While European policies have progressed towards an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), limited attention has been paid to the implications for its advisory system. This paper analyzes the advisory landscape in the European Union (EU) by addressing two questions: to what extent can the needed advice be provided? how prepared is the management system to integrate ecosystem advice? We provide a systematic analysis of the relevant advisory bodies, explore gaps related to the requested and delivered advice, and identify paths for improvement. The findings confirm earlier observations of lack of a formalized process to provide and integrate advice in support of an ecosystem approach into EU fisheries management. Instead of enabling existing capacities to embed ecosystem components (eg investments and initiatives made by stakeholders (and authorities) to move to EAFM -pushing strategies), the system relies heavily on mandatory requests from policy makers (pulling mechanisms). Furthermore, social and economic dimensions are the weakest aspects in the advisory process, which hampers the balancing of objectives that represent one of the hallmarks of EAFM. The policy framework has adopted EAFM for European fisheries, but the advisory processes have not yet been adapted to substantially support EAFM.
This report presents the results from the project 'Future Fishermen'. The report addresses recruitment challenges in Danish fisheries with a particular focus on the Fisheries School's education. The purpose of the study was to provide a broader and more systematic knowledge base that the industry can use to address recruitment problems and challenges derived from them, e.g. generational change.
The report is based on a literature study and qualitative interviews with students at the Fisheries School (who are apprentices in relation to the internship) and other actors in the fisheries as the central empirical evidence. Along the way, we have sparred with representatives from the three fisheries organizations FSK‐PO, DFPO and DPPO, as well as employees at the Fisheries School. However, the conclusions are solely the authors' own.
The main purpose of the study was to understand young people's values and images of fisheries in order to increase recruitment to (and retention in) Danish fisheries and especially the Fisheries School. In this process, we have addressed 3 overall problem complexes that are important in terms of meeting the recruitment challenges in Danish fisheries: recruitment to the Fisheries School; recruitment to the entire fishing industry; and the Fisheries School's education.
With expanding human uses at sea, the objective of maritime spatial planning (MSP) to promote sustainable coexistence between marine uses becomes an increasingly challenging task. In order to assess coexistence options, both use-use interactions and use-environment interactions are important to explore. Tools for doing cumulative impact assessments (CIA) on the environment provide a means for spatially exploring environmental impacts. Finding inspiration in such ecosystem-based spatial use-environment approaches while drawing on pairwise marine use compatibility knowledge from existing literature, a spatial approach to model potential synergies and conflicts between marine uses through an expert-based scoring system is presented and implemented in SEANERGY, an ArcMap-based opensource toolbox. A test based on Baltic Sea GIS data demonstrates how SEANERGY supplements CIA analyzes with knowledge about potential use-use synergies, potential use-use conflicts, and their spatial extents, useful for optimizing the use of marine space in MSP without putting too much cumulative pressure on the environment.
The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishermen, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) in their own fisheries. One of the key uncertainties in fisheries science and management can be linked to (our understanding of) fishermen's behaviour. In this report we describe the project efforts to better understand fisher behavior by assessing literature, interviews and data to advance towards a better representation of fisher behavior in our modelling. A better understanding of fisher behavior is especially needed in the context of change affecting Europe's marine ecosystems. Change is both related to the natural part of the ecosystem (ie climate change) as to the social side of the ecosystem (ie building of wind parks).
To that aim we present nine different case studies in Europe as examples of how fisher behavior has been studied and which factors are (or can be) relevant for a better understanding of fisher behaviour. Each case study ends with a table summarizing the factors influencing behaviour, the categories within that factor and the (potential) application in modeling as well as the implications for management. The table below summarizes the factors found / used in the case studies and the elements (social, cultural, ecological, economic and institutional) to which they relate. A variety of social factors were identified that are promising for use in modelling. A key conclusion is that social data are often context dependent and cannot be copy pasted from one situation to the other and in some cases, additional data needs to be collected. The cases also demonstrate that mixed methods approaches and interdisciplinary approaches are key to get in-depth understanding of fisher behavior in fisheries science.
The profile of small-scale fisheries has been raised through a dedicated target within the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG14b) that calls for the provision of 'access of small-scale artisanal fishermen to marine resources and markets'. By focusing on access to fisheries resources in the context of the European Union, in this article we demonstrate that the potential for small-scale fishing sectors to benefit from fishing opportunities remains low due to different mechanisms at play including legislative gaps in the Common Fisheries Policy, and long-existing local structures somewhat favoring the status quo of distributive injustice. Consequently, those without access to capital and authority are faced by marginalizing allocation systems, impacting the overall resilience of fishing communities. Achieving SDG14b requires an overhaul in the promulgation of policies emanating from the present nested governance systems.
