Quantifying inter-sectoral values within and among the Indigenous, commercial and recreational sectors
Our Pledge: Australian seafood industry response to community values and expectations
Despite considerable investment in RD&E to understand why the Australian seafood industry has been experiencing diminished levels of socio-political and community acceptability, there is still uncertainty regarding the significant values of different segments of the Australian community for coastal and marine systems, their management and industry (Essence Communications 2015). Further, there is evidence these values and associated expectations are highly changeable and can have significant individual, business and national repercussions. While the seafood industry already operates from a strong values-based position of its own - ‘sustainability’, there is evidence the community's concerns have expanded to include animal welfare, supply chain integrity, modern slavery for example.
Understanding community values and expectations is important but not enough. Industry must articulate and demonstrate its commitments to addressing kncommunity expectations. This is critical to breaking the reactive negative cycle that threatens resource access, mental health and viability of our industry. A means of monitoring and tracking industry's success in responding to the community's changing expectations and values must also be developed.
Seafood Industry Australia's (SIA) members have identified social licence. This project is a tangible commitment to a national conversation and action to address community values. It is an opportunity to build seafood industry unity on the basis of a set of shared values and supporting practices.
Australian Council of Prawn Fisheries (ACPF) has initiated a lot of this listening and values-related work relevant to wild catch prawns. ACPF is ready to design, implement and evaluate activities that embed these values as messages and convey the supporting or changing behaviours as proof. ACPF needs to ensure that its outputs reflect the direction of the Australia seafood industry and sees advantages in liaising with SIA as it produces outputs at sector level. In doing so, it will provide a test case for how other seafood industry sectors can undertake to acknowledge and respond to community values and expectations, and make a national set of shared industry-community values their own.
Report
Seafood Industry Australia commissioned Futureye to review existing research into the Australian communities attitudes toward seafood, as well as other market research, that has been undertaken since 2014. The findings from this review were used to make recommendations to Seafood Industry Australia about what to address in their pledge to demonstrate the industry’s intent to earn its ‘social licence to operate.’
Project products
Non-market values to inform decision-making and reporting in fisheries and aquaculture – an audit and gap analysis
Most Australian fisheries policies require that fisheries management take account of the cumulative effect of all human users of marine resources, including professional, recreational and Indigenous Australian fishers. The triple bottom line (TBL) approach is the general framework used to assess performance against economic, social, and environmental dimensions. TBL requires articulation of these broad values, but these may be qualitatively assessed. Significant progress has been made in incorporating some of these elements into fisheries management decision, particularly prioritising different objectives of fishery management [e.g. 1, 2]. In some cases, development of semi-quantitative approaches have been used to assist in decision-making across these multiple dimensions [e.g. 3], including in some cases indigenous value [e.g. 4]. Recent research has also extended this focus to develop a robust articulation of Indigenous Australian customary fishing values to enable their inclusion when developing fisheries management policies [5].
Optimal decisions require the trade-off between costs and benefits to be considered. TBL approaches do not explicitly consider this trade-off, resulting in challenges in identifying optimal outcomes. Where these costs and benefits are expressed as explicit monetary values, assessing the trade-off requires deducting the expected costs from the expected benefits (commonly referred to as cost-benefit analysis (CBA)).
However, in fisheries, many costs and benefits do not have an explicit monetary value. Hence, decisions about the use and management of marine resources increasingly requires objective information on the non-market value of benefits (and costs). Some attention has been focused on the estimation of non-market values of recreational fishing [e.g. 6, 7], although only limited attempts to-date have been made to use these values in supporting management decision making [e.g. 8]. Many other values have not been quantified, and their use in fisheries management has not been fully explored.
Final report
The project identified thirteen types of non-market values that fisheries and aquaculture managers considered as potentially important to their decision making. Of these, the top four involved values related to users of the fisheries resources, including fisher satisfaction, values to Indigenous Australian fishers, and the value of fish and experience to recreational fishers. The next four involved impacts of fishing on others, including habitats, species, local communities and other users of the marine environment.
The gap analysis identified that recent values for most of the values of potential use to fisheries and aquaculture management were unavailable. This limits the role of benefit transfers and identifies a need for further primary studies of non-market values.
Methods to profile and connect the provenance of wild caught prawn fisheries and their values to the community
Review of fishery resource access and allocation arrangements across Australian jurisdictions
Two-Eyed Seeing – a framework for cultural fishery assessments supporting equitable and sustainable access to shared resources in NSW Inland Rivers
Fish are totemic and a primary food source; and so are part of the deep cultural, spiritual and economic connections Aboriginal communities have to their waterways that are part of ‘Country’. Cultural knowledge tells us that when there’s more water availability cultural fishers experience increased total catches and greater diversity of target species, and they fish more (e.g. increase in recreational and subsistence fishing). These narratives also suggest that as a result of these improved cultural fishing opportunities, there are flow on socio-economic benefits to household budgets, diets of communities, social behaviours and mental health and well-being.
Water is sacred and living; and central to the cultural, social and spiritual identity of Aboriginal people, as well as to their livelihoods. Conceptual models underpinning western water management frameworks and decision making do not incorporate Aboriginal/First Nations socio-cultural complexity, local knowledge and governance arrangements. These are critical – Aboriginal/First Nations people have strong connections with fish, water, rivers and knowledge to contribute to planning, as well as a fundamental right to participate. Water and fish are central to the way of life, two-way knowledge and planning frameworks will support reciprocity in engagement and participation.
Two-Eyed Seeing Frameworks (Ganma, Yolgnu for two-ways) provide a way forward for cultural fishery assessments supporting equitable and sustainable access to shared resources. In this framework, knowledge systems (western and cultural) contribute in parallel, on an equal footing, and both serve as evidence bases to produce an enriched picture of mutual understanding. Application of this framework can empower Aboriginal communities to participate more equitably and negotiate by using their science and values and providing a method for inclusion.
The overall objective of this proposed project is to empower Aboriginal communities through application of a “Two-Eyed seeing framework” (Reid et al. 2020) to participate more equitably and negotiate for cultural fishing practices and water allocation and management. This project will define the cultural fishery and quantify the socio-economic value of cultural fishing in two NSW river regions, and assist communities to identify water management needs for key cultural fish species to support ongoing planning and negotiations. It will improve our current fishery and water management by providing a pathway for cultural fisheries and cultural science to be included. Overall, it will increase our current knowledge of fish and fisheries, by bridging the gap between cultural science and western science practitioners and knowledge holders to share understandings, insights and skills. The application and extension of this framework to a national project will be considered for future use in addressing cultural fishery allocations and management.