HISTORY AND EVOLUTION OF THE ADVISORY COUNCILS

Joint AC meeting on the future functioning of the ACs13 April 2018

• Development of the Advisory Councils

Before Now Next

GOVERNANCEWho decides whatHow decisions are

made

PATH DEPENDENCY

• What is the underlying question that comes to your mind when you see this topic on the agenda?

Question by Stefan Baudy licensed under CC BY 2.0

1971

ACF

1977 1983EEZs

CFP

1992

CFP Reform

1994

PECH Committee in the EP

1997

Informal Regional Workshops

CommissionAction Plan for closer dialoguewith the fishing industryACFA (+NGOs)

Council Regulation closer dialogue with the fishing sector and groups affected by the common fisheries policy

1999 2000

Before Now Next

Adap

ted

from

Burn

s and

Stö

hr(2

011)

RACs

20022001

CFP Reform

Before Now Next

Green Book

2004

Common Framework (R)ACsCouncil Decision 2004/585/EC

NSAC NWWAC

2005 2006

LDACSWWAC

Assessment Advisory Councils(ACFA + RACs)

Aim of EuropeanGeneral interest2007/409/EC

BSAC

2007 2008

MEDAC

From DG FISH to DG MARE

MSFD

2008

PELAC

Burn

s and

Stö

hr(2

011)

Functions: • To provide advice to the

Commission• to channel information

between local stakeholders and policymakers

• to react to proposed policy and to create advice proactively

• To provide fora for improving mutual understanding

• to work deliberatively, and consensually : advice must reflect compromise.

• To be inclusive, transparent and accountable, supporting also other EU policies

Challenges• Launching and managing

expectations• Lack of common understanding:

definition of “the problem” and the “solution”. Highly time-consuming work to get a shared view.

• Consensus: radical change from previous CFP contexts.

• Cleavages: national fisheries sectors, industry –NGOs, etc.

• Lack of trust and dominance of self-evident trues

• Ambiguity of the processes and learning-by-doing.

11 ACs (R)60/40 (Parliament 50/50)

20132009

CFP Reform

Before Now Next

MoU EU- ICES

2015

Commission delegated Act onACs functioning. Small-scale fisheries

BlSAC

20162014

MACAAC

ScheveningenGroup of MS (2004)BALTFISH

EU- Increased financialcontribution 20%

From MS shall provide (art. 7 2004/585/EC Council) to MS may provide (art. 7 2015/242 Commission Delegated act) the appropriate support to the Regional Advisory Councils

Landing obligationMMSMP

Process: rationale and timelines

Discontinuation of the ACFA

RegionalizationOMR (not set up yet)

Ramirez et al (forthcoming)

ACs assessmentWho When How

Griffin 2004-2006 50 interviews (NSAC)

European Commission 2008 7 Secretariats and Member States

Ounanian and Hegland 2009 (2012) 138 individual participants

Hatchard and Gray 2002-2008 (2014) 103 interviews (NSAC)

Selke and Dreyer 2010 15 interviews (BSAC)

Pascal Baelde 2011 30 interviews. Audit functioning SWWAC

Linke and Jentoft 2008-2015 27 interviews (BSAC)

Eliasen et al. 2014 7 key informantsinterviews. 16 on-line survey

ACs Learning curve

2004 2007 2009 2013 2018

Peak of expectative

Disillusionment

Opportunity

Frustration

Heavier workloadProcess legitimacy

Risk: prolonged pattern of no perceived influence

What is at stake?

Crossroads by Tawheed Manzoor licensed under CC BY 2.0

How to ensure the ACs’ robustness

• ACs internal functioning• CFP governance system

ACs functioning

• Tension between external effectiveness and internal democracy

• Representativeness: allocating “stakeholderness” and constituency issues.

• Rules of the game: practical procedures for participation and communication. How members are allowed to provide input, how power relations are structured and how negotiation and communication between involved parties evolves during and between meetings.

The NGOs -industry cleavage• ACs should provide balanced arbitration to

determine what is rational and acceptable(value-ladden).

• robustly justify their assertions in the context of publicly held values (Jentoft and Mikalsena, 2001).

• Evidences: comercial interests ≠ unsustainablepolicies

Proposals

• Administrative and logistical burdens: resources and flexibility. Multi-annual budget?

• Free-riders: Commitment. Positive/negative incentives?

• Capacity building: participation and team building• Quality advice: Annual de-briefing with ACs to

discuss the follow-up of their advice? • Reputation: Communication trainees?• Scoping: marine and maritime affairs. Umbrella

organizations?

Advisory system

Able to feed their knowledge into the system beforethe science has been incorporated into management proposals (Rice, 2005; Linke et al. 2011)

Ballesteros et al. (2017)

Regionalisation

Eliasen et al. (2015: 228)

Current regionalisation

• Gradual process (EC)• De facto enables

hierarchical decision making vs. pluralistic participatory processes.

• Hampering the ACs position in the governance system.

• At odds with the supra and sub-regional scopes

Proposals

• Current design– ACs: active observers

in the MS RGs. MS are not decision-makers at that governance tier.

– Setting processes to ensure transparency and accountability

– ACs as channel for all stakeholders (RSC, civil society, etc.)

• Polycentric governance

Polycentric governanceCouncil and Parliament

1. Delegated power (s)Commission 3. Adopted delegated

regulation (s)

MS ACs

Supraregional

Regional

Subregional

2. Request forrecommendations (s)

Advice

Brexit

Brexit by Mick Baker licensed under CC BY 2.0

An opportunity to use the European added value of the ACs:

– Now: to monitor and respond to the progress of negotiations, facilitating also scientist communication and input.

– During the transition period: UK government would not be part of the decision-making process. The ACs concerned may readjust their structure to allow for consultations and joint discussions at stakeholder level

• In the new institutional arrangement: dual nature as Advisory Council within the EU and integrated as Regional Stakeholder Organization(s) (EU-UK-Norway¿?).

• Test the robustness of the stakeholder cooperation in the area.

What about your underlying question for the history of the ACs?

Thank you for your attentionmballesteros@cetmar.org