MSC Fishery Improvement Action Plan Guidance

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 201364. Background to the MSC certification continuedThe following table sets out the components and default performance indicators containedin the MSC fisheries assessment methodology for scoring fisheries against the MSC principlesand criteria for sustainable fishing.PrincipleComponentPerformance indicatorPrinciple 1Target fish stock(s)Outcome1.1.1 Stock status1.1.2 Reference points1.1.3 Stock rebuildingHarvest strategy(Management)1.2.1 Harvest strategy1.2.2 Harvest control rules and tools1.2.3 Information and monitoring1.2.4 Assessment of stock statusPrinciple 2EcosystemRetained species2.1.1 Retained species outcome2.1.2 Retained species management strategy2.1.3 Retained species informationand monitoringBycatch species2.2.1 Bycatch species outcome2.2.2 Bycatch species management strategy2.2.3 Bycatch species informationand monitoringEndangered,threatenedand protected(ETP) species2.3.1 ETP species outcomeHabitats2.4.1 Habitats outcome2.3.2 ETP species management strategy2.3.3 ETP species information and monitoring2.4.2 Habitats management strategy2.4.3 Habitats information and monitoringEcosystem2.5.1 Ecosystem outcome2.5.2 Ecosystem management2.5.3 Ecosystem information and monitoringPrinciple 3Management systemGovernanceand policy3.1.1 Legal and/or customary framework3.1.2 Consultation, roles and responsibilities3.1.3 Long-term objectives3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishingFishery-specificmanagement system3.2.1 Fishery-specific objectives3.2.2 Decision-making processes3.2.3 Compliance and enforcement3.2.4 Research plan3.2.5 Monitoring and managementperformance ent-tree

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 201375. Action Plan Template – a snapshotThere are three Tables in the Word templateto help you develop and implement yourAction Plan:1. Action Plan overview2. Action Plan details3. Evaluation against Action Plan milestonesDetailed guidance about each of the ActionPlan elements and how to complete the Tablesis given in Sections 6 and 7 of this document.Table 1: Action Plan overviewFishery name:Start date:Fishery location:Fishing method:End date (anticipated):Project leaders (organisation responsible for Action Plan):Improvements recommended by:Overview of the Action PlanTable 2: Action Plan ActionleadActionpartnersStakeholdersTimescale /milestones1.2.3.4.5.Table 3: Evaluation against Action Plan scale /milestonesProgress / outcomeRevised milestone

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 201385. Action Plan Template – a snapshot continuedWe have also adapted an Excel spreadsheet summary template (available at www.msc.org/go/fisheries-improvement), will help when cross referencing and linking tasks and actions in anAction Plan to the MSC PIs, which can be used to assign a priority ranking to each action.This may be useful if you have individual actions that may help your fishery meet multiple PIs.A snapshot of this is provided below.Action / taskAction lead and partnersTimescale1.1 Develop stock assessment methodologyClient organisation; Research agency6 mths1.2 Conduct stock assessmentResearch agency12 mths1.3 Commission peer review of stock assessmentResearch agency; Management agency12 mths1.4 Review data collection and sampling protocolsResearch agency; client organisation18 mths1. Stock assessment2. Habitats and ecosystems2.1 Review habitat impactsFishery science consultant2.2 Review of ecosystem literature and produce reportFishery science consultant3. Enforcement (MCS)3.1. Formalise designated landing sitesClient organisation; Enforcement agency3.2. Develop surveillance program at landing sites(e.g. random & targeted checks)Enforcement agency3.3 Employ and train additional enforcement officersEnforcement agency3.4 Review existing MCS strategyEnforcement agency; management agency3.5 Compile data on MCS activities(e.g. number of surveillance patrols, infringements)Enforcement agency4. Management and governance4.1 Review of fisheries legislation, fines & penaltiesManagement agency; managementpartners / advisory group4.2 Review of national and international management measure andtheir effectivenessManagement agency; managementpartners / advisory group4.3 Document existing efforts to demonstrate effective process existsManagement agency; managementpartners / advisory group4.4 Seek letter of support from stakeholders to encourage adoptionof fisheries management planClient organisation; NGOs4.5 Develop research planClient organisation; research agency;management agency; NGOsNotes: assumption is that ‘client organisation’ in this hypothetical case is a fishery group(e.g. a fisher’s association; industry group; or fishery community association)

HLMHMMHHMMHHMMHMMLMMMMMMLM3.2.5 Monitoring & management performance evaluation3.2.4 Research plan3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement3.2.2 Decision-making processes3.2.1 Fishery-specific objectives3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing3.1.3 Long-term objectivesP2. Ecosystem components3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities3.1.1 Legal or customary framework2.5.3 Ecosystem information & monitoring2.5.2 Ecosystem management2.5.1 Ecosystem outcome2.4.3 Habitat information & monitoring2.4.2 Habitat management strategy2.4.1 Habitat outcome2.3.3 ETP species information & monitoring2.3.2 ETP species management strategy2.3.1 ETP species outcome2.2.3. Bycatch species information & monitoringP1. Target stocks2.2.2 Bycatch species management strategy2.2.1 Bycatch species status2.1.3 Retained species information & monitoring2.1.2 Retained species management strategy2.1.1 Retained species outcome1.2.4 Assessment of stock status1.2.3 Information & monitoring1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools1.2.1 Harvest Strategy1.1.3 Stock rebuilding1.1.2 Reference points1.1.1 Stock status9Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013Links to MSC performance indicatorsP3. Management system(Note: H high priority, M medium priority, L low priority according to MSC pre-assessment)LMMHHHHM

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013106. Action Plan elementsThere are important elements that go intoproducing a robust Action Plan. These need to beclearly defined using the Action Plan Template.6.1 General informationTable 1 of the Action Plan Template (seesnapshot below) is to present high level,general information to identify the fisheryand give a brief overview about the fisheryimprovement project. This will enableproject leaders, participants, stakeholdersand other outside readers to see at aglance what the Action Plan is about andwho is responsible for its implementation.The following list explains what to putin each box:Fishery name: The name of the fishery towhich the Action Plan applies. This mightinclude the target species name(s) and/or thefishing method(s) (For example, the Mauritaniansmooth-mouth sea catfish gillnet fishery).Fishery location: If not already identified in thename of the fishery, the geographical locationof the fishery, identifying either the region,ocean or sea and/or the country or countriesthat are within the fishery’s boundaries.Start date: The date upon which the ActionPlan commences, i.e. the date actionsand tasks begin to be implemented.End date: The date project leadersanticipate the actions in the planwill be successfully completed.Project leaders: The lead organisation(s)responsible for implementing the ActionPlan. E.g. the organisation that is coordinating activities and taking responsibilityto ensure that others involved in theproject are meeting their commitments.Just as is recommended in MSC’s Get Certified!booklet, getting organised and having aproject manager to lead your organisation’simplementation of the Action Plan canmake a huge difference to its success.Improvements recommended by: The nameof the organisation or individual(s) thatconducted the pre-assessment (in the caseof a certification body) or baseline review(in the case of independent consultants).Fishing method: If not already identifiedin the name of the fishery, the fishingmethod or methods used in the fishery.Table 1: Action Plan overviewFishery name:Fishery location:Start date:Fishing method:Project leaders (organisation responsible for Action Plan):Overview of the Action PlanEnd date (anticipated):Improvements recommended by:

116.2 Overview of the Action PlanIn Table 1 on the previous page, a largespace is provided for a summary of thekey elements of the Action Plan.If the principal aim of the project is improvingperformance to enable the fishery to becomecertified against the MSC Standard, then thekey elements should relate should relate to thePIs in the default assessment tree. Effectively,this means that the overview shouldcontain enough information for membersof the project team, stakeholders or otherreaders to understand the general activitiesand timescales involved in the fisheryimprovement efforts to achieve the principalaim of the project. To be of practical use itis recommended that the overview be short,communicating only summary information.It may be more practical to complete thissection after the full Action Plan has beendeveloped. Thus ensuring the overviewreflects the actual contents of the plan,taking account of specific milestones andresponsibilities.For example: The Mauritanian smooth-mouthsea catfish fishery commissioned a preassessment from [ABC Certifiers] in November2009. The results indicated the fishery wouldfail to achieve the Standard set for principle1 (target species) and principle 2, retainedand bycatch species components. The keyimprovements required are: 1) providing anadequate stock assessment for the targetstock(s), and 2) increasing the ability ofassessors to more clearly determine the risksposed by the fishery to four retained (nontarget) species and several bycatch species.Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013This Action Plan focuses on activitiesto address these issues. In the next sixmonths, we will work with the Departmentof Fisheries Science to develop an adequatestock assessment methodology. Within 12months, after the revised methodology isadopted, a preliminary stock assessmentusing the best available data and, takinginto account uncertainties, will be conductedand peer reviewed.To more clearly determine risks posed bythe fishery on retained and bycatch species,a scientific workshop will be convened withinthree months of the commencement of thisplan with relevant experts and stakeholdersto discuss all relevant data and conducta formal risk assessment using the MSCRisk-Based Framework. Depending on theoutcomes of this process we may revise theAction Plan or proceed to full assessmentfollowing successful completion of thestock assessment.The following Section (6.3) provides guidanceabout developing the specific content of yourAction Plan.

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013126. Action Plan elements continued6.3 Standard requirementTable 2 of the Action Plan Template (see snapshot below) is where youwill describe in detail the specific tasks and activities of your Action Plan.Table 2: Action Plan ActionleadActionpartnersStakeholdersTimescale /milestones1.2.3.4.5.In the first column, entitled ‘Standardrequirement’, you will specify the wordsthat represent the Standard the fishery willbe aiming to meet through the actions andtasks implemented in your Action Plan.Therefore, to complete this column you shouldtranscribe the performance required by therelevant 80 SG in the fisheries assessmentmethodology default assessment tree.Following the example under Section 6.2of this document, if a key improvementidentified in a pre-assessment report is toprovide “an adequate assessment of thestock status”, this means that the relevantPI in the default assessment tree is PI 1.2.4.The corresponding 80 SG therefore reads:“ The assessment is appropriate for thestock and for the harvest control rule,and is evaluating stock status relativeto reference points.“ The assessment takes uncertaintyinto account.“ The assessment of stock status issubject to peer review.”PI 1.2.4, SG 80Thus, the above words, including theidentifying PI number, would be entered intothe Standard requirement column of Table 2of the Action Plan Template (noting that youmay wish to adjust column widths and layoutto accommodate all the relevant information).In the next column (see Section 6.4) you willidentify the actions you will implement inorder to achieve the performance level setby the relevant 80 SG. Sometimes this mightinvolve several actions aimed at a single PI.Alternatively, a single action may serve tomeet the requirements of several performanceindicators. As will be explained in Section 6.4.Standard requirement if using theRisk-Based FrameworkThe required improvement might relate toone of the species-related outcome PIs1 (seealso Sections 4.1 and 4.2). In data deficientcases a ‘Productivity Susceptibility Analysis’(PSA) may have been conducted as part ofthe pre-assessment process. Alternatively,it might be possible that the Risk-BasedFramework will have to be used to scorethat element in a full assessment2.In such cases, the Standard requirement in thiscolumn should refer to the relevant attributeslisted in the PSA sections of the Risk-BasedFramework of the fisheries assessmentmethodology. There are seven productivityattributes and four susceptibility attributes.PI 1.1.1 target stock status;PI 2.1.1 retained speciesstatus; PI 2.2.1 bycatchspecies status. 1A pre-assessment froman accredited certifierwho is trained in theuse of MSC’s Risk-BasedFramework should makeit clear whether this is alikely outcome in the eventof insufficient data beingavailable to determine thestatus of target, retainedor bycatch species, orthe status of habitats orecosystems. If the report isnot clear, we recommendyou ask the certifier orconsultant who preparedthe report on your fisheryto advise you on this point.2

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 201313In effect, in cases where performanceimprovement is required because the fisheryposes too high a risk to certain attributesaffecting the sustainability of a species, thegoal will be to reduce risks of the fishery tothe particular attribute(s).For example, a PSA may have been conductedon some of the bycatch species taken in yourfishery. This could have revealed that onespecies scores highly (i.e. the risks are toohigh) on the selectivity attribute. The entryinto the ‘Standard requirement’ column couldtherefore read:“ Reduce the risks posed by the selectivityof [xxx] fishing method to [abc] species.”Taking action on such a performanceimprovement goal should therefore aim toreduce the risk score, thus resulting in alower risk that the fishing method in use inthe fishery poses an unacceptably high risk tothe sustainability of the species in question.Additional guidanceIn practice, the pre-assessment report orbaseline review commissioned on the fisheryshould contain information that indicates theissues that currently prevent the fishery frommeeting the MSC Standard. This informationmight be very specific i.e. directly quotingthe MSC PIs and/or SGs from the MSCdefault assessment tree. Alternatively, theinformation provided might be more general,making indirect reference to the componentsof the Standard and providing only generic‘clues’ to the performance requirement.In all cases, it is incumbent upon the fisheryimprovement project participants (especially theleaders) to analyse which MSC PIs are relevantto gain clarity about the specific Standardrequirements they are aiming to improveupon. This means probing more deeply intothe pre-assessment / baseline review report(s)and MSC methodologies to examine the issuesraised and the specific wording of the SGs,which provide the operational interpretationof the Standard. Thus, the 60 SGs will tell youthe minimum threshold that must be passed,whereas the 80 SGs will tell you the thresholdfor passing the Standard unconditionally.Comparing the language used in these narrativeperformance requirements with the languageused in the pre-assessment report or baselinereview should enable you to determine themost appropriate PI and SGs for this part ofyour Action Plan. This should also enable youto identify any contributory factors that mightalso be relevant, which in turn might suggestthe kinds of actions you might choose to take.Given that you are embarking on developingan Action Plan, this probably means yourfishery does not yet meet the MSC Standardand that one or more elements do not achievethe Standard set by the 60 SGs (meaning thefishery cannot be certified). Therefore, theprimary aim is to ensure these elements passthe 60 threshold. However, we recommend thatyour plans aim to meet the requirements atthe 80 SGs level to ensure that the aggregatescores under each principle also achieve 80or higher. Without achieving those aggregatescores at the principle level, for all threeprinciples, the fishery cannot be certified.It is not compulsory to pass the MSCStandard unconditionally. The balancebetween aiming for scores of 60 or 80 onindividual PIs is your choice, representing acalculated risk about whether the fishery islikely to achieve the aggregate scores to enableit to pass overall. You and your project partnerswill need to decide what makes sense in yoursystem. You will also need to be aware thatany PIs that fall between scores of 60 and79 in a full assessment will have conditionsattached to them and will need an ActionPlan to deal with them in any case. It maybe worth considering that the more actionsundertaken in the fishery improvement stageprior to full assessment is likely to impactpositively on your fishery’s aggregate scoreat the principle level and therefore increasethe fishery’s likelihood of being certified.The next section provides guidance abouthow to develop and implement actionsto address the Standard requirements.

Marine Stewardship CouncilFishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013146. Action Plan elements continued6.4 Actions to addressStandard requirementsThe actions column of Table 2 is whereyou will enter the tasks and actions thatyou will implement to address the Standardrequirements you listed in the previouscolumn. Frequently the Standard requirements(i.e. the 80 scoring guideposts) containmore than one factor of relevance to the PI.As demonstrated in the previous examplerelating to PI 1.2.4 on the adequacy of thestock assessment, we can see a numberof factors that contribute to meetingthe 80 SG. Each contributing factor hasbeen underlined in the extract below:“ The assessment is appropriate forthe stock and for the harvest controlrule, and is

5. Action Plan Template – a snapshot 7 6. Action Plan elements 10 6.1 General information 10 6.2 Overview of the Action Plan 11 6.3 Standard requirements 12 6.4 Action to address Standard requirements 14 6.5 Resources required 16 6.6 Action lead(s) 16 6.7 Action partners 17 6.8 Stakeho