128 results
Industry
Blank

Comparative evaluation of Integrated Coastal Marine Management in Australia - Workshop

Project number: 2017-214
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $14,640.00
Principal Investigator: Alistair Hobday
Organisation: CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere Hobart
Project start/end date: 19 Jun 2018 - 29 Nov 2018
Contact:
FRDC

Need

There is widespread evidence, in Australia and internationally, of increased need for an improved, practical approach to integrated management (IM) of fisheries and other coastal marine activities that is able to fully embrace the social, economic and institutional aspects (the so-called ‘human dimensions), of management. Assessment and management systems traditionally neglect the human dimensions. Further, they treat sectors separately, often with different authorities managing diverse activities in different ways, resulting in inconsistencies in management across activities. The result is that there is almost no consideration of the cumulative social, economic or ecological impacts of multiple activities, and no way of informing trade-offs among activities in management decision-making.
Experience to date is that IM has been only partially successful. Management of multiple activities has been additive…squeezing one activity in among others (e.g aquaculture in light of others). While there are some examples of movement toward IM, these have resulted in partial or temporary success. There are examples where management has started toward IM, but progress has been stalled or has fallen back. In general, many preconditions exist, but it has been hypothesized that management is missing key aspects of intentional design that would allow IM to proceed.
The proposed workshop will bring together those with both the science knowledge and the operational knowledge of 8-10 Australian IM case studies and a few with international expertise, to evaluate and compare experience towards identifying key elements of success and failure of Integrated Management.

Objectives

1. Complete the creation of a lens for evaluation of Integrated Management that includes appropriate attention to social, cultural, economic, institutional as well as ecological aspects
2. Convene two workshops involving expert practitioners with sufficient scientific and operational knowledge of existing Australian Integrated Management case studies
3. Evaluate and compare experience on implementing IM in Australia using a single evaluative lens
4. Synthesize and report results of the evaluation and make recommendations for improved IM in Australia

Final report

ISBN: 978-1-4863-1276-4
Authors: Robert Stephenson Alistair Hobday Christopher Cvitanovic Maree Fudge Tim Ward Ian Butler Toni Cannard Mel Cowlishaw Ian Cresswell Jon Day Kirstin Dobbs Leo X.C. Dutra Stewart Frusher Beth Fulton Josh Gibson Bronwyn Gillanders Natalie Gollan Marcus Haward Trevor Hutton Alan Jordan Jan Macdonald Catriona Macleod Gretta Pecl Eva Plaganyi Ingrid van Putten Tony Smith Ian Poiner Joanna Vince
Final Report • 2019-08-02 • 1.16 MB
2017-214-DLD.pdf

Summary

The need for Integrated Management (IM) of diverse marine activities is increasing, but there has been no agreed IM framework. In 2017 and 2018, a team of researchers collaborated to develop a framework for implementation and a ‘lens’ for evaluation of IM.

Project products

Fact Sheet • 408.36 KB
2017-214 - Fact Sheet 1- Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Integrated Management is an approach that links (integrates) planning, decision-making and management arrangements across sectors in a unified framework, to enable a more comprehensive view of sustainability and the consideration of cumulative effects and tradeoffs.
 
Nine key features and five phases of implementation provide a lens for implementation and evaluation of Integrated Management. 
Fact Sheet • 285.61 KB
2017-214 - Fact Sheet 2- Integrated Management.pdf

Summary

Integrated Management is an approach that links (integrates) planning, decision-making and management arrangements across sectors in a unified framework, to enable a more comprehensive view of sustainability and the consideration of cumulative effects and tradeoffs.
 
Evaluation of nine key features and five phases important to Integrated Management has been investigated in seven Australian case studies.
Article • 2.85 MB
2017-214 - Stephenson et al 2023.pdf

Summary

Integrated management (IM) has been widely proposed, but difficult to achieve in practice, and there remains the need for evaluation of examples that illustrate the practical issues that contribute to IM success or failure. This paper synthesises experiences of academics and practitioners involved in seven Australian case studies in which there have been attempts to integrate or take a broader, holistic perspective of management. The evaluative framework of Stephenson et al. (2019a) was used as a lens to explore, through workshops and a questionnaire survey, the nine key features and five anticipated stages of IM in the Gladstone Harbour Project, the Great Barrier Reef, the Northern Prawn fishery and regional development, the South-East Queensland Healthy Waterways Partnership, the Australian Oceans Policy, the New South Wales Marine Estate reforms, and progress toward Integrated Management in the Spencer Gulf. Workshops involving experts with direct experience of the case studies revealed that most of the key features (recognition of the need; a shared vision for IM; appropriate legal and policy frameworks; effective process for appropriate stakeholder participation; comprehensive suite of objectives (ecological, social, cultural, economic and institutional); consideration of trade-offs and cumulative effects of multiple activities; flexibility to adapt to changing conditions; process for ongoing review, evaluation and refinement; and effective resourcing) were seen as important in all case studies. However, there are only a few examples where key features of IM were implemented ‘fully’. A subsequent questionnaire of participants using ‘best-worst’ scaling indicated that an appropriate legal and institutional framework is considered to have most influence on IM outcomes, and therefore is the most important of the key features. This is followed in salience by effective stakeholder participation, effective resourcing, capacity and tools, and recognition of the need for IM. Key features may change in relative importance at different stages in the trajectory of IM. 
Industry

