Ecological and social strategies for managing fisheries using the Resist‐Accept‐Direct (RAD) framework

Abstract

Fisheries management is a complex task made even more challenging by rapid and unprecedented socioecological transformations associated with climate change. The Resist-Accept-Direct (RAD) framework can be a useful tool to support fisheries management in facing the high uncertainty and variability associated with aquatic ecosystem transformations. Here, RAD strategies are presented to address ecological goals for aquatic ecosystems and social goals for fisheries. These strategies are mapped on a controllability matrix which explores the ability to guide a system's behaviour towards a desired state based on ecological responsiveness and societal receptivity to change. Understanding and improving the controllability of aquatic systems and fisheries can help managers to maintain the broadest suite of available RAD management strategies.

Review of adaptations of U.S. Commercial Fisheries in response to the COVID‐19 pandemic using the Resist‐Accept‐Direct (RAD) framework

“…To date, the RAD framework has primarily been used to describe ecological outcomes, but here it has been adapted to categorize social outcomes (see also, Lynch et al, 2022a , 2022b ). In the context of social outcomes, managers and fishers might resist , accept , or direct social transformations in response to potentially permanent shifts in social systems.…”

“…The RAD framework has proved to be a useful tool for ecosystem managers to formalize their expectations of future system states and their options for addressing them (Lynch et al, 2022a , 2022b ; Magness et al, 2022 ; Schuurman et al, 2022 ). However, the existing RAD literature is predominantly focused on ecosystem transformations and ecosystem management, when in fact many ecological systems are embedded within larger, complex SESs (Ostrom, 2009 ; Walker & Meyers, 2004 ).…”

A Resist‐Accept‐Direct (RAD) future for Salmon in Maine and California: Salmon at the southern edge

“…Salmon are connected with human populations by deep and persistent connections with Indigenous peoples on both coasts, reflected in a myriad of ways including names and extensive knowledge of different species and life‐history forms (Atlas et al, 2020; Carothers et al, 2021; Denny & Fanning, 2016). Connections with these iconic fish persist through capture in modern fisheries‐commercial, recreational, subsistence as well as linkages to sense of place for both Indigenous and Western societies (Diver, 2012; Liebich et al, 2018; Lynch et al, 2022, this volume). Their migrations are widely celebrated throughout their ranges in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, but the freshwater ecosystems that salmon need have undergone significant transformation, and changes have also occurred across a variety of distinct marine ecosystems.…”

“…If one recognizes, it will take many decades to restore some limiting factor, then resist duration simply increases. The interplay between ecological and social systems is key to both interpretation and implementation (Lynch et al, 2022). But what if it is determined that limiting factors cannot be restored in a timeframe relevant to salmon?…”

Resist, accept, and direct responses to biological invasions: A social–ecological perspective

“…These factors define the decision space for managers facing RAD decisions (Clifford et al, 2022). More explicit consideration of mental models that shape how people view species (introduced or native) can act as a starting point for incorporating human dimensions into the process of formulating decision alternatives for managing biological invasions (Estévez et al, 2015; Shackleton et al, 2019; Lynch et al, 2022a, b). Through understanding the human dimensions of invasions, practitioners can identify a potentially broader range of decision alternatives (see below) for managing invasions that more effectively address invasion trajectories and are representative of the perspectives of stakeholders and rights holders (Ooft, 2008).…”