MEFEPO M aking the Project aim and objectives E uropean Aim is to - PDF document

MEFEPO M aking the Project aim and objectives E uropean Aim is to support the transition towards an ecosystem approach to the management of European marine F isheries Gerjan Piet fisheries by developing operational strategies for the IMARES implementation of an ecosystem approach in three regions (NS, NWW, SWW), and identify how the E cosystem overarching institutional framework needs to be modified to support these strategies. P lan – Operationalizing an Ecosystem Approach: Framework to translate policy objectives (MSFD) to operational management strategies supporting the ‘three pillars of sustainability’ O perational (ecological, social and economic) – Evaluate the different modes of fisheries governance in relation to the institutional frameworks used to manage the fisheries: Role and functioning of the RACs in relation to regionalisation August 30th, 2010 Pelagic RAC, Leiden MEFEPO MEFEPO RACs and REGIONALISATION REGIONALISATION ? “Another option to be carefully ‘Consultation’ Methods considered would be to rely wherever possible on specific regional management solutions implemented by Member States,  Observations subject to Community standards 4 RAC meetings and 4 conferences with regionalisation on the and control. […] In most cases this delegation would need to be agenda organised at the level of marine  Key-informant interviews regions because shared fish 20 interviews: 2 researchers, 5 managers, 3 policy-makers, 10 stocks and shared ecosystems stakeholders (8 of which were from the fishing industry) cover wide geographical areas  Study of Documents and cannot be managed by individual Member States acting Relevant documents on CFP reform, incl. selected position in isolation. Member States papers would therefore have to work  Survey together to develop the setups 134 respondents (41%) from a population of 329 participants in required” (Commission’s Green selected RAC meetings held in 2009 (Pelagic, North Sea, Paper 2009: p10-11) NWW, SWW) METHODS BREAKDOWN OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS MEFEPO MEFEPO REGIONALISATION: Why ? REGIONALISATION: How? Characteristics of the “Archetypes”, i.e. models of regionalisation Practical reasons to regionalise the CFP Functionality  Nationalisation “The truth is that now with the entry of Regionalisation helps the system to… * No regional politico-administrative structures needed  Cooperative Member State Councils the Lisbon Treaty and the […] long * Cope with lengthy co-decision procedure * Loss of ability to coordinate and micro-manage from the EU level period of time that it supposedly it will “When I think of regionalisation , I don’t * Focus the EU central level on principles * Only simple, regional politico-administrative structures needed  Regional Fisheries Management Organisations think of regionalisation of the CFP, I take to take decisions, the concept of * Member states in the driver’s seat * Facilitate EBFM and integration of policies * Empowerment of stakeholders not an explicit aim regionalisation starts to soak through in “If we do not find ways of involving the think of regionalisation of the wider * RACs obsolete or complete rethinking of role * Necessitates formal regional organisations Procedural / input legitimacy management of the North Sea” (Manager, the different countries” (Industry  Regional Fisheries Co-Management Organisations fishermen, letting them assume part of * RACs to advise regional councils as well as Commission * Drastic change from current system stakeholder, 2009) * Potential empowerment of regional stakeholders the management in the future, they will “The CFP should be regionalized 2009) Regionalisation helps to… * Micro-management may continue, but perhaps more efficient * Necessitates formal regional organisations because without this, it will be always find some way of protecting  Regional Marine Management Organisations * RACs direct advice to regional organisations rather than to EU level * Bring decisions closer to stakeholders * Modest change from the current system * High likelihood for significant empowerment of stakeholders themselves from any organised scheme impossible for the policy to take into “…a more regional / local level where * Provide better match between those making * Reduced micro-management , but EU level maintains coordinating role * Necessitates formal regional organisation and re-orientation of RACs fishermen basically can be more account all the different realities that created” (Women’s representative, 2009) * RACs cease to exist, stakeholders participate in the regional org. decisions and those implementing them * Significant change from current system * Potential empowerment of regional stakeholders exist” (Industry stakeholder, 2009) involved in coming up with the solutions * Reduces micro-management, but EU level maintains coordinating role Content / output legitimacy that would result in the objectives that * Reduces micro-management, but EU level maintains coordinating role * Drastic change from current system have been agreed—because most often Regionalisation helps to… * Holistic, integrated approach to fisheries and marine management you have a number of different choices, * Allow more tailor-made management * Drastic change from current system different ways to do things” * Incorporate local / stakeholder knowledge (Environmental NGO representative, 2009) * Develop ‘best practices’ * Provide for coherent integration of policies PERCEPTIONS 1

MEFEPO MEFEPO REGIONALISATION ? Functioning of RACs “In spite of the fact that the fishing Headline The RACs so far sector and the rest of members are doing praiseworthy work, investing lots of hours, money and time in Possible subheader Mixed feeling of impact RACs work, the reality is that when Text the recommendations are generated from the RACs and sent to the But builds trust… Commission, most of them are not being taken into account, attention is not paid to them—and the truth is that this demotivates and discourages a lot of those who work in the RACs” (Industry stakeholder, 2009) “…many of the taboos that existed and many preconceived ideas have been changing through time” (Industry stakeholder talking about how the relationship between the industry and the NGOs have changed due to interactions in the RACs, 2009) PERCEPTIONS OF MODELS 3 THE RAC EXPERIENCE MEFEPO Policy Project aim and objectives MSFD Aim is to support the transition towards an ecosystem approach to the management of European marine • The Marine Strategy Framework Directive constitutes fisheries by developing operational strategies for the the vital environmental component of the Union's future implementation of an ecosystem approach in three Maritime Policy regions (NS, NWW, SWW), and identify how the • The Marine Strategy Framework Directive aims to overarching institutional framework needs to be modified achieve good environmental status of the EU's marine to support these strategies. waters by 2020 and to protect the resource base upon which marine-related economic and social activities – Evaluate the different modes of fisheries governance in relation depend. to the institutional frameworks used to manage the fisheries: Role and functioning of the RACs • Good Environmental Status (GES) shall be determined – Operationalizing an Ecosystem Approach: Framework to at the level of the marine region or subregion , on the translate policy objectives (MSFD) to operational management basis of the qualitative descriptors. Adaptive strategies supporting the ‘three pillars of sustainability’ management on the basis of the ecosystem approach (ecological, social and economic) shall be applied with the aim of attaining good environmental status Operationalizing policy Operationalizing 3 pillars of sustainability Policy Science Stakeholders Is GES achieved? Compare indicators to reference levels Preference elicitation for the Identify potential management Science GES descriptors identified for the measures that apply different tools pillars of sustainability Assess how these measures affect the GES descriptors using the best scientific knowledge Proces Choose preferred management measure by balancing the tradeoffs between the Choose preferred management measure by balancing the tradeoffs between the ecologic, economic and social pillars/descriptors. This should be conducted in a ecologic, economic and social pillars/descriptors. This should be conducted in a formal and fully transparent process where science and stakeholders interact formal and fully transparent process where science and other stakeholders interact