FISHERIES MANAGEMENT AREAS (FMA)

The Fisheries Administrative Order (FAO) No. 263 or the Establishment of Fisheries Management Areas (FMA) for the Conservation and Management of Fisheries in Philippine Waters took effect on 9-February-2019. The objective of the policy is to establish FMA and provide a science-based, participatory and transparent governance framework and mechanism to sustainably manage fisheries.

Under FAO 263, the Philippine Waters are delineated into 12 FMAs, based on considerations of stocks distribution, structure of fisheries and administrative divisions. To ensure transparency and stakeholders’ participation in the decision and policy making, each FMA will be managed by a Management Body (with the DA-BFAR Regional Office as chair and co-chaired by LCE representatives) composed of representatives from sectors within fisheries (LGUs, municipal and commercial fisheries, aquaculture, processors and traders, academe, NGOs, Indigenous People, and other national government agencies like DENR, Philippine Coast Guard, PNP Maritime, among others).

Decision making within the FMA is based on ecological and economic indicators to establish pre-agreed rules and harvest control measures. In short, policies will be based on the status and capacity of the stocks within the FMA, taking into consideration the impact on the economic well-being of the fisherfolk.

EAFM PRINCIPLES TO GUIDE IMPLEMENTATION OF FMA

A new era of fisheries governance has come. One of the key policies endorsed by the National Fisheries and Aquatic Resources Management Council (NFARMC) and signed by former Agriculture Secretary Emmanuel Piñol is the Fisheries Administrative Order 263 series of 2019, known as the Establishment of FMA for the Conservation and Management of Fisheries in Philippine Waters.

The new policy brings into play a science-based, participatory and transparent governance framework and mechanism to sustainably manage our fisheries resources.

One of the key elements of the new policy is the spatial delineation of Philippine fishing grounds into 12 FMAs. The rationale for this is to manage our fisheries resources using an ecosystem-based approach.

Ecosystem-Based Approach to Fisheries Management

The main tool for the implementation of the FMAs is the Ecosystem-Based Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM) which is meant to implement the said policy at the ecosystem scale, bearing in mind the relation of various interconnected ecological domains from the ‘ridge’ or upland to the ‘reefs’ or coastal areas.

In the newly amended Fisheries Code (RA 10654), the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management is defined as:

“An approach to fisheries that strives to balance diverse societal objectives or needs by taking account of the knowledge and uncertainties about biotic, abiotic, and human components of ecosystems and their interaction; and applying in an integrated approach to fisheries management within ecologically meaningful boundaries. It may be synonymously used with ecosystem approach to fisheries management.”

In order to find a balance between enhancing human well-being and sustainably protecting ecological well-being, good governance must be put in place to ensure that the fisheries resources in an FMA will be sufficient and available for future generations.

Under the EAFM framework, fisheries management will use the best available science to approximate the fish stocks and the distribution of various species in a fishing ground. These information will be used to create a plan that will put in place harvest control rules and other conservation measures while taking into account the long term and short term effect on the livelihood of its immediate users. That is why the delineation of the 12 major FMA factors in stocks boundary, range, distribution and structure of fisheries while also taking into account administrative and geographic divisions. All these science-based efforts will be undertaken in consultation with fisheries stakeholders in each FMA.

Seven Principles of EAFM

In order to fully implement the EAFM to the sustainable management of the FMA, there are seven governing principles that must be put in place: (1) good governance, (2) appropriate scale, (3) increased participation, (4) multiple objectives, (5) cooperation and coordination, (6) adaptive management, and (7) precautionary approach.

• Good Governance

Fisheries managers under the EAFM framework are urged to implement good governance in the implementation of the FMA plan in their respective management areas. Good governance involves consensus-oriented approach to fisheries management that encourages participation among its stakeholders. It is transparent, accountable, and responsive. Also, it effectively and efficiently implements the rule of law to promote a policy that is equitable and inclusive.

• Appropriate Scale

EAFM managers are encouraged to view their respective management policies in reference to an appropriate scale. In taking into account the appropriate scale, four dimensions must be considered namely, (i) ecological (single species management versus large marine ecosystem), (ii) governance (single versus multiple jurisdiction), (iii) socio-economic (single village versus rural and urban coastline); and (iv) temporal (short term measure versus long term measure). It must be noted that in reality, no scale can be absolutely correct. Hence, the challenge is to find the ‘right’ or appropriate scale and pursue the most practical and necessary measures in managing our respective FMAF.

• Increased Participation

The implementation of EAFM puts increased participation among fisheries stakeholders as central to its process. It must be consultative, taking into account stakeholders’ involvement in the crafting of the plan of action that is inclusive and equitable.

• Multiple Objectives

An EAFM framework of policy implementation must also involve the principle of engaging multiple stakeholders. Fisheries stakeholders are not the only stakeholder at play in the EAFM process. The government as well as external agents such as the academe, NGOs, and the scientific community are also part of the process.

Since the EAFM process to FMA involves multiple stakeholders, with each having their corresponding objectives, the process of policy making and implementation must involve harmonizing multiple objectives to reduce conflicting interests among stakeholders. The EAFM process, like many multi-sectoral approach to resource management, is consultative and must be inclusive of all concerns of its multiple stakeholders.

• Cooperation and Coordination

For the EAFM to be successfully adapted in the policy formulation and implementation of the FMA, the principle of cooperation and coordination must be in place. The sustainable management of a fisheries management area has cross-cutting effects. Thus, effective and efficient cooperation and coordination among agencies and institutions is necessary to achieve its multiple objectives.

• Adaptive Management

An EAFM Plan for an FMA involves the principle of adaptive management which is basically a “learning while doing” approach. An EAFM Plan for an FMA is not a one time, big time implementation strategy. Rather, during its implementation, a particular plan may undergo several revision and refinement, in order to fine tune and improve its design. FMA managers are urged to regularly evaluate, improve, or discard action points that may not be appropriate anymore to an existing FMA. This corrective cyclical process aims to lessen the uncertainty in predicting the outcomes and in mitigating the effects of a management action.

• Precautionary Approach.

One of the key principles of an EAFM is the principle of precautionary approach which says that lack of information should not be a reason for lack of action. Adopting a precautionary approach necessarily means that FMA managers must exercise proactive and well-tempered management actions that factors in the potential risks.

In due time, the full implementation of FMA policy using the EAFM process will bear fruit and will lead to a new era of fisheries management –one that is participatory and inclusive, science-based, and one that strikes the balance between socio-economic well-being and ecological well-being through good governance.