Last week, the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM) had the opportunity to make big strides in long-term sustainable fisheries management at their annual meeting in Rome, via the adoption and implementation of management strategy evaluation-tested harvest control rules (HCRs). For the most part, GFCM seized that opportunity and made important progress, but there is still much more that needs to be done.
First, the highlights:
The Commission successfully adopted and implemented two MSE-tested HCRs: for European hake in the Strait of Sicily and giant red shrimp in the Ionian Sea! The giant red shrimp fishery is the world’s first international, invertebrate fishery with a harvest strategy. The implementation of these HCRs will help maintain long-term sustainability of two of the Mediterranean’s most valuable and culturally significant species. However,
The MSE-tested HCR for anchovy in the Adriatic Sea that was adopted in 2024 continues to be implemented, with a 10% decrease in total allowable catch (TAC) from 2026 to 2027 in line with recommendation GFCM/44/2021/20. The stock remains in sustainable exploitation.
While not MSE-tested, the Commission also successfully adopted the standard GFCM HCR (a pre-defined HCR that serves as a default for providing catch or effort advice, in conjunction with short-term forecasts rather than MSE testing) for three stocks: deep-water rose shrimp and giant red shrimp in the Strait of Sicily, and common dolphinfish. They also adopted a data limited approach for setting catch limits for two stocks: blue and red shrimp in the Strait of Sicily and the Ionian Sea.
The Commission also continued to include HCRs in their plans for future work. Next year, that work includes developing an MSE-tested HCR for piked dogfish in the Black Sea, data-limited approaches for two deep-water red shrimp stocks in the Eastern Mediterranean, and an MSE-tested effort allocation formula for demersal stocks in the Adriatic Sea.
Second, the lowlights:
The Commission failed to fully implement the MSE-tested HCR for blackspot seabream that was adopted in 2025. This highly important stock is overfished with no signs of recovery, despite additional remedial measures in place since 2024. Implementing the 4.21t catch limit from the HCR would have supported the stock’s regrowth, but politics got in the way. Instead, the 2027 TAC was reduced by 75%, and the number of hooks reduced by 50%, from 2026, leading to a TAC of 12.23t. While this is a step in the right direction, the Commission will need to fully implement the HCR next year.
The TAC set for sardine in the Adriatic Sea in 2027 is no longer in line with the HCR adopted in 2024. The stock has declined sharply and has fallen below its biomass limit reference point. The HCR’s TAC for 2027 would have been 14,933t, but the Commission set the TAC at 25,139t, a nearly 70% excess. While this was still a 38% decrease from the 2026 TAC, the Commission failed to implement the pre-agreed approach that would have helped the stock recover due to political negotiations. The Commission argued that HCRs are merely used as “guiding principles” for setting annual catch limits for Adriatic pelagic stocks.
Using HCRs as the starting point for setting annual limits but not directly implementing their outputs is highly problematic. An HCR is developed and tested in advance in order to provide a pre-agreed, science-based response to changes in stock health. Allowing political negotiations to override HCR outputs undermines their purpose and risks further stock declines or delayed recovery. Adopting MPs and HCRs is often likened to agreeing to the rules before we play the game; it’s imperative to also stick to those rules, whether they call for increasing or decreasing fishing.
Lastly, looking ahead:
The Commission has made significant progress in advancing sustainable long-term management for several fish stocks this year, but there is still work to be done to ensure these approaches deliver their intended benefits.
The Commission must consistently implement already-adopted HCRs, rather than treating them as optional guidance or starting points for annual negotiations. They will only perform as expected to achieve the agreed management objectives if they are fully implemented.
At the same time, transitioning existing HCRs to fully specified management procedures (MPs; which also define the data collection program and estimation method used to determine stock status) should be prioritized. Transitioning HCRs to fully specified MPs should be relatively simple, as a data collection program and an estimation method were already assumed during the MSE testing of the HCRs. Adopting full MPs, as done in other regional fisheries management organizations, ensures consistent and predictable implementation.
Relatedly, GFCM has not yet adopted a rule tested in a best-practice, full-feedback loop MSE. The stocks with adopted MSE-tested HCRs have utilized a shortcut approach that simplifies the estimation step of the MP, and the GFCM standard HCRs have not been MSE-tested at all. The extra effort to move these shortcut MSEs to full MSEs pays off in more reliable and informative results and is well worth the investment.
Moving towards full-feedback loop MSEs and fully specified MPs for all stocks will maximize the likelihood of successfully achieving management objectives.
Finally, the Commission should continue expanding MSE-based management to additional priority stocks, building on the progress made this year and the work already planned for 2027.
In conclusion…
The Commission did make significant progress in advancing sustainable long-term management for several fish stocks this year, and we are hopeful that this momentum will continue into 2027 and beyond. There is much to be done, and we look forward to supporting the Commission’s commendable efforts on MSE, HCRs, and fully specified MPs.
For more details on GFCM’s work on HCRs, MSE, and MPs, check out our latest factsheet.
Originally posted on Sea Pact.
Earlier this month I attended the 104th Meeting of the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission in Lisbon, as part of Sea Pact’s involvement in the All Tunas 2028 initiative. It was my first RFMO meeting. I’ve sat through plenty of domestic US fishery management council meetings, so I went in wondering whether it would be similar to those, just scaled up across dozens of countries and languages. There are some similarities, but the differences are significant.
For anyone who hasn’t experienced an RFMO meeting, here’s what it actually looks like: representatives (delegates) from dozens of countries spend a week in plenary sessions, side rooms, receptions, breakfasts, lunches, and dinners, working through fleet capacity, allocations, catch limits, closure periods, gear rules, and stock assessments that will shape how fisheries like tuna are managed across the Eastern Pacific for years to come. At times it is technical and slow. At other times it moves fast, with debates that stay respectful (usually) but rarely let up. The outcomes, or adopted proposals, matter enormously to everyone in the supply chain, from the vessels on the water, to Sea Pact members, to the retailers and chefs selling seafood to consumers.
This year’s meeting came at an interesting time. The tropical tuna stocks, including yellowfin, bigeye, and skipjack, all remained in good condition, and catch levels in the Eastern Pacific climbed well above the ten-year average. That good news on stock health did not automatically translate into agreement on how to manage the fisheries. Many coastal states advocated for more fishing capacity and shorter closure periods, pointing to the healthy stocks as an opportunity for developing nations to grow their fleets, while other members pushed for management procedures that would support stock stability and the long-term sustainability of the fisheries. That divide, between rewarding conservation success and managing it responsibly, was part of nearly every tropical tuna discussion in Lisbon. In the end, members did not land on a long-term management procedure for tropical tunas this year. Instead, the Commission agreed to keep negotiating an interim approach while continuing technical work toward a fuller framework.
I understood why coastal states wanted more capacity. But after about 15 years working across different corners of fishery management, I also recognized the risk of adding capacity before the management framework is ready to handle it. These debates reminded me of the New England groundfish fishery’s history, a history I’ve witnessed firsthand. Before the Magnuson-Stevens Act and enforcement of the US’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ), foreign fleets regularly fished cod and other groundfish along the New England coast. Once the US pushed those fleets out, it moved to build up its own domestic fishing capacity and subsidized the construction of new vessels to do it. The problem, and hopefully the lesson the Eastern Pacific doesn’t have to relearn, was that fleet capacity grew well ahead of the management framework meant to govern it. The cod stocks collapsed after years of overfishing and inadequate management, and the resulting overcapacity eventually forced the US government into a vessel buyback program in the 1990s that came with its own set of challenges.
On a more encouraging note, the clearest highlight of the week was Pacific bluefin tuna. After roughly a decade of joint work between IATTC and its Pacific counterpart, the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, members adopted a formal management procedure and implementation measure for the stock, a science-based rule that will set catch limits automatically going forward rather than reopening the fight every year. Pacific bluefin’s recovery arrived roughly a decade ahead of schedule, and watching the Commission put a lasting framework behind that success was one of the more encouraging moments I witnessed at an RFMO meeting. Questions about how that catch gets allocated among fishing nations remain open, but the core management framework is now in place.
Alongside the formal meeting, I had the chance to speak at an NGO Tuna Forum side event, “A Toast to the Future of Tuna Management,” focused entirely on management procedures and the science behind them. It was a genuinely cross-sector discussion with a scientific overview from Shana Miller of The Ocean Foundation, an industry perspective from Dr. Julio Moron of OPAGAC, a government perspective from Ryan Wulff of NOAA, and a seafood company’s view from Peter Adame of Lusamerica Foods. My role was to speak about collective supply chain engagement on management procedures, why buyers, processors, and brands have a stake in how these technical rules get built, and how a coalition like Sea Pact can help bring our perspective into that process.
Management procedures are dry on paper, but they determine whether the tuna in our members’ supply chains gets managed on the basis of sound science or are renegotiated every single year. Lisbon reinforced how far this process has come, bluefin’s adoption is tangible proof it works, and how much work remains on tropical tuna. We’ll keep watching both, and keep showing up to make sure the supply chain’s perspective is part of the conversation.
Sam Grimley serves as Executive Director of Sea Pact, a coalition of North American seafood companies working together to advance seafood sustainability through supply chain engagement and collective action. Sam has more than fifteen years of experience helping seafood buyers and industry partners improve sourcing and drive sustainability initiatives having previously worked for Sustainable Fisheries Partnership and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute.
Thomas Horig / Ocean Image Bank
This piece is part of a series spotlighting leaders at ICCAT and the progress toward sustainable fisheries in the Atlantic.
2026 marks the 60th anniversary of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). Now with almost 60 members, ICCAT has led many key advancements in fisheries management. In celebration of ICCAT’s 60th anniversary, this article highlights reflections from the current chair of the Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS). SCRS is responsible for developing and recommending to the Commission all policy and procedures related to the stocks fished.
During your time as SCRS chair, are there any specific successes you want to highlight?
During my tenure as SCRS Chair, a key focus has been advancing Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE) and moving from theoretical frameworks to operational Management Procedures (MPs) across multiple species groups.
We have achieved major MSE-related milestones over the past few years:
Achieving these successes required tackling capacity and communication challenges along the way. Initially, MSE technical expertise and experience with MP development and testing was very limited within the Committee. To avoid siloing expertise within separate species groups, we encouraged scientists who had gained experience in one group to participate in new MSE work within other groups. This allowed them to assist with the work while also helping to build capacity across the Committee.
As each ICCAT panel (working groups tasked with the management of particular species) began to work with our Committee to define management objectives and evaluate candidate MPs for the first time, many commissioners were not familiar with MSE concepts (some of them ICCAT-specific). The development and selection of an MP is a collaborative process between scientists and commissioners that also considers stakeholder concerns. Considerable dialogue and informational sessions were carried out through panel meetings, capacity-building workshops, and ambassador sessions (informal science-management dialogue meetings on specific MSEs). This helped ensure that scientific evaluations were aligned with management objectives and that commissioners could make informed decisions. The successful adoption of these MPs over the past several years is a testament to the commitment of both the SCRS and the Commission to overcome the capacity and communication obstacles.
MSE work continues for other stocks. We are testing the current and alternative MPs for North Atlantic albacore within an upgraded MSE framework that utilizes current stock assessment software in the development of operating models and integrates best practices established through our recent MSE processes. The development of an MSE for South Atlantic albacore is also progressing, using models from this year’s stock assessment as operating model foundations. Initial work is underway for North and South Atlantic blue shark MSEs, where it is expected that upcoming stock assessments will similarly inform MSE operating models.
Finally, work continues on the Tropical Tunas Multi-Stock MSE covering Atlantic bigeye tuna, Atlantic yellowfin tuna, and Eastern Atlantic skipjack. Given the mixed-species nature of these fisheries, differences in fleet selectivity, and technical complexity, this represents perhaps the most ambitious effort undertaken by the SCRS and Commission to date. And precisely because of those challenges, it is arguably one of the most critical.
What is likely to be on the SCRS docket for this year at the Commission?
On the upcoming docket for the Commission, we can expect a mix of routine monitoring for established MPs and key updates on developing MSEs. First, the SCRS will present the results of routine Exceptional Circumstances (EC) checks for North Atlantic swordfish, North Atlantic albacore, and Atlantic bluefin tuna, alongside the stock status check for bluefin tuna. The Committee will also provide scientific guidance on the proposed Exceptional Circumstances Protocols for the recently adopted Western Atlantic skipjack MP; this ECP is scheduled for Commission adoption this year.
For ongoing MSE development—subject to final SCRS decisions this September—I anticipate several key updates:
How do you see MSE work progressing through SCRS over the next few years?
The ICCAT MSE Roadmap describes the schedule for implementation of adopted MPs, along with other periodic phases such as status checks and MP reviews. The SCRS Bluefin Tuna Species Group is currently traversing these important phases, including an EC check last year, a stock status check this year, and an MP review next year. The process has been a bit bumpier than expected—both the SCRS and the Commission struggled with how best to take into consideration new, impactful scientific estimates of stock biomass and implied status for the Western Atlantic bluefin tuna stock. Through dialogue at both panel and commission levels, it became clear that the SCRS needs to do a better job of communicating the science behind this new scientific input to commissioners, as well as clarifying what the status check and MP review processes actually entail. Going forward, we will be focusing heavily on enhancing communication around these concepts.
There have also been concerns that external and internal pressures to develop more MSEs faster may outstrip the scientific capacity of the SCRS and the financial resources of ICCAT. Long-term costs of MP development and ongoing implementation remain a factor, and our Committee has highlighted the need for deliberate coordination and dedicated technical support to avoid long-term dependence on contracted outside experts. I do think both the SCRS and the Commission are now well aware that we must evaluate available capacity and resources before taking on new MSE commitments. Although managing existing MPs while advancing new MSEs for albacore and blue shark will continue to be a challenge, I am confident the Committee will rise to meet it.
Crucially, we must continue building internal scientific expertise to support both current commitments and future MSE work. To that end, I am pleased to note that an advanced technical workshop is scheduled for this fall to provide SCRS scientists with hands-on training in MSE development.
The Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) held its annual meeting in the historic city of Lisbon, Portugal last week and took the opportunity to make its own mark on history. With adoption of a management procedure (MP) for Pacific bluefin tuna, as well as a measure to implement the MP-based catch limits starting in 2027, IATTC finally joins the other tuna management bodies in application of the MP approach to modernize and improve its management.
However, getting to this point was far from certain.
A hard-won agreement
Despite tentative agreement on the bluefin MP back in March, adoption last week was not assured. Due to a breakdown in negotiations among eastern and western Pacific managers back in July, it looked increasingly unlikely that the MP would make it across the finish line this year. While the MP terms were generally accepted, consensus was held up due to disagreements about how to allocate the MP-based catch limits among countries.
However, demonstrating a rare level of determination and willingness to compromise, with impressive leadership from Japan, the major fishing nations met informally and formally over the past month to work out their differences and come to an agreement. This effort enabled MP adoption in Lisbon and shows what is possible when governments want to make progress.
Because Pacific bluefin tuna is a pan-Pacific stock, the baton now passes to the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) to adopt a complementary measure when they meet in Vanuatu later in the year.
A step forward for South Pacific swordfish management
Thanks to leadership from Ecuador, the EU, and the U.S., IATTC also agreed to its first-ever measure for South Pacific swordfish. The measure sets provisional reference points for the stock and calls for harvest control rule (HCR) development using management strategy evaluation (MSE). It will be important to work with IATTC scientists to ensure this initiative has the necessary structure and resources to progress over the next couple of years.
A step backward for mahi management
Unfortunately, not all of the week’s decisions moved IATTC toward more robust, MSE-based management.
A revision to the 2023 measure for mahi (dorado) not only failed to add mention of MSE as a potential scientific tool but also removed reference to HCR development, a perplexing and misguided decision for this valuable fishery. Management of the eastern Pacific mahi fishery is challenged by multiple uncertainties, from stock structure questions to reporting deficiencies in the extensive artisanal fisheries. MSE is well-suited to help address these kinds of uncertainties and identify viable management options despite them.
A missed opportunity for tropical tunas
And in the biggest disappointment of the week, IATTC failed to adopt an interim multi-stock tropical tunas MP, despite similar proposals tabled by Ecuador, the U.S., and EU.
The proposed MP was based on seven years of MSE development, which included dialogue with fisheries managers and stakeholders throughout the process on the MP objectives and structure. There were five intersessional dialogue meetings in the past year alone! The proposed MP would have even increased fishing opportunities by decreasing the duration of the purse seine closure. However, as with Pacific bluefin tuna in July, an allocation-related debate only tangentially related to the MP (in this case, fishing capacity allowances per country) held up the agreement, and the existing tropical tunas measure remains in place.
Dr. Glen Holmes (Pew) and I published a paper on MPs and allocation several years ago, presenting the arguments of agreeing allocation before, after, or alongside an MP, and finding that allocation does not need to be agreed prior to MP adoption. It is frustrating to see that progress on this MP adoption is still being held hostage to allocation debates, especially when MP agreement and the predictability of future allowable catch/effort can help to facilitate allocation discussions, as we asserted in the paper.
Hopefully the two will be able to be separated or resolved in tandem next year, so IATTC can adopt a multi-stock MP for tropical tunas in 2027.
An important milestone, and more work ahead
Overall though, IATTC made measurable improvements to its management last week, with Pacific bluefin as its first implemented MP a cause for celebration. While IATTC adopted an MP for North Pacific albacore in 2023, they have yet to convert the MP output into catch and/or effort limits so it can be applied. Thankfully, that’s on the agenda for 2027, so when combined with the potential for adoption of the multi-stock tropical tunas MP, next year could be a very big year for MSE-based MPs in the eastern Pacific.
The progress in Lisbon also demonstrates the value of sustained intersessional dialogue. Pacific bluefin showed that difficult allocation disputes can be overcome when governments are committed to working toward consensus, while the lack of agreement on tropical tunas showed the consequences when those issues remain unresolved. Intersessional dialogue will be key to building on this year’s progress, so we’re eagerly awaiting the proposed 2026-27 IATTC calendar. We look forward to partnering with IATTC members to get the job done!
Credit: Kurt Arrigo / Ocean Image Bank
The environmental impacts of global climate change influence marine ecosystems in multiple ways, including changes in productivity, abundance, and spatial distribution of species. These changes have important implications for fisheries and are expected to become more pronounced with time as greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. Multiple fishery management entities, including tuna Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (tRFMOs), have formal commitments in place to consider climate change impacts on stocks under their purview, including resolutions at the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC), the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC), the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC), and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT).
However, a challenge when developing climate-informed fisheries management policies is the uncertainty around long-term climate forecasts. Even if we understand the functional relationship between an environmental factor (e.g., sea surface temperature, SST) and biological process (e.g., recruitment), we cannot predict with certainty the degree to which environmental conditions will change over time. This makes it difficult to predict with confidence how fish stocks will respond to climate change, which in turn has made the adoption of management policies that consider climate change difficult. Fortunately, fisheries managers do not need to predict the future perfectly to be prepared for it.
Management strategy evaluation (MSE) is a framework already in use across fishery management bodies that allows for the testing of candidate management procedures (MPs), also known as harvest strategies, across a range of uncertainties and possible future conditions. This makes MSE an ideal tool for developing and testing MPs that support sustainable fishing practices despite system uncertainties, such as the ecosystem impacts of climate change. This is where the Climate Test, a new tool by the creators of the openMSE framework, comes in.
Rather than trying to exactly predict future climate conditions, the Climate Test simulation tests and rates the performance of candidate MPs under a range of increasingly severe climate scenarios. The analogy often used is that of testing pilots in a flight simulator; we cannot know with certainty what weather a pilot will encounter during a flight, but if all pilots (i.e., MPs) perform similarly well under normal flight conditions, why wouldn’t you select the pilot that can still safely fly the plane (i.e., manage the fishery) under more extreme weather conditions? In the same way, Climate Test puts candidate MPs through simulated future conditions and assesses their ability to meet management objectives as climate impacts intensify. The Climate Test can be easily added on to any MSE framework built in openMSE, providing a streamlined way for managers to evaluate the climate robustness of candidate MPs.
The Climate Test is being developed through several stages. The first involves exploratory tests, where MPs are rated for their climate robustness based on the assumed directional change of a handful of key biological parameters (decreased growth, increased natural mortality, decreased recruitment strength, decreased condition) under increasing climate change impacts. MP performance is assessed using a predefined robustness threshold, for example maintaining the stock size at or above 80% of the current spawning stock biomass (SSB) over the next 30 years. Candidate MPs are ranked by their climate robustness based on the magnitude of climate-related changes in stock dynamics they can withstand before the stock falls below the robustness threshold. For example, if candidate MP #1 (‘MP1’) maintains the stock above the robustness threshold under a 20% increase in natural mortality, but MP #2 (‘MP2’) can only maintain the stock above the robustness threshold under a 10% increase in natural mortality, then MP1 would be considered as more climate-robust. The exploratory Climate Test has been demonstrated for two stocks managed by ICCAT for which MSE-tested MPs are already in place: western skipjack and North Atlantic swordfish. Encouragingly, when the exploratory test was applied to the candidate MPs that had been considered for adoption for each stock, the Climate Test found that the MPs selected for adoption were the most climate-robust of the candidates evaluated.
The second stage of the Climate Test moves from assumed changes in individual biological processes toward conceptual climate tests, which use a hypothetical ecosystem model to simulate the combined impacts of climate change on multiple biological processes over time. For example, rather than simply testing a percentage decline in recruitment, the conceptual test can evaluate how MPs perform under increasing ocean warming scenarios (Figure 1). Returning to our example from above, a conceptual test could show that MP1 maintains the stock above the robustness threshold under a 0.9⁰C increase in SST, while MP2 can only maintain the stock above the robustness threshold under a 0.59⁰C increase in SST.
Figure 1. A demonstration of the conceptual Climate Test framework, which considers the combined impacts of climate change on multiple key biological processes and rates candidate MPs based on their ability to maintain the stock above a robustness threshold (in this case, ≥80% of current SSB) under different ocean warming scenarios. In this case, MP1 is the most climate-robust as it maintains the stock above the robustness threshold until an increase in sea surface temperature of 0.9⁰C. Source: https://climatetest.bluematterscience.com/
The next and final step in developing the Climate Test will be tailored tests using case studies from the Benguela upwelling system off the southwestern coast of Africa. In place of the hypothetical ecosystem model used in the conceptual tests, an Atlantis ecosystem model of the southern Benguela Current system will be used to simulate the biological responses of four case study stocks (anchovy, sardine, shallow- and deep-water hake) to a range of climate change scenarios. The Atlantis model will be informed by an earth system model under one historical and eight potential future carbon-emissions scenarios, or Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs), that span the full range of projected ocean warming. These responses from Atlantis will be incorporated into openMSE models to test hypothetical MPs for these stocks and evaluate which MP formulations perform the best for these life histories under increasing climate change impacts. The lessons learned can be applied in MSE efforts for stocks with similar life histories around the world, or new tailored tests can be developed for specific regions or stocks.
Integrating the Climate Test into future MSE efforts offers a path forward for fisheries management bodies such as the tRFMOs looking to fulfill their climate commitments. By moving past the need for perfect climate projections, the Climate Test equips managers with a structured decision-making tool that ensures MPs are robust to future environmental uncertainty. For more information, visit the Climate Test project page.
1. What is Conxemar and why did it decide to attend SPRFMO?
Conxemar is the Spanish Association of Wholesalers, Importers, Processors and Exporters of Fishery and Aquaculture Products. It represents an important part of the seafood value chain in Spain and Europe, especially in processing and trade.
Our work is closely linked to the monitoring of fisheries, trade and regulatory policies that affect the supply of raw materials, the sustainability of resources and the competitiveness of the European processing industry.
Conxemar decided to attend the annual Commission meeting of the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO), held in Panama City, March 2-6, 2026, because the decisions taken in this organization have a direct impact on a strategic species for our industry: jumbo flying squid. For many Spanish and European companies, jumbo flying squid is an essential natural resource. It is used in many formats and processed products, and it has a very important presence in the Spanish market.
For this reason, we considered it important for the seafood value chain to be present in international discussions on the management of this fishery. The sustainability of the resource is fundamental, but so are stable supply, legal certainty and the need for decisions to take into account the impact on producers, processors, traders and consumers.
2. Why is squid an important species for Conxemar, Spain and Europe?
Jumbo flying squid is a key species for the Spanish processing industry. Spain is one of the main European markets for this product, and many Conxemar member companies depend on a stable, legal and sustainable supply of this natural resource.
Its importance is not limited to imports. Jumbo flying squid creates in both Spain and around the world industrial activity, employment, added value and an accessible source of marine protein for consumers. It is part of a broad value chain that includes international operators, importers, processing plants, distributors, retail and food service.
At European level, it is also a relevant species because it helps diversify the seafood supply. In a context where Europe depends heavily on seafood imports, ensuring the sustainable management of jumbo flying squid is important both for the conservation of the resource and for food security and the competitiveness of the industry.
3. What was Conxemar’s experience at SPRFMO like? What did we learn?
The experience was very positive and useful. It allowed us to better understand how SPRFMO works, how the positions of the different delegations are developed, and how negotiations really take place inside a regional fisheries management organization.
One of the main lessons was that informal conversations, bilateral meetings and side discussions are often as important as the formal sessions. These spaces make it possible to better explain the concerns of the industry, provide context and understand the priorities of each delegation or observer.
We also saw that the position defended by a delegation in a RFMO does not always fully reflect the needs of all the actors in its own country or market. That is why it is important for stakeholders, including members of the seafood supply chain, to participate directly when possible, in order to bring a complementary view and explain how management decisions affect supply chains, processing and the market.
During the meeting, we had the opportunity to speak with different delegations and observers, including The Pew Charitable Trusts and CALAMASUR. With them, we shared the concern about the need to move towards stronger, science-based and precautionary management of jumbo flying squid. These contacts were very useful to identify areas of cooperation and to better understand how Conxemar can add value in future meetings.
4. What were the main results of the meeting?
The meeting brought important progress, although it is still not enough to ensure fully effective management of jumbo flying squid.
On squid management, members adopted amendments to the conservation and management measure for this fishery. The decision reduces the authorized fishing effort limits by 15%, both in terms of fleet size and tonnage.
This is a positive step because it shows a willingness to move towards more precautionary management. However, its real impact on fishing pressure may be limited. The reason is that some fleets are not currently using all the capacity they were allowed to use before the amendment. For example, China, which is the main fleet authorized in this fishery, has around 20% fewer vessels operating than it could have under the previous limits. Therefore, a 15% reduction does not necessarily mean a real reduction in actual fishing effort.
The main problem continues to be the lack of sufficient scientific advice on the status of the stock. This lack of information makes it harder to adopt more ambitious measures. Even so, it is important that members agreed to consider new precautionary measures in 2027, even if there is still no conclusive scientific advice from the Scientific Committee.
In addition, a scientific work plan was approved. This includes the development of management strategy evaluation (MSE) and a harvest control rule (HCR) for jumbo flying squid. This is important because it can create the basis for more predictable, data-based and long-term management. The Commission also accepted the recommendation of the independent performance review panel to move towards harvest strategies for all its fisheries. It was also rightly recognized that this approach should not be the same for every species, but should be adapted to the characteristics of each fishery. A working group will now discuss the timing and conditions for implementing these recommendations.
Another relevant result was the adoption of a measure to establish standards for electronic monitoring. SPRFMO has therefore become the first non-tuna RFMO to approve this type of framework. This decision will allow electronic monitoring to be used to meet the new requirements for increased observer coverage in the jumbo flying squid fishery from 2027. It will also help improve the collection of scientific data and compliance control.
5. What is Conxemar’s view on these results?
Conxemar’s view is cautious. The results show a positive direction and open the way towards more structured, science-based and sustainable management of jumbo flying squid, but they are still not enough.
The 15% reduction in effort limits is a political step forward, but it will probably not significantly reduce real fishing pressure. For this reason, it will be essential for SPRFMO to continue moving towards more ambitious measures, based on the precautionary principle and supported by better scientific knowledge. This is also why Conxemar will continue to participate in SPRFMO.
For Conxemar, the sustainable management of jumbo flying squid must be based on three pillars: good science, effective precautionary measures and the participation of the whole value chain.
6. Why will Conxemar continue to engage with SPRFMO?
Conxemar will continue to engage with SPRFMO because the decisions taken in this organization will be very important for the future of jumbo flying squid and for the industry that depends on this species. For this reason, we have already requested Conxemar’s inclusion as an accredited observer in SPRFMO.
Our intention is to continue working before the next Commission meeting in March 2027, especially in three areas: maintaining contact with delegations and observers, cooperating with organizations such as CALAMASUR and Pew, and continuing to bring the perspective of the European processing and trading industry.
We also want to help ensure that the discussion on jumbo flying squid includes not only the fishing dimension, but also the reality of markets, processing, employment and food supply. Sustainable management needs to understand the whole chain.
7. Was it useful to attend SPRFMO? Would Conxemar recommend that other industry members participate?
Our conclusion is that the seafood industry should be more present in these international forums. The decisions taken in regional fisheries management organizations have direct consequences for supply, companies, workers and consumers. For this reason, when possible, it is useful and recommendable for other actors in the value chain to participate as well.
The sustainability of fishery resources is not only a fisheries management issue. It is also a value chain issue, a food security issue, an employment issue and a shared responsibility. For this reason, Conxemar considers that its presence at SPRFMO was valuable and will continue working to provide a constructive, responsible and long-term perspective.
Pablo Cadarso Rebolledo serves as Deputy Director of Conxemar, the Spanish Association of Wholesalers, Importers, Exporters and Processors of Fishery and Aquaculture Products. A qualified lawyer specialising in Maritime Law, he has professional experience in legal practice and marine insurance. His current areas of expertise include seafood market intelligence, international trade, regulatory affairs and the strategic challenges facing the Spanish and European seafood industry.
Blog originally published on FAO’s Common Oceans Program Newsroom.
