Workshop on Global Assessment of the Implications of Climate Change on the Spatial Distribution of Fish and Fisheries (WKSICCME-Spatial)

Chaired by Anne Hollowed (USA, PICES), Suam Kim (Korea, PICES) and Myron Peck, (Germany, ICES),

Sponsored by the ICES/PICES Strategic Initiative (Section) on
 Climate Change Effects on Marine Ecosystems (SICCME)
Co-Chairs: Manuel Barange (U.K.), Anne Hollowed (U.S.A.),
Suam Kim (Korea), and Brian MacKenzie (Denmark)

St. Petersburg, Russia
Courtyard Marriott Hotel

Agenda and Order of the Day
22-24 May 2013

Terms of Reference:

1. Develop and test analytical methods for detecting changes in distribution
2. Assess the skill of different modelling approaches
3. Develop methods for quantifying uncertainty in projected changes
4. Produce design specifications for a database of marine observations
5. Evaluate the influential factors governing vulnerability to shifting distributions
6. Discuss strategies to ccommunicate outcomes to inform decisions regarding implications of climate change on management of living marine resources
7. Participants will contribute to papers addressing each TOR that will be submitted to a peer reviewed journal.

Please NOTE the content of the following Presentations cannot be used without authors' permissions.
To download and save these files on your local machine, right-click on the link and choose "Save Target As..."

Day 1
Session 1: Analytical methods for detecting changes in spatial distribution

Welcome, introductions
Overview of goals and objectives of WKSICCME-Spatial
[pdf, 0.2 Mb]

William Cheung (Canada, Invited)
Projecting climate change effects on the distribution of global fish stocks

Franz Mueter (USA, Invited)
Quantifying spatial variability in species distributions: The roles of density, temperature and advection
[pdf, 1 Mb]

Breakout group assignments
Session leaders: Franz Mueter (USA), William Cheung (Canada), Brian MacKenzie (DK)
Questions:

• What types of statistical methods and summary measures (e.g., spatial gams, simple means, bio-climatic windows, centroids, other) have been employed to quantify changes in distribution? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these methods?
• What dynamic simulation methods have been applied to forecast changes in distribution? What are the strengths and weaknesses of these methods?
• What mechanisms can explain observed shifts in distribution? How can these mechanisms be implemented in predictive models?
• Can observed shifts be attributed to climate variability and / or climate change? Is it possible to disentangle the effect of fishing from the effects of climate variability and change?
• What additional data, process studies, and theoretical developments would help to resolve the mechanisms and their functional form?
• If you had the funds and international agreements what type of experiment would your group develop to assess projection skill, resolve mechanisms, and enhance our ability to evaluate attribution to climate variability and change?

Plenary discussion action plan, key data gaps and key recommendations

Session 2: Skill Assessment and model inter-comparison

Miranda Jones (UK, Invited)
Applying a multi-model approach to predicting species' distributions

Shin-ichi Ito (Japan, Invited)
How to model fish migration and distribution under future climate?
[pdf, 5.4 Mb]

Breakout group assignments
Session leaders: Miranda Jones (UK), Mark Payne (DK), Enrique Curchitser (USA)
Questions:

• Have skill assessments (statistical comparison of observed and predicted spatial distributions) been performed?  Identify regions and describe the methodology?
• Climate impacts differ by life stage and the impacts are compounded over time.  Which life stages that should be used to assess predictive skill with respect to shifts in spatial distributions of the resource and fisheries?
• Should we consider developing "best practices" guidelines for skill assessments?
• Identify regions where more than one projection modeling approach has been conducted.  How different were the projections and why?
• What are the pros and cons of adopting a multi model projection approach to dynamic population models?
• What initiatives should ICES and PICES advance to facilitate progress on skill assessment and model inter-comparison?

