I.��������� INTRODUCTION

1.�������� This document is the summary by the Chairman of the GFCM Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) of the main discussions and conclusions of the meetings of the Working Groups, Sub-Committees and other related activities conducted in follow-up to the guidelines set by 26^th Session of the Commission. The intersessional activities reported do not include the many other support activities that were carried out by the regional projects, ADRIAMED and COPEMED, and that are described in the reports of the SAC subsidiary bodies.

II.������� GENERAL OBSERVATIONS

2.�������� The work of the SAC and of its Sub-Committees and their Working Groups during the intersessional period has been as intense as ever, as shown by the number of meetings held and documents produced. The meetings continued to be poorly attended by experts from many GFCM countries, with scientific activities concentrated on the Mediterranean countries of the European Union and the countries covered by the ADRIAMED and COPEMED regional projects. The Sub-Committees all voiced this concern and pointed to the resulting limited impact of their scientific recommendations on resource management and more generally on the management actions of the Commission.

3.�������� Equally of concern, while the Sub-Committees and Working Groups advance regularly in their work, the Commission has no mechanism in place to facilitate scientific activity and dissemination of findings to the scientific community as a whole and to the resource managers. There has also been extremely limited progress in organizing a minimum databank programme and the efforts of the Sub-Committee on Statistics and Information have been undermined by the absence of a common data collection system and an integrated databank. In addition, there is a need to reinforce the process of publication and dissemination of scientific documents and studies produced, a �need already recommended at the SAC�s first session.

4.�������� The Sub-Committee on Stock Assessment is probably the most in demand, having to deal with much of the work commissioned by the SAC. Its level of expert participation is also highest, although most of the experts come from a limited number of countries. This Sub-Committee has equipped itself with an effective working method and is producing ever more detailed recommendations, but there is nevertheless a noted rarity of assessment of shared stocks, no doubt because of insufficient data and the absence of related GFCM decisions.

5.�������� Also noted during the intersessional period was the lack of alacrity on the part of member countries in sending information on national Operational Units (OUs), which is preventing the SAC from building a consensus on OU composition. There has however been a healthy collection of economic and social information on the OUs in the western Mediterranean (Alboran Sea and Gulf of Lions), the Adriatic and the Gulf of Gab�s. The Sub-Committee on Economic and Social Sciences produced a manual on survey sampling, an activity that needs to be extended throughout the Commission's area of competence. This information and that from the Sub-Committee on Statistics and Information are essential if the SAC is to give the Commission a consolidated response for effective implementation of management methods.

6.�������� The Sub-Committee on Marine Environment and Ecosystems has worked hard in preparing the forms on environmental parameters that affect priority species, as requested by the GFCM. The related data should complete the economic and social information and the stock assessment findings. This would help the Commission in its decision-making, were it not for the limited participation of national experts in data collection and in the design of standardized forms. The proposal to set up an ad hoc working group should facilitate the necessary work and ease the level of disruption.

7.�������� While the participation of national experts in the work of the SAC is statutorily under the authority of each Member State, participation in the work of the Sub-Committees and Working Groups has proved to be essentially voluntary and not necessarily consistent from one year to another. Some Member States are poorly represented or not represented at all, while others dominate. This situation could be linked to the number of researchers available in each country, but the issue should nevertheless be discussed by SAC in an effort to put forward proposals that will enable the Commission to bring about a broader participation of all Members. Proposals should not only concern the annual sessions but should also cover effective strategies to enable scientists to work year-round on SAC activities.

III.������ ACTIVITIES OF THE SAC DURING THE INTERSESSIONAL PERIOD

8.�������� The 26^th Session of the Commission[1] revised, sometimes extensively[2], and adopted the Programme of Work proposed by the Fourth Session of the SAC[3]. The SAC had nine months within which to implement this programme which included the following meetings:

 

 

9.�������� The Commission also adopted the new title "GFCM Geographical Sub-Areas[4]" to replace "Management Units".

10.������� The Coordinators of the four Sub-Committees and the Working Groups on stock assessment collaborated with the SAC Secretariat and Chairman in drawing up the agendas of working group meetings, in line with the thematic areas identified by the Commission and with an emphasis on priority species[5], especially shared priority species, and GFCM geographical sub-areas.

