The Precautionary Approach and risk management: can they increase the probability of successes in fishery management?

By Ray Hilborn, J. Maguire, A. Parma, A. Rosenberg. 2001

208 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Considerable progress has been made in the implementation of the Precautionary Approach to the protection of fish stocks, but applying the Precautionary Approach to the protection of fishing communities lags considerably. The principle of intergenerational equity, one of the main tenets of the Precautionary Approach, and the principle of sustainable utilization both imply that the Precautionary Approach should explicitly incorporate the protection of fishing communities, not only the resources they depend on. Risk assessment aims primarily at evaluating the consequences of various harvest strategies in terms of probabilistic statements about future trends in yields, biomass, and dangers to the stock, while risk management involves finding and implementing management policies, strategies, and tactics that reduce the risk to the communities exploiting them. Not all fishery management approaches deal equally well with risk, with some compounding rather than reducing risk. Portfolio management, whereby fishin...

Subfields: Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2322ce8d9c2e936b18ccc6daa4eab0f8fbfbbc4a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

Portfolio management of wild fish stocks (2004, background): “This view is widely held by social scientists and harvesters, and is shared by some fisheries biologists (e.g., Larkin, 1977; Hilborn et al., 2001).”
The state of the art in stock assessment: where we are and where we are going (2003, background): “It is becoming increasingly common to use or at least consider precautionary reference points, whose general characteristic is that they aim for larger stock biomass and lower exploitation rates than reference points based on traditional maximum yield objectives (Hilborn et al., 2001).”
The role of diversification in dynamic small-scale fisheries: Lessons from Baja California Sur, Mexico (2015, background): “The resilience perspective first emerged in ecological literature in the 1960s (Holling, 1961), and has since been adopted in ecology as the amount of disturbance an ecosystem can withstand before undergoing a regime shift and occupying an alternate stable state.”
Management strategies for short lived species: The case of Australia's Northern Prawn Fishery 1. Accounting for multiple species, spatial structure and implementation uncertainty when evaluating risk (2006, background): “…implies a low probability of a prawn surviving more than a single year, spawning patterns and availability to the fishery change during the year (Hill and Wassenberg, 1985; Somers et al., 1987; Somers and Kirkwood, 1991), and recruitment is continual throughout the year with a three to 4-month…”
An empirical approach to ecosystem-based fishery management (2008, background): “Therecent collapseof somefishstocksalongwith theuncertainty involved in managing marine systems have prompted fisheries scientists to suggest a precautionary approach (Garcia, 1994; Lauck et al., 1998; Hilborn et al., 2001; Charles, 2002; Ludwig, 2002; Weeks and Parker, 2002).”
State of the World’s Fisheries (2003, background): “There are several ways the precautionary approach could be implemented: ( a) No fishing is allowed if the harvest policy has not been demonstrated to be sustainable (136), ( b) cautious harvest levels are adopted and guided by biological reference points, and ( c) institutional arrangements are chan”
Alternatives to statistical hypothesis testing in ecology: a guide to self teaching. (2006, background): “This alternative supports a variant on the precautionary principle, known as the precautionary approach, suggesting that decisions should be made based on weighing the relative risks of actions (Foster et al. 2000, Hilborn et al. 2001).”