Day 2
Plenary Discussion action plan, key data gaps, and key recommendations (10 minutes each)

Poster Introduction

Session 3: Quantifying uncertainty
Tatiana Pavlova (Russia, Invited)
Climate simulations and projections over Russia and the adjacent seas: a CMIP5 update
[pdf, 1.6 Mb]

Gregoire Certain (Norway, Invited)
Trying to measure what we don’t know: Examples in ecology and management
[pdf, 1.6 Mb]

Breakout group assignments
Session leaders: David Reid (Ireland), Emanuele Di Lorenzo (USA), TBD (USA)
Questions:

• What are the key sources of uncertainty in GCMs or ESMs?
• Can your group agree on a single best practice for use of GCM or ESM outputs in projecting distributional shifts of marine species? If not, why not?
• What are the key sources of uncertainty in dynamic population models? How are these errors addressed in studies of shifts in spatial distribution? 
• How should key uncertainties be incorporated into projections?
• What can ICES and PICES do to improve collaboration between marine ecosystem modelers and earth system modelers?

Plenary discussion action plan, key data gaps and key recommendations

Session 4: Design specification for database of observations of distribution of living marine resources (including filling data gaps)

William Sydeman (USA, Invited Speaker)
Database considerations for global meta-analyses of climatic impacts on distribution: the NCEAS-MarClim experience
[pdf, 0.6 Mb]

Breakout group assignments
Session leaders: Jon Hare (USA), Toru Suzuki (Japan), William Sydeman (USA)
Questions:

• What are the relevant datasets available for use in documenting climate induced shifts in spatial distribution of fish, shellfish and their fisheries? Is this information available on-line either through a public or password protected site? What are the best data delivery systems?
• To what extent are the relevant datasets compatible in time and space scales to the physical observations and model data sets that define climate change?
• In transboundary stocks have methods been established to correct for differences in sampling methods?  What options are available to make these corrections?
• Are protocols needed to allow international data sharing of fisheries or survey?
• Do methods exist to allow integration and synthesis of different types of data (e.g., trawl, longline and acoustic)
• What data display options should be considered? 
• What are the advantages or disadvantages of using existing National data centers as delivery nodes for a distributed data access portal?

Plenary Discussion action plan and key recommendations

Session 5: Vulnerability assessment

Cassandra de Young (Italy, Invited Speaker)
Vulnerability assessments in fisheries and aquaculture socio-ecological systems: some experiences in their development and use in adaptation planning
[pdf, 0.9 Mb]

Gretta Pecl (Australia, Invited Speaker)
Approaches for assessing species vulnerability to climate change in an ocean warming hotspot
[pdf, 2.5 Mb]

Breakout group assignments
Session leaders: Jacquelynne King (Canada), Yury Zuenko (Russia), Tarub Bahri (FAO)
Questions:

• What are the core elements of fish vulnerability to climate change?
• What types of risk assessments have been developed in your region?
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of qualitative and quantitative risk assessment? 
• What research is needed to improve vulnerability assessment?
• Should ICES and PICES strive to publish regional vulnerability assessments on a periodic basis?

Day 3
Breakout groups

Plenary Discussion action plan and key recommendations

Session 6: Communicating outcomes to inform decisions regarding management of living marine resources under changing climate

John Pinnegar (UK, Invited Speaker)
Answering the “so what” question: communicating with policy makers, members of the public and the media
[pdf, 1.5 Mb]

Motomitsu Takahashi (WG 28, Japan, Invited Speaker)
Approaches for identifying ecosystem responses to human activities and natural stressors

Breakout group assignments
Session leaders: John Pinnegar (UK), Phillip Mundy (USA), Motomitsu Takahashi (Japan)
Questions:

• Who are the decision makers and by whom are they directed or influenced?
• How can ICES/PICES capture the different management perspectives?
• What are the management objectives (e.g. building sustainable fisheries, preserving diversity) and how can climate change projections inform strategies to achieve these objectives?
• What products can ICES and PICES deliver to decision makers and their constituencies?  If products are delivered, how will the quality and effectiveness of the products be assessed?
• What form of information is needed for decision making? (e.g., decision tables, risk analyses, decision theoretic approach, verbal models, interdisciplinary explanations)
• What range of management actions could be considered? How could information products be designed to help managers to make informed choices in the future?
• What are the implications of climate change impacts on fish and fishery distributions for making management decisions on resources that cross international boundaries?

Plenary discussion: action plan, key data gaps and key recommendations

Options for Global Partnerships and proposal writing

Closing
[pdf, 0.2 Mb]