104 results
Environment
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2014-028
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Mud cockle (Katelysia spp.) stock enhancement/restoration: practical implementation and policy evaluation

This study was conducted to restore the Mud Cockle population in the Section Bank of Port River, South Australia, which had drastically decreased due to commercial fishing. Mud Cockles are important not only for commercial purposes but also for stabilizing sediment and reducing turbidity in the...
ORGANISATION:
SARDI Food Safety and Innovation
TAGS
Stock Assessment
Recreational Fishing
Rac Sa
Policy
Fisheries Management
SPECIES
Cockles
Blank
PROJECT NUMBER • 2017-122
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Review of fishery resource access and allocation arrangements across Australian jurisdictions

In 2010, the Australian Fisheries Managers Forum listed access and allocation as one of the top priority policy issues to be addressed in Australian fisheries. Subsequently, the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) formed a working group to examine possible approaches to access...
ORGANISATION:
Fishwell Consulting Pty Ltd
TAGS
Values & Ethics
Sustainability
Stakeholder
Resource Sharing
Resource Sharing
Industry
PROJECT NUMBER • 2019-142
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Resource Sharing in Australian Fisheries Workshop - Progress to Date, Lessons Learnt and Next Steps towards a harmonised approach

Resource sharing is a high priority for the Australian Fisheries Managers Forum (AFMF) with all Australian jurisdictions in the process of developing or having developed policies associated with this issue. Some have gone further and implemented resource sharing with limited success....
ORGANISATION:
FutureCatch Consulting
TAGS
Workshop
Stock Assessment
Stakeholder
Resource Sharing
Resource Sharing
People
Environment
Industry

Artificial Reefs: Suitability of recycled materials for integration into purpose built artificial reefs for enhancing marine productivity, biodiversity and social outcomes

Project number: 2021-055
Project Status:
Current
Budget expenditure: $280,505.20
Principal Investigator: Andrew Rowland
Organisation: Recfishwest
Project start/end date: 14 Jun 2022 - 14 Feb 2024
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Rac Wa
Habitat

Need

Traditionally, reef projects around Australia have been funded by public money through government agencies, in particular regional development, research or fisheries grants. More recently in WA, new reefs such as Exmouth’s King Reef, have been brought to life through funding partnerships between government, not for profit & other private/industry sectors. Creating new pathways & processes to unlock & utilise alternative materials to create habitat enhancement structures is critical in ensuring the benefits artificial reefs create for our oceans & communities are maximised. Integrating appropriate recycled materials into reef developments provides opportunities from a scalability & financially sustainable perspective for all sectors of the Australian seafood industry, paving the way for more reefs to be deployed for social, economic and environmental benefit.

Playing a leading role in artificial reef development, Recfishwest often receives offers of materials for new reef projects. Examples include concrete in the form of railway sleepers, roadway culverts & bridge beams or steel in the form of storage tanks, structural frameworks & pipelines. Understanding what structures are suitable & acceptable for repurposing into reefs needs to be determined before these opportunities (current & future) are lost. This will unlock new reef options with alternative partners & funders to build more productive marine habitats for the benefit of local communities & the environment. This project is an extension to the previously FRDC funded habitat enhancement project: https://www.frdc.com.au/Archived-Reports/FRDC%20Projects/2014-005-DLD.pdf

Current Commonwealth & State legislation & policies limit the exploration of new reefing opportunities and there is a need to support change within these regulatory agencies.

We regularly consult with stakeholders who also have a need to understand the outcomes of this project including: DPIRD, NERA, WAFIC, NOPSEMA, DAWE, other Regulators, Resources Sector (including operators), Research agencies and the WA fishing community as end users. NERA and DAWE have also provided Letters of Support for this project as critical project partners to help achieve the outcomes and desired benefits.

Objectives

1. Explore existing literature on structures and materials that have been successfully repurposed into artificial reefs globally
2. Create a framework to assess the habitat and fishing suitability of structures for use in artificial reef projects
3. Create a guidelines and a substantial list of structures available for potential use in integrated artificial reefs from multiple industries
4. Develop a pathway with targeted regulators to assist in the development of a better regulatory environment that supports science-based habitat enhancement projects
People
PROJECT NUMBER • 2016-407
PROJECT STATUS:
CURRENT

Capability and Capacity: Nuffield Australia Scholarships

The Australian seafood industry has a long and proud history of employment of very sound environmental and economic management principles which have made it the envy of much of the world. An altogether robust Australian seafood industry is hyper critical to the social and economic fabric of...
ORGANISATION:
Nuffield Australia
TAGS
Wild Catch
Supply & Demand
Stock Assessment
Stakeholder
Software

Quantifying inter-sectoral values within and among the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors

Project number: 2020-088
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $92,972.00
Principal Investigator: Buyani Thomy
Organisation: Natural Capital Economics
Project start/end date: 10 Jan 2021 - 29 Jun 2021
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Values &Amp; Ethics
Social Science
Social Science
Resource Access And Allocation
Recreational Fishing

Need

In developing the 2020-25 Strategic Plan, FRDC identified five outcomes and associated enabling strategies, including Outcome 4: Fair and secure access to aquatic resources. In developing Outcome 4, FRDC realized that it did not have a shared appreciation of the different beliefs and values that underpin perceptions of fairness and security. Furthermore, it was acknowledged that such values differ within and between different sectors of the fishing and aquaculture sector and can be the source of tension and conflict.

The FRDC is therefore seeking to understand contrasting and complementary values among Indigenous, commercial, and recreational fishing sectors. The proposed project will provide valuable information towards building trust across the industry through an improved understanding of the social, economic and ecological values within and among the three sectors. It will also provide FRDC with the basis for monitoring progress towards the achievement of Outcome 4.

The primary objective of the project is to collect, analyse and report on the values held by the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors. Findings from the project will be used to inform resource management and support for fair and secure access to aquatic resources. The findings will also be valuable to regulators’ through an enhanced understanding of values across the different sectors leading to more efficient and effective consultation processes.
 

Objectives

1. To collect, analyse and report on the values held by the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors using a robust and systematic methodology that is repeatable (i.e., using Q-methodology).
2. To identify complementary and contrasting values among Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors through an extensive survey.
3. To report findings and provide recommendations for efficient and practical data collection mechanisms to FRDC. Findings from the project will be used to inform resource management and to support fair and secure access to aquatic resources. The findings will also be valuable to regulators’ through an enhanced understanding of values across the different sectors leading to more efficient and effective consultation processes.

Final report

ISBN: 978-0-6489972-1-4
Authors: Schultz T. Thomy B. Hardaker T. Perry M. Faranda A. Gustavsson M. Chudleigh P. and Binney J.
Final Report • 2022-03-31 • 1.91 MB
2020-088-DLD.pdf

Summary

This study explored the extent to which values are shared (or not shared) by fishers across three key sectors (i.e., Indigenous, commercial and recreational). The study was run online using Q-Method Software (https://qmethodsoftware.com), a semi-quantitative technique used to explore human perspectives in a systematic and repeatable manner.
Fishers across the three sectors were required to sort and rank the pre-listed value statements. Participants were recruited through emailed invitations, social media posts and newsletters from key fishing sector representative bodies as well as snow-ball sampling. In response to a very low response rate from the Indigenous sector, additional participants (n = 6) were recruited by a member of the project team at a conference held in Far North Queensland. A total of 116 fishers completed the Q study. The collected data was analysed using inverted factor analysis to allow for the identification of distinct sub-groups of people whose responses are highly correlated. Through examining the Q-methodology outputs, five distinct sub-groups emerged: Sub-group A – “social-value fishers” (n = 39); Sub-group B – “economic-value fishers” (n = 19); Sub-group C – “environmental-value fishers” (n = 24); Sub-group D – “traditional-value” fishers (n = 10); and Sub-group E – “fish-focused” fishers (n = 15). Each subgroup comprises fishers who ranked the value statements similarly in terms of those statements they felt were very important to them and those that were less important to them. As such, the analysis provided information about complementary and contrasting values among different groups of fishers. 

This study indicated that values (i) do not “neatly” align to the different industry sectors; and (ii) do not differ based on the different industry sectors. However, the Q-methodology analysis indicated that there were five distinct groups based on how values were ranked. 
Across the five distinct groups the top four complementary values were: (1) fishing is environmentally sustainable, (2) accountability for industry participants who break the rules, (3) having access to fish and fishing, and (4) access to the ocean/sea. Environmental sustainability was the highest ranked value even among the sub-group that was dominated by economic type values (sub-group B), suggesting that even for productivity-based research and development (R&D), the focus should be on R&D that drives productivity and/or profitability improvements without reducing/ compromising environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability is also key driver of production and there seem to be general appreciation of its importance across the fishing sectors.
 
The three lowest ranked values across the five distinct groups were cultural values: (1) fishing’s support of cultural practices and requirements, (2) fishing provides a connection to ancestors/previous generations, and (3) opportunity to barter and trade goods. Some of the social values not considered to be important by any of the sub-groups included catching lots of fish or large fish, and spending time fishing alone. 
 
In terms of contrasting values across the five sub-groups, economic type values were generally not highly ranked except by one group which was dominated by commercial fishers (sub-group B). Statements like fishing’s economic returns and employment/income from fishing, industry innovation and advancement, fishing’s contribution to the local economy were not considered to be important by the remaining groups.
 
The use of Q-methodology to identify values for the different sectors revealed that online survey may not also be practical and effective. For example, there was very limited responses to the online survey by Indigenous sector participants and further effort was required to capture their values in a face-to-face approach. It is recommended that future research should seek to include face-to-face data collection methods to improve efficiency in capturing views of diverse groups.
 
Values play a key role in decision-making and in creating public policy. One of the primary implications of the current study is that it would likely be ineffective and inefficient to make decisions or set policies based on sectoral classifications in the fishing industry such as Indigenous, commercial and/or recreational. The project findings strongly demonstrate that the values held by fishers cannot be neatly delineated into standard industry sector classifications. However, the project findings also show that there are a number of values shared by all fishers across sectors that may provide ‘common ground’ and ‘common language’ that in turn would provide a basis for better engagement and communication both between the sectors and between researchers, fisheries managers, Government and Australian fishers. 
 
Dissemination of the findings that all sectors have several complementary values will help improve engagement and communication between the sectors and enhance effective and efficient implementation of future fisheries policies. Notably, the dissemination of the findings of this study is a step towards building a shared understanding of complementary values among different sectors and contrasting values within individual sectors. The shared knowledge will help improve trust among the sectors and between regulators and resource users. The improvements in trust among the various stakeholders will further enhance effective decision-making processes, particularly co-management and resource access.
 
View Filter

Research

Category

Species

Organisation