Search

WKSTIMP 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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) requires EU Member States to achieve and maintain good environmental status (GES) across their marine waters. WKBENTH3 convened as a hybrid meeting to evaluate benthic assessment methods and indicators for their potential to meet the criteria described under the MSFD Descriptor 6 (seabed integrity). They evaluated a suite of indicator methods, proposed by participants. Those included five indicator methods de-scribing the ‘Condition of the Benthic Habitat’, primarily linked to D6C5, and six indicator meth-ods for ‘Physical Disturbance on Benthic Habitats’, primarily linked to D6C3. Variants of some of the indicators as well as some other commonly used diversity indices were also assessed. A common dataset with broad regional representation was used to compare and contrast indi-cator performance with 17 benthic invertebrate datasets drawn from a range of pressure gradi-ents (14 over gradients of commercial bottom trawling intensity, 2 over gradients of eutrophica-tion and 1 over a pollution gradient). A meta-analysis of the mean response to trawling across all locations showed that most indicators had, on average, declined at the high trawl impact rel-ative to the baseline and a significant effect of trawling was detected for the indicators Commu-nity Biomass, Species Richness, Fraction of long-lived species, Median longevity, Fraction of sen-tinel species - SoS, Relative Margalef diversity index DM’, Shannon Index and Inverse Simpson. The complementarity of the different indices was computed using Spearman correlation coeffi-cients between each of the indices for all gradients, ordering indicators with Ward’s hierarchical clustering. One of the key findings was the identification of four groups of indices that showed clear patterns of association. Considering the link of indicators to different benthic community properties, WKBENTH3 proposed that the assessment of D6 should be carried out selecting a number of indicators drawn from different cluster groups to ensure that components of diver-sity, species sensitivity and abundance (density and/or biomass – or other proxy linked to benthic habitat functioning) are addressed. WKBENTH3 further ranked model-based benthic sensitivity and impact outputs across broad habitat types (BHTs) in eight different subdivisions in order to contrast indicator responses. The ranking showed a broad congruence, however, every subdivision had variation in ranking of BHTs among indicator methods. Further work is needed to determine the cause of those discrep-ancies and to look more closely at the values and the response curves generated. WKBENTH3 developed a worked example of how to estimate thresholds for GES based on the approach of ‘detectable change’. The approach was applied to each of the different pressure gra-dients and to muddy sand habitats. It was not able to estimate thresholds for all gradients da-tasets as the confidence intervals around some relationships were very wide. Experts highlighted that the assessment of seabed integrity needs to ensure that cross-regional, regional, national and local scale assessments can “talk” to each other and that they are complementarity in terms of what aspects of the ecosystem the respective indicators are capturing and what pressure they are tracking (linked to manageable human activity). Cross-regional assessments will inform whether assessments are measuring the same or similar things, allowing for such crosschecking. ICES Published Refereed

The Joint ICES/EUROMARINE Workshop on Common Conceptual Mapping Methodologies (WKCCMM) aimed to advance approaches to support inter- and transdisciplinary science via qualitative conceptual models to inform Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (IEA) throughout Eu-ropean seas and beyond. The workshop focused on developing a common understanding of conceptual mapping meth-odologies, their key uses and limitations, and processes for effective conceptual modelling with stakeholders for a variety of applications (e.g. developing food-webs, socio-ecological modelling, scoping exercises, rapid/initial management action and/or impact evaluations). Discussion in-volved presentation and discussion of a range of conceptual modelling approaches and contexts through the examination of case studies. These case studies gave rise to a suite of recommenda-tions, including the development of a workflow for IEA, and more generic guidelines and best practice advice for the use of conceptual modelling approaches with stakeholders. Although stakeholders were not able to be included in this workshop, they were very much at the heart of discussions, with the challenges and good practices of stakeholder inclusion addressed. WKCCMM also investigated how the methodologies can be best used to contribute to IEA, and may otherwise be applied throughout the ICES community, including identifying opportunities for cross-collaboration and knowledge transfer within the network. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

