THE BEST ENVIRONMENTAL
CHOICE IN SEAFOOD
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement
Action Plans –
Guidance Document
How to use the Action Plan Templates
Contents
Cover photography
The Gambia sole fishery
where improvements are being
planned in the fishery using
the MSC Action Plan Template.
@ MSC / Cassie Leisk
1. Introduction 1
2. How to use this document 2
3. Steps in the action planning process 3
4. Background to the MSC certification 4
4.1 How the MSC process works 4
4.2 Standardised assessment tree for scoring fisheries
(the “default assessment tree”) 5
5. Action Plan Template – a snapshot 7
6. Action Plan elements 10
6.1 General information 10
6.2 Overview of the Action Plan 11
6.3 Standard requirements 12
6.4 Action to address Standard requirements 14
6.5 Resources required 16
6.6 Action lead(s) 16
6.7 Action partners 17
6.8 Stakeholders 17
6.9 Timescale and milestones 18
6.10 Using the Excel spreadsheet to cross-reference actions
with performance indicators 18
7. Evaluating Action Plan progress 19
8. Reference material 20
9. MSC Contact 21
1
1. Introduction
This document assumes you have some
familiarity with the MSC certification and
ecolabelling program, including some
background on the MSC, as well as some
awareness of the basic terminology and broad
concepts relating to the certification process.
Given MSC’s stated purpose and intended
audience of this guidance, the document’s
scope therefore does not include specific
information about how individual fisheries
should or can pass the Standard.
That information is contained within the
MSC Standard itself and pre-assessment
or consultant reports about your fishery.
Together this information should be used
by your organisation to help you decide
which actions are most appropriate and the
order in which they should be implemented.
Who is this guide for?
This document is for potential certification
clients whose fisheries do not yet meet
the requirements of the MSC Standard. It
is directed at those who already have the
results of a commissioned pre-assessment,
or equivalent baseline review, against
the Standard by an accredited third-party
certification body or appropriately qualified
consultants. Thus, as potential certification
clients, users of this document are assumed
to already know about general or particular
areas of performance improvement needed
to enable their fishery to pass a full
assessment against the MSC Standard.
A practical tool
The MSC’s intention is that this guidance
is easy to understand and practical. The MSC
intends it to be a useful tool for potential
certification clients, which outlines:
– The actions your organisation will
implement to enable your fishery
to pass the MSC Standard
– The people, other organisations or
stakeholders involved in the project
and their responsibilities
– The resources required
– The timescales and specific milestones
that will help you measure progress
towards your goals.
The purpose of this document is to provide
templates and operational guidance for
developing a fishery improvement Action
Plan. Such plans are intended to help
potential Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)
certification clients set out and implement
practical actions aimed at enabling their
fishery to meet MSC performance requirements
in a specified timeframe.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
2
2. How to use this document
The Indian oil sardine
fisheries improvement
project (FIP) working
together to develop an
improvement Action Plan.
@ MSC
The flow chart on page 3 outlines the
main steps in an action planning process.
This is followed by some brief background
information about the MSC program and
an overview of the templates. From page
7, there are detailed segments explaining
the component parts of an Action Plan, and
finally, from page 20, there are pointers to
reference material and MSC contacts.
Additional guidance is provided throughout
the document about the considerations that
might influence your decisions in relation to
actions you might take, priorities you assign
to different actions and allocating resources
to your fisheries improvement project.
We have created electronic versions of the
Action Plan Template which are available
in Word and Excel at www.msc.org/go/
fisheries-improvement. This will assist when
cross-referencing planned tasks and actions
with MSC performance indicators (PIs).
Any of these may be adapted to suit your
needs e.g. creating the Action Plan tables
in Excel, or the cross-reference spreadsheet
in Word. These tools are not official MSC
scheme documents, nor are their use
intended to be mandatory: just practical.
Throughout this guidance document you
will find snapshots of the various tables
and explanations for their intended use.
Simply by working your way through each
section you should be able to develop a
comprehensive Action Plan that serves
your needs and the needs of your project
partners, participants and stakeholders.
The focus of this guidance is entirely operational.
It has been created to help you design and
implement practical actions with your project
partners and/or stakeholders to enable your
fishery to pass a full assessment against the
MSC Standard in the future.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
3
3. Steps in the action planning process
When developing an Action Plan, there are a
number of steps that should be taken to ensure
that the Action Plan is robust and will also
be implemented successfully. The following
diagram is a summary of the steps that
should be taken in developing an Action Plan.
1. Pre-assessment or
equivalent baseline
review results
2. Determine Action
Plan leads, partners
& stakeholders
8. When actions achieve
improvement goals, enter
full assessment against
the MSC Standard
4. Analyse pre-
assessment results to
determine performance
improvement goals to
meet MSC Standards
5. With partners and/or
stakeholders, decide
actions using this
guide as a reference
and the templates to
record your actions
7. Regular evaluation of
progress – adjust Action
Plan, if necessary
3. Determine action
planning & stakeholder
engagement process
6. Implement Action Plan
Steps in the action planning process
4
4. Background to the MSC certification
Briefly, the assessment process involves
scoring 31 PIs using narrative guides to the
characteristics that will achieve particular
scores (called scoring guideposts, SGs for
short). In order to obtain MSC certification, the
fishery needs to achieve a score of 60 or more
for each PI. If a fishery achieves a score of
less than 60 on any PI, certification will not be
awarded. Additionally, the fishery must have
an aggregate score of 80 or higher for each of
MSC’s three principles in order to be certified.
In some cases and for only five status-
related (i.e. outcome-related) PIs, when
sufficient quantitative data are not available
to score a given PI using the usual set
of SGs, the MSC Risk-Based Framework
might be used. This is a set of assessment
methods that enable certifiers to assess the
risks a fishery poses to the sustainability
(or status) of target, retained and bycatch
species, as well as habitats and ecosystems.
