The best environmental choice in seafood - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
The best environmental choice in seafood PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
The best environmental choice in seafood

play fullscreen
1 / 83
The best environmental choice in seafood
74 Views
Download Presentation
razi
Download Presentation

The best environmental choice in seafood

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Disclaimer If any interpretive issues arise in relation to the issues covered in these presentations, the text of the MSC Scheme Documents will prevail in all instances. The MSC is not responsible for any issues arising to any parties as a result of consulting these presentations. If you are unsure of any details on any of the subjects covered, please consult the relevant MSC scheme documents or contact the MSC at standards@msc.org. MSC Executive November 2011 The best environmental choice in seafood

  2. Risk Based Framework

  3. Learning objectives • To understand when the RBF can be used • To understand how to implement the different components of the RBF • To understand how performance Indicators are scored when the RBF is used

  4. Agenda • Background • RBF stages in the assessment process • Triggering the RBF in an assessment • Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Information gathering and preparation • Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Special rules and requirements

  5. Agenda • Background • RBF stages in the assessment process • Triggering the RBF in an assessment • Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Information gathering and preparation • Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Special rules and requirements

  6. 1.Background • What is the RBF • Why was it developed • The ERAEF concept

  7. What is the Risk Based Framework A framework of precautionary assessment tools for scoring ‘outcome’ Performance Indicators in cases where insufficient information is available to score a fishery using the default Scoring Guideposts.

  8. Why was it developed? • MSC commitment to ensuring applicability of the standard to all sustainable fisheries • FAO guidelines specify that use of less elaborate stock assessments should not preclude fisheries from possible certification

  9. Ecological Risk Assessment of Effect of Fishing • Hierarchical risk assessment framework • Screens out low risk interactions • Helps to prioritise high risk interactions • Precautionary evaluation of vulnerability of fisheries resources • Applied to federally managed fisheries in Australia • Methodology published in several scientific papers • Applied in other parts of the world (USA, South Africa, East Pacific, New Zealand, etc.)

  10. Overview of ERAEF Framework

  11. Level 3 analysis FAM Level 2 PSA Level 1 SICA Walking along the edge of the cliff… Data, $ Sustainable Unsustainable Fishery exploitation level

  12. Agenda • Background • RBF stages in the assessment process • Triggering the RBF in an assessment • Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Information gathering and preparation • Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Special rules and requirements

  13. RBF stages in the assessment process • RBF stages • RBF stages in a full assessment

  14. RBF stages • Triggering the RBF • Stakeholder notification • Information gathering and preparation • Conduct Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Conduct Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Conversion to MSC score • Reporting

  15. Fishery Assessment Process + RBF Score conversion PSA • Client Review • Client decides to proceed • Contract a CB • Site visit and scoring SICA stakeholder meeting • Peer Review • Pre-assessment • Announces a site visit Make RBF stakeholder announcement Decision tree – Flag RBF use • Consult on the FAM • Public Comment Report • Decision to certify • Decision to proceed- Consult on use of RBF Decision to use RBF Submit RBF Form • Consults on team & peer reviewers • Final Report and Determination • Objections Period • Assembles Expert Team Ensure team includes trained member

  16. Exercise 1.RBF stages in the assessment process_______________________________________

  17. Agenda • Background • RBF stages in the assessment process • Triggering the RBF in an assessment • Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Information gathering and preparation • Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Special rules and requirements

  18. Directly scored performance indicators • Deciding to use the RBF • Implicated PIs • Stakeholder consultation • Team membership

  19. Implicated performance indicators

  20. RBF Decision tree for species PI Outcome PI* ETP outcome PI? Requirements for protection and rebuilding? Yes Yes Use default PISGs No No Sufficient data for default PISGs? No Use RBF *Excluding PI 1.1.2 & 1.1.3

  21. Decision questions • Target species • Can the biologically-based limits for sustainability (e.g. reference points) be estimated such that serious or irreversible harm could be identified,? • Is it a key LTL species • Retained, bycatch, • Can the impact of the fishery in assessment on the P2 species be determined? • ETP species • Is the species protected by national legislation? • Can the impact of the fishery in assessment on ETP species be analytically determined • Habitats • Is information available to support analysis of the impact of the fishery on the habitat • Ecosystem • Is information available to support an analysis of the impact of the fishery on the habitat

  22. Getting started • Submission of “Use of the RBF in a fishery assessment” form • PI to be scored with the RBF • Justification for use • Summary of stakeholder comments and CAB responses • Verify assessment team meets qualification criteria for RBF • 30 day period for stakeholder comment on use of the RBF • As appropriate review of decision to trigger RBF • Notify MSC of any changes

  23. Getting started Use of RBF in a fishery form

  24. Exercise 2. Triggering the RBF in an assessment______________________________________

  25. Agenda • Background • RBF stages in the assessment process • Triggering the RBF in an assessment • Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Information gathering and preparation • Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Special rules and requirements

  26. Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Requirements at notification stage • Requirements during SICA • Requirements during PSA

  27. Requirements at notification • Notify stakeholders with “Use of the RBF form” • Allow 30 days for comment • Record justification for accepting or rejecting comments • As appropriate review decision to use RBF in light of comments • Repeat steps if proposed use changes

  28. Requirements during SICA • SICA meetings must be specified in site visit announcements • Plan stakeholder strategy • Conduct SICA meetings in language understood by participants • Work with stakeholders to implement SICA steps 1-5 • Stakeholders are not required to reach consensus

  29. Requirements during PSA • No specific stakeholder requirements. However…………..

  30. Exercise 3.Stakeholder requirements in the RBF_______________________________

  31. Agenda • Background • RBF stages in the assessment process • Triggering the RBF in an assessment • Stakeholder engagement in the RBF • Information gathering and preparation • Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Productivity Susceptibility Analysis • Special rules and requirements

  32. Information gathering and preparation • Fishery description • Fishing gear • Management practices • Maps of distribution of fishing effort • Identification of “units” • Species • Habitats • Ecosystems • Hazards

  33. Information gathering and preparation Hazard identification table Hazard identification table

  34. Information gathering and preparation Hazard identification table: Example

  35. Scale Intensity Consequence Analysis • Overview • Step 1: Determine worst plausible case combination • Step 2: Score spatial scale of activity • Step 3: Score temporal scale of activity • Step 4: Score intensity • Step 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component • Step 6: Score consequence

  36. Overview • Qualitative analysis of effect of fishing • Consulting stakeholders through a structured process and framework, using expert opinion to estimate risk • Estimating dB/dt due to fishing activity • Uses a set of tables to provide a risk score for activity - component combination • Six steps to a score

  37. SICA steps

  38. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination • 2:Score spatial scale of activity • Finalise list of all activities • Identify the most vulnerable scoring element • P1 • P2 • Identify highest risk causing activity • Determine which combination of risk causing activity is worst case scenario • 3: Score temporal scale of activity • 4: Score intensity • 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence • 6: Convert to MSC score

  39. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination e.g. • 2:Score spatial scale of activity • 3: Score temporal scale of activity • 4: Score intensity • 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence • 6: Convert to MSC score

  40. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination • 2:Score spatial scale of activity • 3: Score temporal scale of activity • 4: Score intensity • 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence • 6: Convert to MSC score Worst plausible case combination

  41. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination • 2:Score spatial scale of activity Principle 1 SICA scoring template - Synapturacadenati • 3: Score temporal scale of activity • 4: Score intensity • 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence • 6: Convert to MSC score

  42. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination 2:Score spatial scale of activity • Principle 1 - % of total range of stock overlapping with all fishing activity • Principle 2 - Percentage overlap of the stock, habitat or ecosystem with fishing activity of the unit of certification being assessed • Document rationale 3: Score temporal scale of activity 4: Score intensity 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence 6: Convert to MSC score SICA spatial scale score table

  43. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination 2:Score spatial scale of activity • Assign temporal score for activity causing an impact on scoring element • Use highest temporal frequency • Document rationale 3: Score temporal scale of activity 4: Score intensity 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence 6: Convert to MSC score SICA temporal scale score table

  44. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination 2:Score spatial scale of activity • Consider nature and extent of spatial and temporal scale • Consider direct impacts to the scoring element being assessed • Document score and rationale 3: Score temporal scale of activity 4: Score intensity 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence 6: Convert to MSC score

  45. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination 2:Score spatial scale of activity 3: Score temporal scale of activity 4: Score intensity 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence 6: Convert to MSC score SICA intensity score table

  46. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination 2:Score spatial scale of activity • Identify most vulnerable sub-component • Score consequence of activity using the SICA consequence table • Scoring should draw on scale and intensity scores • In absence of agreement use highest score considered plausible • Record score and document rationale 3: Score temporal scale of activity 4: Score intensity 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence 6: Convert to MSC score

  47. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination 2:Score spatial scale of activity 3: Score temporal scale of activity 4: Score intensity 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence 6: Convert to MSC score SICA consequence table for Principle 1 Target species, and Principle 2 retained species and bycatch species

  48. 1:Determine worst plausible case combination • 2:Score spatial scale of activity • Complete SICA table • Convert the score to an MSC score if the PI being assessed is retained or bycatch species and the score is 1 or 2. Or if the PI is a habitat or ecosystem outcome PI • If target species PI the SICA score should be converted and documented as MSC score only after conducting a PSA and if both SICA and PSA scores are over 80. • 3: Score temporal scale of activity • 4: Score intensity • 5: Identify most vulnerable sub-component & score consequence • 6: Convert to MSC score