Operationalising Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management for sustainable European Seas. Synthesis of the results of the SEAwise project.

<p dir="ltr">Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) considers the full complexity of fisheries as ‘social-ecological’ systems, evaluating impacts on both the ecological and social system. Over four years, SEAwise has brought together insights across the human and ecological dimensions of fisheries and their management to provide the knowledge base needed for operationalizing EBFM in Europe. Tracing from priority objectives, identified in collaboration with stakeholders, and SEAwise’s EBFM framework for fisheries, we have outlined opportunities and overcome barriers to attaining the goal of operationalising EBFM for European fisheries. This report synthesises this knowledge across our work themes along with the barriers still remaining.</p><p dir="ltr">SEAwise combined different future socio-economic and climate scenarios with management scenarios with a specific focus on small scale (SSF) and large-scale (LSF) fleets. In the human domain, we estimated aspects such as number of meals produced, GVA, fish price and CO₂ per kg of fish landed. In the ecological domain, we investigated aspects such as the status of retained species, bycatch and habitats.</p><p dir="ltr">Fisheries management based on F_MSY with strict implementation of a landing obligation led to improved ecological wellbeing but poorer human wellbeing except in cases where stocks were currently overfished. Allowing some flexibility around F_MSY could in some cases improve human wellbeing without deteriorating ecological wellbeing. Environmental changes led to poorer projected status for many of the retained species. However, the relative ranking of management scenarios in terms of biomass did not change.</p><p dir="ltr">The impacts of area restrictions for fishing activities to reduce bycatch and habitat impact varied depending on whether the area hosted the species or habitat of interest and how effort was redistributed. In most cases, the areas currently suggested did not contain high densities of bycatch species or sensitive habitats and as a result, their effect was limited. Conversely, if specific fishing techniques were prohibited in fit-to-purpose areas to limit impacts such as juvenile catches, incidental bycatch and the degradation of benthic habitats, this improved ecological status. Closing areas often decreased catches and increased operating costs and fuel use as effort was displaced to surrounding areas.</p><p dir="ltr">Ultimately, there are no panaceas when it comes to achieving EBFM. A suite of complementary tailored measures, entailing area-based, effort-based, and technical measures are required to ensure sustainable and resilient fisheries. Climate change impacts must be accounted for within existing and future plans and managers should be prepared to adapt management measures if or when climate impacts render existing measures unfit. This requires adaptive, contextually-sensitive, fisheries-specific and regionally tailored management based on better coverage and integration of particularly social data and data on incidental bycatch. Evaluation of unintended consequences across objectives should be incorporated systematically when choosing management strategies. In addition, timely and responsive support for innovation – for instance, gear innovation – and inclusive policy change, can improve the navigation of trade-offs. Moving beyond a focus on target species to assessments of broader ecological and social impacts of fisheries is urgently needed, and we finalise by discussing the barriers to this transition that are still remaining.</p><p dir="ltr">Read more about the SEAwise project at https://seawiseproject.org/</p>