Are the scientific foundations of temperate marine reserves too warm and hard?

The scientific literature (including some of the most high-profile papers) on the ecological and fisheries effects of permanent no-take marine reserves is dominated by examples from hard tropical and warm temperate ecosystems. It appears to have been tacitly assumed that inference from these studies can directly inform expectations of marine reserve effects in cooler temperate and cold temperate waters. Trends in peer-reviewed studies indicate that the empirical basis for this assumption is tenuous because of a relative lack of research effort in cooler seas, and differences between tropical and temperate regions in ecology, seasonality, the nature of fisheries and prevailing governance regimes. © Copyright Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2012

A critical examination of the scientific credentials of Marine Protected Areas :sound science or a leap of faith?

PhD ThesisMarine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been widely advocated as a tool to protect marine species and habitats and also as a precautionary measure to prevent overfishing. This thesis attempts to do two things: 1) explain the emergence of MPAs in international and national polices by applying three policy network models – the epistemic community, advocacy coalition, and discourse coalition; and 2) discuss the scientific and normative debates surrounding the designation of MPAs in England. In essence it is a critical analysis of how the natural science of MPAs has been produced, interpreted and applied to inform marine planning. The recurring argument throughout this thesis is that advocacy from scientists for MPAs, particularly no-take marine reserves (NMRs) on the basis of their benefits to fisheries, has caused the science-policy boundary to blur. Chapters 3 and 4 examine the social context in which science on MPAs has been produced. Chapter 3 applies social network analysis to study co-author relationships in the MPA literature, and also examines paper citation networks between different research fields. The main findings were that 90% of scientists leading research on MPAs are marine ecologists and that MPA studies dominate the wider marine literature in terms of the number of publications and number of citations. It is speculated that the popularity of MPAs with marine environmental organisations has meant that a disproportionate amount of money has been spent on MPA research compared to other types of marine management intervention. Chapter 4 examines the publication practices of scientists, and also their experiences of having articles rejected in the peer-review process. Ten percent of scientists who responded did indicate that they thought their manuscript had been rejected because of ideological bias (pro-MPA or anti-MPA) held by a peer-reviewer or editor, though no scientists admitted to self- censorship. Interestingly, a bias towards studies showing stronger effect sizes is likely to exist in the wider ecology literature due to the way that research is incentivised and how researchers prioritise their time; it is easier to get larger effect sizes published in higher impact journals, and it takes more time for a researcher to publish non- significant effects in lower impact journals. The ramification of this finding is that claims made by meta-analyses on the ecological effects of MPAs are likely to be exaggerated. Chapter 5 systematically reviewes the literature showing the ecological effects of MPAs. The main finding was that the majority of studies have focused on the measurement of fish biomass within no-take marine reserves (NMRs), and that measurements have been mainly made on fish assemblages residing over reef type habitats. The evidence for the effect of MPAs on the recovery of temperate fin-fish species residing in soft sediment systems is less clear, thus it is problematic if scientists over-generalise claims on the benefits of MPAs, particularly NMRs, to commercial fin- fish fisheries found around England. In chapter 6 key-informant interviews were carried out with leading members of the English policy community to examine competing worldviews on Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). A discourse analysis was undertaken on the interview transcripts, and also relevant policy literature that has informed the planning of MCZs in England. Two general discourses were identified, one emphasising the establishment of MPA networks driven by ecological theory whose adherents consist mainly of conservationists, and another, whose adherents consist mainly of members of the fishing industry, emphasised the establishment of MPAs on a case-by case basis to protect habitats vulnerable to damage by mobile fishing gears. This study found that debates preceding the introduction of MCZs were heavily influenced by a popular discourse that documented the decline of English marine ecosystems and emphasised the use of MCZs as a fisheries management tool to rebuild fish stocks. This subsequently caused confusion amongst stakeholders over what objectives MCZs are being designated to achieve, and in the confusion, important normative areas of debate such as equity and fairness issues were overlooked. The concluding chapter focuses on the role of the scientist in the policy process, and discusses how the linear transfer of information from scientist to policy maker is undesirable. It argues that scientists need to be more reflexive in how their underlying worldview affects how they conduct their research, and also affects how they interpret the meaning of their research findings for policy makers. The thesis argues that institutions that encourage a two-way dialogue between scientists, managers, fishermen, and wider civil society need to form, thereby increasing the salience, credibility and legitimacy of scientific knowledge for policy

Your evidence or mine? : Systematic evaluation of reviews of marine protected area effectiveness

