Pulling mechanisms and pushing strategies: How to improve Ecosystem Approach Fisheries Management advice within the European Union's Common Fisheries Policy

被引:3
作者
Ramirez-Monsalve, P. [1 ]
Nielsen, K. N. [2 ]
Ballesteros, M. [3 ,4 ]
Kirkfeldt, T. S. [1 ]
Dickey-Collas, M. [5 ,6 ]
Delaney, A. [1 ]
Hegland, T. J. [1 ]
Raakjaer, J. [1 ]
Degnbol, P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Aalborg Univ, Ctr Blue Governance CBG, Aalborg, Denmark
[2] Arctic Univ Tromso, Fac Biosci Fisheries & Econ, Tromso, Norway
[3] Fdn CETMAR, Fisheries Socioecon Dept, Ctr Tecnol Mar, Vigo, Spain
[4] Campus Mar, Int Campus Excellence, Vigo, Spain
[5] Int Council Explorat Sea, Copenhagen, Denmark
[6] Tech Univ Denmark DTU, DTU Aqua Natl Inst Aquat Resources, Lyngby, Denmark
关键词
Ecosystem Approach advice; Advisory Council; Member States Regional Group; STECF; RFMO; REGIONALIZATION; FRAMEWORK; LESSONS; EU;
D O I
10.1016/j.fishres.2020.105751
中图分类号
S9 [水产、渔业];
学科分类号
0908 ;
摘要
While European policies have progressed towards an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), limited attention has been paid to the implications for its advisory system. This paper analyses the advisory landscape in the European Union (EU) by addressing two questions: to what extent can the needed advice be provided? how prepared is the management system to integrate ecosystem advice? We provide a systematic analysis of the relevant advisory bodies, explore gaps related to the requested and delivered advice, and identify paths for improvement. The findings confirm earlier observations of lack of a formalized process to provide and integrate advice in support of an ecosystem approach into EU fisheries management. Instead of enabling existing capacities to embed ecosystem components (e.g. investments and initiatives made by stakeholders (and authorities) to move to EAFM -pushing strategies), the system relies heavily on mandatory requests from policy makers (pulling mechanisms). Furthermore, social and economic dimensions are the weakest aspects in the advisory process, which hampers the balancing of objectives that represent one of the hallmarks of EAFM. The policy framework has adopted EAFM for European fisheries, but the advisory processes have not yet been adapted to substantially support EAFM.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 70 条
  • [1] AC Secretariats, 2014, STAT ACS PROV ADV EA
  • [2] AC Secretariats, 2017, PERC DEV ACS CAP PRO
  • [3] AC Secretariats, 2014, ACS CONSTR PROV EAFM
  • [4] Anonymous, 2017, International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas Collective Volume of Scientific Papers, V73, P3042
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2015, FISHERIES, V40, P155, DOI [10.1080/03632415.2015.1024308., DOI 10.1080/03632415.2015.1024308]
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2016, OJ C
  • [7] Do not shoot the messenger: ICES advice for an ecosystem approach to fisheries management in the European Union
    Ballesteros, Marta
    Chapela, Rosa
    Ramirez-Monsalve, Paulina
    Raakjaer, Jesper
    Hegland, Troels J.
    Nielsen, Kare N.
    Laksa, Unn
    Degnbol, Poul
    [J]. ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2018, 75 (02) : 519 - 530
  • [8] BSAC, 2016, OUTC BSAC TECHN WORK
  • [9] Modelling dynamic ecosystems: venturing beyond boundaries with the Ecopath approach
    Coll, M.
    Akoglu, E.
    Arreguin-Sanchez, F.
    Fulton, E. A.
    Gascuel, D.
    Heymans, J. J.
    Libralato, S.
    Mackinson, S.
    Palomera, I.
    Piroddi, C.
    Shannon, L. J.
    Steenbeek, J.
    Villasante, S.
    Christensen, V.
    [J]. REVIEWS IN FISH BIOLOGY AND FISHERIES, 2015, 25 (02) : 413 - 424
  • [10] Moving from ecosystem-based policy objectives to operational implementation of ecosystem-based management measures
    Cormier, Roland
    Kelble, Christopher R.
    Anderson, M. Robin
    Allen, J. Icarus
    Grehan, Anthony
    Gregersen, Olavur
    [J]. ICES JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE, 2017, 74 (01) : 406 - 413