145 results

Non-market values to inform decision-making and reporting in fisheries and aquaculture – an audit and gap analysis

Project number: 2018-068
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $118,293.91
Principal Investigator: Louisa Coglan
Organisation: Queensland University of Technology (QUT)
Project start/end date: 3 Feb 2019 - 29 Jun 2020
:

Need

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.

Objectives

1. To support robust and defeasible evidence based decision-making in fisheries and aquaculture decision making that is understood and supported by key fisheries and aquaculture managers.
2. To provide managers with an understanding of the resources available to account for non-market values in fisheries and aquaculture decision making
3. To identify key research gaps and make recommendations related to the need for further empirical non-market valuation studies

Final report

ISBN: 978-1-925553-26-0
Authors: Louisa Coglan Sean Pascoe Gabriela Scheufele Samantha Paredes and Aimee Pickens
Final Report • 2021-03-19 • 3.77 MB
2018-068-DLD.pdf

Summary

This study examined the issues around non-market values requirements and identified potential sources of robust and defensible estimates of key values, including those generally viewed as difficult to measure.  
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.

Our Pledge: Australian seafood industry response to community values and expectations

Project number: 2017-242
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $153,484.97
Principal Investigator: Jane D. Lovell
Organisation: Seafood Industry Australia (SIA)
Project start/end date: 14 Aug 2018 - 30 Jul 2019
:

Need

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.

Objectives

1. Identify values of major segments of the Australian community for fisheries resources and seafood industries, and expectations of industry behaviours that support those values
2. Identify values of the Australian seafood industry that are common across the industry at national and sector/regional scales
3. Establish industry response to community values and expectations, including measurable benchmarks of industry behaviours and performance that demonstrate commitment
4. Demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness of a community engagement and communication strategy that is built on recognised shared values and committment to supporting industry behaviours (Extension proof of concept – Prawns)
5. Increase capacity of industry's current and emerging leaders to engage in values-and-behaviours conversations with community leaders on an ongoing basis

Report

Author: Futureye
Report • 2020-09-07 • 1.02 MB
2017-242_Review of Community Attitudes.pdf

Summary

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

Report • 2020-09-07 • 354.06 KB
2017-242_The Pledge - Industry Values & Practices.pdf

Summary

Seafood Industry Australia commissioned Sea Change Consulting Australia to review values statements and recorded practices of 52 Australian seafood organisations. This review collated the most common Australian industry values and underpinning behaviours (practices), which provides evidence to demonstrate the industry’s effort and performance regarding to meet shared practices and values to earn its social licence to operate.

Report • 2020-09-07 • 1.12 MB
2017-242_Community Sentiment Research.pdf

Summary

Essence was engaged by Seafood Industry Australia to undertake a research program to help inform the development of a pledge to the Australian community and provide a benchmark of community sentiment towards the Australian seafood industry.

Final Report • 2020-09-15 • 3.70 MB
2017-242-DLD.pdf

Summary

The Australian seafood industry has clearly identified social licence and community perceptions as critical issues for its ongoing viability and prosperity. This is because current research shows substantial proportions of the Australian public are concerned or knows little about the ethics, environmental impact and governance of the seafood industry. To help improve industry’s social licence, this project aimed to develop a clearer understanding of community and industry values and underpinning behaviours to identify both threats to social license and behaviours community would like to see reinforced by industry.

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
:

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.
 
Communities
Industry
PROJECT NUMBER • 2019-106
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

Minor use permit for oxytetracycline in non-salmonid finfish

There are no registered or permitted antimicrobial products approved by the Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicine Authority (APVMA) for treatment of bacterial infections in finfish. This project developed an application for a minor-use permit (MUP) for the use of oxytetracycline (OTC) to...
ORGANISATION:
University of Adelaide
SPECIES
Industry
PROJECT NUMBER • 2022-045
PROJECT STATUS:
CURRENT

Measuring non-commercial fishing catches (traditional fishing) in the Torres Strait in order to improve fisheries management and promote sustainable livelihoods

Traditional fishing in the Torres Strait Region has, and continues to be, important for livelihood sustainability for all Torres Strait Islander communities, providing a source of kai kai or food, nutrition and other social, cultural and spiritual benefits. Protection of the marine environment and...
ORGANISATION:
Charles Darwin University (CDU)
Environment
Industry
Industry
Environment
PROJECT NUMBER • 2017-127
PROJECT STATUS:
COMPLETED

NCCP: defining best practice for viral susceptibility testing of non-target species to Cyprinid herpesvirus 3 -a discussion paper based on systematic quantitative literature reviews

This report based on systematic quantitative literature reviews aims to identify best practice for testing to determine the viral susceptibility of non-target species to CyHV-3. 
ORGANISATION:
University of Adelaide Roseworthy Campus
View Filter

Species

Organisation