New Directions in Oceans Management An overview of current thinking

1
New Directions in OceansManagementAn overview
of current thinking

• Bob OBoyle
• Bedford Institute of Oceanography
• Dartmouth, Nova Scotia

2
21st Century Paradigm inOcean Management

• Ecosystem Approach to Management
• Each ocean sector one of many
• Control of cumulative impacts across sectors to
  meet multiple objectives
• biodiversity, productivity habitat

3
21st Century Paradigm inOcean Management

• Management Strategy Evaluation
• Assessment one element of ocean management system
  (OMS)
• Examination of behaviour of entire OMS
• Relative merits of different management
  strategies given UNCERTAINTY of each OMS element

4
Management Strategy Evaluation
Control Module
Operational Module
Traditional Assessment
Population Ecosystem
Observation
Assessment
Harvest Rules
Decision Making
Implementation
From McAllister et. al. 1999
5
MSE Within EAM
EAM
MSE implementation faster than EAM
Ecosystem
Sector Mgt
Assessment
MSE
Sector e.g. Fisheries
6
Ecosystem Approach to Management(EAM)
7
What is EAM?(FAO 2003)

• Ecological Understanding as Guide to Management
• Coordinated Management of Sectoral Activities
• Ecosystem approach to management within sector
• Integrated management across sectors
• Management of Cumulative Long-term Impacts
• Precautionary Approach

8

• EAM not replacement for conventional sector,
  species or activity specific management
• Takes broader view
• EAM should be implemented in concert with
  Integrated Management (IM)
• IM Planning management across sectors
  agencies (governance)
• Onus on multi-national, federal, state local
  agencies to coordinate communicate on EAM

9
Is EAM Essential?

• Growing awareness that ecosystem approach needed
  for ocean management
• Collapse of fisheries worldwide
• Multiple uses of ocean growing
• Oil gas, trade, aquaculture
• Competition for limited resource (the ocean)
• Many acts, legislations policies that require
  harmonization
• EAM is a means to do this

10
Comparison of International EAM Efforts

• Experience with EAM at different stages of
  development - Lots still to learn
• Canada, EU, Australia, New Zealand USA
• Case studies chosen based on experience with EAM
• Main features identified that lead EAM in 'right
  direction'

11
Enablers of EAM

• Are there conditions that facilitate
• acceptance implementation
• of EAM?

• Political Leadership
• Legislative Mandate
• Overarching Policy
• Stakeholder Buy-in

12
Political Leadership

• Greatly facilitates efforts to advance EAM
• Without this, difficult to overcome conventional
  management structures
• Associated legislative mandate resourcing
• Establish new institutions
• Incentive to existing agencies to embrace EAM

NZ US are examples where some progress on EAM
can be made without legislative mandate or even
national policy (NZ)
13
Legislative Mandate

• Canada
• 1997 Canada Oceans Act, 1992 CEAA 2003 SARA
• EU
• Basis for EAM in ratified international
  national laws, treaties, conventions agreements
  (e.g. OSPAR HELCOM)
• Australia
• 1992 Intergovernmental Agreement on the
  Environment associated National Strategy for
  Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD)
• 1999 Environmental Protection Biodiversity
  Conservation Act

14
Legislative Mandate

• New Zealand
• No national legislation but development of
  Fisheries Act Resource Management Act (cross
  non-fishery sector planning but within 12 nm)
• US
• While no national legislation, ratified UNFA
  implementing FAO Code of Conduct
• Federal legislation incorporates EAM principles
  e.g.
• Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
  Management Act, Marine Mammal Protection Act,
  Endangered Species Act, National Environmental
  Policy Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Marine
  Plastic Pollution Research Control Act
• New state legislation (Oceans Acts) in California
  under development in Massachusetts, Oregon
  New Jersey

15
Overarching Policy

• Canada
• 2002 Oceans Strategy
• EU
• 6th Environmental Action Program has seven
  Thematic Strategies, one of which is
• EU Marine Thematic Strategy (EMS) for Protection
  Conservation of European Marine Environment
  (under development)
• Integrates patchwork of legislation, policy,
  programs action plans at regional, national, EU
  international levels
• Australia
• 1998 Australia Oceans Policy (AOP) basis for
  Marine Bioregional Planning (MBP)
• Since 2005, MBP backed by 1999 Environmental
  Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act

