''Risk'' has appeared more frequently in the fisheries management literature in recent years. The reasons for this are partly internal (scientists seeking better ways to advise fishery managers) and partly external (e.g., adoption of the precautionary approach). Though terminology varies, there is consensus that there are two stages in dealing with risk. The first (here called risk assessment) is the formulation of advice for fisheries managers in a way that conveys the possible consequences of uncertainty. This advice is in the form of an evaluation of the expected effects of alternative management options, rather than recommendations. Risk assessment has been undertaken in many fisheries, and there is general agreement as to how it should be done (although technical details differ). The second stage (risk management) is the way fishery managers take uncertainty into account in making decisions. Much fisheries risk management is informal, i.e., nonquantitative, undocumented, and loosely linked (if at all) with a risk assessment. The major reason for this is that the objectives of fisheries management are often conflicting and are rarely stated in a way that provides explicit direction to managers or scientists.
