A comparative analysis of sustainable fishery development indicator systems in Australia and Canada

Abstract

This paper comparatively analyzes the systems in Australia and Canada from the perspective of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation's Technical Guidelines for Responsible Fisheries No. 8. The results show that the key factors in the success of the Australian system are public participation, selecting an indicator with its objectives and improving management performance by the evaluation of the system. Further, the boundaries of the SFDIS should be the same as the boundaries of the management units and fisheries should be examined independently. The framework chosen by the Canadian system is more all-round, and can be combined with the PSR framework to maximize the management effects. Finally, techniques and specialist software such as fuzzy AHP etc. are 'well-suited to measuring weights and have the potential to be applied elsewhere'. Visual presentation is the best way to promote communication with the public. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation's kite diagram and the Sustainable Development Committee's dashboard of sustainability are two excellent visualizations. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

Untitled

“…On the other hand, gaining clear understanding and assessment would require quantitative and qualitative information regarding the status and development patterns of sectors concerned. With increasing concerns regarding the sustainable use of natural resources among public, civil society organizations and scientific communities, the use of indicators as a practical tool to assess existing status, identify development patterns and monitor ecological, economic and social aspects of fisheries and aquaculture sectors is gaining popularity and support among international and national advisory and management bodies (Bonzon, 2000;Hundloe, 2000;Sabatella and Franquesa, 2004;Liu and Ou, 2007;Ünal and Franquesa, 2010). Many indicators have been developed by scientists and/or international organizations to assess and analyze the performance of fisheries and aquaculture sectors from social and economic perspective (Bonzon, 2000;Hundloe, 2000;Sabatella and Franquesa, 2004;Ceriola et al, 2008).…”

Application of a Sustainable Fisheries Development Indicator System (SFDIS) for Better Management Outcomes in Taiwan Offshore and Coastal Fishery

“…The biggest challenge is therefore selecting development indicators and appropriate measures for them. Currently, there are many selection-related regulations regarding sustainable development indicators (Bedrich, Billharz, and Matravers 1997;Chesson, Clayton, and Whitworth 1999;Charles et al 2002;FAO 1999;Gallic 2002;Hardi and Zdan 1997;World Resources Institute 1993), Downloaded by [The UC Irvine Libraries] at 06:32 02 November 2014 of which the three most common principles are relatedness, accessibility, and acceptability (Liu and Ou 2007). Where there is a lack of target reference points, several studies have adopted average value or baseline year to assess objectively whether the current state/trend of indicators is approaching or moving away from their sustainability (Adrianto, Matsuda, and Sakuma 2005;Chesson, Clayton, and Whitworth 1999;Liu, Ou, and Ting 2005).…”

“…In each method or model, indicator weights, measures, and objectives can be used to adjust progress toward the sustainability of fisheries. The kite diagram and dashboard combined with changes that have occurred over time can be used to show and forecast changes in fisheries, so that managers can come up with solutions and policies in advance (Liu and Ou 2007).…”

An evaluation of self-governance in the New Zealand Bluff oyster fishery – The indicator system approach

“…Since the United Nation's [29] Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, there has been gradual development and use of indicators as a tool for fisheries management [30]. Following their initiation, a series of indicator frameworks were developed by the leading international non-government organisations, namely the United Nations [31,32], the Food and Agriculture Organisation [33][34][35] and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [36][37][38].…”