ANSWER 1

Written response:

Effective quota management depends on understanding the governance structures that shape decision-making and adaptation. I think we can broadly break these into three tiers:

1. High-Level Intragovernmental Governance

This tier includes Acts, Regulations, and Policies. These instruments are foundational but tend to be slow to evolve, often lagging behind the pace of climate-driven changes in ecosystems and species composition. However, their broad scope means they rarely constrain operational flexibility.
Where possible, we should identify opportunities to modernize these frameworks to better reflect current environmental and operational realities. For example, provisions requiring the recovery of depleted species could be revised to account for environmentally driven declines, rather than assuming overfishing as the sole cause.

2. Low-Level Intragovernmental Governance

This tier includes Management Plans (where quota is defined and administered), Harvest Strategies (which translate quota into TACs), and Permit Conditions (which constrain access to TACs). These instruments are more agile and can be updated more readily, though consultation requirements still apply.
Historically, these tools have lacked built-in adaptive mechanisms. Moving forward, adaptability must be embedded as a core feature, enabling timely responses to changing fishery conditions – whether climate-related or otherwise. In short, we must move beyond “set and forget” governance.

Importantly, we’re seeing the increasing use of climate adaptation strategies that complement and enhance existing harvest strategies. These approaches – such as AFMA’s Climate Risk Framework – offer structured ways to integrate climate impacts into decision-making without requiring formal review or amendment of the harvest strategy itself. These frameworks can:

• Modify or add decision rules to account for climate-driven risks.
• Introduce risk-based triggers for management action.
• Provide guidance on interpreting environmental signals alongside stock assessments.

This layered approach allows for more responsive and nuanced management, especially in dynamic fisheries where environmental conditions are shifting faster than traditional governance mechanisms can accommodate.

Species-specific contributions to fishery profiles will continue to evolve, particularly in mixed-species fisheries. While market forces play a role, environmental changes in ecosystem function are increasingly influential. This has major implications for quota management. Quota allocation is deeply rooted in history and tied to asset value, making change complex. However, we can distinguish between:

• Reallocation: Adjusting quota rights in response to long-term, environmentally driven shifts in species composition.
• TAC Adjustments: Modifying the utility of existing quota based on sustainability and species roles.

Harvest strategies, permit conditions, and climate adaptation frameworks offer the best pathways for adaptation, provided they are designed to evolve.

3. Intergovernmental Governance

This tier includes, amongst other things, Offshore Constitutional Settlement (OCS) Agreements and associated Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs). Many of these were drafted in the 1990s and are notoriously difficult to update, despite significant changes in ecological and operational realities since their inception.
Most states share stocks with the Commonwealth and with each other, yet shared harvest strategies and formal catch-sharing agreements remain rare. This is a critical gap. Moving forward, there should be a strong focus on:

• Developing shared harvest strategies across jurisdictions.
• Establishing formal catch-sharing agreements that reflect current and projected ecosystem dynamics.
• Embedding review mechanisms within these agreements to ensure they remain responsive to climate-driven changes.

Allocations based solely on historical catch are increasingly misaligned with the realities of a changing ocean. In a world where history is a poor predictor of the future, we need to rethink how quota is shared and managed across jurisdictions.

That’s my view of the world. It’s easier said than done, but I hope offers some insight.