Synthesis of aquaculture policy and development approaches in Africa

The WorldFish Center was tasked to undertake a study to access, collate and develop background materials to produce an internationally linked and Africa-wide perspective on sectorally relevant policy issues. The specific objective of the study was to assess and define conditions and impact pathways, in Africa or elsewhere, where markets, policies, resources and technologies have combined to promote steady and sustainable growth of aquaculture, and where have been clear direct impacts on food supply, income, employment and consumption opportunities, as well as increase in supply that has led to stabilised prices. The study was also aimed at providing guidelines for scaling up the implementation of the synthesis study via Afri-FishNet (CAADP Fish Expert Pools) at the national and regional levels.

Institutional, policy and regulatory framework for sustainable development of the Egyptian aquaculture sector

This report presents the findings of a mission to critically review the institutional, policy and regulatory framework for sustainable development of the Egyptian aquaculture sector. The study was undertaken by an International Expert on Aquaculture Policy, and a National Expert on Institutions, on behalf of the Project “Improving Employment and Income through the Development of Egypt’s Aquaculture Sector“, implemented by WorldFish and CARE, and funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation(SDC). The objective of the mission was to assess the current status of the Egyptian aquaculture sector, in terms of the policy, legal and institutional environment, with a view to suggesting the major issues to be addressed within a future policy dialogue.

Sea level rise adaptation: emerging lessons for local policy development

Many coastal communities across the United States are beginning to plan for climate-related sea level rise. While impacts and solutions will vary with local conditions, jurisdictions which have begun this process seem to pass through three common stages when developing policy for local sea level rise adaptation: l) building awareness about local sea level rise threats, 2) undertaking analyses of local vulnerabilities, and 3) developing plans and policies to deal with these vulnerabilities. The purpose of this paper is to help advance community dialogue and further inform local decision-makers about key elements and steps for addressing climate-related sea level rise. It summarizes the results of a project the Marine Policy Institute (MPI) undertook during 2011-12 to review experiences from fourteen U.S. coastal jurisdictions representing a variety of city, county, and state efforts with sea level adaptation. There are many more initiatives underway than those reflected in this sample, but the “focus jurisdictions” were selected because of the extensive information publically available on their experiences and lessons being learned that could provide insights for coastal communities, especially in Southwest Florida.

Our living oceans: report on the status of U.S. living marine resources, 6th edition

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is dedicated to the stewardship of living marine resources (LMR’s). This is accomplished through science-based conservation and management, and the promotion of healthy ecosystems. As a steward, NMFS has an obligation to conserve, protect, and manage these resources in a way that ensures their continuation as functioning components of healthy marine ecosystems, affords economic opportunities, and enhances the quality of life for the American public. In addition to its responsibilities within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), NMFS plays a supportive and advisory role in the management of LMR’s in the coastal areas under state jurisdiction and provides scientific and policy leadership in the international arena. NMFS also implements international measures for the conservation and management of LMR’s, as appropriate.NMFS receives its stewardship responsibilities under a number of Federal laws. These include the Nation’s primary fisheries law, the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act. This law was first passed in 1976, later reauthorized as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act in 1996, and reauthorized again on 12 January 2007 as the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act (MSRA). The MSRA mandates strong action to conserve and manage fishery resources and requires NMFS to end overfishing by 2010 in all U.S. commercial and recreational fisheries, rebuild all overfished stocks, and conserve essential fish habitat.

Linking elements of the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) with the planned National Water Quality Monitoring Network. Proceedings from the NOAA-Supported workshop 19-21 September 2005

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in cooperation with the New Jersey Marine Sciences Consortium (NJMSC), hosted a workshop at Rutgers University on 19-21 September 2005 to explore ways to link the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) to the emerging infrastructure of the National Water Quality Monitoring Network (NWQMN). Participating partners included the Mid-Atlantic Coastal Ocean Observing Regional Association, U.S. Geological Survey, Rutgers University Coastal Ocean Observing Laboratory, and the New Jersey Sea Grant College. The workshop was designed to highlight the importance of ecological and human health linkages in the movement of materials, nutrients, organisms and contaminants along the Delaware Bay watershed-estuary-coastal waters gradient (hereinafter, the “Delaware Bay Ecosystem [DBE]”), and to address specific water quality issues in the mid-Atlantic region, especially the area comprising the Delaware River drainage and near-shore waters. Attendees included federal, state and municipal officials, coastal managers, members of academic and research institutions, and industry representatives. The primary goal of the effort was to identify key management issues and related scientific questions that could be addressed by a comprehensive IOOS-NWQMN infrastructure (US Commission on Ocean Policy 2004; U.S. Ocean Action Plan 2004). At a minimum, cooperative efforts among the three federal agencies (NOAA, USGS and EPA) involved in water quality monitoring were required. Further and recommended by the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, outreach to states, regional organizations, and tribes was necessary to develop an efficient system of data gathering, quality assurance and quality control protocols, product development, and information dissemination.