16
Overarching Policy

• New Zealand
• Oceans Policy delayed by jurisdictional issues
  with Maori but reintroduced in 2005
• Framework for coordinating EAM efforts
• Strategy for Managing Environmental Effects of
  Fishing (2006)
• Biodiversity Strategy (2002) MPA Policy
• USA
• Commission on Oceans Policy (2004), complimented
  by Pew Oceans Commission
• Coherent, comprehensive long-range national
  policy for exploration, protection use of ocean
  coastal resources
• Recommendations on EAM for federal state
  authorities with regulatory power over sector
  activities

17
Stakeholder Buy-In

• EAM needs build upon the many sector-based
  consultative / advisory bodies that already exist
• Stakeholders must see benefits of EAM
• Regulators must see benefits of EAM

18
Implementation of EAM

• What elements should
• Implementation of EAM have?
• Best practices
• based on case studies

19
Elements of Implementation

• Planning area boundaries
• Nested planning management process
• Overarching coordination
• Planning area coordination
• Sector management

Outcome Focused Adaptive
20
Planning Area Boundaries

• Ideally, manage circumscribed ecosystem impacted
  by defined group of stakeholders
• Incorporates not only ecological relationships
  but also existing regulatory socio-economic
  boundaries
• But
• Ecosystems have varying scales of organization
• Many administrative areas jurisdictions already
  exist
• No set formula in five case studies
• Ecological administrative realities
• Pragmatic approach
• We manage people, not ecosystems!

21
Canada

• 5 Large Ocean Management Areas (offshore) defined
  so far
• Based upon ecoregions administrative boundaries
• Challenges
• Boundaries with USA on both coasts in coastal
  area
• Federal / provincial jurisdiction

ESSIM
22
European Union

• 11 Eco-regions (from ICES) based upon existing
  biogeographical management regions
• Shared jurisdiction greatest challenge
• EU Water Framework (coastal), EC (fisheries)

23
Australia

• 5 Planning Regions based on Large Marine Domains
  management considerations (jurisdictional
  political)
• Shared jurisdiction challenge, internationally,
  with States across sectors
• AOP only applicable to federal waters, ie.3 nm to
  international boundary

24
New Zealand

• Planning areas not officially defined at national
  level, but
• Under Resource Management Act, within 12 nm
  Territorial Sea, 10 regional councils have
  decision-making authority over most activities
  (but not fishing)
• Under Fisheries Act, fishery has its own areas
• Challenges
• Different boundaries used by regional councils,
  Ministry of Fisheries Department of
  Conservation
• None coincide with Maori boundaries, which are
  becoming increasingly important in managing
  oceans activities (inshore mostly)
• No EAM requirements in mining oil legislation

25
USA

• Planning areas not officially defined at national
  level but Commission on Oceans Policy suggested
  starting with regional fishery management council
  boundaries

Jurisdictional challenge At Federal State level
NOAA 10 regions based on Large Marine Ecosystems
EPA 5 regions to coordinate large scale ecosystem
based programs
26
Nested Planning Management Process

• Hierarchical structure links legislative mandate
  overarching policy at top to control of sectors
  at bottom
• Overarching (Canada Ocean Strategy)
• Planning area (ESSIM)
• Sector (Fishery)
• Sub-sector (Crab fleet)
• Objectives at all levels with management actions
  at planning area below

27
Two Types of Objectives

• Conceptual Objectives or Goals
• Interpret legislative mandate to be
  understandable to broad audience
• E.g. Restore Coral Community Biodiversity to
  pre-1980 levels
• Operational Objectives or Strategies
• Link between Conceptual Objective Management
  Action
• Specific enough to be clear to all
• Refers to indicator (e.g., biomass) reference
  point (e.g., 50,000 t)
• E.g. Limit Area (sq Km) disturbed of Coral
  Community to 5000 sq km
• Allow measurement of progress towards conceptual
  objective
• Precautionary Approach enters EAM at this point

