Canada has committed to integrated ocean management and ecosystem-based management through acts and strategies. Initial integrated ocean management involved broad planning processes but lacked focus on key issues and authorities. New decision support tools are being developed, including pathways of effects models to identify stressors and risks to ecological values from human activities. A risk-based approach will help prioritize management by assessing impacts, establishing conservation limits, and identifying governance needs.

1. Marine Spatial Planning Decision
Support Tools Development in
Canada
Lessons learned on the path
towards meaningful ecosystem-
based management

2. Canada’s Approach to Oceans Management
• Oceans Act (1996) and Canada’s Oceans Strategy (2005) commitments
to:
– Integrated Ocean Management (IOM) plans
– National network of Marine Protected Areas
– Marine Environmental Quality guidelines and standards
• Key premise: human activities are dependant on the health and viability
of marine ecosystems
• Integrated Oceans Management:
– Seeks to maintain the integrity of marine ecosystems & minimize
user conflicts by proactively identifying key ecological & human use
values, collaboratively establishing objectives & developing and
implementing plans to ensure the optimal use of ocean spaces.
– An ecosystem-based approach to management
2
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

3. Integrated Oceans Management Planning Process
3
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

4. Initial Achievements / Products
Planning Areas Identified
Oceans Governance Bodies
Bio-physical Overviews
Human Use Analyses and Activity Maps
Key Marine Ecosystem Features Identified
Strategic Management Plans completed
Marine Protected Areas established
Marine Protected Area Network Planning
4

5. Evaluation
Х Most products were too general to be  Information products & governance
useful processes promoted stakeholder
Х Lengthy and resource intensive engagement
Х Planning process with broad  Increased scientific support & guidance
expectations  Identification of significant ecosystem
Х Lack of focus on key issues and components & functions (e.g. EBSAs)
responsible authorities  Advanced learning on how to proceed
Х Difficult to demonstrate results (i.e. Focus on what is ecologically &
socio-economically important)
5
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

6. Focus on Problem Formulation
• What are the planning priorities?
• What economic activities are occurring where?
• What is at risk?
– What are the ecological impacts?
– What are the socio-economic impacts?
– What are the trade-offs?
• Who is responsible for taking action?
• What management measures exist / what are
the gaps?
• What specific governance is required?
6
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

7. Adoption of an integrated Risk-based Approach:
• Identifying & characterizing marine use activities
– Assessments to identify ecological stressors & potential
conflicts between uses
• Assessing individual & cumulative impacts of
activities
– Development of ‘Pathways-of-Effects’ models for
marine/coastal ecosystems
• Identifying science-based conservation limits
– To ensure structural viability & functioning of marine
ecosystems
• Establishing operational objectives for planning
areas
– Development of desirable state targets for ecosystems
within context of Integrated Oceans Management plans
7
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

8. New IOM/EBM Tools
• We need another “information layer” on potential impacts to
establish the links between ecosystem and human activities to
address effects and to select management priorities
• News tools under development:
– Pathways of Effects (PoEs)
• What are the impacts of human activities on ecosystem components? (Activities 
Ecosystem)
• What are the impacts of affected ecosystems goods and services on other human
uses? (Ecosystem  Activities)
– Integrated Risk Analysis Framework
• What is the likelihood that ecological effects may occur or are occurring as a result of
one or more identified pressures?
• Way to prioritize issues based on actual risk versus perceived risk
• A science-based framework from which to engage marine users and regulators
8
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

9. Step 1: Identify Ecological Values
9

10. Step 2: Geospatial Analysis of Key Pressures
10

11. Step 3: Pathways of Effects to Identify
Interactions and Potential Cumulative Effects
Marine Transport
Fisheries
Collisions (Lobster Pots)
Oil & gas
Entanglement
Pinnipeds and
Cetaceans
Noise
Fisheries
(Crab Pots)
e.g. Human activities and Fisheries
pressures on pinnipeds and (Gillnets)
cetaceans
11
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

12. E.g.: Marine Shipping Pathways of Effects
Marine
Shipping
Transportaton
Sector Activities and Sub-activities
In Port Operations
Loading / Decommission
(Under way)
Unloading
Accidents
Manouvering
near shore
Discharge
Discharge Oils / Discharge Waste Ballast Water Discharge Oils / Discharge Waste Atmospheric
Contaminants Streams Exchange Contaminants Streams Pollutants
Pressures
Oils / Increased Turbulent Oils / Increased
Introduced Alien Reduced Air
Contaminants Nutrients In Vertical Contaminants Nutrients In Waves Collisions Noise
Species Quality
In Water Water Mixing In Water Water
PM
Change in Change in VOC
Water Quality Water Quality Injury / Mortality Sox
Change in NOx
(Nutrients) (Contaminants)
Water Quality Shallow
Change in Change in
(Contaminants)
Macrophytes Phytoplankton
2
Reduced Reduced
Impacts
Change in Breeding
Benthic Habitat Feeding Success
Success
1 Change in Larval
Zooplankton Entrainment
Change in
Benthic Habitat Increased
Structure Change In Stress
Riparian
Change in Change in Fish Vegetation
Benthic Survival, Growth,
Invertebrates Reproduction
Components
Ecosystem
Benthic Community Fish Populations / Marine
Human Health
Fish Community Mammal Populations
End-points
Integrative
Fish Water Biodiversity Climate
Harvest Quality CO2
Socio-Cultural
12
Values
Fisheries &
Tourism &
Fish Aquaculture
Recreation
Processing

13. Step 4: Risk Assessment
Conduct risk assessment
with existing data/information
Determine which pressures and
associated “paths” affect the
EBSA feature: e.g. pinnipeds
and cetaceans
Based on the results of the (fictive)
assessment, collisions, followed by
noise from vessel traffic and seismic
surveys, are the pressures that can
the greatest affect on pinnipeds and
cetaceans in and near West Coast of
Newfoundland EBSA.
13
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

14. Step 5: Establish targets, thresholds and
indicators for component(s) at risk
Pathways of Effects
Pressures on Northwest Atlantic
Targets Thresholds Pressure Indicators
Blue Whale population
Direct Indirect
To reduce Size and Number of
Pressure Collision collisions to less speed of boats in
than one a year boats the area
Avoidance Injury
Mortality
Effects
To reach a level of State Indicators
Ecosystem 1,000 mature
Northwest Atlantic
component Blue Whale population individuals or 70% of Population number
maximum historic
population size
14
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

15. Step 6: Evaluate Existing Policy /
Management Measures
• Identify accountable regulatory and/or non-
regulatory management authorities
• Complete gap analysis to determine where
management measures may not be present,
enforced or effective in mitigating affects
• Evaluate effectiveness of existing management
measures
• Identify need for new or adjustment to existing
management measures
– Select and implement new management
measures (e.g. codes of practice, regulations,
standards, incentives, protection measures,
etc) as required.
15
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

16. Next Steps: New Integrative Tools
• Ongoing Pathways of Effects / Risk Assessment
• Additional Geospatial development
– Targeted improvements in marine use information
• Valuation of marine ecosystem goods and services
– To support cost/benefit analysis of management actions
• Evaluation of existing/Development of new management
tools (e.g. codes of practices, standards, guidelines, etc)
• Develop monitoring and reporting frameworks linked to
ecosystem priorities
16
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca

17. Thank you!
Darren Williams
Manager, Ocean Policy and Planning Unit
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
Darren.Williams@dfo-mpo.gc.ca
17
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca