Suchergebnisse

Nachituti's Gift: Economy, Society, and Environment in Central Africa. David M. Gordon. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2006. 304 pp.

We reflect on the innovation process that led to the development of the pulse trawl that was successfully trialed at a commercial scale, but eventually ended with the European Parliament passing legislation to ban its use. The ban was imposed despite published and emerging evidence that suggested that the environmental performance and catch efficiency of the pulse trawl was superior to the conventional beam trawl design. We used a stakeholder questionnaire to understand which factors undermined wider acceptance of the pulse trawl. The main factors where a lack of involvement of certain key stakeholders earlier in the process that would have ensured better co-development of innovation and a shared vision of the environmental or governance questions that needed to be addressed. Although the stakeholder process itself was seen to be positive, it was implemented too late in the innovation process, as was the implementation of an independent peer review process. We conclude by identifying a pathway for future fishing gear innovation processes that integrate the lessons learnt from the pulse trawl innovation process.

While international agreements and legislation call for incorporation of four pillars of sustainability, the social (including cultural), economic and institutional aspects (the ⠀ human dimension') have been relatively neglected to date. Three key impediments have been identified: a relative lack of explicit social, economic and institutional objectives; a general lack of process (frameworks, governance) for routine integration of all four pillars of sustainability; and a bias towards biological considerations. Practical integration requires a systems' approach with explicit consideration of strategic and operational aspects of management; multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary evaluations; practical objectives for the four pillars of sustainability; appropriate participation; and a governance system that is able to integrate these diverse considerations in management. We challenge all involved in fisheries to immediately take five practical steps toward integrating ecological, economic, social and institutional aspects: (1) Adopt the perspective of the fishery as a system' with interacting natural, human and management elements; (2) Be aware of both strategic and operational aspects of fisheries assessment and management; (3) Articulate overarching objectives that incorporate all four pillars of sustainability; (4) Encourage appropriate (and diverse) disciplinary participation in all aspects of research, evaluation and management; and (5) Encourage development of (or emulate) participatory governance.

While international agreements and legislation call for incorporation of four pillars of sustainability, the social (including cultural), economic and institutional aspects (the 'human dimension') have been relatively neglected to date. Three key impediments have been identified: a relative lack of explicit social, economic and institutional objectives; a general lack of process (frameworks, governance) for routine integration of all four pillars of sustainability; and a bias towards biological considerations. Practical integration requires a 'systems' approach with explicit consideration of strategic and operational aspects of management; multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary evaluations; practical objectives for the four pillars of sustainability; appropriate participation; and a governance system that is able to integrate these diverse considerations in management. We challenge all involved in fisheries to immediately take five practical steps toward integrating ecological, economic, social and institutional aspects: (1) Adopt the perspective of the fishery as a 'system' with interacting natural, human and management elements; (2) Be aware of both strategic and operational aspects of fisheries assessment and management; (3) Articulate overarching objectives that incorporate all four pillars of sustainability; (4) Encourage appropriate (and diverse) disciplinary participation in all aspects of research, evaluation and management; and (5) Encourage development of (or emulate) participatory governance.

The overarching focus of Working Group on Maritime Systems (WGMARS) has been on understanding the conceptualisation and implementation of Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (IEAs) in ICES and more broadly. From 2017-2019, the Working Group reviewed academic literature and ICES documents, interviewed the chairs of the ICES Regional Seas Working Groups (which are charged with conducting IEAs), and heard member reports on the relationships among IEAs, Ecosystem-Based Management, and Marine Spatial Planning in various European nations, the EU, and the US. We have also examined how IEAs are used in management and attempted to use behavioural economics to think about the types of regulations that might be most effective in specific situations. WGMARS also highlighted the importance of having multiple disciplines from the natural and social science, and the humanities (e.g. history), contributing to conceptualisation and implementation of IEA, as well as stakeholders who are likely to be impacted by changes in regulations (e.g. industries, communities, and local, regional, and national government bodies other than those implementing the regulations in question). To foster this type of multidisciplinary (i.e. involving natural and social science, as well as the humanities) and transdisciplinary (i.e. involving stakeholders) work, we have held workshops with other ICES Working Groups and with government officials from the US (the New England and the Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management Councils) and the Netherlands (officials of Rijkswaterstaat, the Dutch national body responsible for roads, waterways, and water systems and part of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management). Our findings suggest that the research work on and for IEAs is still very much a work in progress with strong variance in the way IEA work is approached. Different Regional Seas Working Groups, for instance, are at very different points in moving toward full IEA, especially regarding their inclusion of social sciences and humanities and their inclusion of and types of collaboration with stakeholders. Moreover, structural conditions to create a demand and underlying science varies significantly between different regional seas regions.