Search

© 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd Aims and objectives: To develop a framework to enable discussion, debate and the formulation of interventions to address ethical issues in nursing practice. Background: Social, cultural, political and economic drivers are rapidly changing the landscape of health care in our local environments but also in a global context. Increasingly, nurses are faced with a range of ethical dilemmas in their work. This requires investigation into the culture of healthcare systems and organisations to identify the root causes and address the barriers and enablers of ethical practice. The increased medicalisation of health care; pressures for systemisation; efficiency and cost reduction; and an ageing population contribute to this complexity. Often, ethical issues in nursing are considered within the abstract and philosophical realm until a dilemma is encountered. Such an approach limits the capacity to tangibly embrace ethical values and frameworks as pathways to equitable, accessible, safe and quality health care and as a foundation for strengthening a supportive and enabling workplace for nurses and other healthcare workers. Design: Conceptual framework development. Methods: A comprehensive literature review was undertaken using the social–ecological framework as an organising construct. Results: This framework views ethical practice as the outcome of interaction among a range of factors at eight levels: individual factors (patients and families); individual factors (nurses); relationships between healthcare professionals; relationships between patients and nurses; organisational healthcare context; professional and education regulation and standards; community; and social, political and economic. Conclusions: Considering these elements as discrete, yet interactive and intertwined forces can be useful in developing interventions to promote ethical practice. We consider this framework to have utility in policy, practice, education and research. Relevan

Assessing the stock status of mixed and/or multi-species fishery resources is challenging. This is especially true in highly diverse systems, where landed catches are small, but comprise many species. In these circumstances, whole-of-ecosystem management requires consideration of the impact of harvesting on a plethora of species. However, this is logistically infeasible and cost prohibitive. To overcome this issue, selected ‘indicator’ species are used to assess the risk to sustainability of all ‘like’ species susceptible to capture within a fishery resource. Indicator species are determined via information on their (1) inherent vulnerability, i.e. biological attributes; (2) risk to sustainability, i.e. stock status; and (3) management importance, i.e. commercial prominence, social and/or cultural amenity value of the resource. These attributes are used to determine an overall score for each species which is used to identify ‘indicator’ species. The risk status (i.e. current risk) of the indicator species then determines the risk-level for the biological sustainability of the entire fishery resource and thus the level of priority for management, monitoring, assessment and compliance. A range of fishery management regimes are amenable to the indicator species approach, including both effort limited fisheries (e.g. individually transferable effort systems) and output controlled fisheries (e.g. species-specific catch quotas). The indicator species approach has been used and refined for fisheries resources in Western Australia over two decades. This process is now widely understood and accepted by stakeholders, as it focuses fishery dependent- and/or independent-monitoring, biological sampling, stock assessment and compliance priorities, thereby optimising the use of available jurisdictional resources.

Fisheries managers are becoming increasingly aware of the need to quantify all forms of harvest, including that by recreational fishers. This need has been driven by both a growing recognition of the potential impact that noncommercial fishers can have on exploited resources and the requirement to allocate catch limits between different sectors of the wider fishing community in many jurisdictions. Marine recreational fishers are rarely required to report any of their activity, and some form of survey technique is usually required to estimate levels of recreational catch and effort. In this review, we describe and discuss studies that have attempted to estimate the nature and extent of recreational harvests of marine fishes in New Zealand and Australia over the past 20 years. We compare studies by method to show how circumstances dictate their application and to highlight recent developments that other researchers may find of use. Although there has been some convergence of approach, we suggest that context is an important consideration, and many of the techniques discussed here have been adapted to suit local conditions and to address recognized sources of bias. Much of this experience, along with novel improvements to existing approaches, have been reported only in "gray" literature because of an emphasis on providing estimates for immediate management purposes. This paper brings much of that work together for the first time, and we discuss how others might benefit from our experience.

Management of fisheries around the world is challenged by fishing impacts on habitats, bycatch species, threatened and endangered species, and even associated ecological communities. One response to these other factors has been a call for ecosystem-based fisheries management (EBFM), which demands consideration of the above non-target interactions. A challenge with implementation of EBFM is the scale and range of issues to be considered, all of which cannot be addressed at the same level of detail as for target species, due to data or time constraints. We developed an approach to progress the EBFM mandate in Australia, using a new ecological risk assessment framework applied to fisheries, termed Ecological Risk Assessment for the Effects of Fishing (ERAEF). Novel features of this framework include its hierarchical structure and its precautionary approach to uncertainty. The amount of information required increases through the hierarchy, and allows application in data-limited situations. The ERAEF framework has been applied to over 30 fisheries in Australia and elsewhere. The efficiencies in application of the hierarchical approach are illustrated by the south-east otter trawl fishery, where following Level 1 assessment of all components, an initial set of 600 species and 158 habitats was reduced to a group of concern of 159 species and 46 habitats using the Level 2 analysis, with the number of species of concern further reduced to 25 following Level 3 analysis. As a result of the assessments in Australia, management actions have been enacted for a range of the high risk species. Overall, the ERAEF approach offers a realistic method to assess ecological risk in an EBFM context, and has applicability in a wide range of fisheries. The interactive and inclusive nature of the approach also has the advantage of bringing stakeholders, scientists and managers together to develop management solutions.