Small-scale mussel farming in the coastal area of Chalastra (Thermaikos Gulf, Greece) has faced major problems during the last decade due to environmental limitations and to institutional constraints imposed by the absence of local planning and development policies. The aim of our work was to demonstrate crucial aspects of implementing the Systems Approach Framework (SAF) in the area, and more specifically to explain: (a) the key parts of a bioeconomic model that constitutes the basis of a draft management tool, (b) the results of several investigative scenarios examined through the management tool, and (c) the stakeholders' feedback through the participative procedures. The goal was to evaluate the effects of the SAF implementation on the communication between scientists, policy makers, and local stakeholders. The scenarios refer to alternative farming techniques and different environmental conditions, and examine the effects of institutional deficiencies in qualitative and quantitative ways, regarding the sustainability of the activity. The selection of the scenarios was directed from the need to provide a dialogue platform between the conflicting stakeholders. The results clearly demonstrate the effects of mussel-farming techniques on mussel production, as well as the impacts of environmental conditions, human decisions, and institutional choices on the regional (and individual) economic welfare. In the bottom line, the value of the SAF is demonstrated through the apprehension of the policy issue, its impacts, and the alternative management perspectives, as well as through the establishment of a multidimensional collaboration group for the area, which is essential for the further development of the management tool and the implementation of an integrated management policy

The aim of EKLIPSE is to develop a mechanism to inform European-scale policy on biodiversity and related environmental challenges. This paper considers two fundamental aspects of the decision-support mechanism being developed by EKLIPSE: 1) the engagement of relevant actors from science, policy and society to jointly identify evidence for decision making; and 2) the networking of scientists and other holders of knowledge on biodiversity and other relevant evidence. The mechanism being developed has the potential not only to build communities of knowledge holders but to build informal networks among those with similar interests in evidence, be they those that seek to use evidence or those who are building evidence, or both. EKLIPSE has been successful in linking these people and in contributing to building informal networks of requesters of evidence, and experts of evidence and its synthesis. We have yet to see, however, significant engagement of formal networks of knowledge holders. Future success, however, relies on the continued involvement with and engagement of networks, a high degree of transparency within the processes and a high flexibility of structures to adapt to different requirements that arise with the broad range of requests to and activities of EKLIPSE.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract