Caution! A TAC-Setters Guide to the Precautionary Approach

The document argues that EU decision-makers frequently misuse the 'precautionary approach' to justify higher fishing quotas, contradicting the legal requirement to be more cautious when scientific data is limited. It distinguishes between the CFP's legal precautionary approach, ICES's scientific translation of that approach for data-limited stocks, and 'precautionary' (PA) biological reference points, which are warning signs of stock collapse rather than targets for sustainable fishing. The author asserts that choosing PA reference points over Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) advice to increase catches is a violation of the CFP and risks stock collapse.

• Under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and international law, the precautionary approach mandates that a lack of scientific data cannot be used as a reason to delay or avoid taking conservation measures for fish stocks and their ecosystems.
• The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) implements the precautionary approach for data-limited stocks by applying an 'uncertainty cap' that limits changes in advice to plus or minus 20%, and an additional 20% precautionary margin if the stock is likely being fished unsustainably or its status is unknown.
• There is a critical distinction between the 'precautionary approach' (a method for handling uncertainty) and 'precautionary' (PA) biological reference points (indicators of safe biological limits). PA reference points are warning signs that a stock is at risk of impaired reproduction and collapse.
• EU decision-makers sometimes deliberately choose catch options based on PA reference points instead of MSY-based advice because PA points often allow for larger catches, despite MSY advice being designed for maximum productivity.
• Data shows that TACs for stocks with only precautionary advice are exceeded far more frequently than those with MSY-based advice; between 2015 and 2019, such TACs were set above advice in approximately 80% of cases, compared to only 25% of assessed TACs for 2020 that exceeded MSY-based advice.

APA

Grossmann, J. (2020). Caution! A TAC-Setters Guide to the Precautionary Approach. ClientEarth. https://www.clientearth.org/media/eotdjf3b/ce-tac-briefing-series-precautionary-approach.pdf

Chicago

Grossmann, Jenni. Caution! A TAC-Setters Guide to the Precautionary Approach. ClientEarth, 2020. https://www.clientearth.org/media/eotdjf3b/ce-tac-briefing-series-precautionary-approach.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Grossmann |first1=Jenni |title=Caution! A TAC-Setters Guide to the Precautionary Approach |publisher=ClientEarth |date=December 2020 |url=https://www.clientearth.org/media/eotdjf3b/ce-tac-briefing-series-precautionary-approach.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{grossmann2020caution, author = {Grossmann, Jenni}, title = {{Caution! A TAC-Setters Guide to the Precautionary Approach}}, institution = {ClientEarth}, year = {2020}, month = dec, url = {https://www.clientearth.org/media/eotdjf3b/ce-tac-briefing-series-precautionary-approach.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }