Developing and testing social objectives for fisheries management

Project number: 2010-040
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $693,411.73
Principal Investigator: Lianos Triantafillos
Organisation: Department of Primary Industries and Regions South Australia (PIRSA)
Project start/end date: 19 Jun 2010 - 29 Aug 2013
Contact:
FRDC

Need

As discussed in the Background section, fisheries management has mostly been directed by economic and ecological objectives. With the introduction of the call for triple bottom line assessments of industry and government performance, a need for social objectives has become apparent which has remained largely unaddressed in terms of integration into management plans for specific fisheries.

There is a need for specific social objectives and associated relevant indicators for fisheries management to use in the development of management plans and the assessment of them. This requires clarity over the degree and boundaries of social responsibility fisheries management have in areas such as employment, skills and education. In this context, it is essential to ensure that the tradeoffs between the social, environmental and economic objectives provide the optimal outcomes in the context of fisheries and other external drivers.

A universal set of social objectives needs to be identified, trialled (using relevant case studies) and agreed as acceptable for fisheries managers, before any further effective progress can be made on the implementation of triple bottom line assessments or government management of ESD in Australia’s fisheries.

Objectives

1. Identify social objectives and indicators of relevance at the National level
2. Test and verify applicability of social objectives and indicators using the Queensland Trawl Fishery and three fishing communities in South Australia as case studies
3. Review social objectives and indicators for applicability to National fisheries management

Final report

ISBN: 978-0-9924621-0-9
Author: Dr Lianos Triantafillos
Final Report • 2016-02-23 • 20.66 MB
2010-040-DLD.pdf

Summary

The importance of including social objectives in fisheries management is recognised in many policies and programs that are intended to guide sustainable fisheries management. This includes the principle of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD) that underpins Australian fisheries management and is commonly agreed as the way forward in fisheries and marine ecosystem management, the Marine Stewardship Council certification process and the UNESCO Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO)’s Code of Conduct. 

Yet, little is known about the social dimensions of sustainable fisheries management. In particular, there is little guidance available for fisheries managers to assist them in identifying the social objectives they are managing for, or in collecting information that helps them more successfully manage for these objectives. To address this, this project developed a two-part guide, titled ‘Managing the Social Dimensions of Fishing’ (‘the Guide’). This Guide takes fisheries managers and other key stakeholders through the steps of implementing social objectives, in an ESD context, by helping them identify, document and manage social objectives relevant to their fishery. The Guide also helps fisheries managers identify what aspects of the social dimensions of fisheries they can influence and what factors remain outside their direct influence. This will help fisheries managers better target the identification and management of social objectives to those issues that they can address. Fisheries managers and other key stakeholder will now be able to monitor the performance of a fishery from a social perspective and make decisions regarding future management. This is essential to enable progress to be made on the implementation of triple-bottom-line assessments for Australia’s fisheries. 

The Guide will also assist the Australian Fisheries Management Forum (AFMF) to promote a consistent national management approach across all fisheries jurisdictions for developing social objectives. The adoption of a consistent national approach will lead to improved fisheries management outcomes through increased certainty for all stakeholders.

The development of social objectives and associated indicators for Australian fisheries that can be used to assess performance, in line with ecological and economic objectives, was achieved through three phases. 

First, based on a review of the literature on social dimensions of fishing, existing requirements of all Australian jurisdictions in relation to fisheries legislation and policy, and of existing national and international frameworks that consider social dimensions of fishing, a set of draft social objectives and associated indicators was developed. These draft social objectives and indicators were then revised at a workshop held with fisheries managers and policy makers from across Australia, which also included representatives from commercial, recreational and Indigenous fisheries from all states and territories. The workshop also considered how fisheries managers might best be able to engage with the proposed project outputs. 

