Extending Fisheries Statistics for Ecosystem-Based Management

TG-4.10 Section 4: Compiling and Producing Data Applied Draft

Circular ID	TG-4.10
Version	6.0
Badge	Applied
Status	Draft
Last Updated	May 2026

1Framework Position

2TG-4.10 sits within Section 4 (Data Methods) and addresses how conventional fisheries statistical systems — typically organised around stock assessment and landings reporting — may be extended to populate the physical and monetary provisioning-service entries that ecosystem accounting requires. The circular covers four parallel workflows (wild capture, aquaculture cross-reference, gleaning, and wood/NTFP provisioning). EBM indicators derivable from these accounts are introduced in §3.1.

1. Outcome

1This Circular provides guidance on extending conventional fisheries statistics to support ecosystem-based management (EBM) — the coordination of human uses of an ecosystem so that the combined effects do not compromise its function, structure, and capacity to sustain services over time. For ocean accounting purposes, this Circular is specifically concerned with the provisioning-service accounts defined in the SEEA Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA) framework¹ and with the EBM indicators that are derivable from those accounts (such as catch composition indices, resource-rent-based effort proxies, and stock-extent linkages). Broader fisheries-stock-assessment EBM frameworks (e.g., fishing mortality relative to Fmsy, spawning stock biomass relative to SSBmsy) are not in scope here but are addressed in TG-1.5 OA and Fisheries Management.

2Conventional fisheries statistical systems are built around FAO FishStat capture-production reporting, national logbook and landings registers, and stock-assessment models. These systems are well established for tracking yield and effort, but they do not disaggregate catch to providing ecosystems, value the catch as an ecosystem service flow, or record parallel provisioning flows such as gleaning and aquaculture. By following the candidate workflows in this Circular, statistical compilers may extend their existing systems to produce ecosystem-attributed physical supply tables and monetary supply tables based on resource rent, supporting EBM decision use cases including allocation of access rights across competing provisioning flows and ecosystem-aware coastal investment.

2. Requirements

1This Circular requires familiarity with:

• 2TG-0.1 General Introduction to Ocean Accounts — for the conceptual framework
• 3TG-2.4 Environmental (including Ecosystem) Goods and Services — for ecosystem service definitions and the indicator context within which provisioning-service accounts are interpreted
• 4TG-4.3 Administrative Data Sources — for the use of agency landings, licensing, and logbook registers
• 5TG-4.5 Integrating Research Data into Official Statistics — for the integration of fishery-independent research data into accounting systems

6Related Circulars:

• 7TG-3.9 Aquaculture Accounts — for the parallel cultivated-resource workflow. TG-4.10 provisioning-service supply tables feed into the broader accounts in TG-3.9
• 8TG-1.5 OA and Fisheries Management — for the fisheries-management decision context and stock-assessment EBM frameworks
• 9TG-4.1 Remote Sensing and Geospatial Data — for the upstream remote sensing methods that underpin habitat-extent data used in the §3.4 data matrix
• 10TG-6.7 Fisheries Accounting: Integrating Stock Assessment — for the thematic methods that link the provisioning-service supply tables compiled here to full fisheries asset accounts

3. Guidance Material

3.1 Conceptual Framework

1Conventional fisheries statistics report what was landed — catch by species, gear, and reporting area — and, in more developed systems, what biomass remains through stock assessment models. EBM and ecosystem accounting require two additional dimensions: where the catch came from in ecological terms (which providing ecosystem) and what economic value the providing ecosystem contributed (the resource rent attributable to the natural resource itself, distinct from labour and capital). The SEEA EA framework (Chapter 6) sets out the provisioning-service account structure that organises catch location and economic contribution¹.

2Three related management frameworks use overlapping terminology that this Circular distinguishes. The Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (EAF), as defined by FAO, extends single-species management to consider interactions between target species, bycatch, and habitat². Ecosystem-Based Fisheries Management (EBFM), as practised under frameworks such as the US Magnuson-Stevens Act, further integrates multi-species dynamics and socio-economic considerations into harvest strategies. Ecosystem-Based Management (EBM) is the broadest term, covering the full range of human uses of an ecosystem. This Circular adopts the EBM framing but focuses on the provisioning-service account extensions that support all three approaches, whilst the underlying accounting infrastructure remains the same regardless of which management framework a country employs.

