'The overarching principles of ecosystem-based management of fisheries….. aim to ensure that, despite variability, uncertainty and likely natural changes in the ecosystem, the capacity of the aquatic ecosystems to produce food, revenues, employment and, more generally, other essential services and livelihood, is maintained indefinitely for the benefit of the present and future generations…..'

To facilitate the implementation of EBFM SC-ECO has developed an indicator-based ecosystem report card. A main objective of this new tool is to improve dialogue…

To facilitate the implementation of EBFM SC-ECO has developed an indicator-based ecosystem report card. A main objective of this new tool is to improve dialogue between scientists and managers

and to increase the awareness of the state of the different ecosystem components managed by ICCAT.

The Sargasso Sea is a major component of the ICCAT convention area and provides a variety of ecosystem services to ICCAT and other RFMOs.

Ecosystem services include a variety of products such as fish for food, but also processes that regulate and maintain our environment and cultural experiences.

The ecosystem report card was developed using the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) approach. We show how this approach can be extended to develop a common understanding of how human activities affect the Atlantic ecosystem.

Driver-Pressure-State-Ecosystem services-Response based on the DPSIR framework

Driver-Pressure-State-Ecosystem services-Response based on the DPSIR framework

EBFM implies consideration of a range of frequently conflicting objectives and the needed consensus may not be achievable without dialogue and the equitable distribution of benefits.

EBFM implies consideration of a range of frequently conflicting objectives and the needed consensus may not be achievable without dialogue and the equitable distribution of benefits.

Equitable distribution of benefits?

B@ll%cks!

Review by Fulton, Fuller and Smith showed that most come down to 3 parts namely

• Set and operationalise objectives
• Indicators to assess current system status
• Decision rules and implementation

Quantitative Ecosystem Indicators for Fisheries Management

Philippe M. Cury, Villy Christensen; Quantitative ecosystem indicators for fisheries management, ICES Journal of Marine Science, Volume 62, Issue 3, 1 January 2005, Pages 307–310,

1. environmental indicators including habitat changes;
2. species-based indicators;
3. size-based indicators;
4. trophodynamic indicators;
5. integrated indicators;
6. selection criteria;
7. data sets and reviews; and
8. frameworks for implementing indicators.

— many potential indicators, but do they work? — many framework/criteria documents, few tests (growing slowly now)

— diagnostic indicators tested (ecological information content) — robust = indicators that reliably and consistently predict trends in 1+ key attributes ƒ Indicators tested cover — populations, assemblages (communities), habitats, ecosystems — empirical, model-dependent — fisheries dependent and independent

Correlation of indicators with attributes through time

Determine how robust indicators are to — ecosystem conditions, levels and patterns of fishing pressure, sampling and processing error

Good indicators — easily measured (easy to sample, easy to calculate) — cost effective — easily understood (interpreted)

With ICCAT

Across other RFMOs and management bodies