Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE)

1. Management Strategy Evaluation(MSE) Bob O’Boyle & Tana Worcester Bedford Institute of Oceanography Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada

2. Background • Since 1977, stock assessment in Canada (and elsewhere) has focused on counting organisms to inform decisions by Fisheries and Aquaculture Management • Stock assessment • Counts current number of organisms • Analyses productivity • Projects impacts on resource of different levels of harvesting

3. Issues with Approach • Stock assessment not well integrated into rest of fisheries management system (FMS) • Does stock assessment really meet management needs? • Variability in whole FMS not available to managers • Is stock assessment the problem or enforcement? • FMS increasing recognized as set of interacting systems

4. Fisheries Management System Operating Module Harvest Control Module Traditional Stock Assessment Observation System Population Ecosystem Assessment System Implementation System Decision System Harvest Rules From McAllister et. al. 1999

5. Global and National Trend • Desire to place stock assessment, decision-making, enforcement, etc into context • Developing since mid to late 1990s • In DFO • Since 2001, move to stock assessment frameworks • Assessment module • 2005 discussion on management framework under precautionary approach • Harvest control rule module

6. Fisheries Management Framework consistent with precautionary approach

7. Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) • Simulation-based framework for evaluating Fisheries Management System as a whole: • monitoring programs, • stock assessment methods, • harvest strategies, and • decision rules.

8. DFO and MSE • SARA Recovery Potential Assessments are the nearest to MSE that DFO does: • Species status & trajectory • Recovery reference points & potential • Impacting (all sources) activities • Alternatives & mitigation • SARA Listing process • Includes socio-economic impacts • Evaluates options

9. Key Ingredients of MSE • Simulation of FMS as a whole, including • Monitoring program • Measurements that will be made • How measurements will be analysed & used in assessment • How results will be used in management • How decisions will be implemented • Development of clear objectives to evaluate against - with relevant performance measures (indicator vs. reference point) • Evaluation of feasible management options

10. Steps • Identify issues and objectives • List performance indicators • Identify alternative solutions (alternative management scenarios) • Evaluate each management scenario against the performance indicators • Highlight tradeoffs • Communicate results to stakeholders and decision-makers

11. Investigation through Simulation • Alternate hypotheses on ecosystem / population • Simulation of • observation system (e.g. hypotheses of acoustic surveys) • assessment process • decision rule performance • implementation system

12. Not focused on how much resource exists & can be harvested Conducts comparison of which management strategy is most robust (reliable) under different assumptions of uncertainty

13. Consequences • Ecosystem / population • Greater emphasis on what is know or otherwise • Observation • More explicit consideration of uncertainty of different approaches & impact on rest of FMS • Assessment • provides indicators for decision - making • Could be straight forward • NOT same as ecosystem / population

14. Consequences (cont'd) • Harvest Control Rules • What is best for the system? • Constant F, constant catch, SSB & F, etc • Decision System • What is influence of deviation from control rule? • Implementation System • What is impact of different levels of enforcement & compliance?

15. Qualitative and Quantitative MSE • Often not possible to be fully quantitative (requires complex modelling) • Qualitative MSE • Evaluates impacts from high - medium - low • Can be conducted by a small group of scientists, managers and stakeholders • Results then evaluated by a broader group