The Importance of Connected Ocean Monitoring Knowledge Systems and Communities

Abstract

Ocean monitoring will improve outcomes if ways of knowing and priorities from a range of interest groups are successfully integrated. Coastal Indigenous communities hold unique knowledge of the ocean gathered through many generations of inter-dependent living with marine ecosystems. Experiences and observations from living within that system have generated ongoing local and traditional ecological knowledge (LEK and TEK) and Indigenous knowledge (IK) upon which localized sustainable management strategies have been based. Consequently, a comprehensive approach to ocean monitoring should connect academic practices ("science") and local community and Indigenous practices, encompassing "TEK, LEK, and IK." This paper recommends research approaches and methods for connecting scientists, local communities, and IK holders and their respective knowledge systems, and priorities, to help improve marine ecosystem management. Case studies from Canada and New Zealand (NZ) highlight the emerging recognition of IK systems in natural resource management, policy and economic development. The in-depth case studies from Ocean Networks Canada (ONC) and the new Moana Project, NZ highlight real-world experiences connecting IK with scientific monitoring programs. Trial-tested recommendations for successful collaboration include practices for two-way knowledge sharing between scientists and communities, co-development of funding proposals, project plans and educational resources, mutually agreed installation of monitoring equipment, and ongoing sharing of data and research results. We recommend that future ocean monitoring research be conducted using cross-cultural and/or transdisciplinary approaches. Vast oceans and relatively limited monitoring data coupled with the urgency of a changing climate emphasize the need for all eyes possible providing new data and insights. Community members and ocean monitoring scientists in joint research teams are essential for increasing ocean information using diverse methods compared with previous scientific research. Research partnerships can also ensure impactful outcomes through improved understanding of community needs and priorities.

100 Opportunities for More Inclusive Ocean Research: Cross-Disciplinary Research Questions for Sustainable Ocean Governance and Management

“…Efforts have been in place to coordinate ocean observations within the framework of the Essential Ocean Variables (EOVs), a set of agreed minimum variables that need to be measured in a standardized fashion, so that data are comparable and easily delivered to end-users (Miloslavich et al, 2018). In addition, capacity-building and stakeholder engagement efforts, such as collaboration with communities, citizen scientists, and industrial sectors, governmental and international organizations will be needed to fill in data gaps (Kaiser et al, 2019). The connectivity and dynamics of ocean processes in space and time remain poorly understood, and typical data and/or capacity gaps can exist that challenge data collection, especially in areas that are remote, difficult to sample, and or face particularly rapid increase in human activities (e.g., coastal areas, the deep sea, and Arctic) (Halpern et al, 2015;Menegotto and Rangel, 2018).…”

“…The benefits of policies and practices that incentivize and regulate the sharing and dissemination of data are receiving increased attention (Claudet et al, 2019;Evans et al, 2019;Weller et al, 2019). Environmental and socio-economic data are essential for decision making, and cross-disciplinary collaboration is required to design and prioritize data collection and monitoring (Claudet et al, 2019;deYoung et al, 2019;Evans et al, 2019;Kaiser et al, 2019). Key questions include:…”

Addressing the Sustainable Development Goals with a System‐of‐Systems for Monitoring Arctic Coastal Regions

“…This and other techniques may also uncover needs not expressed in the documentation but relevant to developing the MASSIVE project. For example, the stakeholder list could be expanded based on a recent paper that recommends including peoples whose way of living and observations could contribute to traditional ecological knowledge to help improve marine ecosystem management (Kaiser et al 2019). Table 5.…”

Conceptualizing indicators as boundary objects in integrating Inuit knowledge and western science for marine resource management

“…Despite increasing literature in recent years supporting the importance of integrating IK in resource management (Huntington et al 2002;Brook et al 2009;Kaiser et al 2019), more research effort is needed to shift attention to this issue and specifically to highlight how IK has and could impact further management decisions. All four of the land claim agreements in Inuit Nunangat explicitly reference the need to incorporate IK (termed differently in the different agreements) into fisheries and wildlife decision making (Table 1).…”

“…These are all large barriers in the process of knowledge co-production that hinder meaningful participation of Indigenous communities in regulatory processes. The increasing body of work on the value of IK conservation narratives highlights several overarching areas deserving of further research attention (Berkes et al 2007;Kaiser et al 2019). In this paper we explore the role of indicators for communities across Inuit Nunangat, that are unique compared with where much of the indicators work has been developed and applied before.…”