Over the past 50 years, the diversity of fisheries types being actively managed has changed from mainly data-rich, industrial sectors to more socially, economically, and environmentally complex multispecies and multisector fisheries. Accompanying this change has been a broadening of management objectives to include social and economic considerations with traditional resource sustainability objectives, the so-called triple bottom line, and the need to include these considerations into harvest strategies. The case of a line fishery in Australia’s Great Barrier Reef is used as a demonstration of the first steps in implementing triple bottom line harvest strategies. This fishery has several disparate sectors including commercial, tourism, and recreation; targets multiple but important reef species; and is undertaken in a World Heritage Site. This work highlights the need for a much-expanded set of objectives elicited from stakeholders that are either included in the trade-off analyses of the different harvest strategies or directly in an optimization. Both options demonstrated that a paradigm shift is required to emphasize representative participatory management systems that assemble teams from quite different backgrounds and viewpoints; use much broader set of objectives; and modify tools and (especially) the data collected within revised monitoring programmes to underpin these tools.

No abstract

Ecosystem based fisheries management (EBFM) provides a framework to achieve ecological, economic and social sustainability in fisheries. However, developing harvest strategies to achieve these multiple objectives is complex. This is even more so in multi-sector multi-species fisheries. In our study, we develop such harvest strategies for the multi-species Coral Reef Fin Fish Fishery (CRFFF) operating in the waters of Australia's Great Barrier Reef. The fishery includes recreational, charter and commercial sectors, and is a provider of regional employment and supplier of seafood to both local and export markets. We convened a series of stakeholder workshops and conducted surveys to identify stakeholder objectives and priorities, as well as potential harvest strategy frameworks for the fishery. These potential harvest strategies were assessed against the objectives using a further qualitative impact survey. The analysis identified which frameworks were preferred by different stakeholder groups and why, taking into account the different objective priorities and tradeoffs in outcomes. The new feature of the work was to qualitatively determine which harvest strategies are perceived to best address triple bottom line objectives. The approach is therefore potentially applicable in other complex fisheries developing harvest strategies which, by design, strive to achieve ecological, economic and social sustainability.Sustainability 2019, 11, 644 2 of 21 and governance criteria include a range of administrative structures (e.g., co-management) and processes to ensure the desirable outcomes are achieved [2]. The success of EBFM to date, however, has been limited due to three key impediments: a relative lack of explicit social, economic and institutional objectives; a general lack of process (frameworks, governance) for routine integration of all dimensions of sustainability; and a historical emphasis on biological considerations, especially those related to fished stocks [3]. Definitive research on appropriate ways to select and assess social objectives for fisheries is relatively recent [4]. What tends to be lacking is the inclusion of all three dimensions directly within harvest strategies.The recent Queensland Sustainable Fisheries Strategy [5] aims to move the state's fisheries towards a more ecologically, economically and socially sustainable future. As part of this process, a number of Fisheries Working Groups have been established to identify fishery objectives and harvest strategies aimed at moving the fisheries forward. These Working Groups include a wide range of stakeholders, including all fisher sectors (commercial, charter and recreational); processors and buyers; scientists, fishery managers, marine park managers and conservation groups.The aim of this paper is to outline the process undertaken to develop a harvest strategy for a complex multi-sector fishery to achieve ecological, economic and social sustainability objectives. The Coral Reef Fin Fish Fishery (CRFFF) is one of Queensland's most valuable in term...

Australia’s fisheries have experience in responding individually to specific shocks to stock levels (for example, marine heatwaves, floods) and markets (for example, global financial crisis, food safety access barriers). The COVID-19 pandemic was, however, novel in triggering a series of systemic shocks and disruptions to the activities and operating conditions for all Australia’s commercial fisheries sectors including those of the research agencies that provide the information needed for their sustainable management. While these disruptions have a single root cause—the public health impacts and containment responses to the COVID-19 pandemic—their transmission and effects have been varied. We examine both the impacts on Australian fisheries triggered by measures introduced by governments both internationally and domestically in response to the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, and the countermeasures introduced to support continuity in fisheries and aquaculture production and supply chains. Impacts on fisheries production are identified by comparing annual and monthly catch data for Australia’s commercial fisheries in 2020 with averages for the last 4–5 years. We combine this with a survey of the short-term disruption to and impacts on research organisations engaged in fisheries monitoring and assessment and the adaptive measures they deployed. The dominant impact identified was triggered by containment measures both within Australia and in export receiving countries which led to loss of export markets and domestic dine-in markets for live or fresh seafood. The most heavily impact fisheries included lobster and abalone (exported live) and specific finfishes (exported fresh or sold live domestically), which experienced short-term reductions in both production and price. At the same time, improved prices and demand for seafood sold into domestic retail channels were observed. The impacts observed were both a function of the disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic and the countermeasures and support programs introduced by various national and state-level governments across Australia to at least partly mitigate negative impacts on harvesting activities and supply chains. These included protecting fisheries activities from specific restrictive COVID-19 containment measures, pro-actively re-establishing freight links, supporting quota roll-overs, and introducing wage and businesses support packages. Fisheries research organisations were impacted to various degrees, largely determined by the extent to which their field monitoring activities were protected from specific restrictive COVID-19 containment measures by their state-level governments. Responses of these organisations included reducing fisheries dependent and independent data collection as required while developing strategies to continue to provide assessment services, including opportunistic innovations to harvest data from new data sources. Observed short run impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak has emphasised both the vulnerability of fisheries dependent on export markets, live or fresh markets, and long supply chains and the resilience of fisheries research programs. We suggest that further and more comprehensive analysis over a longer time period of the long-run impacts of subsequent waves of variants, extended pandemic containment measures, autonomous and planned adaptive responses would be beneficial for the development of more effective counter measures for when the next major external shock affects Australian fisheries.