This paper centers local processes for co-creating transitions towards more sustainable, inclusive, and resilient coastal community development. We have conceptualized a path for change processes with phases of transition including 1. Reasons to convene; 2. Governance and participation "rules"; 3. Building knowledge together; 4. Implementation and experimentation; 5. Post-hoc reflections and assessment; 6. Transfer/reproduction of practices. Here, we focus on the first three stepping stones, which form the foundation of the collaborative process, focusing on the challenges and opportunities encountered as a pilot intervention is planned. We use a framework informed by partnership-, co-creation-, transition-, and justice literatures, to analyze data focused on establishing partnerships for ongoing co-creation of knowledge, empowering actors in the local communities, and selecting options for an intervention pilot. Conclusions relate to (a) trust and preexisting relationships, (b) what inclusion means, (c) internal power differentials, (d) preexisting tensions in the community, (e) challenges to co-creation.
Any ecosystem based fisheries management system is necessarily faced with the problem of multiple objectives that trade-off against one another. Typically, objectives such as the maximization of yield, employment or profit or minimizing environmental impacts will be optimized in different parts of the decision space, which is formed of the fishing mortality rates that can be applied to the various species, given the constraints imposed by the mixed species nature of many fishing fleets. Since objectives cannot be simultaneously achieved, managers need to consider how such objectives trade-off against one another in order to choose a balanced strategy. Normally, they also have to consider the views of different groupings of stakeholders, who often favour widely different and conflicting objectives. This is particularly difficult if stakeholders are reluctant to expose their negotiating positions. This article explores two possible approaches to developing a Decision Support Framework for the North Sea. The first is a classic Multi- Criteria Analysis (MCA) approach that was developed in cooperation with North Sea stakeholders. The implementation went smoothly for the definition of suitable scenarios, decision trees and criteria, but failed in facilitating consensus on how to set priorities at the stakeholder level. However, it remains a possible approach for higher level management to adopt. Consequently, to aid effective decision-making a simpler approach was designed to visualise stakeholders concerns both to themselves and to the managers in charge of actual decision-making. Rather than trying to achieve some joint optima of the objectives that stakeholders wish to achieve this approach seeks to avoid the solutions various stakeholder groups resent the most. This ‘N dimensional potato approach’ proposed here treats the decision space as analogous to a partially rotten potato that has to be prepared for the table: each group of stakeholders cut away those parts of the decision space that they consider unacceptable. Ideally, this would leave a decision space where somewhat acceptable compromise solutions exist. But, if no decision space is left after all have made their cuts, this approach will still inform managers about the consequences of different solutions in terms of which group will be disappointed and by how much. Making this approach operational requires both uncovering various stakeholders’ views of the unacceptable areas, and also displaying these areas in a convenient fashion together with areas of stakeholder consent. The article describes the steps taken to address these two tasks by the North Sea case study of the MareFrame research project.
This article discusses the development of second ship registers and their interconnections to the policy idea of maritime clusters. Through a narrative of the contemporary history of Danish maritime policy, the article shows how these apparently different policy measures were closely related and together constitute a coherent framework based upon specific values, views of cause–effect relationships, and perceptions of major challenges and their context. Danish maritime policy provides an excellent case for the study of the contemporary history of maritime policy-making. Denmark was among the first of the traditional shipping nations to set up a second register, and the concept of maritime clusters became part of Danish maritime policy before it emerged as a construct in European Union maritime policy. We provide detail on the unfolding of some of the most important recent events in Danish maritime policy and highlight its development as a process of learning that involves the prolonged drafting and fine-tuning of statements and ideas, and the borrowing and adjustment of policy ideas developed elsewhere.
This study analyses the relation between management practices and the performance of Brazilian port authorities. In order to do so, a survey-based evaluation tool of the quality of management practices was developed. In addition, a set of operational and financial performance indicators of such port authorities and their ports was calculated. The differences in operational and financial performance between port authorities with a high and a low quality of management practices were analysed by Student t-tests and the relation between management practices and port performance was accessed through linear regression analysis. The results indicated that the better managerial practices have a positive impact on port authorities' financial performance but have no significant impact on ports' operational performance. The study also found that port authorities controlled by States and Municipalities have better financial and operational results and use more management practices than those managed by the Brazilian Federal Government.
This paper discusses how public interests in seaports can be secured in the corporatized model. This corporatized model, in which port authorities engage in port development on a commercial basis, is increasingly used. We discuss in detail an important question that so far has not received attention in the literature on port governance: how can the public shareholders use their influence as shareholders of port authorities to achieve public policy goals. We advance the theoretical body of knowledge by applying insights from regulatory economics to the port industry. As an empirical illustration, we analyse the current practices of the public shareholders of the four large Dutch port authorities, based on policy documents and interviews. All of them have explicit shareholder policies. However, some of these policies are too broad to provide sufficient direction for the management team and supervisory board of the port authority involved.