Project number: 2011-216
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $60,401.55
Principal Investigator: Peter Neville
Organisation: PJ Neville and Associates
Project start/end date: 16 Dec 2010 - 31 May 2012
Contact:
FRDC

Need

Review the preconditions and the underpinning industry and government structures necessary for the successful implementation of co management

Objectives

1. To investigate the resilience of the various co-management approaches to a changing fishing operational environment (biophysical and socio-governance)
2. To look at the lessons learnt, and the challenges arising from, the implementation of co-management in all jurisdictions
with a view to identifying positive and negative drivers
3. To assess the skill sets needed to successfully implement co-management
4. To assess how to resource co-management once the fishery has moved past the RD&E phase
5. To identify the relevant RD&E questions to inform future investment
6. To document recommendations for the future implementation of co management

Final report

Author: Peter Neville
Final Report • 2011-12-20 • 395.83 KB
2011-216-DLD.pdf

Summary

The original Fisheries Research and Development Corporation (FRDC) Report – “Comanagement: Managing Australia’s fisheries through partnership and delegation” Project No. 2006/068 – was reviewed and found to remain rigorous, relevant and appropriate as a guide to co-management and the issues surrounding its implementation.

The list of “drivers” for co-management in the original report (Appendix 1) has been confirmed in this review. In particular, the importance of cost savings as a driver for both the industry and government was again emphasised. However, one further driver has been raised which should be added, namely the opportunity to build on human and social capital development across fisheries stakeholders and the community.

The list of “essential pre-conditions” for co-management in the original report (Appendix 2) has also been confirmed. The point was reinforced that not all “preconditions” needed to be satisfied to enter into co-management negotiations, but those negotiations needed to ultimately cover all those points in some way in reaching an agreed co-management arrangement.

Most industry organisations (and some government agencies) are adopting a “wait and see” attitude dependent on the reviews of current co-management trials to demonstrate that real costs and benefits are achievable in a practical sense. Others continue to seek funding for additional trials designed to confirm successful results in different situations.

Related research

Communities
Environment
Industry