Emergence of multi-stakeholder-driven cooperative research in the Northwest Atlantic: The case of the Northeast Consortium

Hartley, Troy W.; Robertson, Robert A.

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2005.09.006

Cited by 48 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is a conflict of interest requirement that prohibits anyone who is involved in any of the projects being funded from participating in the proposal review. An example of this is the Northeast Consortium's Advisory Committee which reviews proposals and offers advice, regarding which projects are funded, a process that includes fishers (Hartley and Robertson 2006). Involving fishers in the proposal review process means that they contribute, even if indirectly, in the selection of which projects are funded.…”

Section: Boundary Management: Balanced Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is particularly true for the large-scale commercial groundfish fisheries in the Northeast U.S. As participants in a co-management system (Pomeroy and Berkes 1997), scientists, fishers, and managers collectively failed to devise rules to effectively manage this common-pool resource. With few opportunities to contribute their knowledge, which was often dismissed as irrelevant or anecdotal, fishers grew distrustful of scientists' stock assessments and resulting management decisions (Hartley and Robertson 2006). In particular, fishers were concerned about the credibility of the government's resource survey that produced assessments and management advice that conflicted with their experience and observations (Dobbs 2000;Weber 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This paper investigates the interactions between fishers and scientists in the case of cooperative research in the Northeast U.S. Cooperative research emerged in this region beginning in the late 1990s in response to the regional fisheries crisis, including stock depletion and socioeconomic hardship, as well as an adversarial political climate (Dobbs 2000;Hartley and Robertson 2006). The U.S. Congress allocated millions of dollars to fund industry-science cooperative research with the intent of improving industry-science relations, improving the knowledge base of fisheries management, and providing supplemental income to fishers impacted by the fisheries crisis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cooperative research and knowledge flow in the marine commons

Johnson

2009

Int J Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The lack of communication and knowledge exchange between fishers and scientists, as well as managers, has often been at the root of fisheries management conflicts. Integration of fishers' knowledge into scientific-based fisheries management is difficult due to distrust between fishers and scientists and institutional constraints that limit management to only the best scientific information available. A recent response to the Northeast U.S. fisheries crisis has been to include fishers in scientific research. Cooperative research, where fishers and scientists collaborate to produce knowledge for fisheries management, aims to improve the knowledge base of fisheries management and integrate fishers and their knowledge into the science policy process, which together is expected to generate broader acceptance of scientific-based management. Drawing on ethnographic research conducted in the Northeast U.S., this paper discusses the value of cooperative research as a tool for managing the commons. Specifically, it focuses on the flow of knowledge and expertise between fishers and scientists. The flow of knowledge from fishers to science often involves a process of translation, where fishers' knowledge is transformed (proven, verified, etc.) into scientific knowledge. Knowledge and expertise also flow from scientists to fishers, where fishers gain understandings of the scientific research process. With this new expertise, fishers develop a greater capacity to participate in science and management discussions. The paper suggests that two-way knowledge flow between fishers and scientists can improve commons management through increased communication, trust and capacity building, which ideally can improve mutual understanding necessary for collective action. Finally, boundary spanners are identified as being critical to successful knowledge exchange in cooperative research.

show abstract

Section: Boundary Management: Balanced Flowmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cooperative research and knowledge flow in the marine commons

Johnson

2009

Int J Commons

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These projects involve effective, equal partnerships among fishermen, scientists, and other stakeholders. The program emerged from political demands for more democratic forms of fisheries science and to provide relief for the socioeconomic hardships experienced by fishing communities due to more restrictive fisheries management (Hartley and Robertson 2006a). The University of New Hampshire, the University of Maine, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution work together to foster this program.…”

Section: Northeast Consortiummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The divide between industry, science, and management increased exponentially. Out of this adversity evolved several programs to bring industry and science together-both to increase data collection and to improve relationships among marine fisheries stakeholders through collaborative fisheries research (Hartley and Robertson 2006a). The past decade has seen a substantial investment in collaborative fisheries research focusing on the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank ecosystems.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Stakeholder Perspectives on the Impacts of a Decade of Collaborative Fisheries Research in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-Analysis of the perceptions of commercial fishermen, marine scientists, and other stakeholders of the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank ecosystem regarding collaborative fisheries research revealed that the benefits of collaboration have been extensive and that a loss of further research opportunities would be consequential. To date, more than 1,000 individuals have participated in research initiatives dedicated to promoting collaboration between scientists and fishermen. A series of eight public meetings were held in the summer of 2008 to determine from fishermen, scientists, and others how this collaboration has affected them, their communities, and the management of important marine resources. Of the 142 attendees, participation was greatest among fishermen (28%) and scientists (24%). The impact of collaborative fisheries research most frequently cited was an increase in the regional capacity to conduct research, utilizing the knowledge and expertise of fishermen and industry vessels as research platforms. Improvements in communication, relationships, and trust between science, industry, and other stakeholders were also lauded. In addition to the social impacts, the economic benefits included enhanced gear efficiency, new fishery opportunities, and help in sustaining fishing operations in times of more restrictive fisheries management. The most frequently cited potential impact of a loss in future funding were probable limits to the capacity of science and management to address local, emerging, or regulatory priorities. Less funding would result in fewer opportunities for stakeholders to work together, build trust, and network. We conclude that because the demands for stakeholder engagement and scientific information will only increase with the global shift toward ecosystembased management, programs specifically designed to foster collaboration will play a critical role.

show abstract

Collaborative Approach to Fisheries Management as a Way to Increase the Effectiveness of Future Regulations in the Galapagos Archipelago

Usseglio

Schuhbauer

Friedlander

2013

Social and Ecological Interactions in the Galapagos Islands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For coastal fishing communities, it is becoming increasingly clear that the key to success is community-based comanagement, which incorporates all users and stakeholders in the decision-making processes about fisheries management. Established regulations can easily fail due to lack of enforcement. However, many coastal communities do not have the economic resources for the necessary enforcement and therefore rely on compliance by fishers. There are about 400 local fishers in the Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR), who depend on the exploitation of coastal resources for their living. Evidence shows that the GMR suffers from lack of compliance; coastal resources have been overexploited and illegal fishing has been observed. The results of interviewing 26 % of Galapagos' active fishers show no trust in scientific studies, lack of income alternatives provided, no dissemination of results, and lack of participation of fishers in the studies. We argue that the abovementioned problems can be tackled by using a collaborative approach, which includes fishing community members in each step of the research process. This would foster a sense of belonging among the Galapagos fishers, who are currently an underrepresented part of the already-established comanagement scheme, which has yet to achieve sustainable fisheries in the Galapagos Islands.

show abstract

Emergence of multi-stakeholder-driven cooperative research in the Northwest Atlantic: The case of the Northeast Consortium

Cited by 48 publications

References 3 publications

Cooperative research and knowledge flow in the marine commons

Cooperative research and knowledge flow in the marine commons

Assessing Stakeholder Perspectives on the Impacts of a Decade of Collaborative Fisheries Research in the Gulf of Maine and Georges Bank

Collaborative Approach to Fisheries Management as a Way to Increase the Effectiveness of Future Regulations in the Galapagos Archipelago

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About