Browsing by Author "Pedreschi, Debbi"
Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Putting fishing communities on the map in ICES ecoregionsPublication . Kraan, Marloes; Himes-Cornell, Amber; Pedreschi, Debbi; Motova, Arina; Hamon, Katell; Pita, Cristina; Ballesteros, Marta; Barz, Fanny; Fonseca, Tereza; García-De-Vinuesa, Alfredo; Guitierrez, Angel; Jackson, Emmet; Lam, Mimi; Norman, Karma; Seixas, Sónia; Steins, NathalieThis paper highlights the importance of identifying fishing communities for fisheries and ecosystem-based management, which often focuses on fleets and ecological impacts rather than on the communities where fishers live and land their catches. Fishing communities are key to understanding the broader impacts and benefits of fishing, as they support many livelihoods in fleet and trade-related activities. Recognizing these communities, allows for better data collection, analysis, and informed policy-making. ICES WGSOCIAL developed a method to identify fishing communities across ICES ecoregions, first applied in the Celtic Seas and North Sea ecosystem o verviews. These o verviews describe ecosystems, identify human pressures, and assess their impact. Using fishing ports as proxies, our method links socio-economic indicators (e.g. landings value) to communities. We identify limitations to our methods and explore the complexities of defining a ‘fishing community’ due to its dynamic, multidimensional nature. We discuss next steps for improving our mapping approach and deepening our understanding of the social, cultural, and economic value of fishing, and why these matter for applied marine science in support of policy and management.
- Working Group on Balancing Economic, Social and Ecological Objectives in Integrated Assessments (WGBESEO; outputs from 2022 meeting)Publication . De Clercq, Adelbert; Goldsborough, David; Ramírez-Monsalve, Paulina; Ballesteros, Marta; Belgrano, Andrea; Delpeuch, Claire; DePiper, Geret; Fraga, Ana; Gómez Mestre, Sílvia; Goti, Leyre; Hamon, Katell; Haynie, Alan; Jaenig, Manuel; Jakobsen, Sonja; Kellne, Julie; Kotelis, Andreas; Hallin, Julie; Laksá, Unn; Lam, Mimi; Langlet, David; Jørgensen, Lis; López, Romain; Mangano, Cristina; Pedreschi, Debbi; Rice, Jake; Röckmann, Christine; Said, Alicia; Scharff-Olsen, Camilla; Schonen, Lea; Seixas, Sónia; Prieto, Marta; Stephenson, Robert; Symes, Will; van Santen, Gert; Varjopuro, Riku; Vernhout, Gerben; Ramírez-Monsalve, Paulina; De Clercq, Adelbert; Goldsborough, DavidWorking Group on Balancing Economic, Social and Ecological Objectives in Integrated Assess- ments (WGBESEO) has two main objectives: (1) identifying objectives from legal and policy doc- uments, and (2) understanding the implications derived from trade-offs among Economic, So- cial, Ecological and Institutional (ESEI) objectives. WGBESEO members are multidisciplinary professionals, including lawyers, political scientists, economists, and natural scientists, with di- verse backgrounds ranging from early careers to experienced practitioners in various marine disciplines. From 2020 to 2022, WGBESEO achieved several milestones, including developing a project plan, joining integrated ecosystem assessment (IEA) groups to enhance collaboration, updating man- agement objectives for EOs, and engaging early career researchers through traineeships and a thesis. A systematic review of peer-reviewed marine governance literature performed by WGBESEO found that little is documented on how objectives are derived from legislative mandates. A plu- rality of approaches was also observed: in addition to explicit management objectives found in official documents (the primary focus of the search), objectives are also derived from participa- tory processes like stakeholder workshops or consultations, often outside the public sphere. Most of the identified objectives relate to fisheries management, sustainability, or balancing mul- tiple ESEI objectives. These findings were presented at ICES ASC 2021 and are being drafted into a journal manuscript. A workshop hosted by WGBESEO at the MARE 2021 conference gathered insights on factors considered by authorities when deciding on conflicting ESEI objectives. The findings revealed that authorities often face an overwhelming amount of information and considerations. Addi- tionally, there is not a single "authority" as authorities vary in institutional levels, contextual set- tings, and needs to respond to different requirements, making it impossible to refer to them as a homogeneous group. Using scenarios to observe consequences is useful, but the time scales for seeing these consequences—both intended and unintended—differ for ESEI objectives, and the time scale for recovery—if recovery is possible—also varies (e.g., the possibility of rebuilding a coral reef or a fishing-dependent community). Discussions on attributes inherent to policy objectives are ongoing. Six dimensions are recog- nized, each set on a continuum: time, space, ambition, dimension, integration and force (obliga- tion). WGBESEO 2025 – 2027 work continues within the framework of its two main objectives.
- Working group on ecosystem assessment of Western European shelf seas (WGEAWESS)Publication . Abrantes, Fatima; Andonegi, Eider; Beggs, Steven; Bentley, Jacob; Borges, Fátima; Christensen, Villy; Corrales, Xavier; Depestele, Jochen; Fariñas, Andrea; Fox, Clive; Gal, Gideon; Gascuel, Didier; Halouani, Ghassen; Heymans, Sheila; Holdsworth, Neil; Issac, Pierre; Kalinina, Olga; Kellner, Julie; Kempf, Jed; Kraan, Marloes; Lehuta, Sigrid; Llope, Marcos; López, Romain; Martinez, Inigo; Motova, Arina; Payne, Mark; Pedreschi, Debbi; Piroddi, Chiara; Potier, Mikaëla; Preciado, Izaskun; Püts, Miriam; Ramirez-Monsalve, Paulina; Reid, Dave; Rufino, Marta; Salgueiro, Emilia; Schoenen, Lea; Schuchert, Pia; Seixas, Sónia; Serpetti, Natalia; Silvar Viladomiu, Paula; Steenbeek, Jeroen; Szalaj, Dorota; Tomczak, Maciej; Torres, Marian; Travers-Trolet, Morgane; Vernhout, Gerben; Villanueva, ChingThe ICES Working Group on Ecosystem Assessment of Western European Shelf Seas (WGEA-WESS) aims to provide high quality science in support to holistic, adaptive, evidence-based man-agement in the Celtic seas, Bay of Biscay and Iberian coast regions. The group works towards developing integrated ecosystem assessments for both the (i) Celtic Seas and (ii) Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast which are summarized in the Ecosystem Overviews (EOs) advice products that were recently updated. Integrated Trend Analysis (ITA) were performed for multiple sub-ecoregions and used to develop an understanding of ecosystem responses to pressures at varying spatial scales. Ecosystem models (primarily Ecopath with Ecosim; EwE) were developed and identified for fisheries and spatial management advice. The updated Celtic Seas EO represents a large step forward for EOs, with the inclusion of novel sections on climate change, foodweb and productivity, the first application of the new guidelines for building the conceptual diagram, inclusion of socio-economic indicators, and progress made toward complying with the Transparent Assessment Framework (TAF). We highlight ongoing issues relevant to the development and communication of EO conceptual diagrams. A common methodology using dynamic factor analysis (DFA) was used to perform ITA in a comparable way for seven subregions. This was supported by the design and compilation of the first standardized cross-regional dataset. A comparison of the main trends evidenced among subregions over the period 1993–2020 was conducted and will be published soon. A list of available and developing EWE models for the region was also generated. Here, we re-port on the advances in temporal and spatial ecosystem modelling, such as their capacity to model the impacts of sector activities (e.g. renewables and fisheries) and quantify foodweb indi-cators. We also reflect on model quality assessment with the key run of the Irish sea EwE model. The group highlighted the hurdles and gaps in current models in support of EBM, such as the choice of a relevant functional, spatial, and temporal scales and the impacts of model structure on our capacity to draw comparisons from models of different regions. The group aims to ad-dress these issues in coming years and identify routes for ecosystem model derived information into ICES advice.
- Workshop on Implementation of Stakeholder Engagement Strategy (WKSTIMP)Publication . Ballesteros, Marta; Boo, María; Ribeiro, Morgan; Chevalier, Adrien; Clay, Patricia; Dengbol, Poul; Collas, Mark; Farrell, Edward; Fernández, José; Gamaza, María; Glyki, Eirini; Haynie, Alan; Henneveux, Aurélien; Hegland, Troels; Kenny, Andrew; Kraan, Marloes; Köpsel, Vera; Minkkinen, Terhi; O´Donoghue, Sean; Pedreschi, Debbi; Rodríguez, Alexandre; Couto, Joana; Sandell, Jane; Schmidt, Jörn; Seixas, Sónia; Sverdrup, Esben; Talevska, Tamara; Van der Meeren, Gro; Wilson, AshleyWKSTIMP supports the ICES Stakeholder Engagement Strategy, through drafting elements for ICES Implementation Plan. The report defines a suit of actions to make the ICES Strategy work. If implemented successfully, a diverse and representative pool of competent, reliable and committed stakeholders will engage with ICES. All stakeholders will be able to contribute effectively based on a clear understanding of the process and what is expected from them. ICES will become a natural place for stakeholders to engage and collaborate, delivering better science and advice by integrating essential knowledge and providing arenas for meaningful dialogues. And, the engagement process will be fully traceable, and its monitoring and evaluation outcomes inform decision-making and organizational learning. The WKSTIMP participants represented a plurality of profiles and backgrounds including natural and social scientists, representatives from the fisheries sector, NGOs, Advisory Councils, ICES Head of SCICOM and ACOM and ICES staff. The analysis and reflective thinking on the Strategy set the basis for exploring actions within the ICES system (Expert Groups, Advice Drafting Groups, MIACO and MIRIA meetings) and across topics (research ethics, data protection, informed consent, conflicts of interest, transparency). The discussion in WKSTIMP highlighted the centrality of stakeholders as data, information and knowledge providers, and highlighted how two complementary ICES initiatives reinforce the Strategy: firstly, the development of guidelines for ensuring the integrity of scientific information submitted to ICES by data providers (e.g., WKENSURE); and secondly, the accountability for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions (forthcoming Workshop on perceptions on the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice, WKAFPA). Furthermore, participants discussed risks associated with opportunistic behaviour in the engagement processes (creative and created blindness and advice shopping), tailoring specific actions to cope with them. Exploring actions for implementation was guided by feasibility within the current ICES framework. Additional considerations were to avoid burdens, disruptions, and manage change in the ICES community. WKSTIMP proposes 35 time-based priority actions, urges the implementation plan's timely approval, and suggests strengthening ICES capability by creating an expert group on engagement. Potential actions developed by stakeholders beyond ICES provide synergies that could reinforce the Strategy.
- Workshop on the operational use of food web indicators and information (WKFoodWeb; outputs from 2024 meeting)Publication . Belgrano, Andrea; Winter, Anna-Marie; Bauer, Barbara; Planque, Benjamin; Faithfull, Carolyn; Howell, Daniel; Pedreschi, Debbi; Szalaj, Dorota; Andonegi, Eider; Cafferty, Erin; Gal, Gideon; Saygu, Ismet; Laveric, Jack; Bentle, Jacob; Brito, Joana; Woronof, Josephine; Czechowska, Karolina; Ortega-Cisnero, Kelly; Tomcza, Maciej; Castro, María; Torres, Marián; Püts, Miriam; Silvar, Paula; Puntila-Dodd, Riikka; Seixas, Sónia; Corrales, Xavier; Andonegi, Eider; Bentley, Jacob; Torres, Marián; Tomczak, MaciejThe Workshop on the operational use of Food Web indicators and information (WKFoodWeb), held in Copenhagen from February 19–21, 2024, focused on the future integration of food web information into ICES advice and progress towards Ecosystem-Based Management and Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management (EBFM). Key iscussions focused on how food web and ecosystem information could compliment the existing ICES advisory framework, including catch advice and Ecosystem Overviews. Invited presentations addressed ecosystem-informed scientific advice, the use of food web indicators, and the development and availability of food web models. Examples from academics, NGOs, and government advisors showcased how ICES might use food web indicators (such as feeding guild indicators and Ecological Network Analysis indicators) to deliver food web information to requesters which is consistent with their objectives under various policy commitments (e.g., Good Environmental Status; GES). Participants emphasised the need for standardised and accessible methods across ecoregions and ICES expert groups with improved data integration, stakeholder engagement, and transparent and robust communication of uncertainties. Breakout groups discussed options for the integration of food web information in advice, where and when needed, by means of pragmatic mechanisms for EBFM and the inclusion of more informative food web products in Ecosystem Overviews. The workshop concluded with actions and priorities focused on 1) synthesizing information and efforts regarding the development food web indicators across ICES expert groups, 2) developing and communicating options for ecosystem-informed fisheries advice, and 3) creating a roadmap for the systematic and transparent use of food web models within ICES.