Work package 8.
This point is probably what most funding agencies would worry about. It might be formulated as a question: “How precisely do we maximize the likelihood that our new Fmsy points are used in management?”.
A homepage, a final conference to present and discuss the results, scientific publications and a final project report will be produced.
It seems that the ICES benchmark WKs, Management Plan Evaluation groups and Harvest Control Rule groups, are obvious places to promote our study, but there might be other expert groups as well in ICES for which this is relevant. We will try persuade ICES to set up a dialogue meeting with clients and stakeholders. We will also aim for a theme session at the ICES 2018 ASC.
The EU Advisory Councils are other fora we will focus on, by offering a presentation and discussion at one of their general meetings.
It can also be argued that if we can produce not only the Fmsy values but also the EU ranges (the Flower = the F lower than Fmsy that gives 95% of the MSY, and Fupper = the F higher than Fmsy that gives 95% of the MSY) it would help implementation. Both ASPIC and PROST should be able to give these easily, but the GLM might not be able to. We will produce these at least from the ASPIC and PROST runs and look into whether they can be produced from the GLM analysis.
Key persons: HS (Chair), all, maybe in co-operation with observers from managers and stakeholders.