Discussion with NS RAC (ExCom members and others) on socio- economic management objectives at RAC level Draw on experiences from Socio-economic Impact Analysis projects: Draw on experiences from Socio-economic Impact Analysis projects: - NS Plaice and Sole Management Plan? - Other?

27. MEFEPO Making the European Fisheries Ecosystem Plan Operational Troels J. Hegland, Jesper Raakjær and Sten Sverdrup-Jensen Innovative Fisheries Management, Aalborg University

28. EU 7th Research Framework Programme KBBE-2007-1-4-19: Governance for an operational regional ecosystem approach to fisheries management Project runs from spring 2008 to spring 2011 Total budget around 4 million € Partners: University of Liverpool (coordinator), UK Instituto de Investigação das Pescas e do Mar, Portugal Institute for Marine Resources & Ecosystem Studies, Netherlands Université de Bretagne Occidentale, France Marine Institute, Ireland University of Tromsø, Norway Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science, UK Innovative Fisheries Management, Denmark Universidade dos Açores, Portugal Instituto Español de Oceanografía, Spain

29. Background The FP5-funded European Fisheries Ecosystem Plan (EFEP) project developed a Fisheries Ecosystem Plan (FEP) for European waters, using the North Sea as a case study. EFEP incorporated social and political sciences, marine ecology, fisheries science and mathematical modelling to identify the effects of fisheries management scenarios (including changes in effort, changes in gear types and spatial closures) on the ecosystem, and their acceptability to a broad range of marine stakeholders including fishers, fish processors, managers, policy makers, scientists and environmentalists. EFEP also developed a step-wise framework for the transition of management from the current regime to an ecosystem approach, and an outline of how the FEP could be made operational within existing legislation.

30. MEFEPO objectives To show how an ecosystem approach to fisheries can be made operational within three major European regions (North Sea, North Western Waters and the South Western Waters RAC regions) by identifying the management objectives, and the operational strategies required to achieve those objectives, using economic, social and ecological approaches. To evaluate the different modes of fisheries governance, and their combinations, and their implications on the development of the institutional frameworks used to manage the fisheries to provide a transitional framework towards a mature ecosystem approach to fisheries management. To develop operational FEPs for the three marine regions targeted at an audience of non-scientists with managerial, policy and RAC roles, and which provides a vision of an mature ecosystem approach and a description of how it can be delivered.

31. MEFEPO plan

32. IFM involvement WP 3: Operational instruments and adaptive management WP 3: Operational instruments and adaptive management WP 4: Institutional frameworks in the European Union and Associated Countries WP 4: Institutional frameworks in the European Union and Associated Countries WP 6: Identify the operational challenges to introducing an ecosystem approach to the fisheries WP 6: Identify the operational challenges to introducing an ecosystem approach to the fisheries WP 7: Develop operational Fisheries Ecosystem Plans for the (a) North Sea, (b) North Western Waters and (c) South Western Waters regions WP 7: Develop operational Fisheries Ecosystem Plans for the (a) North Sea, (b) North Western Waters and (c) South Western Waters regions

33. Thank you