From beans to breams: how participatory workshops can contribute to marine conservation planning

Wheeler, Marius; Chambers, Frank M.; Sims-Castley, Rebecca; Cowling, R. M.; Schoeman, David S.

doi:10.2989/ajms.2008.30.3.3.637

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other mapping studies have annotated paper maps during interviews and then transformed them into digital form [36], [51], but direct annotation into the GIS is more resource efficient and removes the possibility of introducing error or bias during a later digitising process. Use of digitised maps also provides much greater flexibility, allowing the interviewer to carry multiple maps and work at different scales, depending on the type of fisher being interviewed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Spatial Access Priority Mapping (SAPM) with Fishers: A Quantitative GIS Method for Participatory Planning

Yates

Schoeman

2013

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial management tools, such as marine spatial planning and marine protected areas, are playing an increasingly important role in attempts to improve marine management and accommodate conflicting needs. Robust data are needed to inform decisions among different planning options, and early inclusion of stakeholder involvement is widely regarded as vital for success. One of the biggest stakeholder groups, and the most likely to be adversely impacted by spatial restrictions, is the fishing community. In order to take their priorities into account, planners need to understand spatial variation in their perceived value of the sea. Here a readily accessible, novel method for quantitatively mapping fishers’ spatial access priorities is presented. Spatial access priority mapping, or SAPM, uses only basic functions of standard spreadsheet and GIS software. Unlike the use of remote-sensing data, SAPM actively engages fishers in participatory mapping, documenting rather than inferring their priorities. By so doing, SAPM also facilitates the gathering of other useful data, such as local ecological knowledge. The method was tested and validated in Northern Ireland, where over 100 fishers participated in a semi-structured questionnaire and mapping exercise. The response rate was excellent, 97%, demonstrating fishers’ willingness to be involved. The resultant maps are easily accessible and instantly informative, providing a very clear visual indication of which areas are most important for the fishers. The maps also provide quantitative data, which can be used to analyse the relative impact of different management options on the fishing industry and can be incorporated into planning software, such as MARXAN, to ensure that conservation goals can be met at minimum negative impact to the industry. This research shows how spatial access priority mapping can facilitate the early engagement of fishers and the ready incorporation of their priorities into the decision-making process in a transparent, quantitative way.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participatory mapping projects have documented a diverse range of features, including: the locations of fishing grounds; the distribution of habitats and species; key management areas such as spawning grounds; and benthic and oceanographic features [26], [28]–[36]. These projects provide invaluable information for marine management.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial Access Priority Mapping (SAPM) with Fishers: A Quantitative GIS Method for Participatory Planning

Yates

Schoeman

2013

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Stakeholder input was decisive in five stages of planning: identifying broad goals; setting objectives; defining selection criteria for priority areas; supplying, validating, and generating spatial data to represent conservation features; and identifying priority areas (see Pomeroy and Douvere (2008) for a review on stakeholder participation in marine planning). Expert workshops facilitated stakeholder involvement in decision-making processes in the Gulf of California and contributed to filling gaps concerning ecological and socioeconomic data (Wheeler et al, 2008). In addition, highly participatory processes (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine conservation planning in practice: lessons learned from the Gulf of California

Álvarez‐Romero

Pressey

Ban

et al. 2013

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Overfishing, pollution, coastal development and climate change threaten marine biodiversity globally and compromise the services that marine ecosystems provide. Systematic conservation planning (SCP) provides a framework to identify areas where actions can be effective in addressing these threats, while minimizing the costs of interventions. This study investigated the application of SCP in the Gulf of California, a marine hotspot where seven prioritization exercises have been undertaken.The review of planning exercises showed that the use of SCP methods has progressed slowly (gaps include planning for land–sea connections and ecosystem services) and highlighted benefits and difficulties of applying SCP principles and tools.Despite some convergence, important spatial differences were found in priorities between plans. Convergence was evident in well‐studied shallow and benthic marine ecosystems. There were also important differences related to the planning approach, methods and extent. Divergence between methodological and spatial similarities between plans suggests that additional factors (e.g. manually delineating priority areas, incorporating updated datasets, random error), in addition to data and objectives, play an important role in defining the distribution of conservation priorities.According to expert opinion, the implementation of new marine protected areas (MPAs) in the region has been influenced by some of the planning exercises. However, uptake of planning outputs has progressed slowly for many reasons (e.g. conflicting mandates and interests between organizations, limited technical capacities and resources, insufficient political commitment). Other benefits of planning included: developing institutional skills and knowledge; improving collaboration and coordination between organizations (including agencies, and local, regional and national NGOs); converging on the need to assess priorities for marine conservation in regional context; and building trust among organizations.The existence of multiple marine conservation plans in the Gulf of California also highlighted some of the complexities and benefits of having multiple sets of priorities.Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…Overall, there is a significant body of literature which documents that the incorporation of participatory approaches in decision making can lead to better social, economic and environmental outcomes in many different contexts (e.g. Hernandez and Kempton, 2003;Walker, 2007;Wheeler et al, 2008). In the case of fisheries and marine reserves, participatory approaches have the potential to be an effective bridge between traditional fisheries management and marine biodiversity conservation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine Park Planning and Recreational Fishing: Is the Science Lost at Sea? Case Studies from Australia

McPhee¹

2011

The International Journal of Science in Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

No take" marine parks are widely advocated and increasingly utilised as a tool aimed at protecting marine biodiversity, and they may also be used as a fisheries management tool. In Australia a national system of no-take marine parks is being established to protect marine biodiversity. The creation of this network of no-take marine parks that exclude the public from recreational fishing in large areas of the ocean is extremely contentious. Nearly one quarter of the Australian population goes recreational fishing at least once a year, and it is a $2 billion industry. The motivations for, and aspirations of these recreational anglers are extremely diverse. While there is a clearly documented and accepted need to engage stakeholders through consultation and participation, there has been little focus in considering how the marine science associated with marine parks is communicated to, and interpreted by, recreational fishers. It is generally presented as value neutral information when in fact it can be demonstrated to frequently be value laden and the underlying values are increasingly inconsistent with many recreational fishers' observations of the natural environment which they interact with. The application of marine science in the context of marine parks has significant social and economic impact, and it is contested that these impacts are rarely understood clearly by most scientists active within the discipline, however views on them are offered that are frequently unchallenged by decision makers. In this paper, a number of Australian marine park case studies from urban and rural areas are used to examine identified contentions in detail. Potential solutions to challenges and contentions that have been encountered are presented.

show abstract

From beans to breams: how participatory workshops can contribute to marine conservation planning

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Spatial Access Priority Mapping (SAPM) with Fishers: A Quantitative GIS Method for Participatory Planning

Spatial Access Priority Mapping (SAPM) with Fishers: A Quantitative GIS Method for Participatory Planning

Marine conservation planning in practice: lessons learned from the Gulf of California

Marine Park Planning and Recreational Fishing: Is the Science Lost at Sea? Case Studies from Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About