Countries strengthen skills in management procedures through regional training
16/07/2026
15 -16 July 2026 – Antigua, Guatemala – Fisheries scientists and managers from across Central America gathered in Antigua for the first regional workshop on management procedures for sustainable fisheries, under the framework of the Organization of the Fisheries and Aquaculture Sector of the Central American Isthmus (OSPESCA).
The two‑day event forms part of a global series of capacity‑building workshops hosted by The Ocean Foundation (TOF) and supported by the GEF‑funded FAO Common Oceans Tuna Project, designed to strengthen science‑based decision‑making in tuna and tuna‑like fisheries.
Management procedures (MPs), also known as ‘harvest strategies’, are pre-agreed decision-making frameworks that determine allowable fishing levels under different stock conditions. They aim to keep fisheries within sustainable limits while reducing the risk of stock decline.
Management strategy evaluation (MSE) simulations are used to stress test MPs to assess their performance under uncertainties such as climate change, illegal fishing and data gaps. This approach supports more predictable management that can also reduce conflict in decision-making.
©FAO/Camilo Pareja
Previous capacity-building sessions have been held in the Seychelles, Egypt and the Pacific region, the latter led by the Pacific Community (SPC). The Guatemala workshop marks the first time this training has been offered in the Central American region.
“Many fisheries managers have heard about MSE and management procedures, but fewer have had the opportunity to gain the depth of knowledge needed to participate confidently in their development and application,” said Dr. David Die, the lead instructor of the workshop. “By strengthening the capacity of managers to engage constructively in these processes, we can accelerate the adoption of MPs and support more effective, transparent, and sustainable fisheries management for the benefit of all.”
Strengthening regional cooperation through OSPESCA
OSPESCA, a specialized institution of the Central American Integration System (SICA), coordinates sustainable fisheries frameworks across the region. Its mandate covers the national waters, inland waters and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of its member states – Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama and the Dominican Republic. The organization works to harmonize fisheries laws, design sustainable management policies and combat Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing.
“Strengthening technical capacity is essential for ensuring that management decisions are based on solid science,” said Bernal Chavarría, Coordinator of Fisheries Management and Policy at OSPESCA. “This workshop will provide our countries with the knowledge and tools to engage meaningfully in the decision-making process for our shared marine resources to ensure sustainable management.”
Applying the latest fisheries management methodologies
Participants included fisheries managers, scientists and technical officers from seven OSPESCA member countries. Prior to the workshop, they were asked to complete FAO’s e‑learning course series on management procedures for sustainable tuna fisheries. Building on that foundation, the training provided practical experience in applying the concepts to real‑world decision‑making.
The first day focused on developing and testing MPs. Participants explored management objectives, reference points, harvest control rules and performance indicators, as well as stakeholder roles and implementation considerations. The sessions were complemented by hands-on activities allowing participants to apply what they’d learned.
On the second day, experts from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC ) and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) presented ongoing multi-stock MSE frameworks, currently under development to advance MPs for tropical tuna stocks. Participants discussed the technical aspects, opportunities and challenges of these approaches, helping prepare them for upcoming tRFMO meetings on MPs and MSEs.
A growing global movement toward robust management procedures
Management procedures are increasingly recognized as one of the most effective tools for long‑term, precautionary fisheries management. Their adoption has already delivered measurable gains in several tuna fisheries worldwide, helping rebuild stocks and stabilize catch levels.
The workshop in Guatemala contributes to a broader global effort to equip countries with the skills needed to design, test and implement MSE‑based management procedures. Through the guidance of OSPESCA leadership and the workshop, Central American countries are strengthening their ability to manage shared resources sustainably and cooperatively.
“This training represents an important step toward strengthening knowledge in our region,” said Yesuri Pino, a Biologist with the Aquatic Resources Authority of Panama. “It helps ensure that decisions are science-based and, at the same time, allows us to contribute to the implementation of management approaches that benefit both our fisheries and our communities.”
The workshop in Guatemala was hosted by The Ocean Foundation, with support from the Common Oceans Tuna Project, Oceankind, the Paul M. Angell Family Foundation, and The Pew Charitable Trusts.
About the Common Oceans Tuna Project
Led by FAO and funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the Common Oceans Tuna Project brings together all five tuna RFMOs, scientific institutions, governments, civil society and the private sector to promote responsible, efficient and sustainable tuna fisheries while conserving biodiversity in a changing ocean environment.
To learn more: