Trust in the fisheries scientific community

This paper explores the issue of “trust” in the fisheries science community, a key corollary of effective risk communication. It presents the findings of a survey undertaken in Iceland, Greece, Spain, United Kingdom and Faroe Islands during 2008. The findings reveal differing levels of trust and mistrust in the fisheries science community between countries and between stakeholder groups, demonstrating areas for future attention in the interests of improving fisheries science and management. As this paper explores, unfortunately the “trust” necessary for effective stakeholder cooperation and participation within current fisheries science is currently somewhat lacking. The cited reasons behind this lack of trust include: a lack of soundness, credibility, responsiveness, flexibility and stakeholder involvement, flawed data and weak science, poor communications and political and lobby group interference. Notable from the results is a lack of consensus on the existence of a common language and vision. It is evident, however, that certain aspects of fisheries science are strong contributors to trust and that there are opportunities for improvement.     

Managing overcapacity in small-scale fisheries in Southeast Asia

It is now almost universally accepted that most of the nearshore fisheries in Southeast Asia are overfished. It is also accepted that overcapacity is one of the leading causes of this overfishing. The problem of addressing overcapacity in small-scale fisheries in Southeast Asia is much more complex than that of reducing overcapacity in industrial fleets. In order to manage capacity, managers need to measure and understand how much capacity currently exists in the fishery and what is the desirable level of capacity that best meets the set of management objectives. The only feasible solution to overcapacity may be based on a coordinated and integrated approach involving a mixed strategy of resource management, resource restoration and conservation, livelihoods and economic and community development, and restructured governance arrangements. The reduction of overcapacity implies an increased focus on people-related solutions and on communities.     

Distributing the bigeye conservation burden in the western and central pacific fisheries

The Western and Central Pacific Ocean is home to the world's most productive tuna fisheries, with the majority of tuna catches occurring inside the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of the region's developing coastal States. It is important that these fisheries are managed effectively throughout their range, both within and between EEZs and on the high seas. Unrestrained exploitation in a particular EEZ or on the high seas has the potential to significantly impact on catches elsewhere with potentially devastating consequences for developing coastal States, some of which have few alternate resources. The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) was established in 2004 to manage the region's highly migratory tuna fisheries. However, the WCPFC has since repeatedly failed to adopt conservation and management measures that are sufficient to meet the WCPFC's conservation and sustainable use objectives. This paper analyses catch data from the WCPFC and suggests that the weak position of bigeye (in a strategic political context), the unwillingness of members to compromise their interests and the lack of a transparent framework for distributing the burden of conservation are key factors in the WCPFC's failure to adopt sufficiently strong conservation and management measures.     

Evaluating the basic elements of transparency of regional fisheries management organizations

This paper reports on the first global study of regional fisheries management organization (RFMO) transparency. It was prompted by recent scholarship that suggests that RFMOs are failing to meet their conservation and management mandates and that transparency is a critical element of this performance. In this study, 11 RFMOs were evaluated using 34 questions, divided into three sections: (i) access to full, up-to-date and accurate information; (ii) public participation in decision-making; and (iii) access to outcomes. Secretariats for all 11 RFMOs were contacted, and all responded, to correct and comment on initial findings and to share additional information. The total scores in this study reflect transparency as measured against current good practices in RFMOs as a whole, rather than some sort of idealistic benchmark. Each question should therefore be seen as a diagnostic tool that shows where some RFMO(s) fall short and how they can correct the shortfall based on the practices of their peers. These results have highlighted a number of good practices amongst RFMOs, with no single RFMO standing out as having particularly poor transparency practices. On the other hand, there also were not any RFMOs that had exemplary transparency practices in every respect and all RFMOs still have room to improve upon their basic transparency practices. This first transparency assessment is necessarily broad in nature and considers only very basic elements of transparency. It is to be expected that as RFMO practices become more sophisticated, so will the techniques and criteria of future transparency assessments.     