Detailed procedures for the applicability
and use of the Risk-Based Framework are
in the MSC certification requirements.
4.1 How the MSC process works
As an independent, global, non-profit
organisation, the MSC’s mission is to use its
ecolabel and fishery certification program
to contribute to improving the health of the
world’s oceans by rewarding sustainable fishing
practices, influencing the choices people make
when buying seafood, and working with our
partners to transform the seafood market to
a sustainable basis.
Under the MSC program, fisheries are certified
and entitled to display the blue ecolabel if
they meet the MSC Standard: the principles
and criteria for sustainable fishing.
The Standard comprises three core principles:
1. Health of fish stocks
2. Impact on ecosystems
3. Effective fisheries management.
The actions that fisheries take to demonstrate
they meet these three principles vary
considerably and take into account the
unique circumstances of each fishery.
Certification to the MSC Standard is a
multi-step process conducted by independent
certification bodies. The process usually begins
with a pre-assessment to determine whether
a fishery is ready for full assessment against
the Standard and provides guidance about the
issues that may need improvement in order
to meet the MSC performance requirements.
Full assessment is a seven step process,
which will not be described here (refer to the
document Get Certified! for more information).
However, it is important to note that a full
assessment will be based primarily upon the
MSC default assessment tree. This reference
should also be the basis for the development
of your Action Plan, as it provides the detailed
performance requirements against which you
will measure the outcomes of your plan.
Fishery certification is a voluntary assessment
to determine whether a fishery meets the MSC
principles and criteria for sustainable fishing.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
5
4.2 Standardised assessment
tree for scoring fisheries (the
“default assessment tree”)
The following table sets out the components
and default performance indicators contained
in the MSC fisheries assessment methodology
for scoring fisheries against the MSC principles
and criteria for sustainable fishing.
www.msc.org/go/msc-default-assessment-tree
Your pre-assessment report should give you
an indication of the level of preparedness
of your fishery with respect to each of the
31 PIs and therefore those performance
indicators for which improvement actions
need to be developed.
When a fishery scores less than 80 for a PI,
but at least 60, the certifier will set one or
more conditions for continuing certification.
The certifier will specify an appropriate
timescale for addressing each condition and
should specify the outcome or targets the
fishery should work towards. The certifier’s role
is to make clear the desired outcome rather
than prescribe specific actions that should be
taken. The decision is therefore the fishery’s to
make on how to achieve the desired outcomes.
In the context of your pre-assessment or
baseline review, you should have a wealth
of information relevant to the performance
improvements required to meet the
performance required by the MSC Standard.
You will need to analyse these issues and
link any improvements you decide upon directly
to one or more of the 31 performance indicators
set out in the default assessment tree. MSC
scheme documents and useful reference
material, including the Get Certified! Fisheries
booklet, the default assessment tree and
information about the Risk-Based Framework
are listed in Section 8 of this guidance.
The Suriname Atlantic
Seabob Fishery, where
a well-planned Action
Plan is leading to
good progress being
made as the fishery
moves towards MSC
certification.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
@ MSC
Get Certified! Fisheries
6
4. Background to the MSC certification continued
Principle Component Performance indicator
Principle 1
Target fish stock(s)
Outcome 1.1.1 Stock status
1.1.2 Reference points
1.1.3 Stock rebuilding
Harvest strategy
(Management)
1.2.1 Harvest strategy
1.2.2 Harvest control rules and tools
1.2.3 Information and monitoring
1.2.4 Assessment of stock status
Principle 2
Ecosystem
Retained species 2.1.1 Retained species outcome
2.1.2 Retained species management strategy
2.1.3 Retained species information
and monitoring
Bycatch species 2.2.1 Bycatch species outcome
2.2.2 Bycatch species management strategy
2.2.3 Bycatch species information
and monitoring
Endangered,
threatened
and protected
(ETP) species
2.3.1 ETP species outcome
2.3.2 ETP species management strategy
2.3.3 ETP species information and monitoring
Habitats 2.4.1 Habitats outcome
2.4.2 Habitats management strategy
2.4.3 Habitats information and monitoring
Ecosystem 2.5.1 Ecosystem outcome
2.5.2 Ecosystem management
2.5.3 Ecosystem information and monitoring
Principle 3
Management system
Governance
and policy
3.1.1 Legal and/or customary framework
3.1.2 Consultation, roles and responsibilities
3.1.3 Long-term objectives
3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing
Fishery-specific
management system
3.2.1 Fishery-specific objectives
3.2.2 Decision-making processes
3.2.3 Compliance and enforcement
3.2.4 Research plan
3.2.5 Monitoring and management
performance evaluation
The following table sets out the components and default performance indicators contained
in the MSC fisheries assessment methodology for scoring fisheries against the MSC principles
and criteria for sustainable fishing.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
Source:
www.msc.org/go/
msc-default-
assessment-tree
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
7
5. Action Plan Template – a snapshot
Detailed guidance about each of the Action
Plan elements and how to complete the Tables
is given in Sections 6 and 7 of this document.
There are three Tables in the Word template
to help you develop and implement your
Action Plan:
1. Action Plan overview
2. Action Plan details
3. Evaluation against Action Plan milestones
Table 1: Action Plan overview
Fishery name: Start date:
Fishery location: Fishing method:
End date (anticipated):
Project leaders (organisation responsible for Action Plan):
Improvements recommended by:
Overview of the Action Plan
Table 2: Action Plan details
Standard
requirement
Actions Resources
required
Action
lead
Action
partners
Stakeholders Timescale /
milestones
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Table 3: Evaluation against Action Plan milestones
Standard
requirement
Actions Timescale /
milestones
Progress / outcome Revised milestone
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Links to MSC performance indicators
P1. Target stocks P2. Ecosystem components P3. Management system
1.1.1 Stock status
1.1.2 Reference points
1.1.3 Stock rebuilding
1.2.1 Harvest Strategy
1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools
1.2.3 Information & monitoring
1.2.4 Assessment of stock status
2.1.1 Retained species outcome
2.1.2 Retained species management strategy
2.1.3 Retained species information & monitoring
2.2.1 Bycatch species status
2.2.2 Bycatch species management strategy
2.2.3. Bycatch species information & monitoring
2.3.1 ETP species outcome
2.3.2 ETP species management strategy
2.3.3 ETP species information & monitoring
2.4.1 Habitat outcome
2.4.2 Habitat management strategy
2.4.3 Habitat information & monitoring
2.5.1 Ecosystem outcome
2.5.2 Ecosystem management
2.5.3 Ecosystem information & monitoring
3.1.1 Legal or customary framework
3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities
3.1.3 Long-term objectives
3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing
3.2.1 Fishery-specific objectives
3.2.2 Decision-making processes
3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement
3.2.4 Research plan
3.2.5
Monitoring & management performance evaluation
Action / task Action lead and partners Timescale
(Note: H = high priority, M = medium priority, L = low priority according to MSC pre-assessment)
1. Stock assessment
1.1 Develop stock assessment methodology Client organisation; Research agency 6 mths
H M M H
1.2 Conduct stock assessment Research agency 12 mths
H M M H
1.3 Commission peer review of stock assessment Research agency; Management agency 12 mths
H M M H
1.4 Review data collection and sampling protocols Research agency; client organisation 18 mths
L L
2. Habitats and ecosystems
2.1 Review habitat impacts Fishery science consultant
M
2.2 Review of ecosystem literature and produce report Fishery science consultant
M
3. Enforcement (MCS)
3.1. Formalise designated landing sites Client organisation; Enforcement agency
H
3.2. Develop surveillance program at landing sites
(e.g. random & targeted checks)
Enforcement agency
H M M M M H
3.3 Employ and train additional enforcement officers Enforcement agency
M H
3.4 Review existing MCS strategy Enforcement agency; management agency
H
3.5 Compile data on MCS activities
(e.g. number of surveillance patrols, infringements)
Enforcement agency
M M
4. Management and governance
4.1 Review of fisheries legislation, fines & penalties Management agency; management
partners / advisory group
M
4.2 Review of national and international management measure and
their effectiveness
Management agency; management
partners / advisory group
M
4.3 Document existing efforts to demonstrate effective process exists Management agency; management
partners / advisory group
M
4.4 Seek letter of support from stakeholders to encourage adoption
of fisheries management plan
Client organisation; NGOs
L L
4.5 Develop research plan Client organisation; research agency;
management agency; NGOs
M
8
We have also adapted an Excel spreadsheet summary template (available at www.msc.org/go/
fisheries-improvement), will help when cross referencing and linking tasks and actions in an
Action Plan to the MSC PIs, which can be used to assign a priority ranking to each action.
This may be useful if you have individual actions that may help your fishery meet multiple PIs.
A snapshot of this is provided below.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
Notes: assumption is that ‘client organisation’ in this hypothetical case is a fishery group
(e.g. a fisher’s association; industry group; or fishery community association)
5. Action Plan Template – a snapshot continued
Links to MSC performance indicators
P1. Target stocks P2. Ecosystem components P3. Management system
1.1.1 Stock status
1.1.2 Reference points
1.1.3 Stock rebuilding
1.2.1 Harvest Strategy
1.2.2 Harvest control rules & tools
1.2.3 Information & monitoring
1.2.4 Assessment of stock status
2.1.1 Retained species outcome
2.1.2 Retained species management strategy
2.1.3 Retained species information & monitoring
2.2.1 Bycatch species status
2.2.2 Bycatch species management strategy
2.2.3. Bycatch species information & monitoring
2.3.1 ETP species outcome
2.3.2 ETP species management strategy
2.3.3 ETP species information & monitoring
2.4.1 Habitat outcome
2.4.2 Habitat management strategy
2.4.3 Habitat information & monitoring
2.5.1 Ecosystem outcome
2.5.2 Ecosystem management
2.5.3 Ecosystem information & monitoring
3.1.1 Legal or customary framework
3.1.2 Consultation, roles & responsibilities
3.1.3 Long-term objectives
3.1.4 Incentives for sustainable fishing
3.2.1 Fishery-specific objectives
3.2.2 Decision-making processes
3.2.3 Compliance & enforcement
3.2.4 Research plan
3.2.5
Monitoring & management performance evaluation
Action / task Action lead and partners Timescale
(Note: H = high priority, M = medium priority, L = low priority according to MSC pre-assessment)
1. Stock assessment
1.1 Develop stock assessment methodology Client organisation; Research agency 6 mths
H M M H
1.2 Conduct stock assessment Research agency 12 mths
H M M H
1.3 Commission peer review of stock assessment Research agency; Management agency 12 mths
H M M H
1.4 Review data collection and sampling protocols Research agency; client organisation 18 mths
L L
2. Habitats and ecosystems
2.1 Review habitat impacts Fishery science consultant
M
2.2 Review of ecosystem literature and produce report Fishery science consultant
M
3. Enforcement (MCS)
3.1. Formalise designated landing sites Client organisation; Enforcement agency
H
3.2. Develop surveillance program at landing sites
(e.g. random & targeted checks)
Enforcement agency
H M M M M H
3.3 Employ and train additional enforcement officers Enforcement agency
M H
3.4 Review existing MCS strategy Enforcement agency; management agency
H
3.5 Compile data on MCS activities
(e.g. number of surveillance patrols, infringements)
Enforcement agency
M M
4. Management and governance
4.1 Review of fisheries legislation, fines & penalties Management agency; management
partners / advisory group
M
4.2 Review of national and international management measure and
their effectiveness
Management agency; management
partners / advisory group
M
4.3 Document existing efforts to demonstrate effective process exists Management agency; management
partners / advisory group
M
4.4 Seek letter of support from stakeholders to encourage adoption
of fisheries management plan
Client organisation; NGOs
L L
4.5 Develop research plan Client organisation; research agency;
management agency; NGOs
M
9
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
10
6. Action Plan elements
Start date: The date upon which the Action
Plan commences, i.e. the date actions
and tasks begin to be implemented.
End date: The date project leaders
anticipate the actions in the plan
will be successfully completed.
Project leaders: The lead organisation(s)
responsible for implementing the Action
Plan. E.g. the organisation that is co-
ordinating activities and taking responsibility
to ensure that others involved in the
project are meeting their commitments.
Just as is recommended in MSC’s Get Certified!
booklet, getting organised and having a
project manager to lead your organisation’s
implementation of the Action Plan can
make a huge difference to its success.
Improvements recommended by: The name
of the organisation or individual(s) that
conducted the pre-assessment (in the case
of a certification body) or baseline review
(in the case of independent consultants).
6.1 General information
Table 1 of the Action Plan Template (see
snapshot below) is to present high level,
general information to identify the fishery
and give a brief overview about the fishery
improvement project. This will enable
project leaders, participants, stakeholders
and other outside readers to see at a
glance what the Action Plan is about and
who is responsible for its implementation.
The following list explains what to put
in each box:
Fishery name: The name of the fishery to
which the Action Plan applies. This might
include the target species name(s) and/or the
fishing method(s) (For example, the Mauritanian
smooth-mouth sea catfish gillnet fishery).
Fishery location: If not already identified in the
name of the fishery, the geographical location
of the fishery, identifying either the region,
ocean or sea and/or the country or countries
that are within the fishery’s boundaries.
Fishing method: If not already identified
in the name of the fishery, the fishing
method or methods used in the fishery.
There are important elements that go into
producing a robust Action Plan. These need to be
clearly defined using the Action Plan Template.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
Table 1: Action Plan overview
Fishery name: Start date:
Fishery location: Fishing method:
End date (anticipated):
Project leaders (organisation responsible for Action Plan):
Improvements recommended by:
Overview of the Action Plan
11
This Action Plan focuses on activities
to address these issues. In the next six
months, we will work with the Department
of Fisheries Science to develop an adequate
stock assessment methodology. Within 12
months, after the revised methodology is
adopted, a preliminary stock assessment
using the best available data and, taking
into account uncertainties, will be conducted
and peer reviewed.
To more clearly determine risks posed by
the fishery on retained and bycatch species,
a scientific workshop will be convened within
three months of the commencement of this
plan with relevant experts and stakeholders
to discuss all relevant data and conduct
a formal risk assessment using the MSC
Risk-Based Framework. Depending on the
outcomes of this process we may revise the
Action Plan or proceed to full assessment
following successful completion of the
stock assessment.
The following Section (6.3) provides guidance
about developing the specific content of your
Action Plan.
6.2 Overview of the Action Plan
In Table 1 on the previous page, a large
space is provided for a summary of the
key elements of the Action Plan.
If the principal aim of the project is improving
performance to enable the fishery to become
certified against the MSC Standard, then the
key elements should relate should relate to the
PIs in the default assessment tree. Effectively,
this means that the overview should
contain enough information for members
of the project team, stakeholders or other
readers to understand the general activities
and timescales involved in the fishery
improvement efforts to achieve the principal
aim of the project. To be of practical use it
is recommended that the overview be short,
communicating only summary information.
It may be more practical to complete this
section after the full Action Plan has been
developed. Thus ensuring the overview
reflects the actual contents of the plan,
taking account of specific milestones and
responsibilities.
For example: The Mauritanian smooth-mouth
sea catfish fishery commissioned a pre-
assessment from [ABC Certifiers] in November
2009. The results indicated the fishery would
fail to achieve the Standard set for principle
1 (target species) and principle 2, retained
and bycatch species components. The key
improvements required are: 1) providing an
adequate stock assessment for the target
stock(s), and 2) increasing the ability of
assessors to more clearly determine the risks
posed by the fishery to four retained (non-
target) species and several bycatch species.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
12
6. Action Plan elements continued
Thus, the above words, including the
identifying PI number, would be entered into
the Standard requirement column of Table 2
of the Action Plan Template (noting that you
may wish to adjust column widths and layout
to accommodate all the relevant information).
In the next column (see Section 6.4) you will
identify the actions you will implement in
order to achieve the performance level set
by the relevant 80 SG. Sometimes this might
involve several actions aimed at a single PI.
Alternatively, a single action may serve to
meet the requirements of several performance
indicators. As will be explained in Section 6.4.
Standard requirement if using the
Risk-Based Framework
The required improvement might relate to
one of the species-related outcome PIs
1
(see
also Sections 4.1 and 4.2). In data deficient
cases a ‘Productivity Susceptibility Analysis’
(PSA) may have been conducted as part of
the pre-assessment process. Alternatively,
it might be possible that the Risk-Based
Framework will have to be used to score
that element in a full assessment
2
.
In such cases, the Standard requirement in this
column should refer to the relevant attributes
listed in the PSA sections of the Risk-Based
Framework of the fisheries assessment
methodology. There are seven productivity
attributes and four susceptibility attributes.
In the first column, entitled ‘Standard
requirement’, you will specify the words
that represent the Standard the fishery will
be aiming to meet through the actions and
tasks implemented in your Action Plan.
Therefore, to complete this column you should
transcribe the performance required by the
relevant 80 SG in the fisheries assessment
methodology default assessment tree.
Following the example under Section 6.2
of this document, if a key improvement
identified in a pre-assessment report is to
provide “an adequate assessment of the
stock status”, this means that the relevant
PI in the default assessment tree is PI 1.2.4.
The corresponding 80 SG therefore reads:
“ The assessment is appropriate for the
stock and for the harvest control rule,
and is evaluating stock status relative
to reference points.
“ The assessment takes uncertainty
into account.
“ The assessment of stock status is
subject to peer review.”
PI 1.2.4, SG 80
1
PI 1.1.1 target stock status;
PI 2.1.1 retained species
status; PI 2.2.1 bycatch
species status.
2
A pre-assessment from
an accredited certifier
who is trained in the
use of MSC’s Risk-Based
Framework should make
it clear whether this is a
likely outcome in the event
of insufficient data being
available to determine the
status of target, retained
or bycatch species, or
the status of habitats or
ecosystems. If the report is
not clear, we recommend
you ask the certifier or
consultant who prepared
the report on your fishery
to advise you on this point.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
6.3 Standard requirement
Table 2 of the Action Plan Template (see snapshot below) is where you
will describe in detail the specific tasks and activities of your Action Plan.
Table 2: Action Plan details
Standard
requirement
Actions Resources
required
Action
lead
Action
partners
Stakeholders Timescale /
milestones
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
13
Comparing the language used in these narrative
performance requirements with the language
used in the pre-assessment report or baseline
review should enable you to determine the
most appropriate PI and SGs for this part of
your Action Plan. This should also enable you
to identify any contributory factors that might
also be relevant, which in turn might suggest
the kinds of actions you might choose to take.
Given that you are embarking on developing
an Action Plan, this probably means your
fishery does not yet meet the MSC Standard
and that one or more elements do not achieve
the Standard set by the 60 SGs (meaning the
fishery cannot be certified). Therefore, the
primary aim is to ensure these elements pass
the 60 threshold. However, we recommend that
your plans aim to meet the requirements at
the 80 SGs level to ensure that the aggregate
scores under each principle also achieve 80
or higher. Without achieving those aggregate
scores at the principle level, for all three
principles, the fishery cannot be certified.
It is not compulsory to pass the MSC
Standard unconditionally. The balance
between aiming for scores of 60 or 80 on
individual PIs is your choice, representing a
calculated risk about whether the fishery is
likely to achieve the aggregate scores to enable
it to pass overall. You and your project partners
will need to decide what makes sense in your
system. You will also need to be aware that
any PIs that fall between scores of 60 and
79 in a full assessment will have conditions
attached to them and will need an Action
Plan to deal with them in any case. It may
be worth considering that the more actions
undertaken in the fishery improvement stage
prior to full assessment is likely to impact
positively on your fishery’s aggregate score
at the principle level and therefore increase
the fishery’s likelihood of being certified.
The next section provides guidance about
how to develop and implement actions
to address the Standard requirements.
In effect, in cases where performance
improvement is required because the fishery
poses too high a risk to certain attributes
affecting the sustainability of a species, the
goal will be to reduce risks of the fishery to
the particular attribute(s).
For example, a PSA may have been conducted
on some of the bycatch species taken in your
fishery. This could have revealed that one
species scores highly (i.e. the risks are too
high) on the selectivity attribute. The entry
into the ‘Standard requirement’ column could
therefore read:
“ Reduce the risks posed by the selectivity
of [xxx] fishing method to [abc] species.”
Taking action on such a performance
improvement goal should therefore aim to
reduce the risk score, thus resulting in a
lower risk that the fishing method in use in
the fishery poses an unacceptably high risk to
the sustainability of the species in question.
Additional guidance
In practice, the pre-assessment report or
baseline review commissioned on the fishery
should contain information that indicates the
issues that currently prevent the fishery from
meeting the MSC Standard. This information
might be very specific i.e. directly quoting
the MSC PIs and/or SGs from the MSC
default assessment tree. Alternatively, the
information provided might be more general,
making indirect reference to the components
of the Standard and providing only generic
‘clues’ to the performance requirement.
In all cases, it is incumbent upon the fishery
improvement project participants (especially the
leaders) to analyse which MSC PIs are relevant
to gain clarity about the specific Standard
requirements they are aiming to improve
upon. This means probing more deeply into
the pre-assessment / baseline review report(s)
and MSC methodologies to examine the issues
raised and the specific wording of the SGs,
which provide the operational interpretation
of the Standard. Thus, the 60 SGs will tell you
the minimum threshold that must be passed,
whereas the 80 SGs will tell you the threshold
for passing the Standard unconditionally.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
14
6. Action Plan elements continued
Without an adequate stock assessment,
determining the sustainability of the stock
is likely to be problematic, thus likely to
generate a low or failing score against
the Standard. Using this example, we can
begin to see that sometimes some actions
might also serve to meet the Standard
requirements of more than one PI. Should
the above actions be implemented, then the
Standard requirements for PI 1.1.1 may also
be met to a higher level, thus contributing
to a higher aggregate score for principle 1.
Similarly, if we return to the underlined
contributory factors, we can see that
other PI scores may be affected if a
new stock assessment methodology
is developed and implemented:
– PI 1.2.1 harvest strategy – To score 80
or higher for 1.2.4 the stock assessment
methodology needs to be adequate for the
harvest control rule(s) applied in the fishery.
