The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Implementing effective fisheries-management systems – management strategy evaluation and the Australian partnership approach
Abstract
Fisheries management is characterized by multiple and conflicting objectives, multiple stakeholders with divergent interests and high levels of uncertainty about the dynamics of the resources being managed. This conjunction of issues can result in high levels of contention and poor outcomes in the management process. Management strategy evaluation (MSE) can assist in the resolution of these issues. MSE involves assessing the consequences of a range of management options and laying bare the trade-offs in performance across a range of management objectives. Key steps in the approach involve turning broad objectives into specific and quantifiable performance indicators, identifying and incorporating key uncertainties in the evaluation, and communicating the results effectively to client groups and decision-makers. At a technical level, the framework facilitates dealing with multiple objectives and uncertainties in prediction. At the implementation level, it fails if it cannot accommodate effective stakeholder participation and acceptance. MSE shares many features with approaches such as adaptive management and development of management procedures. The principles for implementing the MSE approach are reviewed and practical aspects of its implementation under the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) partnership model to fisheries management are discussed. The model stresses stakeholder involvement in all key areas of fisheries management, from stock assessment and setting research priorities, to enforcement and decision-making. Stakeholder involvement, including industry, science, and conservation, extends from membership of the AFMA Board, through Management Advisory Committees to Fisheries Assessment Groups. The benefits and limitations of the AFMA partnership approach are reviewed, both for MSE, and, in a wider sense, in the development of an effective fisheries management system.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Lessons in modelling and management of marine ecosystems: the Atlantis experience
Fulton, E. A., Link, J. S., Kaplan, I. C., Savina‐Rolland, M., Johnson, P., Ainsworth, C., Horne, P., Gorton, R., Gamble, R. J., Smith, A. D. M., et al. (2011) · Fish and Fisheries · doi:10.1111/j.1467-2979.2011.00412.x · Cited by 593
Self-citationA framework for selecting a suite of indicators for fisheries management
Rice, J. C., & Rochet, M.-J. (2005) · ICES Journal of Marine Science · doi:10.1016/j.icesjms.2005.01.003 · Cited by 441
Linking Movement Ecology with Wildlife Management and Conservation
Allen, A. M., & Singh, N. J. (2016) · Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.3389/fevo.2015.00155 · Cited by 441
Marchal, P., Andersen, J. L., Aranda, M., Fitzpatrick, M., Goti, L., Guyader, O., Haraldsson, G., Hatcher, A., Hegland, T. J., Le Floc'h, P., et al. (2016) · Fish and Fisheries · doi:10.1111/faf.12147 · Cited by 65
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, A.
- Venue
- ICES Journal of Marine Science
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 967-979
- ISSN
- 1054-3139 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2126475261
- Cited by
- 418
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Implementing effective fisheries-management systems – management strategy evaluation and the Australian partnership approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1006/jmsc.1999.0540
- The paper
- Smith, A. (1999). Implementing effective fisheries-management systems – management strategy evaluation and the Australian partnership approach. ICES Journal of Marine Science. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmsc.1999.0540
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.