28
Terminology

• Indicator
• Quantity that can be measured used to track
  changes over time
• Reference point / direction
• Value of indicator corresponding to target or
  limit
• Direction of indicator towards target or away
  from limit

29
Operational Objective
Green zone
or PA
Yellow zone
Red zone
30
Ecosystem Objectives Hierarchy
Overarching Conceptual Objectives
Link to National Policy
Planning Area Conceptual Objectives
Link to Overarching COs Regional Priorities
Planning Area Operational Objectives
Monitor Ecosystem States Control Cumulative
Impacts of Sectors
Sector Operational Objectives
Control Cumulative Impacts of Sub-Sectors
Control Impacts of Sub-Sector
Sub - Sector Operational Objectives
31
Cumulative Impacts
Level of Hierarchy Conceptual Objective Operational Objective
Overarching Conserve Community Biodiversity N/A
Planning Area Restore Coral Community Biodiversity to pre-1980 levels Limit Area (sq Km) disturbed of Deep Sea Coral Community to 6000 sq km
Fishery Sector N/A Limit Area (sq Km) disturbed of Deep Sea Coral Community to 50 of 6000 sq km (3000 sq km)
Crab Fishery N/A Limit Area (sq Km) disturbed of Deep Sea Coral Community to 1000 sq km
Groundfish Fishery N/A Limit Area (sq Km) disturbed of Deep Sea Coral Community to 1000 sq km
Shrimp Fishery N/A Limit Area (sq Km) disturbed of Deep Sea Coral Community to 1000 sq km
32
Suite of Conceptual Operational
Objectives defines EAM in Planning Area
Colour indicates Performance Of Operational
Objective Green Good Yellow
Caution Red Poor
33
Overarching Objectives

• Conceptual, long term, should enable countries
  to satisfy terms of international agreements
  conventions
• Linked to legislative mandate overarching
  policy
• Guidance coordination to all planning areas
  under EAM

34
Overarching Objectives

• Canada, Australia EU
• All have / considering overarching objectives
• New Zealand
• Coordination regionally based
• USA
• Commission on Ocean Policy provided set of
  overarching objectives

35
CanadaNationalOverarchingObjectivesSocio-econ
omicObjectives Structurebeing considered
36
Planning AreaConceptual Objectives

• Overarching objectives made specific to address
  issues in planning area, based on
• Ecosystem description
• Components Relationships
• Threats analysis
• Stressor / Receptor Analysis

37
Canadian Example of Stressor / Receptor Analysis
Sector responsible for threat identified Gaps in
responsibility (e.g., non-point source pollution)
identified
38
Planning AreaConceptual Objectives

• Conceptual Objectives formulated prioritized
  based on
• Top - down (scientists)
• What are key components being impacted?
• Bottom - up (stakeholders)
• What are important stressors to address?
• Risk analysis (quantitative / qualitative)
• Risk impact likelihood

39
Determine Ocean Sectors to Implement Planning
Area Objectives

• Determine which ocean sectors implicated in which
  stressors thus Operational Objectives
• Some stressors might come from outside planning
  Area
• Some objectives, while noted by one sector, might
  be relevant to others
• Some objectives need to be addressed at sector
  level, others at sub-sector level

40
In Canada

• Ecosystem Overview Assessment Report (EOAR) for
  each LOMA
• Ecosystem structure / functioning, human
  activities (e.g. fishing), stressors (e.g.
  dragging) impacted ecosystem components or
  receptors (e.g. benthic community)
• EOARs to be completed in 2007
• Conservation Objectives being formulated
  prioritized
• Priority based on
• Ecological Biological Significant Areas
  Species
• Degraded Areas Depleted Species
• Discussion with stakeholders on other objectives

41
EU

• Coastal member states are to develop
  Implementation plans including (within x years of
  EMS adoption)
• Assessment of environmental status (within 4
  years)
• Objectives (within 5 years)
• Monitoring program (within 6 years)
• Develop operationalize management actions (by
  2016 2018 respectively)
• Irish Sea Project
• Implementation of EAM tested