Technical and mapping support for marine spatial planning: Final report

Washington depends on a healthy coastal and marine ecosystem to maintain a thriving economy and vibrant communities. These ecosystems support critical habitats for wildlife and a growing number of often competing ocean activities, such as fishing, transportation, aquaculture, recreation, and energy production. Planners, policy makers and resource managers are being challenged to sustainably balance ocean uses, and environmental conservation in a finite space and with limited information. This balancing act can be supported by spatial planning. Marine spatial planning (MSP) is a planning process that enables integrated, forward looking, and consistent decision making on the human uses of the oceans and coasts. It can improve marine resource management by planning for human uses in locations that reduce conflict, increase certainty, and support a balance among social, economic, and ecological benefits we receive from ocean resources. In March 2010, the Washington state legislature enacted a marine spatial planning law (RCW §43.372) to address resource use conflicts in Washington waters. In 2011, a report to the legislature and a workshop on human use data provided guidance for the marine spatial planning process. The report outlines a set of recommendations for the State to effectively undertake marine spatial planning and this work plan will support some of these recommendations, such as: federal integration, regional coordination, developing mechanisms to integrate scientific and technical expertise, developing data standards, and accessing and sharing spatial data. In 2012 the Governor amended the existing law to focus funding on mapping and ecosystem assessments for Washington’s Pacific coast and the legislature provided $2.1 million in funds to begin marine spatial planning off Washington’s coast. The funds are appropriated through the Washington Department of Natural Resources Marine Resources Stewardship Account with coordination among the State Ocean Caucus, the four Coastal Treaty Tribes, four coastal Marine Resource Committees and the newly formed stakeholder body, the Washington Coastal Marine Advisory Council.

Developing alternative shoreline armoring strategies: the living shoreline approach in North Carolina

This paper reviews the scientific data on the ecosystem services provided by shoreline habitats, the evidence for adverse impacts from bulkheading on those habitats and services, and describes alternative approaches to shoreline stabilization, which minimize adverse impacts to the shoreline ecosystem. Alternative shoreline stabilization structures that incorporate natural habitats, also known as living shorelines, have been popularized by environmental groups and state regulatory agencies in the mid-Atlantic. Recent data on living shoreline projects in North Carolina that include a stone sill demonstrate that the sills increase sedimentation rates, that after 3 years marshes behind the sills have slightly reduced biomass, and that the living shoreline projects exhibit similar rates of fishery utilization as nearby natural fringing marshes. Although the current emphasis on shoreline armoring in Puget Sound is on steeper, higher-energy shorelines, armoring of lower-energy shorelines may become an issue in the future with expansion of residential development and projected rates of sea level rise. The implementation of regulatory policy on estuarine shoreline stabilization in North Carolina and elsewhere is presented. The regulatory and public education issues experienced in North Carolina, which have made changes in estuarine shoreline stabilization policy difficult, may inform efforts to adopt a sustainable shoreline armoring strategy in Puget Sound. A necessary foundation for regulatory change in shoreline armoring policy, and public support for that change, is rigorous scientific assessment of the variety of services that natural shoreline habitats provide both to the ecosystem and to coastal communities, and evidence demonstrating that shoreline armoring can adversely impact the provision of those services.

Scientific assessment of marine harmful algal blooms

Algae are the most abundant photosynthetic organisms in marine ecosystems and are essential components of marine food webs. Harmful algal bloom or “HAB” species are a small subset of algal species that negatively impact humans or the environment. HABs can pose health hazards for humans or animals through the production of toxins or bioactive compounds. They also can cause deterioration of water quality through the buildup of high biomass, which degrades aesthetic, ecological, and recreational values. Humans and animals can be exposed to marine algal toxins through their food, the water in which they swim, or sea spray. Symptoms from toxin exposure range from neurological impairment to gastrointestinal upset to respiratory irritation, in some cases resulting in severe illness and even death. HABs can also result in lost revenue for coastal economies dependent on seafood harvest or tourism, disruption of subsistence activities, loss of community identity tied to coastal resource use, and disruption of social and cultural practices. Although economic impact assessments to date have been limited in scope, it has been estimated that the economic effects of marine HABs in U.S. communities amount to at least $82 million per year including lost income for fisheries, lost recreational opportunities, decreased business in tourism industries, public health costs of illness, and expenses for monitoring and management. As reviewed in the report, Harmful Algal Research and Response: A Human Dimensions Strategy1, the sociocultural impacts of HABs may be significant, but remain mostly undocumented.