TY - JOUR
T1 - The ecosystem approach to fisheries
T2 - Management at the dynamic interface between biodiversity conservation and sustainable use
AU - Jennings, Simon
AU - Smith, Anthony D.M.
AU - Fulton, Elizabeth A.
AU - Smith, David C.
PY - 2014/8
Y1 - 2014/8
N2 - The emergence of an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) was characterized by the adoption of objectives for maintaining ecosystem health alongside those for fisheries. The EAF was expected to meet some aspirations for biodiversity conservation, but health was principally linked to sustainable use rather than lower levels of human impact. Consequently, while policies including EAF concepts identified objectives for fisheries management and biodiversity conservation, the wording often reflected unresolved societal and political debates about objectives and gave imprecise guidance on addressing inevitable trade-offs. Despite scientific progress in making trade-offs and consequences explicit, there remain substantial differences in interpretations of acceptable impact, responses to uncertainty and risk, and the use of management measures by groups accountable for fisheries management and biodiversity conservation. Within and among nations and regions, these differences are influenced by the contribution of fisheries, aquaculture, farming, and trade to food security, consumers' options, and other social, economic, and environmental factors. Notwithstanding, mutual understanding of the motivations and norms of fisheries management and biodiversity conservation groups is increasing, and interactions between these groups have likely supported more progress toward meeting their stated objectives than would have otherwise been achievable.
AB - The emergence of an ecosystem approach to fisheries (EAF) was characterized by the adoption of objectives for maintaining ecosystem health alongside those for fisheries. The EAF was expected to meet some aspirations for biodiversity conservation, but health was principally linked to sustainable use rather than lower levels of human impact. Consequently, while policies including EAF concepts identified objectives for fisheries management and biodiversity conservation, the wording often reflected unresolved societal and political debates about objectives and gave imprecise guidance on addressing inevitable trade-offs. Despite scientific progress in making trade-offs and consequences explicit, there remain substantial differences in interpretations of acceptable impact, responses to uncertainty and risk, and the use of management measures by groups accountable for fisheries management and biodiversity conservation. Within and among nations and regions, these differences are influenced by the contribution of fisheries, aquaculture, farming, and trade to food security, consumers' options, and other social, economic, and environmental factors. Notwithstanding, mutual understanding of the motivations and norms of fisheries management and biodiversity conservation groups is increasing, and interactions between these groups have likely supported more progress toward meeting their stated objectives than would have otherwise been achievable.
KW - Aquaculture
KW - Biodiversity
KW - Conservation
KW - Fisheries
KW - Food security
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84906090115&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/nyas.12489
DO - 10.1111/nyas.12489
M3 - Article
C2 - 25040601
AN - SCOPUS:84906090115
SN - 0077-8923
VL - 1322
SP - 48
EP - 60
JO - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
JF - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
IS - 1
ER -