Limits of governability: Institutional implications for fisheries and coastal governance

Drawing on some recent developments in so-called “interactive governance theory”, it is argued that fisheries and coastal governance is basically a relationship between two systems, which could be termed a “governing system” and a “system-to-be-governed.” The former system is social: it is made up of institutions and steering mechanisms. The latter system is partly natural, partly social: it consists of an ecosystem and the resources that it harbors, as well as a system of users and stakeholders who form political coalitions and institutions among themselves. Obviously, we need to be concerned with the relationship and interaction between the governing system and the system-to-be-governed, which forms a system in its own right. According to governance theory, these systems share similar structural attributes: they are diverse, complex, dynamic and vulnerable. In order for governance to work they must somehow be compatible, in order to be mutually responsive. This is not a matter of natural mechanism but of institutional design by societal actors such as legislative bodies, planning agencies and civic organizations—alone, or in concert. What conditions, mechanisms and institutions are conducive to creating a better rapport between the governing system and the system-to-be-governed? Before we can start this discussion, we need to rethink our basic assumptions of what governance is, what governors do, and what we can expect from governance. How do we get from where we are now to where we want to be? In order to accomplish this we need something other than an instrumental, rational model. We need “a technology of foolishness” that emphasizes institutional experimentation and learning by doing.     

Not all fisheries will be collapsed in 2048

In a recently published paper, Worm et al. [Impacts of biodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science 2006;314:787–90.] project “the global collapse of all taxa currently fished” by 2048. Using their criteria and data, this paper shows that the number of not-collapsed fisheries actually increased over time to a plateau of about 5600 in 1985–2003. Furthermore, if trends are projected into the future, more than half of the world's fisheries would always be in a recovered state.     

Systems engineering principles in fisheries management

Fisheries management receives valuable, but often fragmented information from academic disciplines such as biology, economics, and social sciences. A multi-disciplinary perspective seems to be necessary if the fisheries are to become sustainable. Globally, overcapacity is considered as the most serious threat to sustainable fisheries, which indicates the need for a stronger integration of technological aspects into fisheries management. This paper discusses application of systems engineering principles and integration of technology into fisheries management. The systems engineering process facilitates implementation of multi-disciplinary information from researchers to fisheries managers in the decision-making towards sustainable fisheries, but may also be used to overcome multi-disciplinary obstacles among scientists. The article concludes that use of systems engineering principles may become a valuable contribution to fisheries management because of increased transparency and reduced risk associated with the decision-making process.     

Network governance in fisheries

Globalisation is enabling an increasing number of stakeholders to become better informed and more determined to participate in the management of both coastal and high-seas fisheries. Centralised fisheries management agencies are therefore becoming increasingly unable to exert control over the flow of information in fisheries management processes, and less able to exclude other formal and informal institutions from influencing management processes. This work details the emergence of network governance processes and concludes that network governance is likely to erode the traditional command and control authority of many formal government-mandated agencies, and potentially increase the transaction costs in fisheries management processes. However, this style of emergent management may also increase the robustness of management decisions.     

Considering communities in fisheries management

Fisheries management in the United States, the European Union, and other parts of the globe, increasingly reflects a burgeoning realization that fisheries management policies affect not only fishermen, but also the broader communities in which fishermen work and reside. Understanding fishing communities, however, is not a straightforward task. Researchers draw upon many methodologies across diverse disciplines in the attempt to better understand the needs of fishing communities and the ways in which fisheries management programs affect these communities. This special issue draws together international research on fishing communities, highlighting the diverse relationships between people, places and their fish and fisheries. Rather than attempting to consolidate these complex, multifarious relationships into simple metrics, the papers presented in this issue illuminate community needs and wants from a variety of frameworks highlighting the importance of meaningfully understanding local contexts. These papers represent novel frameworks and case studies, adding depth of scholarly knowledge to a relatively understudied segment of fisheries management. Specifically, the goal of this issue is to advance the inclusion of community considerations in fisheries management processes. While approaching the topic of fishing communities from diverse perspectives, the papers in this special issue work together to provide a broad view of the concerns and conflicts existent in these communities. They highlight the need for management endeavors to be flexible, broad, and inclusive, providing potential tools and frameworks to aid in management projects.     

