Dear Natheer,

In general "strategy" identifies the goal that you want to achieve while "management plan" indicates the path you follow to accomplish this goal. In other words "strategy" is what you want to do and "management plan" is how you will do it. But I guess that in fisheries context “management plan” is much used compared to “strategy” and it encompasses the two different aspects described above. The FAO in the technical guidelines on Fisheries Management describe a fisheries management plan as "an arrangement between a fisheries management authority and stakeholders which identifies the partners in the fishery and their respective roles, details the agreed objectives for the fishery and specifies the management rules and regulations which apply to it and provides other details about the fishery which are relevant to the task of the management authority".

Hope that helps

One is implementation of a plan based on assessments (FMP) with whatever (i.e., "best available") data are available and the other (FS) is a strategic systems approach to develop the science necessary to implement a integrated process of data collection-assimilation, model building and risk assessment that ensures sustainability of the resource(s).

Easy, both terms are fisheries specific (using a specific gear to in a certain area and time in order to catch a certain species composition, the latter can be single or multi-species). The fisheries strategy is describing the performance (impact) of the fishery, while the fisheries management plan is the desparate try to constrain the strategy towards sustainability as agreed by political frameworks.

In Alaska, an important difference (one that I can imagine is relevant elsewhere as well) is that the fisheries strategy is statutory, that is, written in law. In Alaska, this is management for optimum sustained yield for the maximum benefit of Alaskans. Management plans, however, are documents that are overseen by a political body, and include interpretations of the strategy, guidelines for how managers should respond to information regarding abundance through fishing openings and closures, and as such, include decisions regarding allocation of catches across groups.

First of all: ”fisheries management plan” has more letters than ”fisheries strategy”

Hello, Natheer:

Sometimes it is quite hard to explain those terms this way, my recommendation is to get any good textbook on fisheries management; my favorite is INLAND FISHERIES MANAGEMENT IN NORTH AMERICA by Christopher C. Kohler and Wayne A. Hubert (editors). The second chapter explains in deep the whole process of fisheries management. Good luck.

I agree with Antonio Di Franco

In my mind, a fisheries management plan is comprised of multiple fisheries strategies. The same way a conservation plan has multiple elements: risk assessment, ecology, viability, genetic structure, etc.

Antonio Di Franco provided a good answer to the question. Usually, "fishing strategy" refers to the main goals and objectives of a specific fishery management governance, such as the Common Fisheries Policy in the EU or the Magnuson-Stevens Act in the U.S. Then, a "Fishery Management Plan" for a specific stock stems from the original objectives of the "fishing strategy" in the specific fishery governance system. So, to restate Antonio Di Franco's words: "fishing strategy" identifies the goal, while "fishery management plan" indicates the path you follow to accomplish this goal for a specific stock. For example, a fishing strategy may be to avoid overfishing, and in order to achieve this objective the adoption of annual quotas for the commercial fishery targeting a specific stock could be part of a fishery management plan to rebuild the stock.

The policy sets the guiding principles for taking decisions, the strategy describes what you want to do or where to want to get to, and the plan describes how you will get there.

In general, Di Franco and Csirke gave the most valid explanations.In addition to that, the Fisheries Policy is to be set (e.g., by negotiations) between goverment (administration) and various kinds of stakeholders, in order to define the main aims that fishery should reach in prospect. Fisheries Startegy then promotes the long-term measures and actions that are to be accomplished to fulfill the aims set by FIsheries Policy and gives the background to the fisheries legislative (i.e., Fisheries Act). Fisheries Management Plan is the Action Plan that contains the particular stock's assessment and projects its sustainable exploitation, sticking to the legal means issued by Fisheries Act. It is dedicated to the middle-, or short-time period and follows the strategy.

The policy addresses the issues or challenges and provides the basis for the legislative framework, the strategy states the overarching goal and the FMPs, the actions to achieve the goal for particular fisheries.

Thank you all for your valuable comments.

Still it is confusing to understand the difference between these different terms. I would like to know which comes first, which give the foundation or the background to the other. From Dr Simonovic I understood that the fisheries policy comes first and it defines the main goals of the fishery, next it comes the fisheries strategy and finally the fisheries act has to be formulated according to the fisheries strategy. But how different the fisheries policy from the fisheries strategy? Is it that the fisheries policy set the main goals of the fishery and the fisheries strategy set specific goals to each fishery? This means that the fisheries act is not more than a legislation to be followed to make any subsequent plans and to be the reference in case of conflicts between different objectives or between conflicting interests of stakeholders. It also means that the plan which is going to be implemented in reality is the FMP and in case there is any modifications in future it has to be made to the FMP without the need to change the fisheries policy which is the main reference and the fisheries strategy can be modified if major changes has been made to the FMP and these changes does not have a reference in the fisheries strategy.

Fisheries management is a broad term and the fisheries strategies are included in that. It can be categorized as biological, ecological, economical , social, and legal and many more in the fisheries sector since it is a complex system which consists of biota, habitat and human component . Fishery strategies are formulated by the stake holders with a time frame in order to develop or establish and to make changes.

Fisheries management from an authority point of view is the concrete advice, substantiated by concrete proofs after having taken manifold observations & experiments conducted by Fishery Biologists. It is a piece of Legislation for do’s & don’t’s & along with certain powers vested with a layer of authority in case of appeal & redressal. In short, the Fishery Biologists carry out exhaustive field studies for each of the commercial Fauna,& then give their views to authorities, so as to sustain the fish stocks. The fishery biologist/s do advice on all aspects of a fishery. This is then enforced by authorities.

Fisheries management & Legislation go hand in hand.

Fishery strategy means how to evolve plan/s so as to get the maximum benefit from natural resources, taking into consideration that no one section of a society gets an undue advantage over other/s & at the same time timing the action/s for the overall good of all the stake holders.

Fishery Policy is broad sets of workable ideas for the future taking into consideration the current scenario & future inputs so as to enhance harvests, sustenance, conservation & biodiversity usually propounded by a country/province/ state.

Dear Natheer, I see that you understood well following what I wrote about Fisheries Policy, Startegy, Legislation and Management Plan. Changes in the Management Plan(s) during their implementsation do not necessarily mean that whole Strategy which was followed on their accomplishment was wrongly set. However, that implicates the need for the change of strategy, and initiates the limited correction, or radical revision of the adopted strategy, as wel as the questioning of the sdopted policy and even maybe the new negotiations for the determination of the completely new, or slightly modified policy. The radical change in strategy that would lead to the redefining of the policy is (or should be) rare, if the valid policy was agreed by all major stakeholders and the strategy was defined according to it by experts in Fisheries Sciences (Fish Biologists, experts on Economics in Fishery, etc.). Changes in strategy usually have in consequence changes in particular sections of the Fisheries Act (i.e., the legislative) that should regulate better the issues in concern. How that will work out in reality depends on the legal system established in particular countries and dependence of policy and strategy on current political situation in them.

It all depends on contecxt and you need to provide the context in order to get a useful answer. For instance in new Zealand context there are legal definitions of Fisheries Management Plan in the Fisheries act 1983 (now repealed) and of Fisheries Plans in the Fisheries Act 1996 - but what is eant is quite different in each case although the words seem similar. A plan may contain enfoirceable rules and may be very simila rto a marien saptial plan, or it may be somethign prepapred as a means to coordinate betwene different users hiow they will use a fish stock. A fisheries strategy has not been defined in our legislation so it is entirely in the mind of the person who uses the word and the particualr fashion of the time. Eg the Seafood NZ may release a strtagey that might tbe a typpe of broad directional blue porint, but has no legal weight. Context is critical.

Fishery policy planners including subject experts chalk out future plans about the overall development of the fisheries sector, taking into consideration all the natural resources at hand.For e.g a state may have say natural resources in the form of availability of natural ponds,lakes & reservoirs,along with a coast line.They will then assess the needs of varieties of seeds needed to aquaculture in these water bodies,what type of hatcheries are needed to produce these seeds,the type of natural & artificial feeds needed,whether they can be manufactured within the state or to be imported,whether a cold chain is needed to market the harvested catch.Whether the expertise is available in the required amount or to be imported. For e.g.which type of resources are available for mariculture & which are the prospective marine fish catch grounds.Which coastal area needs to have a fishery harbour,what has to be its capacity. Which type of fishery vessels & gear are needed to harvest marine catch. How much will be the local consumption,how much can be marketed into hinterland areas, & how much can be exported. Fishery management encompases ardent & detailed scientific work of fishery biologists in such a way so that they have to specifically spell out how much of which size & from where & time can a particular species of fish can be caught by fishermen of that state. This they have to spell out for each of the fish species,so that specific rules & regulations can then be made by Legislators to be enforced in the field.Other persons like aquaculturists,fishery technologists etc. are NOT involved in this process.The word of the Fishery Biologist is final as far as the catch from natural resources is concerned. Fishery strategy is a plan/s to see how the goals of the state are achieved as regards all works at the work stations in as short time & entailing least expenditure as possible.For e.g.if FAD's can harvest the same amount of catch instead of say by using trawlers,then the strategy would be to use the former than the latter. 2) say a need for setting up of a shrimp hatchery has arise, & the state already has a Molluscan hatchery in the area.Fishery strategy is to get the technical help from the molluscan hatchery experts to set up the shrimp hatchery,with adequate training of the available experts in the new set up.Totally new experts from the shrimp hatchery field need not be imported. 3) When the harvest from marine resources is declining,fishery strategy is to see that more importance is given the the aquaculture sector so as to ease the marine sector. I suppose all the 3 terms are by now clear.

Again it comes down to context. WQhat Chandravedan has beautifully laid out may be the case in one country (not sure which) would certainly not be the case in others. Over the years I have reached the conclusion that what is described as a policy a strategy or a plan, and whether a plan is part of management or managemtn is soemthign directed by a plan is entirely in the mind of the person who uses the words. What is important is that when someone uses such words one asks them to specify the context in which they are using them and even to expolain in detial what htey mean - ( a similar issue arrises in relation to objectiuves, goals targets and indicators)

You have answered your own question. At the federal level in the U.S., fishery policy is established by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation Act (federal law). It is implemented in part through fishery management plans (FMPs), which can be for single or multiple species. FMPs are detailed, science-based documents. For one example, see http://www.gsmfc.org/publications/GSMFC%20Number%20099.pdf

Strategy is relatively long-term and an overall objective, while FMP is usually short-term and the way you go about achieving the strategy...