Setting objectives for evaluating management adaptation actions to address climate change impacts in south‐eastern Australian fisheries

Abstract

Under likely climate change scenarios, changes to fisheries assessment, monitoring, management and governance, intended to reduce negative impacts and seize opportunities to improve performance, will form an important part of climate change adaptation responses for fisheries. Comprehensively and consistently assessing possible management adaptation options requires a clear definition of a multi-criteria evaluation framework incorporating information about the relative importance of often competing criteria or objectives. Such a framework is often missing from climate change adaptation evaluation, with adaptation priorities and plans often developed without direct reference to the key objectives of management. We used the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to develop a weighted hierarchy of objectives in four south-eastern Australian fisheries. The developed hierarchy included fisheries management objectives routinely articulated in policy and management documents, those that may underpin effective adaptation and adaptation planning, and objectives likely to contribute to ongoing adaptive capacity and resilience of fisheries and associated communities. Results of an interactive survey of managers, researchers and commercial and recreational fishers yielded average weightings of objectives that were quite consistent across the four fisheries, with a very strong preference for ensuring that adaptations support environmental and ecological values, particularly through sustaining the harvested population. However, differences between stakeholder groups were more marked, with economic objectives considered more important by commercial fishers, and social objectives by recreational fishers, than by other groups. This suggests the possibility of conflicts between groups when determining appropriate adaptation strategies, as alternative strategies will have different economic and social outcomes even if achieving comparable environmental outcomes.

Fisheries management approaches as platforms for climate change adaptation: Comparing theory and practice in Australian fisheries

“…To identify "adaptive attributes" for assessment of the suitability of each of the management approaches as platforms for climate change adaptation, the study draws on previous evaluations of fisheries governance [23], adaptation and fisheries management [22,26,38], and marine biodiversity conservation governance in the context of climate change [25]. The adaptive governance regime requirements identified by Lockwood et al [25] were initially derived from resilience and other adaptive governance management approaches and subsequently refined by a panel of international marine scientists and marine biodiversity managers using an iterative multi-stage process of expert elicitation (Delphi method).…”

“…In contrast, embedding or "mainstreaming" the development of adaptive capacity within existing fisheries management systems has been seen as the more practical approach to addressing climate-driven changes [8]. As climate change is likely to exacerbate existing fisheries management problems [11], adaptation options need to be assessed within prevailing development contexts and governance goals [26,[36][37][38].…”

South Pacific Integrated Ecosystem Studies meeting: toward conservation and sustainable use of marine resources in the South Pacific

“…The contributions by Jennings et al . () and Frusher et al . () are good examples of challenges posed in this section, where an increased knowledge of factors affecting vulnerability of coastal communities, the need for models and frameworks that deal with climate change and ways to engage community are required.…”

“…Jennings et al . () demonstrated the use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, using a stakeholder‐developed weighted hierarchy of objectives including fisheries management and climate adaptation objectives, to underpin effective adaptation planning. Setting objectives for evaluating management adaptation actions requires a multi‐criteria approach that captures biological, economic and social objectives, especially as different stakeholder groups can have different and conflicting aims.…”

Management priorities for seawater desalination plants in a marine protected area: A multi-criteria analysis

“…The approach is particularly useful for examining tradeoffs in situations when multiple management objectives cannot be optimized simultaneously [44]. While the AHP has been used in the context of multiple marine issues including fisheries [36,39,42], aquaculture [70], marine protected areas [28,32,52], and ecosystem services [45], the method has not been applied to quantify local preferences for desalination plants.…”