It is conceivable that a new stock assessment
methodology might inform managers and
fishers about the adequacy of the harvest
control rule and thus the performance of
the harvest strategy itself. Again, this might
lead to changes in the scoring for this
particular performance indicator in a full
assessment against the MSC Standard.
Processes to help identify appropriate actions
Experts or appropriately qualified fisheries
consultants might be of help in leading or
contributing advice about which actions to take
or helping to develop the overall plan itself.
Similarly, you may choose to host stakeholder
workshops or consultations to seek not only
their input, but also creative or innovative
ideas that will work in your fishery system.
Completing the Action Plan Template
Give each action a number (like in the
example on the previous page). Fill in the
actions column of Table 2 of the template,
against each Standard requirement list the
individual actions with their corresponding
number. Maintain the same number for
each action throughout the plan.
6.4 Actions to address
Standard requirements
The actions column of Table 2 is where
you will enter the tasks and actions that
you will implement to address the Standard
requirements you listed in the previous
column. Frequently the Standard requirements
(i.e. the 80 scoring guideposts) contain
more than one factor of relevance to the PI.
As demonstrated in the previous example
relating to PI 1.2.4 on the adequacy of the
stock assessment, we can see a number
of factors that contribute to meeting
the 80 SG. Each contributing factor has
been underlined in the extract below:
“ The assessment is appropriate for
the stock and for the harvest control
rule, and is evaluating stock status
relative to reference points.”
“ The assessment takes
uncertainty into account.”
“ The assessment of stock status
is subject to peer review.”
Any one of these factors might be significant
to choosing actions. The pre-assessment
report or baseline review should give
you the information that will enable you
to determine which of the factors might
require action. So, for example, assuming
we know other factors in the hypothetical
Mauritanian smooth-mouth sea catfish fishery
example, actions and tasks might include:
1.1. Develop a new stock assessment
methodology appropriate for
the Mauritanian smooth-mouth
sea catfish fishery stock
1.2. Conduct the stock assessment
1.3. Commission a peer review of the
stock assessment results.
As has been demonstrated, given the number
of contributory factors, more than one action is
linked to this Standard requirement. Equally, it
is also worth noting that those actions (in this
example) are also relevant to another significant
performance indicator under principle 1, i.e. the
one relating to actual stock status (PI 1.1.1). In
our hypothetical fishery it is conceivable that
the absence of an adequate stock assessment
will have had important implications for the
score assigned to the PI on stock status.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
15
For example:
Standard requirement Actions
PI 1.2.4, SG80
– The assessment is appropriate for the
stock and for the harvest control rule,
and is evaluating stock status relative
to reference points.
– The assessment takes uncertainty
into account.
– The assessment of stock status is subject
to peer review.
1.1. Develop a new stock assessment
methodology appropriate for the
Mauritanian smooth-mouth sea
catfish fishery stock.
1.2. Conduct the stock assessment.
1.3. Commission a peer review of
the stock assessment results.
PI 1.1.1, SG80
– It is highly likely that the stock is above the
point where recruitment would be impaired.
– The stock is at or fluctuating around its
target reference point.
1.1. Develop a new stock assessment
methodology appropriate for the
Mauritanian smooth-mouth sea
catfish fishery stock.
1.2. Conduct the stock assessment.
1.3. Commission a peer review of the
stock assessment results.
1.4. Review the likely score for PI 1.1.1 in
the light of the results of the stock
assessment using the new methodology.
PI 1.2.1, SG80
– The harvest strategy is responsive to the
state of the stock and the elements of the
harvest strategy work together towards
achieving management objectives reflected
in the target and limit reference points.
– The harvest strategy may not have been
fully tested but monitoring is in place
and evidence exists that it is achieving
its objectives.
1.2. Conduct the stock assessment.
1.5. Review the harvest strategy in the light
of the results of the stock assessment
using the new methodology.
1.6. Adopt and implement a new harvest
strategy if indicated by 1.5 above.
PI 2.2.1
– Reduce the risks posed by the selectivity of
[xxx] fishing method to [abc] bycatch species.
2.1 Design and test fishing gear aimed
at reducing catches of [abc] species.
2.2 Analyse the effects in relation to bycatch
species selectivity, as well as impacts
on target and retained species catches.
2.2 Commission research into the potential
effectiveness of non-fishing zones
for reducing risks to [abc] species,
including the effects on target and
retained species catches.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
16
6. Action Plan elements continued
Cross-reference actions
The cross-reference spreadsheet template
described in Section 6.10 of this guidance
document enables you to present the actions
in simple list, cross-referencing each one to
multiple PIs and assigning a high, medium
or low priority to each. Thus you will have
practical summary sheet that gives an overview
of a complex Action Plan in a simple format.
6.5 Resources required
It is important to consider how much time
a task or action may take in person-days,
or indeed whether implementing the task
may involve direct costs, such as employing
consultants, external researchers, hosting
workshops or purchasing equipment.
This column of the Action Plan Template
enables you to provide an indication of the
likely resources that may be involved in
completing the action. This section should not
include more general timeframe information
such as how many months it may take to
complete an action. That information can
be inserted into the final column of the
table under timescale / milestones.
6.6 Action lead(s)
A single organisation may have leadership
over many or all aspects of the fishery
improvement project. However, on individual
actions or tasks, the overarching project leader
may not be leading. This responsibility may rest
with another person, group or organisation.
Leadership on a task means that an actual
named person or group ensures that actions
are undertaken as planned within agreed
timescales. The action lead is also responsible
for holding action partners to account. The
person or group (e.g. working group, steering
group or task force) undertaking this crucial
role should be identified in this column.
