3 results

Using multiple values to inform the management of Australian marine partially protected areas

Project number: 2021-064
Project Status:
Current
Budget expenditure: $280,411.00
Principal Investigator: Louisa Coglan
Organisation: Queensland University of Technology (QUT)
Project start/end date: 31 Jul 2022 - 28 Feb 2024
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Rac Qld
Rac Nsw
Rac Cmwth
Marine Park
Fisheries Management

Need

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are a primary tool for conservation and protection of marine habitats and their associated marine life. However, 69% of MPAs are partially open to some form of fishing activity, either recreational or commercial (Turnbull, et al., 2021). In Australia, which has the second largest MPA network in the world, 75% of the total MPA area is partially protected (Roberts et al., 2020). While these partially protected areas (PPAs) provide economic and social benefits, this comes at the cost of reduced conservation benefits. Hence, the implementation of PPAs as a management tool to safeguard habitat and aquatic resources is underpinned by a tension to balance environmental, economic, and social values of multiple users.

Managing this balance requires that resource managers are cognisant of these diverse user values, and have an appropriate management framework to ensure that decision making results in socially optimal outcomes where possible. Decision making that does not considered these multi-user values can result in undesirable trade-offs, adverse environmental impacts, unnecessary complexity, ineffectiveness of management, inefficiency in resource use, social conflict and increased costs.

From the FRDC R&D priorities, access to aquatic resources, guided by good management, is fundamental for the continued delivery of economic and social benefits such as food, income, employment, recreation and cultural identity for all Australians. Optimising these benefits means sharing resources fairly using open and evidence-based processes within the limits of sustainability. As a first step to developing optimal multi-user management, there is a need to first review, and where possible, quantify the multiple values (environmental, economic, and social) that are attained through the implementation of PPAs.

Roberts, K. E., Hill, O., Cook, C. N. (2020). Evaluating perceptions of marine protection in Australia: Does policy match public expectation? Marine Policy 112: 103766
Turnbull, J. W., Johnston, E. L., Clark, G. F. (2021). Evaluating the social and ecological effectiveness of partially protected marine areas. Conservation Biology 35: 921-932.

Objectives

1. Undertake a review of existing literature on values of partially protected areas, including a review of different frameworks in which the environmental, social and economic values can be incorporated for management decision making
2. Assess the key environmental, social and economic values and their trade-offs in the use of partially protected areas, based on two case studies
3. Identify how understanding these values can assist management decision making when implementing marine parks more broadly in Australia

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
Contact:
FRDC
TAGS
Resource Access And Allocation
Recreational Fishing
Policy
Non Market Values
Indigenous

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.
Environment
View Filter

Research

Category

Organisation