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.
Indigenous fishing subprogram: Business Nous - Indigenous business development opportunities and impediments in the fishing and seafood industry
Fishing and Aquaculture Workforce Capability Framework
Bursaries to fund three South Australian Recreational Fishing community members to attend the National Recreational Fishing Conference 2019
Co-management is an arrangement whereby responsibilities and obligations for sustainable fisheries management are negotiated, shared and delegated at appropriate levels between government, recreational fishers, Aboriginal traditional fishers, the commercial fishing industry and other key stakeholders such as conservation groups (Neville 2008).
The Minister’s Recreational Fishing Advisory Council (MRFAC) was formed to improve dialogue and communication between recreational fishers and Government. The primary role of the MRFAC is to provide feedback and advice to government on recreational fishing development issues, initiatives and policies that impact the recreational fishing sector. The MRFAC strives to pursue opportunities to improve the co-management arrangements for the recreational fishery.
In 2010/11 an engagement project was undertaken by PIRSA to better understand what recreational fishing means to people and what future they want for their sector. Discussions generated consistent themes and issues of concern to recreational fishers, including sustainable fishing, ongoing access, funding and leadership, governance, education and promotion of the sector.
The outputs from this project identified opportunities for incorporating 'grass roots' input from the recreational sector into fisheries management processes in South Australia (Rowling et al. in prep) must include public consultation opportunities and participation in (1) technical working groups; (2) regional recreational committees; & (3) community forums.
This project aims to enhance these jurisdictional-based opportunities by increasing national-level capacity building opportunities for members of the South Australian community. In addition to the personal development aspect, the ability to create connections and links to the recreational community leaders from other states and territories will be invaluable to the future stewarding of the South Australian Recreational Fishing community.