2001
DOI: 10.1006/jmsc.2001.1051
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An application of the Bayesian approach to stock assessment model uncertainty

Abstract: Bayesian methods have a number of advantages that make them especially useful in the provision of fisheries management advice: they permit formal decision analysis, and they facilitate the incorporation of model uncertainty. The latter may be particularly useful in the management of contentious fisheries, where different nations and interest groups may suggest alternative assessment models and managementeach likely to imply different findings, even when using the same data. Such situations might be approached … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2005
2005
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They cautioned that using information criteria (such as AIC) can be misleading. These inconsistent results can cause disagreement over which models should be used for a particular stock or management decision (Patterson, 1999;Hammond and O'Brien, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…They cautioned that using information criteria (such as AIC) can be misleading. These inconsistent results can cause disagreement over which models should be used for a particular stock or management decision (Patterson, 1999;Hammond and O'Brien, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Therefore, to reduce uncertainty, ecosystem modelers usually examine the quality and compatibility of the inputs (Håkanson 2003;Murawski 2007), assume constancy in ecological processes (Magnứsson 1995;Bogstad et al 1997), and reduce or aggregate the species and inter-species links that are considered (Plagányi 2007). The total uncertainty of a model can be evaluated through the quality of outputs according to statistical parameters (e.g., standard deviation), classifications of input origin (e.g., a mere guess, imported from similar system or a precise estimate on local data; Pauly et al 2000), methods of sensitivity estimation (Hammond and O'Brien 2001;Kavanagh et al 2004), or/and calculations of error propagation (Snowling and Kramer 2001).…”
Section: Ebfm General Goalsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Structural uncertainty refers to the basic lack of knowledge about the components, dynamics, and internal interactions of a system , Charles 1998, De Young et al 1999, Walker et al 2003, and manifests as ambiguity, confusion, and controversy in management discussions (Charles 1998, Hammond and O'Brien 2001, Gréboval 2002.…”
Section: Structural Uncertaintymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The models can be merged into a graphical meta-model and extended into a quantitative form by adding probabilistic information related to the strength of the links between factors. The most advanced possibility is to build an extensive meta-model of the system using the model-averaging technique (Hammond andO'Brien 2001, Mäntyniemi et al 2009a). This would require observations to be compared with the models to weight the different models according to their correspondence with data (Mäntyniemi et al 2009a).…”
Section: Usability Of the Bbn Approach For Fisheries Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation