A number of solutions, with varying efficiency, have been proposed to mitigate discards. In this paper twelve mitigation measures were reviewed by their strengths and weaknesses, along with opportunities and threats, they might entail. How mitigation methods could either support or counteract others was also reviewed. The analyses of the mitigation measures are based on expert knowledge and experience and supported with existing literature. Discarding is highly variable and is influenced by numerous biological, technical and operational factors as well as social and economic drivers. These influences need to be carefully considered when designing management approaches. Finally, all reforms must be carefully considered within the context of a broader management system. The full management system needs to be thought of coherently to create an incentive framework that motivates fishers to avoid unwanted catches. It is only in this setting that discard mitigation methods may be potentially effective.
This article deals with the implementation of ecosystem-based marine management in the Baltic Sea. It explores and documents in particular the preliminary lessons from environmental and fisheries management with reference to the Helsinki Commission Group for implementation of the ecosystem approach and the Baltic Sea Fisheries Forum, both examples of regionalization processes in order to implement ecosystem-based marine management. The Helsinki Commission Group for implementation of the ecosystem approach is a joint management body for the implementation of the Baltic Sea Action Plan and the European Union's Marine Strategy Framework Directive. The Baltic Sea Fisheries Forum is a new governing body to facilitate regional cooperation in fisheries management. The aim of the article is twofold: a) to describe and discuss two different pathways of regionalization in the Baltic Sea and b) to explore how these forms of regionalization could contribute to the implementation of governance structures needed to implement ecosystem-based marine management at the level of a regional sea – efficiently, legitimately and effectively. We conclude that a nested governance structure could be developed by building upon existing institutions while learning from new initiatives to organize stakeholder involvement.
ABSTRACT: This article reviews early experiences with what is commonly referred to as 'regionalisation'. Initially, the article briefly recalls the shortcomings of the traditional, highly centralized governance structure of the Common Fisheries Policy of the European Union, for which regionalization was widely perceived as a solution, while at the same time providing an overview of the policy processes and various inputs that led to the provisions of recent regulation. Subsequently, the article presents empirical experiences related to the actual implementation and performance of the regional structures in the North and Baltic Seas and discusses the extent to which the adopted model of regionalization is appropriate in light of the objectives it was intended to advance. Finally, the article offers some scenarios of possible 'futures' of the regional structures.
The Faroe Islands are currently struggling to find their feet in a new context of globalization and changing international requirements on fishery management best practices, as exemplified by United Nations protocols and agreements. We introduce the Faroese fisheries effort management system for cod, haddock and saithe, which represents an innovative attempt to tackle the challenges of mixed fisheries by means of a combination of total allowable effort implemented through days-at-sea and extensive use of closed or limited access areas. Subsequently, we present and discuss controversies concerning the system's ability (or lack thereof) to achieve a level of fishing effort that produces long-term sustainability. Over the years the system has proven able to evolve and overcome challenges, and the Faroe Islands are currently considering adding a proper fisheries management plan to the system to achieve fishing at maximum sustainable yield. However, finding support for this plan presents a challenge due particularly to an enduring gap between the perspectives of scientists and actors in the catching sector. Finally, we outline some actions that could be taken to reduce the gap and hence facilitate reform of the system: 1) integration of the consultative/advisory process; 2) obtaining tailor-made advice for the Faroese effort management system from the relevant scientific body; 3) establishment of a transparent mechanism for monitoring and regulating fishing effort; 4) clarifying the effectiveness of the prevalent system of closed areas.
The purpose of this paper is to clarify some important issues as regards ship speed optimization at the operational level and develop models that optimize ship speed for a spectrum of routing scenarios in a single ship setting. The paper’s main contribution is the incorporation of those fundamental parameters and other considerations that weigh heavily in a ship owner’s or charterer’s speed decision and in his routing decision, wherever relevant. Various examples are given so as to illustrate the properties of the optimal solution and the various trade-offs that are involved.
For the EU's Common Fisheries Policy, solving the discard problem is a central issue. Through a study of the institutional set-up and initiatives to solve the discard problem in Denmark, the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Norway, the article identifies the discard problem as related to natural and other material conditions as well as cultural conditions. Therefore, solving the discard problem requires not only technical and regulatory instruments, but also arenas and structures that allow and support cultural change processes.
ABSTRACT: Denmark is among the more loyal European Union (EU) member states when it comes to national implementation of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). However, even in Denmark several mechanisms contribute to sub-optimal implementation of the CFP. Looking at implementation problems for a relatively loyal member state, this chapter sheds critical light on national implementation of the CFP in the EU as a whole. The chapter initially provides a description of the institutional set-up for fisheries policy-making and implementation in Denmark, including a short historical account of the development of the Danish fisheries and their management since 1983. Subsequently, the chapter provides an understanding of the mechanisms and processes behind the Danish implementation of fisheries policy, arguing that these mechanisms and processes have led to a situation where the goals agreed at the EU level are supplemented or even replaced by national priorities. The chapter concludes that in order to capture the domestic politics associated with CFP implementation in Denmark, it is important to understand the policy process as a synergistic interaction between dominant interests, policy alliances/networks and prevailing discourses. The inability of the EU to ensure that the conservation goals agreed at the EU level are loyally pursued during national implementation is one of the reasons why the EU has been struggling to keep fishing mortality rates at a sustainable level.