For the past 20 years the Lenfest Ocean Program (LOP) has supported the development and advancement of ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM). This journey has resulted in the development of a targeted portfolio of projects that address key issues for the adoption of EBFM principles and practice. As we reflect on this this important work, we see the field’s remarkable growth, as well as areas where critical needs remain. Here are some of the lessons we’ve learned along the way:
Looking back, projects within the EBFM portfolio addressed key priorities in this issue area. The Fishery Ecosystem Plan (FEP) Task Force offered clear guidance on how to structure EBFM as a dedicated fisheries management process across the United States. The Forage Fish and International Crustacean Task Forces provided expert consensus on managing critical ecosystem components. Other projects developed ecosystem models and reference points to help inform management of Atlantic Menhaden in the United States and anchovies in Peru. The portfolio also supported innovative approaches and techniques that had not yet been used widely in fisheries management, like empirical dynamic modeling (EDM-I, EDM-II, EDM-III), portfolio theory, network theory, and coupled qualitative and quantitative modeling.
Project teams should be inclusive, diverse, and built on trust. We built teams and structured projects to maximize the uptake of results. While the individual projects varied in their specific needs, management contexts, and geographies, they all shared a common foundation of inclusive research, engagement, and partnerships. Building relationships between knowledge holders and knowledge users was crucial for effectively informing decision-making.
Long-term issues require long-term funding. Topics like EBFM often require significant shifts in the status quo, necessitating extended funding periods. Our decision to fund projects over decades was intentional for a few reasons. First, the high volume and diversity of requests for support from technical experts, fisheries managers, fishers, and others involved in fishery management decisions highlighted numerous opportunities to help. Second, a long-term view ensured that results stemming from individual projects could be used in decision-making, even if it meant funding follow-on projects to build on previous work.
Flexibility and engagement matter to project success. While we can’t foresee all the changes that will happen in our projects at the beginning, we remain adaptable. As the science-policy landscape shifts, we’ve tried to be open and available to support our project teams in adjusting their plans to meet those changing needs. Whether they be technical in nature or focused more on where and how the research results can be discussed or incorporated, we maintain close coordination with project leads and teams to understand what’s changing and how the project could be adjusted.
This collection of projects is not the only work advancing this topical area, but it has made significant impact in filling knowledge gaps, reducing barriers, and fostering relationships to help link ecosystem-level analysis with management decisions. Several of the projects are still underway (stay tuned!) and we hope that this work serves as a blueprint for others to continue addressing the remaining concerns and hurdles to operationalizing EBFM in the future.