Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dspace.azti.es/handle/24689/1077
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMerino, Gorka
dc.contributor.authorMurua, Hilario
dc.contributor.authorSantiago, Josu
dc.contributor.authorArrizabalaga, Haritz
dc.contributor.authorRestrepo, Victor
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-02T08:12:06Z-
dc.date.available2021-07-02T08:12:06Z-
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifierISI:000586592000001
dc.identifier.urihttp://dspace.azti.es/handle/24689/1077-
dc.description.abstractTunas sustain important fisheries that face sustainability challenges worldwide, including the uncertainty inherent to natural systems. The Kobe process aims at harmonizing the scientific advice and management recommendations in tuna regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) toward supporting the sustainable exploitation of tunas globally. In this context, we review the similarities and differences among tuna RFMOs, focusing on stock assessment methodologies, use of information, characterization of uncertainty and communication of advice. Also, under the Kobe process, tuna RFMOs have committed to a path of adopting harvest strategies (HSs), also known as management procedures (MPs), which are the series of actions undertaken to monitor the stock, make management decisions, and implement the management measures. The adoption of HSs for tuna stocks is supported by Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE), which is considered the most appropriate way to assess the consequences of uncertainty for achieving fisheries management goals. Overall, notable progress has been made in achieving some of the Kobe objectives, but there are still some aspects that are inconsistent and need to be agreed upon, due to their management implications. First, not all RFMOs report on stock status based on maximum sustainable yield (MSY) as a reference. Instead, some use depletion level to represent the available fish biomass. Also, the definition of overexploited is not common in all oceans. Finally, very few stock assessments characterize all major sources of uncertainty inherent to fisheries. With regards to HSs, two different approaches are being followed: One is designed to adopt an automatic decision rule once the stock status and management quantities have been agreed upon (harvest control rules (HCRs), not strictly an HS) and the other aims at adopting all the components of HSs (data, use of information and decision rule).
dc.language.isoEnglish
dc.publisherMDPI
dc.subjectfisheries management
dc.subjectuncertainty
dc.subjectmanagement strategy evaluation
dc.subjecttunas
dc.subjectRFMO
dc.subjectscientific advice
dc.subjectstock assessment
dc.subjectSTOCK ASSESSMENT
dc.subjectFRAMEWORK
dc.subjectALBACORE
dc.subjectMODEL
dc.subjectRISK
dc.titleCharacterization, Communication, and Management of Uncertainty in Tuna Fisheries
dc.typeReview
dc.identifier.journalSUSTAINABILITY
dc.format.volume12
dc.contributor.funderInternational Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF)
dc.identifier.e-issn2071-1050
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/su12198245
Appears in Publication types:Artículos científicos



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.