The Origin of NOAA’s Integrated Ecosystem Assessment Program: A Retrospective and Prospective

Harvey, Chris J.; Fluharty, David; Fogarty, Michael J.; Levin, Phillip S.; Murawski, Steven A.; Shuford, Rebecca; Kelble, Christopher R.; Monaco, Mark E.

doi:10.1080/08920753.2021.1846110

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is suggested that the scale of integrated assessments be based on management needs and available research funds and capacity (Samhouri et al, 2017;Spooner et al, 2021), where practitioners have also found that societal needs and management objectives determine matters of scale of ecosystem assessments (Harvey et al, 2021).…”

Section: Groundtruthing the Cumulative Impact Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Groundtruthing cumulative impact assessments with biodiversity data: Testing indicators and methods for marine ecosystem condition assessments in South Africa

Smit,

Sink,

Shannon

et al. 2024

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate assessments of ecosystem condition are needed to inform management processes such as systematic conservation planning and protected area expansion, marine spatial planning and other effective area‐based conservation measures. Yet measuring the condition of dynamic and often largely inaccessible marine ecosystems is extremely difficult and presents a global challenge. Broad‐scale cumulative impact assessments have been used in South Africa as a proxy for marine ecosystem condition in national assessments and reporting because the data are more readily available, and knowledge exists on the impacts of various human activities (or pressures) on marine ecosystems. While useful for national reporting, assessments based on in situ ecological data are also needed at finer scales relevant to management. Applying the HELCOM BEAT approach, this study used in situ ecological data to identify potential methods and indicators that can be applied in South Africa to conduct integrated ecosystem assessments and to assess the suitability of current cumulative impact assessments as a proxy for condition. Aggregated fish indicators demonstrated greater sensitivity to varying human pressures compared with benthic community indicators, with responsiveness differing by location. Notably, site‐level differences in empirical condition emerged that broad‐scale cumulative assessments often missed. The study thus highlighted the varying suitability of cumulative impact scores as proxies for condition, indicating their reliability for fish communities. However, this is also dependent on the pressure types included, the biotic indicators used and the area of focus. Conservation decisions based solely on cumulative impact scores could misrepresent the actual condition of the environment, which makes it difficult to make management decisions, especially at finer scales. As such, conservation initiatives need to be regionally adapted to effectively address the unique pressures and conditions of each area and should be tailored to account for fine‐scale variability, instead of adopting a one‐size‐fits‐all approach.

show abstract

Section: Groundtruthing the Cumulative Impact Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Groundtruthing cumulative impact assessments with biodiversity data: Testing indicators and methods for marine ecosystem condition assessments in South Africa

Smit,

Sink,

Shannon

et al. 2024

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Increasing familiarity with the tools and having broader system perspectives will also help fisheries address broader questions more easily—such as risk assessment tools, for example, Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Hobday et al 2011 ) or Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (Harvey et al 2021 ), ecosystem scale models that can be rapidly applied to fished systems (e.g., Mizer; Scott et al 2014 ), or multispecies models tailored to deliver information in formats that management processes are familiar with [e.g., the Model of Intermediate Complexity for Ecosystem assessments applied by Angelini et al ( 2016 ) and Thorson et al ( 2019 )]. The collation and transmission of information (both raw data and processed products tailored to decision maker needs) is also foreseen to be a growing need into the future, with the ambition to deliver updated information in near real time in a format and on platforms that are widely accessible (e.g., on mobile devices) but also fit for purpose.…”

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Increasing familiarity with the tools and having broader system perspectives will also help fisheries address broader questions more easily-such as risk assessment tools, for example, Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (Hobday et al 2011) or Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (Harvey et al 2021), ecosystem scale models that can be rapidly applied to fished systems (e.g., Mizer; Scott et al 2014), or multispecies models tailored to deliver information in formats that management processes are familiar with [e.g., the Model of Intermediate Complexity for Ecosystem assessments applied by Angelini et al (2016) and Thorson et al (2019)].…”

Section: Modernizing and Integrating Assessment And Information Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all: learning from the last 30 years to inform the next 30 years

Cooke

Fulton

Sauer

et al. 2023

Rev Fish Biol Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A common goal among fisheries science professionals, stakeholders, and rights holders is to ensure the persistence and resilience of vibrant fish populations and sustainable, equitable fisheries in diverse aquatic ecosystems, from small headwater streams to offshore pelagic waters. Achieving this goal requires a complex intersection of science and management, and a recognition of the interconnections among people, place, and fish that govern these tightly coupled socioecological and sociotechnical systems. The World Fisheries Congress (WFC) convenes every four years and provides a unique global forum to debate and discuss threats, issues, and opportunities facing fish populations and fisheries. The 2021 WFC meeting, hosted remotely in Adelaide, Australia, marked the 30th year since the first meeting was held in Athens, Greece, and provided an opportunity to reflect on progress made in the past 30 years and provide guidance for the future. We assembled a diverse team of individuals involved with the Adelaide WFC and reflected on the major challenges that faced fish and fisheries over the past 30 years, discussed progress toward overcoming those challenges, and then used themes that emerged during the Congress to identify issues and opportunities to improve sustainability in the world's fisheries for the next 30 years. Key future needs and opportunities identified include: rethinking fisheries management systems and modelling approaches, modernizing and integrating assessment and information systems, being responsive and flexible in addressing persistent and emerging threats to fish and fisheries, mainstreaming the human dimension of fisheries, rethinking governance, policy and compliance, and achieving equity and inclusion in fisheries. We also identified a number of cross-cutting themes including better understanding the role of fish as nutrition in a hungry world, adapting to climate change, embracing transdisciplinarity, respecting Indigenous knowledge systems, thinking ahead with foresight science, and working together across scales. By reflecting on the past and thinking about the future, we aim to provide guidance for achieving our mutual goal of sustaining vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all. We hope that this prospective thinking can serve as a guide to (i) assess progress towards achieving this lofty goal and (ii) refine our path with input from new and emerging voices and approaches in fisheries science, management, and stewardship.

show abstract

“…Measurement of ecological condition is required to inform ecosystem threat status and other national indicators and project objectives (Sink et al, 2019b;Orejas et al, 2020;Harvey et al, 2021;Monaco et al, 2021). However, some of the biggest challenges that hinder the effective use of capacity and resources for marine assessment include uncoordinated reporting on multiple commitments and objectives and an often extensive but scattered marine policy and legislative landscape (Taljaard et al, 2019).…”

Section: Challenges and Opportunities For Marine Biodiversity Assessm...mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Roadmap to Advance Marine and Coastal Monitoring, Biodiversity Assessment, and International Reporting: A Developing Nation Perspective

Smit

Niekerk²,

Harris³

et al. 2022

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the increasing number of tools and indicators to measure biodiversity status and trends, many developing countries struggle to initiate and advance coastal and marine assessments needed to monitor and track national and international progress in biodiversity targets. We identified five key challenges that hinder progress in this context, based on a national marine assessment workshop held in South Africa, and developed recommendations and tangible actions to address these challenges drawing from multiple national assessments, regional initiatives, and global collaborations over the last 15 years. Challenges include a poor understanding of methods, limited capacity and funding for assessments, a lack of systematic approaches to biodiversity assessment and indicator development, and scattered efforts that often fail to link science to policy. Key actions could enable the development of a coordinated framework to feed into policy and decision-making at multiple scales. We provide South African examples to highlight a developing country’s progress toward marine biodiversity assessment and provide a roadmap to integrated monitoring, assessment, and reporting based on positive outcomes. Recommendations to address challenges include building collective understanding of assessment tools and methods, prioritizing pressures urgently needing mitigation measures, using relevant indicators to support reporting at multiple scales, applying coordinated approaches to identify gaps and opportunities, codeveloping coordinated approaches with direct policy links, and leveraging resources and technical capacity for iterative improvement. This roadmap can guide developing and developed countries and support global best practices to collaboratively advance marine and coastal ecosystem monitoring and assessment at multiple scales for meeting many objectives.

show abstract

The Origin of NOAA’s Integrated Ecosystem Assessment Program: A Retrospective and Prospective

Cited by 13 publications

References 35 publications

Groundtruthing cumulative impact assessments with biodiversity data: Testing indicators and methods for marine ecosystem condition assessments in South Africa

Groundtruthing cumulative impact assessments with biodiversity data: Testing indicators and methods for marine ecosystem condition assessments in South Africa

Towards vibrant fish populations and sustainable fisheries that benefit all: learning from the last 30 years to inform the next 30 years

A Roadmap to Advance Marine and Coastal Monitoring, Biodiversity Assessment, and International Reporting: A Developing Nation Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About