3The EBM indicators that are derivable from the extended accounts described in this Circular include (1) catch composition indices (the share of total provisioning supply attributable to each species group or providing ecosystem), (2) resource-rent trends as a proxy for fishing pressure relative to ecosystem capacity, and (3) cross-account consistency checks between provisioning-service use rates and ecosystem extent or condition accounts. FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries principles on economic sustainability³ provide the normative context for interpreting these indicators.

4The four workflows introduced in the Outcome section are detailed in Sections 3.3—3.6 respectively.

3.2 Extending Existing Statistical Systems

1The starting point for most national compilers is an established FAO FishStat-aligned capture-production reporting system, supplemented by national landings registers, logbooks, port-sampling programmes, and (in better-resourced systems) stock-assessment models⁴. The base system may be extended in three directions: ecological attribution (§3.3), economic attribution (§3.3.2), and coverage extension (§§3.6—3.7). Figure 4.10.1 demonstrates how the three extensions compile into a single SEEA EA provisioning supply-use table, closed by an EBM consistency loop against extent and condition accounts.

Figure 4.10.1 Fisheries statistics gain ecological and economic attribution plus coverage extension to compile a SEEA EA provisioning supply-use table. Dashed EBM loop checks use rates against extent and condition accounts. Source: TG-4.10, §3.1 (conceptual framework -- ecological and economic attribution), §3.2 (extending existing statistical systems), §3.3.1 (species x providing-ecosystem physical supply table), §3.3.2 (resource-rent valuation), §3.3.3 (tiered implementation), §3.6 (gleaning), §3.7 (wood / NTFP, incl. §3.7d cross-account consistency), §3.8 (reporting and integration); TG-4.8 / TG-4.9 (extent and condition accounts); SEEA EA (2021) Chapter 6 (provisioning-service supply-use tables).

3.3 Wild-Capture Catch Accounting

1The candidate workflow for wild-capture catch as a provisioning ecosystem service flow has three parts:

3.3.1 Physical measurement

1a) Compile total annual landed catch (kg/yr) from the national fisheries authority landings register, FAO FishStat returns, and (where coverage is thin) structured fisher surveys.

2b) Disaggregate by (i) species or species group; (ii) gear type — typical categories include pole-and-line, handline, gillnet, longline, trap, and trawl; and (iii) providing ecosystem, using species-habitat associations (standard sources include FishBase species-habitat associations⁵ and the FAO CWP Handbook of Fishery Statistical Standards habitat classifications⁶).

3c) Where landings surveys cover only a fraction of total fishing trips, practitioners may calibrate survey coverage against provincial or regional statistics to derive an extrapolation factor.

4d) Map the spatial distribution of fishing effort using vessel monitoring data, logbooks, or structured fisher reporting.

5The output is a physical supply table with rows for species groups and columns for providing ecosystems, totalled in kg/yr.

3.3.2 Monetary valuation — resource rent

1The candidate primary monetary method is resource rent, computed as:

2Resource rent = Gross revenue - Total fishing costs

3where gross revenue is the sum across species groups of catch x first-sale price, and total fishing costs comprise labour, capital consumption, fuel, equipment, and maintenance. A positive residual represents the ecosystem’s economic contribution. A negative residual indicates that fishing costs exceed revenue under prevailing conditions, in which case the entry may be reported as a zero ecosystem service value with the negative figure disclosed in metadata. The resource rent method aligns with the SEEA EA monetary valuation hierarchy for provisioning services⁷.

4Where detailed cost decomposition is feasible, practitioners may consider:

• 5Operational expenses (consumables, fuel, maintenance, repairs)
• 6Labour costs, with the option of regional agricultural wages as a proxy where direct fisher wage data are unavailable
• 7Capital costs comprising vessel and gear depreciation plus a return on fixed capital computed at the national weighted-average cost of capital

3.3.3 Tiered implementation

Tier	Catch data	Ecosystem allocation	Cost data
Tier 1	National aggregate statistics (FAO FishStat)	Single global habitat-dependence fraction	Value transferred from comparable contexts
Tier 2	Landings by species and gear from agency records, validated against fisher surveys	Species-habitat literature with local species composition	Domestically sourced fisher cost surveys
Tier 3	Fishery-independent surveys plus logbook data	Acoustic telemetry, otolith microchemistry, or diel habitat use models	Vessel-level production accounts with site-specific capital stock valuation

1Practitioners may begin at Tier 1 and progress as data systems mature. Value-transfer accuracy is limited. Tier 1 entries may be flagged in metadata as indicative.

3.4 Data Requirements and Sources

1The following matrix sets out the minimum data items required for each workflow, with typical source agencies, recommended update frequencies, and alternatives for data-poor contexts.

Variable	Unit	Source agency (typical)	Update frequency	Data-poor alternative
Wild-capture fisheries
Catch by species / species group	kg/yr	National fisheries department; FAO FishStatJ	Annual	FAO-modelled estimates (FishStat global capture production); Sea Around Us reconstructions
Catch by gear type	kg/yr by gear	National logbook system; port-sampling programme	Annual	Gear-composition ratios from FAO CWP national statistics
Fishing effort (trips, vessel-days, hook-hours)	Vessel-days/yr, fishing trips/yr, or hook-hours/yr	National logbook system; VMS/AIS records	Annual	Regional effort proxies from RAM Legacy Stock Assessment Database
Catch per unit effort (CPUE) index	kg/vessel-day	Logbook system; scientific observer programme	Annual	Stock-status narrative from FAO SOFIA regional assessment
Stock biomass index	Index or t	Fishery-independent trawl survey; acoustic survey	Periodic (1—5 years)	RAM Legacy SSCOM/CMSY estimates; FAO stock-status categories
Discards and bycatch	kg/yr	Scientific observer programme; video monitoring	Annual	Regional discard fraction from FAO (2019) third global discard assessment
First-sale price by species group	USD/kg or local currency/kg	Fish landing-site price monitors; national statistics office	Annual	Regional price series from FAO GLOBEFISH
Fisher operating costs (fuel, labour, gear, maintenance)	USD/vessel/yr or % of gross revenue	Fisher cost survey; vessel production accounts	Periodic (3—5 years)	Value-transfer from comparable fleet cost studies in same region
Aquaculture
Production by species and system type (ponds, cages, longlines)	t/yr	National aquaculture authority; national statistics office	Annual	FAO FishStatJ aquaculture-production database
Farm-gate price by species and system	USD/kg	Market price monitoring; national aquaculture authority	Annual	FAO GLOBEFISH aquaculture price series
EBM-relevant indicators
Prey availability index	Index	Ecosystem monitoring survey; scientific observer programme	Periodic (1—5 years)	Regional forage-fish abundance indices from large marine ecosystem assessments
Predator abundance index (large pelagics, marine mammals)	Index or individuals/km²	Biodiversity monitoring programme; OBIS records	Periodic (1—5 years)	IUCN Red List population trend data
Habitat extent (coral reef, seagrass, mangrove, pelagic zone)	km²	TG-4.8 / TG-4.9; remote sensing	Periodic (3—5 years)	Global habitat databases (Global Mangrove Watch, Allen Coral Atlas)
Gleaning harvest by species group	kg/yr	Household survey; community monitoring	Periodic (2—5 years)	Spatial proxy model using household distance-to-shore and resource density estimates
Wood and NTFP extraction from coastal forests	m³/yr (wood); kg/yr (NTFP)	Household survey; community forestry records	Periodic (2—5 years)	Spatial proxy model calibrated against regional biomass extraction studies

2Notes on data-poor contexts. Where national survey data are unavailable, practitioners should use the alternatives listed above as Tier 1 starting points, disclosing the source and any assumptions in metadata. The RAM Legacy Stock Assessment Database⁸ provides modelled reference points for a large number of assessed stocks. The Sea Around Us reconstruction methodology⁹ provides catch time series for countries with limited official reporting. FAO-modelled estimates are routinely used in official reporting contexts and are acceptable for Tier 1 compilation provided provenance is documented.