The Working Group on Integrated Assessment of the North Sea (WGINOSE) aims to provide a holistic analysis of the present and future status of the North Sea Ecosystem and the human activities therein. Analysis is split among 14 strata since the North Sea is a diverse ecosystem spanning the shallows of the Southern North Sea banks to the deeps of the Norwegian Trench. State-of-the-art statistical methods for trend analysis have been performed on time-series data spanning 35 years (between 1984–2022) with two different methods. In addition, a flagged observation (FO) analysis has been performed. The overall picture is that herring and cod show a downward trend in most subareas, while plaice, mackerel and sprat have an upward one. The total biomass of zooplankton is upward in areas Utsira, German Bight and Norwegian Trench, and downward in the Fladen area. The FO analysis give several occasions where the fish stocks are above the estimated trend in the period 2020–2022, and a few that is below. A lack of consistent datasets for oceanography suggest that next year that analysis will be based on model-data (Copernicus). An interactive map of human activities was developed and presented the first time in 2020, and further updated in 2021 with more layers. All data are obtained from The European Marine Observation and Data Network (EMODnet). Procedures for periodic update are documented and published. The plan is to update the pressure maps every third years, in time for revision of the Greater North Sea ecosystem overview. A paper has been published in Frontiers in Marine Science which explores the utility of Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) and conceptual models developed by WGINOSE and others for the North Sea (Olsen et al., 2023). Information gained from a series of workshop with stakeholder’s engagement developing qualitative (mental) models for different North Sea strata, showed the potential of contributing to integrated ecosystem assessment (IEAs) to facilitate the pathways towards an ecosystem-based management advice. The Ecosystem Overview of the Greater North Sea was updated in 2022 following the new structure (ICES 2022). The overview concluded that the greatest impact risk is caused by fishing followed by shipping. WGINOSE will work toward the operationalization of the strata specific ecosystem trend analysis including the integration of indicators of ecosystem state and function including information generated from models output; and provide the best available science for quantifying and evaluate trade-offs between different human activities and ecosystem components and services.

To support the implementation of the Ecosystem Based approach to Management (EBM), ICES strives to provide evidence-based scientific advice and relevant management options that also assess potential trade-offs among sectors or between environmental status and human uses. To help achieve this, the Workshop on Challenges, Opportunities, Needs and Successes in including human dimensions in Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (IEAs) (WKCONSERVE) focused on economic, social, and interdisciplinary research and data needed to inform on the societal drivers and objectives of marine resource use as context for advice. More specifically, the workshop goals were to a) summarize social and economic data, indicators and relevant research done across ICES IEA regions and other IEA regions, b) Identify goals for including social and economic data and analyses in different IEAs, and c) to develop a roadmap for including social and economic data and analyses in IEAs, identifying common needs across groups and unique priorities of each region. Discussion across IEA groups made clear that while great strides have been made in ICES IEA groups to identify and provide important ecological measures relevant to EBM, far less attention has been given to providing comparable economic and social information. WKCONSERVE identified a number of practical steps to take to include more societal measures relevant to EBM. These differ among regions, depending on data availability and ecosystem context, and are detailed in IEA roadmaps developed during the workshop. However, in general, the first step involves including social scientists in the IEA groups. Key topics and data for each IEA region were identified. It was, however, repeatedly noted that more interaction with stakeholders will help both IEA and human dimensions Expert Groups to better develop research and data collection efforts to address stakeholder needs. A lack of funding is a key obstacle to the development of IEAs, both regarding science and advisory products. It is now up to each IEA group to use the developed roadmaps to include the human dimension in IEAs. Furthermore, to support the development of methods for integration, follow-up workshops should be organized on a regular basis (e.g. every other year).

The deep-sea benthos covers over 90% of seafloor area and hosts a great diversity of species which contribute toward essential ecosystem services. Evidence suggests that deep-seafloor assemblages are structured predominantly by their physical environment, yet knowledge of assemblage/environment relationships is limited. Here, we utilized a very large dataset of Northwest Atlantic Ocean continental slope peracarid crustacean assemblages as a case study to investigate the environmental drivers of deep-seafloor macrofaunal biodiversity. We investigated biodiversity from a phylogenetic, functional, and taxonomic perspective, and found that a wide variety of environmental drivers, including food availability, physical disturbance (bottom trawling), current speed, sediment characteristics, topographic heterogeneity, and temperature (in order of relative importance), significantly influenced peracarid biodiversity. We also found deep-water peracarid assemblages to vary seasonally and interannually. Contrary to prevailing theory on the drivers of deep-seafloor diversity, we found high topographic heterogeneity (at the hundreds to thousands of meter scale) to negatively influence assemblage diversity, while broadscale sediment characteristics (i.e., percent sand content) were found to influence assemblages more than sediment particle-size diversity. However, our results support other paradigms of deep-seafloor biodiversity, including that assemblages may vary inter- and intraannually, and how assemblages respond to changes in current speed. We found that bottom trawling negatively affects the evenness and diversity of deep-sea soft-sediment peracarid assemblages, but that predicted changes in ocean temperature as a result of climate change may not strongly influence continental slope biodiversity over human timescales, although it may alter deep-sea community biomass. Finally, we emphasize the value of analyzing multiple metrics of biodiversity and call for researchers to consider an expanded definition of biodiversity in future investigations of deep-ocean life.

ICES was requested to investigate the main physical disturbance pressure(s) causing benthic impact on habitats per EU ecoregion. The three workshops in this process - WKBEDPRES1, WKBEDLOSS and WKBEDPRES2 – form part of a stepwise process that will deliver advice on seafloor integrity for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD). In collaboration with its strategic partners, the high level objectives undertaken by ICES within the advice request process were: 1) to identify benthic physical disturbance pressure layers available within ICES and the European and wider marine community across the four EU (MSFD) regions – including the mapping of pertinent data flows and the establishment of criteria needed to ensure the practical use of the data in assessing benthic impact in the workshop WKBEDPRES1 (ICES HQ 24–26 October 2018); 2) to identify physical pressure layers causing loss of benthic habitats across the four EU regions, including mapping of data flow and establish guidance to ensure the practical use of the data in assessing benthic impact in the workshop WKBEDLOSS (ICES HQ 11–13 March 2019); 3) to collate physical pressure layer data causing loss or disturbance (October 2018–Aug 2019), using identified sources and targeted data calls; and 4) to evaluate and operationally test the application of compiled physical pressure layer data causing loss or disturbance (WKBEDPRES2, 30 September–2 October 2019). WKBEDPRES 2 represents the end of this process prior to submission to an ICES coordinated scientific peer-review. During this ICES review phase the EU’s TG SeaBed group will also be given the opportunity to highlight any issues requiring further clarification, and input on the operational implementation of the suggested approaches. An ICES Advice Drafting Group (ADGD6PRES) will be convened to draft advice in response to the original advice request based on the workshop reports and their review (including TG SeaBed input) to then be approved by the ICES Advisory Committee. The expected release of the ICES advice is 5 December 2019.WKBEDPRES2 focused on objectives 3 and 4 above, developing EU-wide guidance on how to assess and report human activities that cause physical disturbance to the seafloor and loss of benthic habitats and to present relevant methodological flows and demonstration products. Within WKBEDPRES2 suitable data streams relating to activities thought to be the main causes of physical disturbance were identified, as were the links from activity to pressure and then through to impact. To produce an assessment process that allowed an accurate assessment of pressures, whilst at the same time being tractable operationally, key pressures drivers and activities were identified and have been reported herein. Definitions of what constitutes physical disturbance and loss, including further definitions required in their assessment, were also set out. The methodology laid out in WKBEDPRES2 was found to be generally applicable to each ecoregion and pressure type thought to have a main impact upon seabed integrity. The resultant demonstration product confirms the current availability of reliable methods that can implement such an assessment and the data requirements needed to serve such methods. Limitations to this assessment process, in terms of supporting models and data gaps were also identified. The implementation of such methods provides a framework that is able to assess multiple pressures arising from multiple activities and presents the possibility of further activities being included into the assessment framework in a cumulative and biologically relevant manner: appropriate to assessment of adverse effects under D6C3 and D6C5, both for the single pressure and the cumulative of all pressures.