42

• Australia
• First regional marine plan (SE Australia)
  completed in 2004
• 9 conceptual objectives
• Planning currently being conducted for northern
  southwestern regions
• New Zealand
• Fiordland Marine Conservation Strategy
• Conceptual objectives for fisheries, values of
  special significance, risks to marine
  environment, Stewardship
• USA
• Oceans Commission report
• Regional Ecosystem Assessment should be conducted
  to assess state threats to ecosystems

43
Planning AreaOperational Objectives

• Start with planning area conceptual objective
  'unpack' to point where indicator reference
  point can be referred to
• Important to classify indicators
• Pressure State Response framework being
  considered by many
• These are linked to management actions
• Basis of decision rules
• Suite of all operational objectives in planning
  area could inform determination of ecosystem
  health

44
Suite of Operational Objectives At Planning Area
Level could define Ecosystem Health
Colour indicates Performance Of Operational
Objective Green Good Yellow
Caution Red Poor
45

• Canada
• Suites of LOMA operational conservation
  objectives planned for 2007
• EU
• Irish Sea Pilot Project
• Operational conservation objectives established
  tested
• Australia
• Southeast Regional Marine Plan completed
• Operational objectives under development
• New Zealand
• Fiordland
• Activities focused on how to devise operational
  objectives
• USA
• California Action Plan includes 13 operational
  objectives

46
Sector Operational Objectives

• Sectoral Operational Objectives already part of
  management systems of all case studies
• Need to adapt existing sector management to move
  towards an ecosystem approach
• Putting current objectives in EAM framework
• Developing new objectives to fill gaps
• Engaging regulators stakeholders on EAM

47
Conclusions

• Impetus for EAM apparent through endorsement of
  international treaties / agreements
• EAM adopted in all cases studies
• Neither US nor New Zealand have formal national
  EAM coordination
• Some success in advancing EAM
• Case studies with strong institutional approach
  likely to be more successful

48
Conclusions

• Planning area boundaries based on practical
  realities of conservation administration
• Many jurisdictional issues (international,
  national, regional)
• Objective setting prioritization a challenge
• Unclear how socio-economic objectives
  incorporated
• EAM should be participatory, proactive, open
  transparent to ensure credibility buy-in

49
Conclusions

• Need to interconnect regulatory agencies to
  ensure EAM success
• Sector plans must be linked to ensure management
  of cumulative long-term impacts
• No single sector can implement EAM independently
• Refocus sector management to meet EAM objectives
• Don't abandon single species management but fill
  gaps to meet EAM objectives

50
Management Strategy Evaluation(MSE)
51
Background

• Since 1977, fish stock assessment in Canada (and
  elsewhere) has focused on counting organisms to
  inform management decisions
• Stock assessment
• Counts current number of organisms
• Analyses productivity
• Projects impacts on resource of different levels
  of harvesting

52
Issues with Approach

• Stock assessment not well integrated into rest of
  fisheries management system
• Does stock assessment really meet management
  needs?
• Variability in whole management system not
  evident
• Is stock assessment the problem or enforcement?
• Management increasing recognized as set of
  interacting systems

53
Ocean Management System
Harvest Control Module
Operating Module
Traditional Assessment
Observation System
Population Ecosystem
Assessment System
Harvest Rules
Decision System
Implementation System
From McAllister et. al. 1999
54
Management Strategy Evaluation

• Simulation of ocean management system as a whole,
  including
• Monitoring program
• Measurements that will be made
• How measurements will be analysed used in
  assessment
• How results will be used in management
• How decisions will be implemented
• Development of clear objectives to evaluate
  against - with relevant performance measures
  (indicator vs. reference point)
• Evaluation of feasible management options

55
Not focused on how much resource exists can be
harvested
Conducts comparison of which management strategy
is most robust (reliable) under different
assumptions of uncertainty
56
Steps

• Identify issues and objectives
• List performance indicators
• Identify alternative solutions (alternative
  management scenarios)
• Evaluate each management scenario against the
  performance indicators
• Highlight tradeoffs
• Communicate results to stakeholders and
  decision-makers

EAM part
57
Consequences

• Ecosystem / population
• Greater emphasis on what is know or otherwise
• Observation
• More explicit consideration of uncertainty of
  different approaches impact on rest of
  management system
• Assessment
• provides indicators for decision - making
• Could be straight forward
• NOT same as ecosystem / population

58
Consequences (cont'd)

• Harvest Control Rules
• What is best for the system?
• Constant F, constant catch, SSB F, etc
• Decision System
• What is influence of deviation from control rule?
• Implementation System
• What is impact of different levels of enforcement
  compliance?

