TY - JOUR
T1 - Pulling mechanisms and pushing strategies
T2 - How to improve Ecosystem Advice Fisheries Management advice within the European Union's Common Fisheries Policy
AU - Ramírez-Monsalve, P.
AU - Nielsen, K. N.
AU - Ballesteros, M.
AU - Kirkfeldt, T. S.
AU - Dickey-Collas, M.
AU - Delaney, A.
AU - Hegland, T. J.
AU - Raakjær, J.
AU - Degnbol, P.
N1 - Funding Information:
This article was written as part of work in the MareFrame project titled: Co-creating Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management Solutions. MareFrame received funding from the EU’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant agreement no. 613571. We would like to thank all persons who participated in all the previously mentioned events (focus group, interviews, workshops, round table discussions), for their time, for being open and honest about their perceptions and opinions, for the ideas on how to move forward which we have compiled and merged.
Funding Information:
This article was written as part of work in the MareFrame project titled: Co-creating Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management Solutions. MareFrame received funding from the EU's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant agreement no. 613571. We would like to thank all persons who participated in all the previously mentioned events (focus group, interviews, workshops, round table discussions), for their time, for being open and honest about their perceptions and opinions, for the ideas on how to move forward which we have compiled and merged.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2021/1
Y1 - 2021/1
N2 - While European policies have progressed towards an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), limited attention has been paid to the implications for its advisory system. This paper analyses the advisory landscape in the European Union (EU) by addressing two questions: to what extent can the needed advice be provided? how prepared is the management system to integrate ecosystem advice? We provide a systematic analysis of the relevant advisory bodies, explore gaps related to the requested and delivered advice, and identify paths for improvement. The findings confirm earlier observations of lack of a formalized process to provide and integrate advice in support of an ecosystem approach into EU fisheries management. Instead of enabling existing capacities to embed ecosystem components (e.g. investments and initiatives made by stakeholders (and authorities) to move to EAFM -pushing strategies), the system relies heavily on mandatory requests from policy makers (pulling mechanisms). Furthermore, social and economic dimensions are the weakest aspects in the advisory process, which hampers the balancing of objectives that represent one of the hallmarks of EAFM. The policy framework has adopted EAFM for European fisheries, but the advisory processes have not yet been adapted to substantially support EAFM.
AB - While European policies have progressed towards an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), limited attention has been paid to the implications for its advisory system. This paper analyses the advisory landscape in the European Union (EU) by addressing two questions: to what extent can the needed advice be provided? how prepared is the management system to integrate ecosystem advice? We provide a systematic analysis of the relevant advisory bodies, explore gaps related to the requested and delivered advice, and identify paths for improvement. The findings confirm earlier observations of lack of a formalized process to provide and integrate advice in support of an ecosystem approach into EU fisheries management. Instead of enabling existing capacities to embed ecosystem components (e.g. investments and initiatives made by stakeholders (and authorities) to move to EAFM -pushing strategies), the system relies heavily on mandatory requests from policy makers (pulling mechanisms). Furthermore, social and economic dimensions are the weakest aspects in the advisory process, which hampers the balancing of objectives that represent one of the hallmarks of EAFM. The policy framework has adopted EAFM for European fisheries, but the advisory processes have not yet been adapted to substantially support EAFM.
KW - Advisory Council
KW - Ecosystem Approach advice
KW - Member States Regional Group
KW - RFMO
KW - STECF
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090987237&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85090987237&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.fishres.2020.105751
DO - 10.1016/j.fishres.2020.105751
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85090987237
SN - 0165-7836
VL - 233
JO - Fisheries Research
JF - Fisheries Research
M1 - 105751
ER -