11.������� The following meetings were organized during this intersessional period:

For the Sub-Committees

 

For the SAC����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

 

12.������� The reports of the meetings of Sub-Committee were discussed during the respective Sub-Committee meetings held in parallel in Barcelona, Spain. The Sub-Committee Coordinators will present the outputs of these meetings under the corresponding agenda item and on the basis of document SAC/2002/4. The conclusions and recommendations of the Sub-Committees are therefore not dealt with here.

13.������� On the initiative of the SAC Chairman, a coordination meeting of the Sub-Committees was held in Barcelona following the Sub-Committee meetings. It was recognized that such a meeting was essential if the SAC was to function properly. It was therefore recommended that the principle of holding such a meeting be formally adopted by the Committee and Commission, with a brief annual meeting of the SAC subsequent to the meeting of the Sub-Committees[6].

14.������� The Chairman of the SAC also attended the following meetings during the intersessional period:

�         26^th Session of the GFCM where he presented the conclusions and recommendations of the 4^th Session of the SAC;

�         Coordination meeting of the Sub-Committees;

�         Coordination meetings of the Steering Committee of the COPEMED[7].

15.������� As regards agenda item 4 of this Session concerning stock assessment methods, the Chairman requested COPEMED collaboration in preparing a document to facilitate SAC discussions. The preliminary draft was presented during the meeting of the Sub-Committee on Stock Assessment, but its conclusions failed to earn consensus. It was therefore decided that two additional documents[8] expressing differing viewpoints would be made available to the delegates at the Session.

16.������� As regards the meeting approved by the Commission on the ecosystem-based management approach[9], the Chairman of the SAC organized a small focus group and contacted experts of the region, including the RAC/SPA and FAO�s Fisheries Department. Three meetings were held to identify issues and related experts and to record the preliminary comments of these experts and of FAO's Fisheries Department, in the light of the results of the Reykjavik Conference[10] on this same subject. The main conclusions of these preliminary actions follow.

17.������� Before organizing a first SAC meeting on this subject, a "corpus of scientific information" needs to be built before models and instruments for implementing the approach can be suggested. The main management concept promoted by the GFCM is the control of fishing effort. This is not yet fully operative, particularly for shared fish stocks, so the use of any other method (such as ecosystem-based management) needs to be approached with caution, taking into consideration any existing practical experiences in this field and limited progress to date in the management of shared fish stocks in the Mediterranean.

18.������� The SAC preliminary focus group therefore suggested:

�         that, as a first step, the GFCM should discuss the Reykjavik Declaration in order to determine the feasibility of its application to the Mediterranean, paying particular attention to the Declaration�s express call for cooperation between Fisheries Commissions and regional bodies entrusted with conserving the marine environment (i.e. the institutions of the Barcelona Convention, in the case of the Mediterranean);

�         that, in the meantime, SAC representatives should work with experts from FAO's Fisheries Department in elaborating technical guidelines on fisheries regulation measures and ecosystem management, and participate in the Expert Consultation on Ecosystem-based Fisheries Management, to be held from 16 to 20 December 2002 in Reykjavik (Iceland) under the aegis of FAO, in order to advance the formulation of technical guidelines;

�         that, through the SAC and notably its Sub-Committee on Marine Environment and Ecosystems, the GFCM should carefully monitor all activities pursued by FAO in this area.

19.������� The focus group also suggested that, once the international scientific community (acting in the framework of FAO) had formulated technical guidelines and identified practical improvements for the integration of fisheries management into an ecosystem approach, the Commission could envisage testing the practical implementation of the guidelines in the Mediterranean.

IV.������ CONCLUSIONS

20.������� The Chairman of the SAC pays tribute to the work of the Coordinators of the Sub-Committees and Working Groups and of the experts, and commends the results gained, while thanking the institutions that have generously hosted meetings during the intersessional period. He also welcomes FAO�s� nomination of a new Secretary to the Commission, Mr Alain Bonzon, to whom he wishes every success and reiterates his support, while calling for his utmost dedication in facilitating the work of the SAC and its Sub-Committees.

21.������� The Committee is invited to review and discuss this report on the intersessional activities, together with the conclusions and recommendations of the Sub-Committees provided in document SAC/2002/4. The Committee is also invited to put forward recommendations for the attention of the Commission and to provide guidelines and suggestions for the future programme of work of the SAC.