Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What model suits ecosystem-based fisheries management? A plea for a structured modeling process

  • Reviews
  • Published:
Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As tools within ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM), a wide range of Ecosystem Models (EMs) have been designed to represent ecosystem complexity, but it is not always clear how the outputs of these models can be applied. We address this debate in a literature review to illustrate how a better understanding of ecosystem modeling within the EBFM framework could facilitate the use of EMs in the decision-making process. We classify EMs according to their complexity, and qualitatively evaluate their level of success with regard to five general goals of EBFM. In principle, no single EM is found to successfully accomplish all the EBFM goals. Therefore, we suggest that the way in which ecosystem modeling can effectively contribute to EBFM is through a structured modeling process, which should be pursued according to the context of each specific area. Within this planning strategy a range of Ems should be considered, from rather simple ones with few parameters, whose outputs are scientifically robust but possibly of limited use within the EBFM, to those which include a large number of ecosystem elements yet at the expense of increased uncertainty. If multiple EMs, despite their different assumptions, leads to consistent and converging results then robust management decisions will be supported. The present paper appears particularly useful to anyone confronted with the selection of modeling tools for the implementation of fisheries management strategies considering the particular situation of the fishery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bart J (1995) Acceptance criteria for using individual-based models to make management decisions. Ecol Appl 5:411–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogstad B, Hauge HK, Ulltrang Ø (1997) MULTSPEC—A multi-species model for fish and marine mammals in the Barents Sea. J Northw Atl Fish Sci 22:317–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branch TA, Watson R, Fulton EA, Jennings S, McGilliard CR, Pablico GT, Ricard D, Tracey SR (2010) The trophic fingerprint of marine fisheries. Nature 468:431–435

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Breckling B, Müller F (1994) Current trends in ecological modeling and the 8th ISEM conference on the state-of-the-art. Ecol Modell 75(76):667–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caddy JF (1999) Fisheries management in the twenty-first century: will new paradigms apply? Rev Fish Biol Fish 9:1–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caddy JF (2000) Marine catchment basin effects versus impacts of fisheries on semi-enclosed seas. ICES J Mar Sci 57:628–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caddy JF, Cochrane KL (2001) A review of fisheries management past and present and some future perspectives for the third millennium. Ocean Coast Manage 44:653–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caddy JF, Surette T (2006) In retrospect the assumption of sustainability for Atlantic fisheries has proved an illusion. Rev Fish Biol Fish 15:313–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen V, Caddy JF (1994) Reflections on the pelagic food web structure in the Black Sea. Fisheries Technical Paper 495. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

  • Christensen V, Walters CJ (2004) Trade offs in ecosystem scale optimization of fisheries management policies. Bull Mar Sci 74:549–562

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen V, Walters CJ, Pauly D (2005) ECOPATH with ECOSIM: a user’s guide. Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouvers, p 154

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie P, Fluharty DL, White AT et al (2007) Assessing the feasibility of ecosystem-based fisheries management in tropical contexts. Mar Policy 3:239–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Convention on Biological Diversity (2004) Enfoque por ecosistemas. Convention on Biological Diversity D, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  • Drechsler M, Grimm V, Myšiak J, Wätzold F (2007) Differences and similarities between ecological and economic models for biodiversity conservation. Ecol Econ 62:232–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espinoza-Tenorio A, Montaño-Moctezuma G, Espejel I (2010) Ecosystem-based analysis in a marine protected area where fisheries and protected species coexist. Environ Manag 45:739–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espinoza-Tenorio A., Wolff M, Espejel I (2011) Are ecosystem models an improvement on single-species models for fisheries management? The case of Upper Gulf of California, Mexico. In: Environmental management systems. Nova publishers, New York

  • Foden J, Rogers IS, Jones PA (2008) A critical review of approaches to aquatic environmental assessment. Mar Poll Bull 56:1825–1833

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (1995) Code of conduct for responsible fisheries. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Fulton EA, Smith ADM, Johnson CR (2004a) Biogeochemical marine ecosystem models I: IGBEM—a model of marine bay ecosystems. Ecol Modell 174:267–307

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fulton EA, Parslow JS, Smith ADM, Johnson CR (2004b) Biogeochemical marine ecosystem models II: the effect of physiological detail on model performance. Ecol Modell 173:371–406

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Galindo-Bect MS, Glenn EP, Page HM et al (2000) Penaeid shrimp landings in the upper Gulf of California in relation to Colorado River freshwater discharge. Fish Bull 98:222–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia SM, Zerbi A, Aliaume C et al (2003) The ecosystem approach to fisheries. Issues, terminology, principles, institutional foundations, implementation and outlook. Fisheries technical paper 443. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm V (1999) Ten years of individual-based modeling in ecology: what have we learned and what could we learn in the future? Ecol Modell 115:129–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guichard F, Peterson G (2009) Ecological cross-scale interactions. In: McLeod K, Leslie H (eds) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 74–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Håkanson L (2003) Propagation and analysis of uncertainty in ecosystem models. In: Canham DC, Cole JJ, Lauenroth KW (eds) Models in ecosystem science. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, pp 139–167

