This website is provided for information purposes only and is no longer being maintained.

You are here: University Home > MEFEPO home > Project structure > WP8 overview

WP8 Overview

Synthesis and review of progress

WP8    Objectives

  • An assessment of the progress towards the implementation of an ecosystem approach will be
    assessed against the test developed by ICES (2005) for the three regions.
  • The next steps towards the progression of an ecosystem approach will be identified.


Description of work

This WP will be achieved at a Project Meeting held in Month 36.

Task 1. An assessment of the whole project will be undertaken by the MEFEPO leaders for the three regions
to determine how far the project has progressed the 11 point test developed by ICES to measure the
development and implementation of an ecosystem approach (ICES, 2005). These 11 points are:

a. Have management regions with unambiguous boundaries been defined and have
responsibilities for the management of all activities at all scales been identified?

b. Has the current status of the ecosystem been described and contrasted with the Vision?

c. Have the properties of the ecosystem and the associated threats been fully documented
and likely additive or synergistic threats identified?

d. Have ecological objectives and operational objectives with appropriate properties
(SMART) been identified and agreed in all regions, based on an inclusive and consultative

e. Have all incompatibilities of ecological objectives, operational objectives, and scales of
management been identified and rectified?

f. Have indicators, limits, and targets been established for each operational objective and are
they inter-compatible?

g. Have sufficient management tools to support the operational objectives been identified
and put in place?

h. Will all proposed management tools be effective in supporting the ecological objectives
and operational objectives of management and are the management methods coordinated
and compatible?

i. Has a process for providing quality-controlled supporting science been established, and is there a clear route by which the science is fed into the decision-making process?

j. Is the science advice supported by adequate monitoring and assessment and are the
monitoring and assessment procedures also quality controlled?

k. Has a process for management feedback and decision-making been established and will
it ensure ongoing compatibility of management methods?

The development and implementation of an ecosystem approach requires self-governance by the scientific
community, the fishing industry, the public and responsible fisheries management. The UN Atlas of the
Oceans (Sissenwine & Mace 2002) identifies 6 criteria of an ecosystem approach to management:

1. Are the goals and constraints that characterise the desired state of fisheries and undesirable
ecosystem changes defined?
2. Are suggested conservation measures precautionary, take account of species interactions, and are
3. Is the allocation of rights to provide incentives for conservation considered?
4. Is the designed governance process participatory and transparent?
5. Is the ecosystem protection for habitat and species of special concern?; and
6. Does the designed governance process consider management support including scientific
information, enforcement, and performance evaluation?

Task 2. The outcome of Task 1 will identify the immediate priorities for research and governance
development which will be detailed and published to provide the next steps in the process.


A short report will be produced which identifies the status of an ecosystem approach to fisheries
management in Europe.

WP8 Lead Institute: UoL

Go to WP9 Overview