Prioritizing qualitative, ecosystem-based risk assessments to maximize impact in single-species fishery management

IF 5.4 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 OCEANOGRAPHY
Abigail S. Golden , Megan Feddern , Kristin Marshall , Mary E. Hunsicker , Anne H. Beaudreau , Jameal Samhouri , Kiva L. Oken
{"title":"Prioritizing qualitative, ecosystem-based risk assessments to maximize impact in single-species fishery management","authors":"Abigail S. Golden ,&nbsp;Megan Feddern ,&nbsp;Kristin Marshall ,&nbsp;Mary E. Hunsicker ,&nbsp;Anne H. Beaudreau ,&nbsp;Jameal Samhouri ,&nbsp;Kiva L. Oken","doi":"10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2025.107917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Accelerating environmental changes are altering the landscape of risks associated with marine resource management. Risk assessment approaches are gaining traction as a way to incorporate qualitative ecosystem information into the marine fishery management process to evaluate and mitigate these risks. For instance, risk tables that distill complex, ecosystem-based information into qualitative advice can add flexibility to existing processes by providing a way to adjust risk tolerance in response to information about uncertainty and ecosystem trends that do not fit into more rigid decision making structures. However, their effectiveness depends strongly on the key factors of data availability, timing of risk table development, and management on-ramps. Where scientific capacity is constraining, targeting risk table development for situations where they can have the most potential risk mitigation benefit will be key. Here, we share lessons learned from developing a pilot risk table approach for groundfish management on the U.S. West Coast and make recommendations for prioritizing risk table development in light of data availability and management needs. We explore West Coast groundfish case studies to present general guidance for effective prioritization of risk tables in capacity-limited contexts. Key suggestions that offer support within and beyond the West Coast are: 1) identifying management on-ramps for risk tables before or alongside risk table development, 2) coordinating risk table development with management cycles where possible to take advantage of scientific capacity, and 3) tailoring risk table objectives based on the quantity and quality of ecosystem information and its level of inclusion in stock assessments.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54698,"journal":{"name":"Ocean & Coastal Management","volume":"270 ","pages":"Article 107917"},"PeriodicalIF":5.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ocean & Coastal Management","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964569125003801","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OCEANOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Accelerating environmental changes are altering the landscape of risks associated with marine resource management. Risk assessment approaches are gaining traction as a way to incorporate qualitative ecosystem information into the marine fishery management process to evaluate and mitigate these risks. For instance, risk tables that distill complex, ecosystem-based information into qualitative advice can add flexibility to existing processes by providing a way to adjust risk tolerance in response to information about uncertainty and ecosystem trends that do not fit into more rigid decision making structures. However, their effectiveness depends strongly on the key factors of data availability, timing of risk table development, and management on-ramps. Where scientific capacity is constraining, targeting risk table development for situations where they can have the most potential risk mitigation benefit will be key. Here, we share lessons learned from developing a pilot risk table approach for groundfish management on the U.S. West Coast and make recommendations for prioritizing risk table development in light of data availability and management needs. We explore West Coast groundfish case studies to present general guidance for effective prioritization of risk tables in capacity-limited contexts. Key suggestions that offer support within and beyond the West Coast are: 1) identifying management on-ramps for risk tables before or alongside risk table development, 2) coordinating risk table development with management cycles where possible to take advantage of scientific capacity, and 3) tailoring risk table objectives based on the quantity and quality of ecosystem information and its level of inclusion in stock assessments.
优先进行基于生态系统的定性风险评估,以最大限度地提高对单一物种渔业管理的影响
加速的环境变化正在改变与海洋资源管理有关的风险格局。风险评估方法作为一种将定性生态系统信息纳入海洋渔业管理过程以评估和减轻这些风险的方法,正受到越来越多的关注。例如,将复杂的、基于生态系统的信息提炼成定性建议的风险表,可以通过提供一种方法来调整风险容忍度,以响应有关不确定性和生态系统趋势的信息,从而增加现有过程的灵活性,这些信息不适合更严格的决策制定结构。然而,它们的有效性在很大程度上取决于数据可用性、风险表开发的时间和管理的进入阶段等关键因素。在科学能力受到限制的情况下,将风险表的编制目标锁定在可能具有最大潜在风险缓解效益的情况将是关键。在这里,我们分享了在美国西海岸开发底栖鱼管理风险表试点方法的经验教训,并根据数据可用性和管理需求提出了优先开发风险表的建议。我们探讨了西海岸底栖鱼的案例研究,为在能力有限的情况下有效确定风险表的优先级提供一般指导。在西海岸内外提供支持的主要建议是:1)在风险表制定之前或同时确定风险表的管理入口;2)在可能的情况下利用科学能力协调风险表的制定与管理周期;3)根据生态系统信息的数量和质量及其在种群评估中的纳入程度来定制风险表目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ocean & Coastal Management
Ocean & Coastal Management 环境科学-海洋学
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
15.20%
发文量
321
审稿时长
60 days
期刊介绍: Ocean & Coastal Management is the leading international journal dedicated to the study of all aspects of ocean and coastal management from the global to local levels. We publish rigorously peer-reviewed manuscripts from all disciplines, and inter-/trans-disciplinary and co-designed research, but all submissions must make clear the relevance to management and/or governance issues relevant to the sustainable development and conservation of oceans and coasts. Comparative studies (from sub-national to trans-national cases, and other management / policy arenas) are encouraged, as are studies that critically assess current management practices and governance approaches. Submissions involving robust analysis, development of theory, and improvement of management practice are especially welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信