3.5 Aquaculture Production Accounting (Cross-Reference)

1Aquaculture in the same accounting area is accounted as a cultivated provisioning flow following the produced-asset methodology in TG-3.9 Aquaculture Accounts, Sections 3.2—3.3. The fisheries statistical extension required here is primarily reconciliation: practitioners may consider cross-checking aquaculture output recorded in production accounts against FAO FishStatJ national aquaculture-production figures¹⁰, and recording cultivated and wild-capture provisioning flows in adjacent columns of the same supply table to enable trade-off analysis.

3.6 Gleaning (Intertidal Hand-Collection)

1Gleaning is the hand-collection of molluscs, crustaceans, echinoderms, and seaweeds from intertidal mudflats, reef flats, and mangrove edges. It is a provisioning flow frequently missed by both aquaculture and conventional fisheries statistics, despite its importance for coastal household food security and women’s livelihoods. Practitioners may consider the following candidate workflow:

2a) Physical measurement. Household survey instruments may be used to estimate per-collector annual harvest (kg/yr) by target species group, aggregated across the eligible population within accessible distance of the providing ecosystem. Spatial proxy models — collection modelled as a function of distance to the resource edge, accessible standing stock, and household demand parameters — may be used to extrapolate where survey coverage is incomplete.

3b) Monetary valuation. Where gleaned products enter local markets, first-sale prices may be used to compute gross revenue and a resource rent analogous to wild-capture fisheries. Where collection is predominantly for subsistence with no observed market transaction, practitioners may consider a substitute-cost approach, valuing the catch against the market price of the nearest commercial equivalent, and recording the result as a non-market valuation using a cost-based approach, consistent with the SEEA EA monetary valuation hierarchy (Chapter 6, Section 6.3), in metadata.

4c) Use table allocation. Gleaning output typically flows to subsistence households rather than the formal fisheries sector. The use table should record this allocation distinctly to preserve the distributional information needed for livelihood and food-security analysis.

3.7 Wood and NTFP Provisioning from Coastal Forests

1Where the accounting area includes coastal forests — particularly mangroves — the forested area may continue to provide wood and NTFP provisioning services (fuel wood, building poles, charcoal feedstock, honey, dye, traditional medicine) alongside any fisheries or aquaculture present. Whilst not a fisheries flow, wood and NTFP provisioning typically shares the coastal accounting area with fisheries and may be compiled in the same supply table to support EBM trade-off analysis between mangrove conversion (for aquaculture ponds, for example) and retained provisioning value.

2a) Physical measurement — spatial proxy. Where direct household survey data are unavailable, practitioners may consider a spatial proxy model estimating per-household extraction as a function of distance from household to mangrove edge, accessible deadwood stock, and a baseline household demand parameter drawn from peer-reviewed literature. Aggregation across eligible households within an accessible distance band yields total annual collection. Practitioners may consider flagging the implied use rate against a sustainable yield benchmark to check consistency with mangrove extent accounts.

3b) Monetary valuation — substitute-cost. Where collected wood does not enter formal markets, the candidate primary method is substitute-cost: total annual collection converted to energy equivalent and valued at the market price of the displaced commercial fuel (typically LPG or kerosene). Air-dried biomass is converted to MJ using species-appropriate calorific values. Bark and leaves are typically excluded.

4c) Monetary valuation — resource rent (stumpage value). Where mangrove wood is marketed (sold as timber, poles, or firewood), practitioners may instead use the stumpage-value resource rent method: market price at point of sale less harvesting and transport costs. This yields a directly observed market-based exchange value consistent with the SEEA EA monetary valuation hierarchy¹¹.

5d) Cross-account consistency. The use rate implied by the physical account must be cross-checked against extent and condition accounts for the providing mangrove ecosystem. A use rate exceeding sustainable yield implies declining mangrove biomass and should be reflected in the extent or condition account and metadata.

3.8 Reporting and Integration

1The extended fisheries statistical system may be integrated into a single provisioning-service supply and use table for the coastal accounting area, with rows for species groups and columns for providing ecosystems, and parallel sheets for the four workflows above. Monetary supply tables are compiled where cost and price data permit.

2The physical and monetary supply tables produced by the workflows in Sections 3.3—3.7 are direct inputs to the cultivated-resource accounts in TG-3.9 Aquaculture Accounts and the fisheries asset accounts described in TG-6.7 Fisheries Accounting: Integrating Stock Assessment. The provisioning-service flows also contribute to ecosystem service indicator analysis described in TG-2.4 Environmental (including Ecosystem) Goods and Services. Compilers should document in metadata:

• 3Data sources, vintage, and coverage for each component
• 4Allocation parameters and their sources (species-habitat literature, distance elasticity values, use rates)
• 5Tier of implementation for each sub-procedure
• 6Components flagged as data-deficient or indicative
• 7Cross-account consistency checks performed

3.9 Data Quality and Limitations

Issue	Impact	See also
Limited cost-survey data or low response rates in artisanal contexts	Unreliable resource rent calculation	§3.3.2
Subsistence and gleaning catch poorly captured by formal statistics	Underestimates total provisioning supply	§3.6 (Gleaning)
Species-habitat allocations from regional literature may not reflect local conditions	Mis-attribution to providing ecosystems	§3.3.1
Spatial proxy parameters for wood and NTFP provisioning are literature-derived	Model outputs sensitive to elasticity and use-rate assumptions	§3.7(a)
Temporal mismatch between catch records and accounting period	Misaligned physical account	§3.3.1
Data-poor alternative sources (Sea Around Us, RAM Legacy) carry model uncertainty	Tier 1 entries may have wide confidence intervals	§3.4

4. Acknowledgements

1This Circular has been approved for public circulation and comment by the GOAP Technical Experts Group in accordance with the Circular Publication Procedure.

2Authors: [To be confirmed]

3Reviewers: [To be confirmed]

5. References

Footnotes

1. 1

   UN et al. (2021). System of Environmental-Economic Accounting — Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA EA), Chapter 6 (Ecosystem Service Accounts), Section 6.1 on provisioning services. ↩ ↩²

2. 2

   FAO (2003). The ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No. 4, Supplement 2. FAO, Rome. The EAF extends single-species management to account for species interactions, bycatch, habitat impacts, and socio-economic dimensions within fisheries management. ↩

3. 3

   FAO (1995). Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries, Article 7 (Fisheries Management) on the economic, social and environmental sustainability of fisheries. ↩

4. 4

   FAO. FishStat — global capture production database and FishStatJ — software for fishery and aquaculture statistical time series. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Division, Rome. ↩

5. 5

   Froese, R. and Pauly, D. (eds). FishBase. World Wide Web electronic publication. <www.fishbase.org>. FishBase provides species-habitat association data including depth range, habitat type, and ecosystem affiliation for over 35,000 fish species. ↩

6. 6

   FAO. CWP Handbook of Fishery Statistical Standards. Section H: Fishing Areas. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Division, Rome. Provides standardised habitat and fishing-area classifications used in national and international fisheries statistics. ↩

7. 7

   SEEA EA, Section 6.3 on monetary valuation of ecosystem services, including the resource rent method for provisioning services. ↩

8. 8

   Ricard, D., Minto, C., Jensen, O.P. and Baum, J.K. (2012). Examining the knowledge base and status of commercially exploited marine species with the RAM Legacy Stock Assessment Database. Fish and Fisheries, 13(4), 380—398. ↩

9. 9

   Pauly, D. and Zeller, D. (2016). Catch reconstructions reveal that global marine fisheries catches are higher than reported and declining. Nature Communications, 7, 10244. The Sea Around Us project (seaaroundus.org) provides reconstructed catch time series by country and ecosystem. ↩

10. 10

    FAO. FishStatJ — aquaculture production database. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Division, Rome. ↩

11. 11

    SEEA EA, Section 6.3 on stumpage-value resource rent as a directly observed exchange-price method for wood provisioning. ↩