The review concentrated on:

•  the consultative process linking research to management;
•  the link between the current strategic research plan and industry needs;
•  gaps in the current research strategic plan, particularly relating to the requirement of industry to undertake a strategic ecological assessment of the SEF;
•  opportunities to engage industry more effectively in SEF research.

 

Consultation with various stakeholders revealed a large number of formal consultative committees and subcommittees that introduced much bureaucratic inertia into the industry consultation process.  Emerging issues dealing with a move to ecosystem, as opposed to species, management of fisheries present new challenges to industry.  There is a need to present greater clarity in dealing with ecological management and its influence in the research priority setting process.  It is suggested that the Management Advisory Committee (MAC) assume the role of the Total Allowable Catch (TAC) subcommittee to more demonstrably separate TAC setting from the wider research needs (particularly ecological issues).  This, and the consolidation of other consultative committees would greatly reduce time spent in meetings and allow a greater focus on critical issues such as improving the TAC-setting process, addressing concerns of environmental agencies (e.g. bycatch from trawlers, impacts on the seafloor by trawlers).

 

Given the prominence of ecological/environmental issues, it is further suggested that committees dealing with common research issues be combined to provide greater cost effectiveness (in participation and in research program execution) in tackling ecological issues (e.g. identification and evaluation of ecosystem performance indicators).  As research resources are limited, there should be sharing of common needs in environmental/ecological assessment and management across participating fisheries in the region including fisheries for shark, scallops, squid, tuna, and billfish.