Leaning on user-groups: The role of civil society in fisheries governance

Fisheries have long been managed through public–private partnerships based on collaboration between government and user-groups. The alleged benefits of involving the latter—as representatives of civil society—are a management system that is more flexible and legitimate than one based exclusively on top–down command and control. A question that is rarely addressed is whether civil society is up to the task. Are voluntary associations fit—‘technically’ and ‘democratically’—to take on management responsibilities? Assessing the pros and cons of involving civil society in fisheries governance requires a closer look at the role of user-groups in public policy-making. This paper attempts to do that by examining certain aspects of the Norwegian system of fisheries management, focusing—in particular—on the role of its most prominent civil society player: the Norwegian Fishers’ Association. The association has long been a privileged partner, virtually monopolizing the attention and goodwill of government. How has this been justified, and does it still serve its original purpose? As the fishery has changed, so—we contend—has the association: from something akin to a public interest group into what is essentially a ‘trade union’ pursuing the economic interests of its most powerful members. How and why did this change—in goals and priorities—come about, and is it tenable that this particular partnership continues? What lessons, if any, can be drawn from the Norwegian case about the pros and cons of user involvement, interactive governance and the role of civil society in fisheries management?     

Considering ecosystem-based fisheries management in the California Current

Recognizing that all management decisions have impacts on the ecosystem being exploited, an ecosystem-based approach to management seeks to better inform these decisions with knowledge of ecosystem structure, processes and functions. For marine fisheries in the California Current, along the West Coast of North America, such an approach must take into greater consideration the constantly changing climate-driven physical and biological interactions in the ecosystem, the trophic relationships between fished and unfished elements of the food web, the adaptation potential of life history diversity, and the role of humans as both predators and competitors. This paper reviews fisheries-based ecosystem tools, insights, and management concepts, and presents a transitional means of implementing an ecosystem-based approach to managing US fisheries in the California Current based on current scientific knowledge and interpretation of existing law.     

A cautious fisheries management policy in South Africa: the fisheries for rock lobster

In South Africa, political emancipation has resulted in a new fisheries policy which is embodied in the Marine Living Resources Act of 1998. The pillars of the new policy are sustainability, equity and stability within the industry. We look particularly at a suite of mainly accessible species, the rock lobsters (truly spiny lobsters), at their management, at control measures, at realities of resource status and harvesting, at naturally occurring ecosystem stimuli, and investigate whether the policy can achieve what it aims to do, to provide more for more South Africans at levels at least equal to what they do today. Put simply, are the political aims and the sustainability aims of the new policy mutually achievable?     

Guidelines for organizing a fisheries learning exchange

This short communication piece presents guidelines and challenges for organizing fisheries learning exchanges (FLEs). Non-governmental organizations, government agencies, and resource users use FLEs to share best practices and bridge knowledge gaps between small-scale fishing communities and stakeholder groups. Even though FLEs are widely used and have numerous cited benefits, there are challenges associated with planning and implementing FLEs. To overcome these challenges and maximize FLEs’ effectiveness, the authors describe guidelines for FLE organizers. The guidelines are based on the perspectives of over 20 FLE experts collected during 2013 through questionnaires, interviews, discussions, and surveys. The guidelines include steps that organizers should take before, during, and after a FLE. For instance, there was broad consensus that before a FLE, it is important to select a diverse group of participants, including both conservation advocates and critics, and to create an exchange agreement outlining the roles and responsibilities of participants. During a FLE, cultural activities and daily reflections by participants are valuable to the exchange process. After a FLE, activities that formalize the participants’ involvement in the FLE are important, such as welcome-home ceremonies and participation certificates. Follow-up support for FLE participants is perceived as an essential step in the FLE and should be included in the FLE's budget. Finally, challenges in organizing FLEs are explicitly described and potential solutions to overcome those challenges are provided. The authors researched and compiled these guidelines and challenges to inform and improve the increasingly widespread use of FLEs.     

Is there any hope for fisheries management?

Fisheries is not the only discipline where models have been used in attempts to fine tune an aspect of the economy. Such fine-tuning can prove ineffective because of the uncertainties in the scientific underpinnings of the models and because of the omission of critical elements. In fisheries, the biological goal is to set allowable catches so that the harvest is not so large that it endangers the future health of the fish stock while it is not so low as to waste food, while the economic goal is to maximize the net economic rent generated by the fishery. It has long been recognized that the science underlying the setting of the total allowable catch is often too uncertain to justify such fine tuning, and that attempts to achieve that delicate balance has helped lead to crises in fisheries. One solution is to abandon such marginalism in favor of seriously reducing current catches.     

Review of participatory fisheries management arrangements in the European Union

Promoting and attaining sustainable use of resources through community participation is a central tenet of the European Union's (EU) 2013 Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. A systematic review approach was used to identify participatory fisheries management arrangements within the EU. Following this, the participatory arrangements were categorized based on the nature of the decision-making arrangement, influence and empowerment of the fishing industry. The study identified 40 management arrangements distributed through 8 member states, with a variety of fisheries and institutional settings for participation in fisheries management in the EU. The majority of the partnerships identified are “Functional participation”, i.e., the participatory arrangement is based in pre-determined goals encouraged by higher decision-making levels in order to increase efficiency of management decisions. Interactive partnership was the highest level of participation identified in the systematic review, and is usually more conducive with local arrangements in coastal and small-scale fisheries targeting low mobility species.     

Defining success in fisheries and conflicts in objectives

The traditional fisheries management objectives of maximizing yield and employment lead to heavily exploited stocks. Many current high-profile disputes arise from conflicting objectives, and the proposed solutions to “the fisheries problem” are primarily particular stakeholders’ efforts to have managers implement their own objectives. I suggest many “failures” are in fact successes for other objectives. Fisheries objectives, as reflected in management actions, are changing. Two current trends are the acceptance of objectives that value less disturbed ecosystems and acceptance of fisheries allocation through dedicated access to improve the fisheries’ economic efficiency. I suggest that increased use of dedicated access will result in more congruent objectives and less conflict.     

Small-scale marine fisheries policy in Vietnam

Vietnam's marine fisheries are considered to be small scale and are concentrated in coastal near-shore waters. This has resulted in heavy pressure on near-shore fisheries resources. Near-shore fisheries are considered by fishers and the government to be over-exploited, causing hardship for many coastal communities. This paper reviews and analyzes changes in policy towards small-scale fisheries in Vietnam over the last two decades. The primary issues facing the small-scale fisheries in Vietnam are to restructure the near-shore fisheries and to address over-capacity. Recommended actions include improved fisheries statistics, resources for provincial fisheries staff, and a coordinated and integrated approach involving a mixed strategy of resource management; resource restoration; economic and community development; and new governance arrangements.     

The scope of fisheries learning exchanges for conservation

Over the past decade, fisheries learning exchanges (FLEs), in which representatives from different fisher communities come together to share marine conservation challenges and solutions, have been produced by a range of non-government organizations (NGOs) and federal agencies. This paper presents an overview of the history and scope of FLEs. A literature review, questionnaire, expert workshop, and key informant interviews were conducted. A content analysis was performed of the key informant interviews using a grounded theory approach. This paper offers a formal definition of a FLE, describes different configurations of FLEs, discusses the utility, common objectives, and common outcomes of FLEs, and outlines a research agenda for future work on FLEs. Organizers have found FLEs to have four main utilities: 1) FLEs leverage peer-to-peer sharing so that participants open each other's horizons for improving fisheries and fishing 2) FLEs catalyze and speed change, 3) FLEs are good for sharing thoughts that are difficult to receive and accept, 4) FLEs facilitate involvement and commitment from relevant parties needed for change. The most commonly documented purposes of FLEs were related to marine reserves, fisheries management strategies, bycatch reduction, and alternative livelihoods to fishing. The most common objectives among the FLEs surveyed were to encourage action or behavior, to openly exchange ideas, and to introduce new technology. As a result of FLEs the common outcomes were that participants were inspired to make changes, new programs were implemented, relationships were built and connections made, and participants enhanced their understanding of marine management strategies.     

Stakeholder participation in ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries management: A synthesis from European research projects

In this synthesis article, we claim that institutional innovation is required for ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries management (EBAFM), and that such innovation can best be achieved by engaging in a delicate process of societal decision making. Current instances of participation in fisheries shed light on the societal processes required for such institutional innovation. We apply the IBEFish analytical frame to examine findings from recent European research on participation in fisheries management at different jurisdictional levels. We distil several issues of major concern for institutional innovation towards EBAFM. These concern information management, legitimacy, social dynamics and costs, as well as aspects of cross-scale and cross-sector integration of fisheries governance.