Economists have long argued that a fishery that maximizes its economic potential usually will also satisfy its conservation objectives. Recently, maximum economic yield (MEY) has been identified as a primary management objective for Australian fisheries and is under consideration elsewhere. However, first attempts at estimating MEY as an actual management target for a real fishery (rather than a conceptual or theoretical exercise) have highlighted some substantial complexities generally unconsidered by fisheries economists. Here, we highlight some of the main issues encountered in our experience and their implications for estimating and transitioning to MEY. Using a bioeconomic model of an Australian fishery for which MEY is the management target, we note that unconstrained optimization may result in effort trajectories that would not be acceptable to industry or managers. Different assumptions regarding appropriate constraints result in different outcomes, each of which may be considered a valid MEY. Similarly, alternative treatments of prices and costs may result in differing estimates of MEY and their associated effort trajectories. To develop an implementable management strategy in an adaptive management framework, a set of assumptions must be agreed among scientists, economists, and industry and managers, indicating that operationalizing MEY is not simply a matter of estimating the numbers but requires strong industry commitment and involvement.bioeconomic modeling | fisheries dynamics | fisheries governance | fisheries management
Evaluating the success of natural resource management approaches requires methods to measure performance against biological, economic, social, and governance objectives. In fisheries, most research has focused on industrial sectors, with the contributions to global resource use by small-scale and indigenous hunters and fishers undervalued. Globally, the small-scale fisheries sector alone employs some 38 million people who share common challenges in balancing livelihood and lifestyle choices. We used as a case study a fishery with both traditional indigenous and commercial sectors to develop a framework to bridge the gap between quantitative bio-economic models and more qualitative social analyses. For many indigenous communities, communalism rather than capitalism underlies fishers' perspectives and aspirations, and we find there are complicated and often unanticipated trade-offs between economic and social objectives. Our results highlight that market-based management options might score highly in a capitalistic society, but have negative repercussions on community coherence and equity in societies with a strong communal ethic. There are complex trade-offs between economic indicators, such as profit, and social indicators, such as lifestyle preferences. Our approach makes explicit the "triple bottom line" sustainability objectives involving trade-offs between economic, social, and biological performance, and is thus directly applicable to most natural resource management decision-making situations.Panulirus ornatus | Torres Strait | management strategy | stewardship | indigenous fishing
Marine ecosystems evolve under many interconnected and area-specific pressures. To fulfil society's intensifying and diversifying needs while ensuring ecologically sustainable development, more effective marine spatial planning and broader-scope management of marine resources is necessary. Integrated ecological-economic fisheries models (IEEFMs) of marine systems are needed to evaluate impacts and sustainability of potential management actions and understand, and anticipate ecological, economic and social dynamics at a range of scales from local to national and regional. To make these models most effective, it is important to determine how model characteristics and methods of communicating results influence the model implementation, the nature of the advice that can be provided and the impact on decisions taken by managers. This article presents a global review and comparative evaluation of 35 IEEFMs applied to marine fisheries and marine ecosystem resources to identify the characteristics that determine their usefulness, effectiveness and implementation. The focus is on fully integrated models that allow for feedbacks between ecological and human processes although not all the models reviewed achieve that. Modellers must invest more time to make models user friendly and to participate in management fora where models and model results can be explained and discussed. Such involvement is beneficial to all parties, leading to improvement of models and more effective implementation of advice, but demands substantial resources which must be built into the governance process. It takes time to develop effective processes for using IEEFMs requiring a long-term commitment to integrating multidisciplinary modelling advice into management decision-making. K E Y W O R D Sbio-economic models, comparative model evaluation, fisheries management advice, integrated ecological-economic fisheries models, marine spatial planning and cross-sector management, performance criteria and scales and risks, use and acceptance and implementation and communication and flexibility and complexity | INTRODUCTIONThere is a growing need for tools to evaluate policies and assess tradeoffs in management of marine resources and provision of ecosystem services such as fishing, aquaculture, renewable energy, shipping, conservation and recreation (Cormier, Kannen, Elliott, & Hall, 2015;Degnbol & Wilson, 2008;EU 2014;Langlois, Fréon, Steyer, Delgenés, & Hélias, 2014;White et al., 2012). It is necessary to elaborate and apply common principles and broader, interdisciplinary management evaluation in the use of marine space involving several types of activities and sectors Soma et al., 2013;Stelzenmüller et al., 2013;Sundblad et al., 2014). Policymakers need to know the costs and benefits of conserving ecosystem goods and services to manage them sustainably. Moreover, according to an ecosystembased approach to management, specific pressures, associated uncertainties and risks need to be taken into account (Douvere, 2008;Ehler & Douvere, 2009;Gi...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.