Suchergebnisse

Abstract One of the objectives of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is to increase the contribution of fisheries to fish food availability and self-sufficiency. Still, the use of catch is often a secondary concern in fisheries governance and management — or not a concern at all — while the focus is on harvesting. This paper examines how the use of forage fish for human consumption can be increased within the limits of sustainability, using Baltic herring as a case study. Baltic herring contains high levels of dioxins and the human consumption is very low: the catches are mostly used for industrial purposes. The paper uses a participatory backcasting exercise to define a desirable future vision for the use of Baltic herring catch and to develop pathways of actor-specific governance actions to increase the use of the fish as a safe-to-eat food. The results reveal that increasing the contribution of forage fish, such as Baltic herring, to food security entails a paradigm shift in fisheries governance that involves 1) inclusion of well-defined objectives for catch use in the EU CFP and the related regional multiannual plans, 2) broadening the scope of the MSY-driven governance and management to one that addresses catch use, and 3) proactive catch use governance.

How can uncertain fisheries science be linked with good governance processes, thereby increasing fisheries management legitimacy and effectiveness? Reducing the uncertainties around scientific models has long been perceived as the cure of the fisheries management problem. There is however increasing recognition that uncertainty in the numbers will remain. A lack of transparency with respect to these uncertainties can damage the credibility of science. The EU Commission's proposal for a reformed Common Fisheries Policy calls for more self-management for the fishing industry by increasing fishers' involvement in the planning and execution of policies and boosting the role of fishers' organisations. One way of higher transparency and improved participation is to include stakeholders in the modelling process itself. The JAKFISH project (Judgment And Knowledge in Fisheries Involving StakeHolders) invited fisheries stakeholders to participate in the process of framing the management problem, and to give input and evaluate the scientific models that are used to provide fisheries management advice. JAKFISH investigated various tools to assess and communicate uncertainty around fish stock assessments and fisheries management. Here, a synthesis is presented of the participatory work carried out in four European fishery case studies (Western Baltic herring, North Sea Nephrops, Central Baltic Herring and Mediterranean swordfish), focussing on the uncertainty tools used, the stakeholders' responses to these, and the lessons learnt. It is concluded that participatory modelling has the potential to facilitate and structure discussions between scientists and stakeholders about uncertainties and the quality of the knowledge base. It can also contribute to collective learning, increase legitimacy, and advance scientific understanding. However, when approaching real-life situations, modelling should not be seen as the priority objective. Rather, the crucial step in a science–stakeholder collaboration is the joint problem framing in an open, transparent way

Abstract The implementation challenge of ecosystem-based (fisheries) management (EB(F)M) has entailed calls for integrated governance (IG) approaches in the marine field. We arranged an expert workshop to study the preconditions and applicability of IG, and to suggest how IG could be arranged in practice. Focusing on the management of the dioxin problem shared by the herring and salmon fisheries in the Baltic Sea, and using a coupled 'insight network'- SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) methodology, we evaluated two scenarios: 1) IG of herring and salmon fisheries to benefit from collaboration between these fisheries that suffer from the same problem, and 2) IG between the fisheries sector and the food/public health sector to incorporate food safety in fisheries governance. Our results demonstrate that a variety of societal, political, institutional, operational, instrumental, and biological factors affect the applicability of IG in marine contexts, and work as preconditions for IG. While societal needs for IG were obvious in our case, as major challenges for it we identified the competing cross-sectoral objectives, path dependencies, and limitations of experts to think and work across fields. The study suggests that establishing an IG framework by adding new aspects upon the current governance structures may be easier to accept and adapt to, than creating new strategic or advisory bodies or other new capacities. Viewing IG as a framework for understanding cross-sectoral issues instead of one that requires a defined level and form of integrated assessment and management may be a way towards social learning, and thereby towards the implementation of more sophisticated, open and broad EB(F)M frameworks.