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond TR, O’Brien CM (2001) An application of the Bayesian approach to stock assessment model uncertainty. ICES J Mar Sci 58:648–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilborn R (1997) Uncertainty, risk and the precautionary principle. In: Pikitch EK, Huppert DD, Sissenwine MP (eds) Global trends: fisheries management. American Fisheries Society Symposium, Bethesda, MD, pp 100–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilborn R (2003) The state of the art in stock assessment: where we are and where we are going. Sci Mar 67:15–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilborn R, Walters CJ (1992) Quantitative fisheries stock assessment: choice, dynamics and uncertainty. Thomson Science, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hollowed AB, Ianelli JN, Livingston PA (2000a) Including predation mortality in stock assessments: a case study for Gulf of Alaska walleye pollock. ICES J Mar Sci 57:279–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollowed AB, Bax N, Beamish R et al (2000b) Are multispecies models an improvement on single-species models for measuring fishing impacts on marine ecosystems? ICES J Mar Sci 57:707–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman L, Karrer BL, Peterson HC (2009) Monitoring and evaluation. In: McLeod LK, Leslie HM (eds) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island press, Washington, DC, pp 115–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Kavanagh P, Newlands N, Christensen V, Pauly D (2004) Automated parameter optimization for Ecopath ecosystem models. Ecol Modell 172:141–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keyl F, Wolff M (2008) Environmental variability and fisheries: what can models do? Rev Fish Biol Fish 18:273–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lachica-Aliño L, Wolff M, David LT (2006) Past and future fisheries modeling approaches in the Philippines. Rev Fish Biol Fish 16:201–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin PA (1996) Concepts and issues in marine ecosystem management. Rev Fish Biol Fish 6:139–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehodey P (2001) The pelagic ecosystem of the tropical Pacific Ocean: dynamic spatial modelling and biological consequences of ENSO. Prog Oceanogr 49:439–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehodey P (2004a) A Spatial Ecosystem And Populations Dynamics Model (SEAPODYM) for tuna and associated oceanic top-predator species: Part I—lower and intermediate trophic components. Oceanic Fisheries Programme, Secretariat of the Pacific Community, SCTB17, pp 1–26

  • Lehodey P (2004b) A Spatial Ecosystem And Populations Dynamics Model (SEAPODYM) for tuna and associated oceanic top-predator species: Part II—tuna populations and fisheries. Oceanic Fisheries Programme, Secretariat of the Pacific Community, SCTB17, pp 1–36

  • Lercari D, Chávez EA (2007) Possible causes related to historic stock depletion of the totoaba, Totoaba macdonaldi (Perciformes: Sciaenidae), endemic to the Gulf of California. Fish Res 86:136–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levins R (1966) The strategy of model building in population biology. Am Sci 54:421–423

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingston AP, Jurado-Molina J (2000) A multispecies virtual population analysis of the eastern Bering Sea. ICES J Mar Sci 57:294–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Magnứsson GK (1995) An overview of the multispecies VPA–theory and applications. Rev Fish Biol Fish 5:195–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Margules CR, Pressey RL (2000) Systematic conservation planning. Nature 405:243–253

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McLeod LK, Leslie HM (2009) State of practice. In: McLeod LK, Leslie HM (eds) Ecosystem-based management for the oceans. Island press, Washington, DC, pp 314–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Megrey AB, Link SJ, Hunt LG Jr, Moksness E (2009) Comparative marine ecosystem analysis: applications, opportunities, and lessons learned. Prog in Oceanogr 81:2–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montaño-Moctezuma G, Li HW, Rossignol PA (2007) Alternative community structures in a kelp-urchin community: a qualitative modeling approach. Ecol Modell 205:343–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morales-Zárate MV, Arreguín-Sánchez J, López-Martínez SE, Lluch-Cota E (2004) Ecosystem trophic structure and energy flux in the Northern Gulf of California, Mexico. Ecol Modell 174:331–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morishita J (2008) What is the ecosystem approach for fisheries management? Mar Policy 32:19–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse WC, Nielsen-Pincus M, Force J, Wulfhorst J (2007) Bridges and barriers to developing and conducting interdisciplinary graduate-student team research. Ecol Soc 12:8. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol12/iss2/art8

