Travel bursary: Sustainable Ocean Summit 2017, Canada
Australia possesses significant coastal and near coastal oil and gas reserves within its continental shelf. It follows that oil and gas exploration (especially seismic) is also significant; especially in the the Bass Strait, Great Australian Bight and North-Western 'Kimberley' areas of Australia. Up until recently, the offshore regulatory framework which includes assessment of effects on the aquatic environment and engagement with other users has been somewhat nebulous and Offshore Industry driven, with the development of aquatic environmental benchmarks being based on the same process as offshore OH&S and butressed by disputed sometimes irrelevant science.
Seismic expoloration in recent years has seen increased interaction between different aquatic ecosystems and marine users, resulting in a "contact" situation that was initially calamitous; but which has resulted in significant investment in Marine biological R&D, an increase in the deployment of the precautionary principle and marine environmental policy innovation.
Johnathon Davey (SIV) and Aaron Irving (NAC) will deliver a presentation that will draw on a number of aquatic environmental effects research project where Australia's fishing sectors were or are driving, policy innovations that we assisted in driving or supporting and case studies including the pearling Industry story, to provide a snapshot of the exciting work being undertaken in Australia currently in the marine environmental space with regard to the effects of seismic surveying and the ability for different users to play together successfully.
Final report
Comparative evaluation of Integrated Coastal Marine Management in Australia - Workshop
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.
Final report
Project products
FRDC Resource: Development and ongoing maintenance of Australian Fish Names Standard 2019-2020
Embedding impact pathway thinking into the identification and prioritisation of RD&E needs and investments for FRDC
In order to support a greater degree of systems thinking in its advisory committees, it is proposed to expose all committee members to the potential approaches to priority setting through a systems lens and benefits of these approaches, and then work with a subset of Research Advisory Committees [and possibly others] to test how bringing tools such as theory of change into their deliberations could assist them to deliver better designed priorities. Working specifically towards theories of change in the committee processes, at appropriate levels of complexity, is expected to provide (i) a context to making approaches of different committee members more explicit, (ii) a basis for better design logic, and (iii) a way of more readily communicating the committee's priorities. The focus of this approach on identifying and working back from ultimate objectives helps frame what may legitimately be narrow priorities in a wider analysis of system drivers such as incoherent policy environments or climate change and thus enable larger agendas to be built around such issues across FRDC. An explicit emphasis on barriers, enablers and assumptions, as well as what is necessary and sufficient to achieve the objectives, also provides a strong basis for evaluating progress and learning. Together these attributes are anticipated to achieve the intent of supporting better FRDC priority setting and increased impact for its stakeholders.