59
Qualitative and Quantitative MSE

• Often not possible to be fully quantitative
  (requires complex modelling)
• Qualitative MSE
• Evaluates impacts from high - medium - low
• Can be conducted by a small group of scientists,
  managers and stakeholders
• Results then evaluated by a broader group

60
Summary

• New directions in oceans management implicate
  significant changes to current approach
• Planning Objectives Hierarchy
• Management System
• Will take a number of years of sustained effort
  to implement
• global exchange on concepts approaches needed

61
Thank You!
62
Synopsis
Element Australia NZ EU Canada USA
Politics Strong Strong Strong but Green Paper Strong Getting better
Legislation 1999 EPBCA No but RMA FA devel OSPAR, HELCOM, etc 1997 COA No but updates to many acts
Policy 1998 AOP Under devel 2002 EMS 2002 COS 2004 USCOP
Areas 5 MBPAs FA RMA areas 11 Ecoregions 5 LOMAs (so far) NOAA (10) EPA (5)
COs MBP guidelines Biodiversity Strategy 14 COs guidelines EOARs Eos USCOPs COs guidelines
OOs MPA network MPA Policy Fiordland Irish Sea Project By sector By agency state
Challenge Fed - State RMA - FA Jurisdiction Coastal NOAA - EPA
63
Assessment EBM

• Stock Assessment
• few features to consider
• few indicators (biomass, F) based upon models
• Ecosystem Assessment
• require indicators/RPs related to biodiversity,
  productivity habitat
• many features to consider
• limited understanding few models
• many potential indicators
• some qualitative some quantitative
• Need different analytical approach
• for assessment, decision-making communication

64
Traffic Light Approach

• Methodology to combine diverse indices into one
  framework
• could foresee indicators / RPs for all parts of
  management system
• resource (diversity, productivity, habitat)
• socio-economics
• enforcement
• Promising for Ecosystem-based Management
• Many issues of assessment framework remain to be
  resolved

65
Traffic Light Approach
66
Putting Unpacking Traffic Light Method Together
AHA!
Rebuild or maintain biomass at optimum levels
Restore abundance to levels comparable to the
1950-60s
Restore abundance to levels comparable to the
1950-60s
Healthy fish stocks for the benefit of Canadians
67
Management Actions

• Tools same as now
• Quotas
• Time at Sea limits
• Gear restrictions
• Closed seasons / areas
• New ways to control human impacts on benthic
  communities
• need to classify by type vulnerability
• need to limit human activities by type

68
Expected Life History Traits according to
Southwood Model
Physiologically Benign (High Productivity) Physiologically Adverse (Low Productivity)
Physically Stable Offspring medium small Longevity medium Offspring few large Longevity long
Physically Disturbed Offspring many small Longevity short Offspring medium large Longevity medium
69
Scope for Growth
High Productivity (Benign)
Low Productivity (Adverse)

Highest Risk to Impact
Stable

Disturbance
Lowest Risk to Impact
e
z
Wave height/period
i
t
Disturbed
s
n

h
n
t
e
i
r
p
r
a
u
e
r
G
D
C
Food Availability
Water temperature
Variability in temperature
Oxygen Saturation
Stratification
70
Risk to Impact Map
Areas of Potentially Higher Sensitivity
71
Example of Fisheries Issues

• By-catch including endangered species
• Habitat impacts
• Genetic consequences
• Large scale community changes
• Climate change
• Control of species interactions (e.g. cod / seal)

Fishery on Ecosystem

Ecosystem on Fishery
Ecosystem Manipulation