Second, case studies of the Queensland East Coast Trawl Fishery, the South Australian communities of Ceduna, Port Lincoln and Wallaroo (in which a diversity of fisheries operate) and the Indigenous community of Narunnga from South Australia were used to test the draft social objectives and indicators, identify how best to select and apply them to the circumstances of specific fisheries and to identify low-cost approaches that can be used by fishery managers to enable them to more explicitly incorporate social objectives in their management. 

The results of the case studies were used to revise and refine the objectives, and to develop indicators designed to inform each objective. The outcome was a set of recommended social objectives and associated indicators, as well as recommended processes for selecting, measuring, and analysing them in different contexts. Testing in multiple case studies ensured that the resulting social objectives and associated indicators included in the Guide are appropriate for fisheries management across different jurisdictions, at the State, Territory and Commonwealth level. 

Third, the revised social objectives and indicators were workshopped with the fisheries managers that had participated in the first phase of the project. This provided the basis for developing the two-part Guide that is the final output of the study. The draft Guide was reviewed by fisheries managers from across Australia, and their comments and feedback incorporated into revisions of the Guide.

Throughout the project, the objectives and indicators were developed with future integration into potential fisheries status report frameworks, such as the National Fisheries Status Report, in mind. To that end, the social objectives and indicators included in the Guide are high-level and include options that enable individual fisheries management jurisdictions to select options for measuring social objectives that best fit their needs, resources and budgets. 

Keywords: ESD, social objectives, social indicators, triple-bottom-line assessment, national guidelines, fisheries management.

Related research

Communities
Blank
Communities

Feasibility study for integrated multitrophic aquaculture in southern Australia

Project number: 2010-201
Project Status:
Completed
Budget expenditure: $448,868.00
Principal Investigator: Jason E. Tanner
Organisation: SARDI Food Safety and Innovation
Project start/end date: 31 Aug 2010 - 29 Aug 2013
Contact:
FRDC

Need

With aquaculture production increasing rapidly in South Australia, as well as several other states including Tasmania, there is an increasing level of concern about the trade-offs between economic returns and environmental sustainability. In Australia, most aquaculture, particularly in-sea aquaculture, is undertaken on a single species basis. For finfish, which are fed a diet based on either baitfish or pelleted feeds, this means that a considerable amount of nutrients are released into the environment. For example, for the two main species farmed in Spencer Gulf in South Australia, southern bluefin tuna and yellowtail kingfish, for every tonne of production, as much as 500 and 200 kg respectively of nitrogen is released into the environment. In areas of high production, these wastes have the potential to stimulate plankton blooms and/or smother the benthos. As a consequence, stocking levels are closely regulated to reduce the potential for environmental harm, and there is considerable interest in methods for removing wastes and/or mitigating their impacts. IMTA thus has the potential to be utilised in Australia to both decrease the environmental impacts of finfish farming, and increase financial returns to the aquaculture industry. If successful, IMTA could be used to reduce nutrient inputs from farming into the marine environment, giving industry the flexibility to maintain higher stocking levels, leading to more optimal use of resources. Before IMTA can be undertaken on a commercial scale in the warm temperate waters of southern Australia, however, there are a number of questions that need to be addressed. These include what species and farming systems are suitable, what is the potential for the species used to act as an intermediate host for parasites of other species in the system, and are their any food safety issues that need to be addressed.

Objectives

1. Review available published and unpublished literature and databases, and liase with international research teams, to assess potentially suitable species and farming techniques for use in IMTA
2. Trial selected macroalgae species in tanks to improve understanding of their biology and develop appropriate propagation techniques for later open-water grow-out, based on knowledge gained from Objective 1
3. Undertake a field trial of IMTA, to assess macroalgal growth rates, determine optimal spatial configuration to maximise growth, and commercial potential
4. Assess the potential for macroalgal species trialled to act as reservoirs for parasites/pathogens of other species used in the system
5. Provide improved parameter estimates for biogeochemical modelling of IMTA, enabling its consequences for regional nutrient enrichment to be determined
6. Provide recomendations to industry on what species to farm, with what culture systems, and in what densities, to optimise both nutrient extraction and economic returns