  • Murawski AS (2007) Ten myths concerning ecosystem approaches to marine resource management. Mar Policy 31:681–690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz M, Wolff M (2002) Application of loop analysis to benthic systems in northern Chile for the elaboration of sustainable management strategies. Mar Eco Prog Ser 242:15–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pauly D, Christensen V (1993) Stratified models of large marine ecosystems: a general approach and an application to the South China Sea. In: Sherman K et al (eds) Large marine ecosystems: stress, mitigation and sustainability. AAS Press, Washington, DC, pp 148–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Pauly D, Christensen V, Walters C (2000) Ecopath, Ecosim, and Ecospace as tools for evaluating ecosystem impact of fisheries. ICES J Mar Sci 57:697–706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pelletier D, Mahévas S (2005) Spatially explicit fisheries simulation models for policy evaluation. Fish Fish 6:307–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Pikitch EK, Santora C, Babcock EA et al (2004) Ecosystem-based fishery management. Science 305:346–347

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pitcher TJ, Watson R, Haggan N et al (2000) Marine reserves and the restoration of fisheries and marine ecosystems in the South of China Sea. Bull Mar Sci 66:543–566

    Google Scholar 

  • Plagányi EE (2007) Models for an ecosystem approach to fisheries. Fisheries Technical Paper 477. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  • Prager MH, Williams EH (2003) From the golden age to the new industrial age: fishery modeling in the early 21st century. Nat Res Model 16:477–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson LA, Frid CLJ (2003) Dynamic ecosystems models and the evaluation of ecosystem effects of fishing: can we make meaningful predictions? Aquatic Conserv: Mar Freshw Ecosyst 13:5–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Routledge R (2001) Mixed-stock vs. terminal fisheries: a bioeconomic model. Nat Res Model 14:523–539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin JY, Cury P (2001) Exploring fish community dynamics through size-dependent trophic interactions using a spatialized individual-based model. Aquat Living Resour 14:65–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith ADM, Fulton EJ, Hobday AJ et al (2007) Scientific tools to support the practical implementation of ecosystem-based fisheries management. ICES J Mar Sci 64:633–639

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snowling SD, Kramer JR (2001) Evaluating modelling uncertainty for model selection. Ecol Modell 138:17–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sparholt H (1995) Using the MSVPA/MSFOR model to estimate the right-hand side of the Ricker curve for Baltic cod. ICES J Mar Sci 52:819–826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starfield AM, Smith KA, Bleloch AL (1990) How to model it: problem solving for the computer age. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor HM, Wolff M (2007) Trophic modeling of eastern boundary current systems: a review and prospectus for solving the “Peruvian Puzzle”. Rev Peru Biol 14:87–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor LB, Wade RP, De Master PD, Barlow J (2000) Incorporating uncertainty into management models for marine mammals. Conserv Biol 14:1243–1252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjelmeland S, Bogstad B (1998) MULTSPEC± a review of a multispecies modeling project for the Barents Sea. Fish Res 37:127–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tjelmeland S, Lindstrom U (2005) An ecosystem element added to the assessment of Norwegian spring spawning herring: implementing predation by minke whales. ICES J Mar Sci 62:285–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uchmanski J, Grim V (1996) Individual-based modeling in ecology: what makes the difference? TREE 11:437–441

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walters CJ (2000) Impacts of dispersal, ecological interactions, and fishing effort dynamics on efficacy of marine protected areas: how large should protected areas be? Bull Mar Sci 66:745–757

    Google Scholar 

  • Walters CJ, Martell JD (2004) Fisheries ecology and management. Princenton University Press, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

  • Wätzold F, Drechsler M, Armstrong WC et al (2006) Ecological-economic modeling for biodiversity management: potential, pitfalls, and prospects. Conserv Biol 20:1034–1041

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff M, Mendo J (2000) Management of the Peruvian scallop (Argopecten purpuratus) metapopulation with regard to environmental change. Aquatic Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst 10:117–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Leibniz-Zentrum für Marine Tropenökologie GmbH, Fahrenheitstr., 6, 28359, Bremen, Germany

    Alejandro Espinoza-Tenorio & Matthias Wolff

  2. Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, am Handelshafen 12, 27570, Bremerhaven, Germany

    Marc H. Taylor

  3. Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, Carretera Tijuana-Ensenada 103 km, 22800, Ensenada, Mexico

    Ileana Espejel

Authors
  1. Alejandro Espinoza-Tenorio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Matthias Wolff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marc H. Taylor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ileana Espejel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro Espinoza-Tenorio.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Espinoza-Tenorio, A., Wolff, M., Taylor, M.H. et al. What model suits ecosystem-based fisheries management? A plea for a structured modeling process. Rev Fish Biol Fisheries 22, 81–94 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-011-9224-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11160-011-9224-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation