The science of spatial fisheries management, which combines ecology, oceanography, and economics, has matured significantly. As a result, there have been recent advances in exploiting spatially explicit data to develop spatially explicit management policies, such as networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). However, when data are sparse, spatially explicit policies become less viable, and we must instead rely on blunt policies such as total allowable catches or imprecisely configured networks of MPAs. Therefore, spatial information has the potential to change management approaches and thus has value. We develop a general framework within which to analyze the value of information for spatial fisheries management and apply that framework to several US Pacific coast fisheries. We find that improved spatial information can increase fishery value significantly (>10% in our simulations), and that it changes dramatically the efficient management approach-switching from diffuse effort everywhere to a strategy where fishing is spatially targeted, with some areas under intensive harvest and others closed to fishing. Using all available information, even when incomplete, is essential to management success and may as much as double fishery value relative to using (admittedly incorrect) assumptions commonly invoked.dispersal kernel | fisheries management | value of information S patially explicit policies are increasingly used for conservation and management of marine resources. Broad patterns of resource decline, increasing conflicts in coastal zones among competing users, and pressures from a complex set of human impacts are some of the reasons policy makers are turning to spatial management as an evolving paradigm for ocean policy (1, 2).A substantial body of literature indicates that spatial management can improve marine resource management. For example, siting a network of marine protected areas (MPAs) in strategic spatial locations can simultaneously enhance both the yields and profits of a fishery and improve ecosystem service provision (3-7). Other prominent examples include ocean zoning for various activities, ecosystem-based management, and the use of spatial concessions or territorial user rights in fisheries (TURFs) management. Several studies have documented the benefits arising from more explicit spatial management (2,(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)13), although concerns about whether spatial management approaches increase or maintain fisheries catches still remain (e.g., refs. 14 and 15).Achieving benefits from spatial management policies requires spatial information. For example, designing effective MPA networks requires spatial information on habitat, species distributions, larval, juvenile, and adult movements and source-sink dynamics of larval production and recruitment (7,(16)(17)(18). These data are often scarce and costly to obtain. The questions of which sources of uncertainty may be reduced cost effectively, and what management approaches are more robust to remaining uncertainties are fundamentally important in t...