Search

Understanding the potential future impacts of climate change along the supply chain for highly traded fisheries products can inform choices to enhance future global seafood security. We examine the supply chains of the Australian tropical rock lobster fishery (TRL) and southern rock lobster fishery (SRL), with similar destination markets but different catch methods and fishing communities. A boat-to-market analysis allows for comparison and illustration of the effects of single supply-chain aspects. We used life cycle assessment to provide an overview of the environmental footprint, expressed as global warming potential (GWP), eutrophication, and cumulative energy demand, for two lobster products: live animals and frozen tails. The export phase contributed 44% and 56% of GWP of live-weight lobster for SRL and TRL, respectively. The SRL fishery currently produces 68% of the combined 1,806.7 tonnes of lobster product and 78% of the combined global warming for the two fisheries over the whole supply chain. We develop climate adaptation options that: (1) reduce the overall footprint; (2) consider alternative supply-chain strategies (e.g., reduce cost); and (3) predicted impact of future climate change. Adaptation options include: more direct export routes and change in the export transport mode. Value adding and product differentiation, which can level out seasonality and thus spread risk, is likely to become increasingly important for both increases and decreases in predicted climate-induced abundance of fish species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The changing geographical distribution of species, or range shift, is one of the better documented fingerprints of climate change in the marine environment. Range shifts may also lead to dramatic changes in the distribution of economic, social, and cultural opportunities. These challenge marine resource users' capacity to adapt to a changing climate and managers' ability to implement adaptation plans. In particular, a reluctance to attribute marine range shift to climate change can undermine the effectiveness of climate change communications and pose a potential barrier to successful adaptation. Attribution is a known powerful predictor of behavioural intention. Understanding the cognitive processes that underpin the formation of marine resource users' beliefs about the cause of observed marine range shift phenomena is therefore an important topic for research. An examination of the attribution by marine resource users of three types of range shifts experienced in a marine climate change hotspot in southeast Australia to various climate and non-climate drivers indicates the existence of at least three contributing cognitions. These are: (i) engrained mental representations of environmental phenomena, (ii) scientific complexity in the attribution pathway, and (iii) dissonance from the positive or negative nature of the impact. All three play a part in explaining the complex pattern of attribution of marine climate change range shifts, and should be considered when planning for engagement with stakeholders and managers around adaptation to climate change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the domain of decision-support tools for the management of marine fish resources, considerable attention has been paid to the development of models explaining how fish stocks change over space and time. In most models, fishing effort is assumed to be exogenous and determined by factors such as management. Increasingly, there has been a call for bio-economic models to also account for the dynamics of fishing fleets, recognizing that fishers respond to changing environmental, institutional and economic conditions. A growing literature has sought to explicitly model the endogenous determinants of the capacity of fishing fleets, the intensity of its use and its temporal and spatial allocation across fishing opportunities. We review this literature, focusing on empirical applications of the behavioural models that have been put forward to explain and predict observed fleet dynamics. We find that although economic factors are usually included as a dominant driver in most studies, this is often based on the use of proxy variables for the key economic drivers, for which adequate data are lacking. Also, while many studies acknowledge that social and social-psychological factors play a significant role in explaining observed fishing behaviour, their inclusion in fishing fleet dynamic models is still very limited. Progress in this domain can only be achieved via the development of multidisciplinary research programmes focusing on applied quantitative analysis of the drivers of fishing fleet dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is broad consensus that the main problem facing fisheries globally is too many boats chasing too few fish. Unfortunately it is also possible to argue that there are too many proposed solutions and not enough practical answers to improving fisheries management. There is a deepening divide between those who propose alternative regulatory controls on fishers, including establishing large areas permanently closed to fishing, and those who argue for better alignment of incentives combined with broad participation of resource users in fishery management decisions (in simple terms, between top down and bottom up systems of governance). However despite the choice of policy instruments used, a consistent outcome is that resource users behave in a manner that is often unintended by the designers of the management system. Hence whilst uncertainty is broadly recognized as a pervasive feature of fisheries management, to date most of the attention has focussed on only part of that uncertainty - scientific uncertainty about the status of exploited resources. The effect of uncertainty generated on the human side of fisheries science and management has received much less attention. However, the uncertainty generated by unexpected resource user behaviour is critical as it has unplanned consequences and leads to unintended management outcomes. Using empirical evidence of unexpected resource user behaviour and reviewing current responses to unexpected management outcomes, we identify different approaches that both improve prediction of human behaviour in fisheries systems and identify management measures that are more robust to these sources of uncertainty. However, unless the micro scale drivers of human behaviour that contribute to macro scale implementation uncertainty are communicated effectively to managers and considered more regularly and in greater depth, unanticipated responses to management actions will continue to undermine management systems and threaten the sustainability of fisheries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Knowledge co-production (KCP) is presented as an effective strategy to inform responses to complex coastal and marine social-ecological challenges. Co-production processes are further posited to improve research and decision outcomes in a wide range of problem contexts (e.g., biodiversity conservation, climate change adaptation), for example, by facilitating social learning among diverse actors. As such, KCP processes are increasingly centered in global environment initiatives such as the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. However, KCP is not a panacea, and much uncertainty remains about its emergence and implementation, in particular, the manner in which broader governance contexts determine the interplay of knowledge, power, and decision-making. Three objectives guide our analysis: (1) to interrogate more fully the interplay among social relations of power, knowledge production practices, and the (colonial) governance contexts in which they are embedded; (2) to consider the challenges and limitations of KCP in particular places by drawing attention to key governance themes and their implications for achieving better outcomes; and (3) to work toward a fuller understanding of "deep KCP" that cautions against a tendency to view knowledge processes in coastal and marine governance settings as an instrumental or techno-managerial problem. A qualitative and reflective approach was used to examine multiple dimensions of the interplay of KCP, governance, and power in several marine and coastal contexts, including Canada, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea. In particular, our analysis highlights the importance of: (1) recognizing diverse motivations that frame co-production processes; (2) the manner in which identities, positionality, and values influence and are influenced by governance contexts; (3) highlighting governance capacity with respect to spatial and temporal constraints; (4) institutional reforms necessary for KCP and the links to governance; and (5) the relationship between knowledge sharing, data sovereignty, and governance. We seek to encourage those involved in or considering co-production initiatives to engage carefully and critically in these processes and make co-production more than a box to tick. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]