Pursuit of the triple bottom line of economic, community and ecological sustainability has increased the complexity of fishery management; fisheries assessments require new types of data and analysis to guide science-based policy in addition to traditional biological information and modeling. We introduce the Fishery Performance Indicators (FPIs), a broadly applicable and flexible tool for assessing performance in individual fisheries, and for establishing cross-sectional links between enabling conditions, management strategies and triple bottom line outcomes. Conceptually separating measures of performance, the FPIs use 68 individual outcome metrics—coded on a 1 to 5 scale based on expert assessment to facilitate application to data poor fisheries and sectors—that can be partitioned into sector-based or triple-bottom-line sustainability-based interpretative indicators. Variation among outcomes is explained with 54 similarly structured metrics of inputs, management approaches and enabling conditions. Using 61 initial fishery case studies drawn from industrial and developing countries around the world, we demonstrate the inferential importance of tracking economic and community outcomes, in addition to resource status.

Table l. Surveyed sites in the UWPs. MPAs and UPs. R e d type (r=rocky, s=sand/mud, w=sand/ rock), slope angle (deg), visibility (m). temperature (C") and depth (m).

This Chapter has three objectives. First, it presents a modest update of the evidence used in the 1997 study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that attempted to show which management measures are effective in conserving marine fisheries and producing significant economic and social benefits. In its original report, the OECD found that competitive total allowable catch (TAC) management results in a race-to-fish, with all its attendant effects; and that individual fishing quotas are an effective means of controlling exploitation, of mitigating the race-to-fish, of generating resource rent and increased profits, and of reducing the number of participants in a fishery. In addition, the OECD evidence indicated that time and area closures have not been effective in ensuring resource conservation, though conservation might well have been poorer without them. The update indicates that most of the original results are upheld. The second objective is to report on recent trends in policy since 1995, with a focus on ecosystem-based management policies. These include large marine ecosystem (LME) programmes, marine protected areas (MPAs) and the development of alternative rights-based regimes. Thirdly, the chapter examines the governance challenges of ecosystem-based fisheries management. We argue that the political marketplace that produces fisheries management policies tends to be biased against conservation and long-term economic benefits. The chapter concludes with recommendations for reforming our fishery governance institutions.

No abstract

This paper reports the results of a bioeconomic evaluation of alternative management strategies for the Georges Bank transboundary multispecies fishery. Because the distribution of the principal groundfish resources on Georges Bank involves substantial movement and migration across the US–Canada boundary, the harvest by one country affects the benefits to the other country. An empirically based model of the transboundary multispecies fishery was built to simulate alternative management strategies imposed by each country. The simulations were used to help determine whether the status quo management is superior to any other strategy and, if not, what other strategies are better in terms of economic performance. Our aim is to determine whether there are combinations of US and Canadian harvest policies that would make both countries better off and whether a “win–win” strategy exists in the fishery. The results suggest that there are win–win strategies in terms of economic benefits, but such strategies may not be legally feasible under current fisheries law.