List the actions in order according to the
priority of the Standard requirement (as
indicated in the above example). Ideally
pre-assessment reports or baseline reviews
will have identified those PI or requirements
that have the greatest bearing on aggregate
scores against each principle under the
Standard. You may decide to assign these
issues high, medium or low priority in your
plan. Cases where an action is needed to
address multiple issues, or actions from
which others cascade, or upon which the
resolution of other issues depend, might
indicate higher priority tasks and actions.
However, such decisions may also be
influenced by your fishery’s circumstances,
the resources you have available to you
and/or the participation of project partners
and/or stakeholders.
SMART actions
When developing actions to meet the 80
SGs, in order for them to be as practical as
possible for your purposes, apply the ‘SMART’
test to ensure that the actions are: Specific,
Measurable, Agreed, Realistic and Time bound.
Specific – be as clear and as succinct as
possible, ensuring each action is particular
to the Standard requirement you are aiming
to achieve.
Measurable – is the action written in a way that
makes it clear you will know when it has been
completed, i.e. can you ‘measure’ its success?
A g r e e d – have crucial or appropriate project
partners and/or stakeholders agreed to
participate or otherwise facilitate the
achievement of the stated action?
Realistic – is the action achievable, given
a range of constraining or enabling factors?
Time bound – is there a realistic timeframe
for the action? (See separate column of the
Action Plan Template.)
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
17
In other cases, stakeholders may need to
be consulted in order to complete an action
or task effectively, or on the basis of a
consensus in order for the ultimate outcome
to successfully meet the Standard. If this is
the case, relevant stakeholders should be
listed here against any actions that specifically
call for stakeholder consultation, participation,
engagement or dialogue, in whatever form
(e.g. workshops, meetings, etc).
Stakeholders can include:
– Government management agencies, including
research, fisheries or environmental
protection agencies.
– Commercial fishers, fishing sector groups,
associations or other organisations.
– Commercial fishing industry groups.
– Recreational or sport fishers and their groups.
– Community groups.
– Environmental or conservation organisations.
– Commercial / post harvest sector.
– Scientists.
In this column of the Action Plan Template,
include those stakeholders who are not
already listed as project partners or co-leads,
particularly if those stakeholders will influence
the success or otherwise of the particular
actions or tasks.
6.7 Action partners
While the action lead may take responsibility
for ensuring actions are undertaken as planned
within agreed timescales, sometimes it may
be the actual task of other actors in the
fishery’s system to implement the specific
actions. These may be active partners in the
fishery improvement project, in which case
any and all action partners should be listed
here against specific actions.
For example, the fishery certification client may
be a local fisher association, but the action
requires scientific expertise to develop an
adequate stock assessment. While the action
lead may be the project manager appointed
by the fisher association, the scientists from
the regional fisheries research laboratory are
the ones that may have to develop the stock
assessment method in collaboration with the
client organisation. The research laboratory,
indeed the individual scientists if known,
should be listed as action partners, if they have
become actively involved in helping to achieve
the aims of the Action Plan by contributing
their time, expertise or other resources.
6.8 Stakeholders
The MSC program depends on the input
and involvement of stakeholders, i.e. those
individuals or organisations that are affected
by, or are interested in, the fishery’s assessment
and certification. The MSC Standard itself
emphasises the importance of stakeholder
engagement in the fishery management process.
Thus, in any fishery improvement project
stakeholders are considered to be important
potential resources and contributors to the
eventual success of an Action Plan.
Indeed, sometimes it may even be the
responsibility of different stakeholders in
the fishery’s system to take action to improve
an aspect of the fishery to meet the Standard,
despite these stakeholders not being active
partners in the fishery improvement project.
In cases such as these, there may be additional
actions that the project lead and/or partners
may have to take to convince, influence,
or otherwise effect in order to ensure the
improvement action is completed.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
18
6. Action Plan elements continued
Actions Timescale and milestones
1.2. Conduct the stock assessment. Overall timescale: Six months to 30 June 2010
Milestone 1: January 2010 – host preliminary
workshop
Milestone 2: February–April 2010 – consult
relevant experts and stakeholders; collate
available data
Milestone 3: June 2010 – conduct assessment
6.10 Using the excel spreadsheet
to cross-reference actions with PIs
If you have actions that meet multiple PIs,
you may want to keep track of them by using
the cross-reference spreadsheet we created
in Excel (see snapshot in Section 5).
The cross-reference spreadsheet template
enables you to present all the agreed
actions in a simple list, cross-referencing
each one to multiple PIs and assigning a high,
medium or low priority to each. Each line also
has space for a summary of action leads and
partners and an indicative timeframe. This
information can easily be transcribed from the
Action Plan Template you have completed.
The Excel spreadsheet is offered as a practical
summary sheet which provides an overview of
the complex Action Plan in a relatively simple
format. Use it only if you find it helpful.
6.9 Timescale and milestones
Against every action, commit to an overall
timescale to complete and achieve the
outcome you have set yourselves. If
appropriate, you may also wish to include
intermediate milestones for component
parts of the action.
For example, it may take six months from
the beginning of the project to develop a new
stock assessment methodology. However,
within this timeframe, a milestone at the end
of the first four months may be that all the
relevant scientists have been consulted, data
and background information pertinent to the
methodology has been collated and the team
(or scientist) is ready to begin developing
the new model. We recommend that these
are listed as individual milestones with
specific dates attached, along with a specific
completion date for the overall action.
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
19
7. Evaluating Action Plan progress
If this additional template is practical and
useful to you, simply transcribe (or cut
and paste) the contents of the Standard
requirement, actions and timescale / milestones
columns contained in Table 2. Then use the
progress / outcome column to report how well
or completely the actions and tasks have been
completed based on agreement from project
participants. If necessary, discuss and revise
the milestone or timescale. If not necessary,
because actions themselves are revised or
indeed complete, indicate such outcomes
in the table.
This should be a relatively straightforward
process, guided by the information you
have created in the ‘Standard requirement’
column (i.e. the outcomes you are seeking
to achieve), the ‘actions’ column (i.e. the
activities and tasks you are implementing
to achieve the outcomes, and the ‘Timescale /
milestones’ column (i.e. the overall timeframe
and intermediate steps to fully completing
the actions).
Table 3 of the Action Plan Template (see
snapshot below) has been provided to help
you systematically evaluate and/or report your
progress against the timescales and milestones
set out in the main body of the Action Plan.
You should regularly monitor and review
progress of your implementation of the
Action Plan.
Table 3: Evaluation against Action Plan milestones
Standard
requirement
Actions Timescale /
milestones
Progress / outcome Revised milestone
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
20
8. Reference material
MSC chain of custody
The MSC chain of custody Standard for seafood
traceability ensures that the MSC label is only
displayed on seafood from a MSC certified
sustainable fishery. If a fishery is certified as
meeting the MSC environmental Standard for
sustainable fishing, use of the MSC ecolabel
on seafood products is permitted only where
there has been independent verification that
the product originated from a certified fishery.
An independent certification against the chain
of custody Standard provides this verification.
www.msc.org/get-certified/supply-chain
Get Certified!
A 32 page, illustrated booklet providing guidance
about the fisheries certification process.
www.msc.org/go/get-certified-fisheries-pdf
Stakeholder’s guide to the Marine
Stewardship Council
An illustrated booklet providing guidance
about how stakeholders can get involved
in the fisheries certification process.
www.msc.org/go/stakeholder-guide-to-msc
MSC principles and criteria for
sustainable fishing
The MSC Standard has three overarching
principles.
www.msc.org/go/msc-environmental-standard-
for-sustainable-fishing
MSC certification requirements
The MSC certification requirements provides
a detailed operational interpretation of the
MSC’s principles and criteria for sustainable
fishing to be used when assessing fisheries
for MSC certification. The requirements set
out the steps that accredited certifiers must
take when they assess fisheries against the
MSC Standard. It specifies:
– How to define a fishery (unit of certification)
– What can be involved in a pre-assessment
– The process for inviting comment at key
stages of the assessment
– The contents of a draft and final
certification reports
– How to conduct a surveillance audit.
www.msc.org/go/msc-scheme-requirements
MSC Risk-Based Framework
The MSC Risk-Based Framework (RBF) is
a set of assessment methods contained in
the certification requirements. It is used in
certain instances while carrying out an MSC
fishery assessment when sufficient data are
not available to score a given PI using the
Standard set of SGs.
www.msc.org/go/rbf
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
9. MSC contact
For further information please contact:
The Developing World Team
at the MSC head office, London
Marine Stewardship Council
Marine House
1 Snow Hill
London
EC1A 2DH
United Kingdom
www.msc.org
Marine Stewardship Council
Fishery Improvement Action Plans Guidance 2013
21
Participation in MSC’s certification program changes over time; all
details within this document are accurate at the time of publication.
Designed by Forster Communications.
www.msc.org
@MSCecolabel
/MSCecolabel
/sustainableseafood
© Marine Stewardship Council 2013
MSC Global Headquarters
and Regional Office – Europe,
Middle East and Africa
Marine House
1 Snow Hill
London
EC1A 2DH
Tel: + 44 (0) 20 7246 8900
Fax + 44 (0) 20 7246 8901
Registered Charity number: 1066806
Registered Company number: 3322023
MSC Regional Office – Americas
2110 N. Pacific Street
Suite 102
Seattle, WA 98103
USA
Tel: + 1 206 691 0188
Fax: +1 206 691 0190
Non-profit status: 501 (C) (3)
Employer Identification number: 91-2018427
MSC Regional Office – Asia
Tanglin International Centre
352 Tanglin Road
Strathmore Block #02-09
Singapore 247671
Tel: +65 64723280
Fax: + 65 64723780
Non-profit status: application pending
Registered Company number: 201215612M
MSC Local Office – Australia
and New Zealand
10/46-48 Urunga Parade
Miranda NSW 2228
Australia
Tel: + 61 (0)2 9524 8400
ABN: 69 517 984 605
MSC Local Office – Baltic Sea Region
Skeppsbron 30
111 30
Stockholm
Sweden
Tel: +46 (0)8 503 872 40
MSC Local Office – France
La Ruche
84 Quai de Jemmapes
75010 Paris
France
Tel: +33 (0)1 83 64 68 16
MSC Local Office – Germany,
Switzerland, Austria
Schwedter Straße 9a
10119 Berlin
Germany
Tel: +49 (0)30 609 8552 0
MSC Local Office – Iceland
Fjar
ðargata 11
220 Hafnarfjör
ður
Iceland
Tel: +354 5656022
MSC Project Manager – Poland
Anna Dębicka
Rakowiecka Street 34 m 51
02-532 Warsaw
Poland
Mobile: +48 502 44 77 34
MSC Local Office – Japan
7th floor, Kabuto-cho MOC building,
15-12, Nihonbashi Kabutocho
Chuo-ku, Tokyo
103-0026
Japan
Tel: +81 (0)3 5623 2845
MSC Local Office – Benelux
Koninginnegracht 8
2514 AA Den Haag
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 (0)70 360 5979
MSC Local Office – Scotland
69 Buchanan Street
Glasgow G1 3HL, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 131 243 2605
MSC Local Office –
Southern Africa
Unit F178,
Millennium Business Park
Century City
Cape Town
South Africa
Tel: +27 (0)21 551 0620
MSC Local Office –
Spain and Portugal
C/ Paseo de la Habana, 26
Piso 7, Puerta 4
28036 Madrid
Tel: +34 674 07 10 54