The right conversations - Identifying optimal stakeholder engagement and evaluation practices for fisheries

Project number: 2017-133
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $69,250.00
Principal Investigator: Nicki Mazur
Organisation: ENVision Environmental Consulting
Project start/end date: 14 Dec 2017 - 29 Jun 2018
Contact:
FRDC

Need

Improved seafood industry engagement with its stakeholders/communities remains a high priority for the Fisheries Research & Development Corporation (FRDC) to address low rates of societal acceptance and/or support. The FRDC recognises that social support for the seafood industry relies heavily on members’ improving their understanding of people’s views about the industry, and on building more trusting relationships with those people - especially those with direct influence on resource access decisions. In addition to being more effective ‘engagers’, the industry also needs to be able to evaluate how effective their engagement activities are and how they can continually build community trust. Towards that end, the FRDC commissioned a range of projects focusing on building the seafood industry’s capacity for effective stakeholder/community engagement (e.g. Ogier & Brooks 2016, FRDC 2014/301, 2011/525; Ham 2010, 2001/310), long term industry leadership (e.g. FRDC 2011/410), and adaptation and well-being (e.g. 2012/402) - all of which are necessary for the industry to build social support.

However, it remains unclear how and to what extent industry members are using these and other resources to help them ‘engage’ with their stakeholders/communities. It is believed that there are obstacles that can limit industry members’ use of these resources and their general engagement practices, including:

1. Industry members not seeing the full relevance or need for engagement;
2. Industry members perceiving ‘engagement’ as marketing and/or product promotion;
3. Industry members lacking the necessary expertise, capability and capacity in engagement;
4. Lack of knowledge and information about the comparative effectiveness of various engagement activities and strategies, particularly in a fisheries context; and
5. Ineffective extension of existing information (e.g. unsuitable formats).

This Project is designed to explore how and to what extent these and other barriers keep the seafood industry from making substantive progress towards building greater stakeholder and community trust.

Objectives

1. Conduct desktop research to ascertain the range of factors influencing (primary) industry’s use of available and best practice engagement strategies, tools and practices.
2. Identify examples of effective and accessible processes for designing and evaluating targeted engagement strategies (for primary industries, including fisheries).
3. Identify means for industry to assess the effectiveness of engagement activities (evaluation) to give confidence in their investments
4. Share project findings with the primary audience (the Human Dimensions Program and seafood industry leaders).
5. Improve understanding of key barriers to the seafood industry’s adoption of existing best practice models and methods of engagement.
6. Improve applicability of existing engagement resources for seafood industry to increase their capacity to effectively engage with its stakeholders and communities.

Final report

ISBN: 978-0-646-99461-1
Author: Nicole Mazur and Kate Brooks
Final Report • 2018-10-30 • 1.58 MB
2017-133-DLD.pdf

Summary

This Project aimed to improve understanding of how and to what extent certain barriers keep the seafood industry from making substantive progress towards building greater stakeholder and community trust.  The Project was designed to meet this aim by researching obstacles to, and enablers of, practice change; examples of good engagement; and evaluation practices in fisheries settings, and collate that information into a cogent report and end user frameworks, that will be both useful in guiding the FRDC HDR in future investments and for dissemination by the FRDC HDR as appropriate for the benefit of the industry.
Industry
PROJECT NUMBER • 2019-147
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Risk factors and management strategies associated with summer mortality in Australian abalone

In this project, we reviewed the scientific literature and collaborated with Australian abalone growers to develop a case definition for summer mortality. The case definition developed for summer mortality is as follows: i. Chronic mortality of unknown cause (if in doubt take this to mean...
ORGANISATION:
University of Adelaide
Industry
Communities
PROJECT NUMBER • 2022-038
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Valuing WA smaller commercial fisheries across the supply chain

This study aimed to produce information about the economic contribution of the supply chain of selected small-scale fisheries in Western Australia (WA), as well as a method that can be applied to making these estimates for other fisheries. Substantial research has been completed to estimate the...
ORGANISATION:
BDO EconSearch
View Filter

Organisation