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a key strategy for mitigating the impacts of fisheries, but their designation can be controversial, and there is uncertainty surrounding when and where MPAs are most effective. Evidence synthesis that collates primary research on MPA effectiveness can provide a crucial bridge between research, policy and practice. However, reviews vary in scope and rigour, meaning decision-makers face the challenge of identifying appropriate reviews. Documenting differences amongst reviews can therefore support nonspecialists in locating the most relevant and rigorous reviews and can also assist researchers in targeting evidence gaps. We addressed these priorities by systematically searching for reviews examining effectiveness of MPAs for biodiversity, critically appraising methods used and categorizing review scope. The 27 reviews assessed overlapped in scope (suggesting some redundancy) and differed substantially in reliability. Key strengths related to the effects of MPAs on fish abundance and the influence of MPA size and age on effectiveness. However, several gaps were noted, with some questions not addressed and others lacking highly reliable syntheses – importantly, the latter may create the perception that particular questions have been adequately addressed, potentially deterring new syntheses. Our findings indicate key aspects of review conduct that could be improved (e.g. documenting critical appraisal of primary research, evaluating potential publication bias) and can facilitate evidence-based policy by guiding nonspecialists to the most reliable and relevant reviews. Lastly, we suggest that future reviews with broader taxonomic coverage and considering the influence of a wider range of MPA characteristics on effectiveness would be beneficial

Pay Gaps Between Domestic and International Fishers: an Economic or Ethical Issue?

Through the global market for maritime labour, multi-national crews now work on fishing vessels which were once serviced by domestic crews only. The remuneration and working conditions for non-domestic crews are causing concern, with allegations of unequal and poor pay levelled at the industry. This paper presents evidence from Scotland, a nation where a significant proportion of crews on fishing vessels originate from outside of the UK, a large number of whom come from outside the European Economic Area. Their level of remuneration is significantly lower than their Scottish counterparts, even when employed on the same boats to carry out the same work. The question arises whether the remuneration and inferred pay differences are justifiable economic consequences of local and global labour markets, or whether they constitute a failure of maritime governing institutions to prevent unjust pay discrimination. After exploring the economic and ethical arguments for keeping or removing remuneration differentials, the paper concludes that ‘equal share’ is the most just distributional criterion for international fishers’ remuneration. Although we recognise that other distributive justice principles will continue to be defended on economic grounds, the paper argues that policy makers need to find ways of redressing the power imbalances between employers and employees that contribute to unequal pay

Traceability in the UK Seafood chain

Traceability in seafood supply chains is vital for ensuring food safety, proving legality and tackling illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing, and verifying sustainability. UK seafood supply chains vary in complexity. As complexity across a supply chain increases, the importance of seafood transparency and traceability at each stage of the supply chain increases.The project sought examples of different supply chains of seafood landed in the UK to examine the current levels of traceability across the supply chain, examples of best practice, challenges to traceability and improvements that could be recommended for implementation in UK seafood supply chains. Case studies were sought from three UK seafood supply chains: i) Case study A: (Demersal) Dover (common) sole landed into ports in South West England; ii) Case Study B: (Pelagic) Mackerel from vessels landing into Peterhead, Scotland; and iii) Case Study C: (Shellfish) Brown crab / lobster from vessels landing into Bridlington, England. An initial seafood supply chain mapping exercise was undertaken for each case study through stakeholder structured interviews followed by in-depth semi structured interviews with actors across the supply chain.Key recommendations for improving traceability within the UK seafood supply chain include:• Focus on improving traceability up to the point of first sale.• Definitions of traceability need to more clearly stated to stakeholders.• Digitalise and integrate information systems.• Improve stakeholder engagement around data submission.• Minimise duplication of catch reporting by MMOs and IFCAs• Improvements to traceability systems are needed to allow for the distinction between sustainable versus non-sustainably caught seafood.• Increase transparency in how data submissions are used to increase data accuracy• Improve monitoring of wholesale markets.It should be acknowledged that the current approaches to improving traceability in seafood supply chains are already implementing some of the recommendations highlighted in this report. The recommendations from this report should serve to strengthen areas of traceability work that are already ongoing and to provide further impetus for development of best practice across UK seafood supply chains

Traceability in the UK Seafood chain

Traceability in seafood supply chains is vital for ensuring food safety, proving legality and tackling illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing, and verifying sustainability. UK seafood supply chains vary in complexity. As complexity across a supply chain increases, the importance of seafood transparency and traceability at each stage of the supply chain increases.The project sought examples of different supply chains of seafood landed in the UK to examine the current levels of traceability across the supply chain, examples of best practice, challenges to traceability and improvements that could be recommended for implementation in UK seafood supply chains. Case studies were sought from three UK seafood supply chains: i) Case study A: (Demersal) Dover (common) sole landed into ports in South West England; ii) Case Study B: (Pelagic) Mackerel from vessels landing into Peterhead, Scotland; and iii) Case Study C: (Shellfish) Brown crab / lobster from vessels landing into Bridlington, England. An initial seafood supply chain mapping exercise was undertaken for each case study through stakeholder structured interviews followed by in-depth semi structured interviews with actors across the supply chain.Key recommendations for improving traceability within the UK seafood supply chain include:• Focus on improving traceability up to the point of first sale.• Definitions of traceability need to more clearly stated to stakeholders.• Digitalise and integrate information systems.• Improve stakeholder engagement around data submission.• Minimise duplication of catch reporting by MMOs and IFCAs• Improvements to traceability systems are needed to allow for the distinction between sustainable versus non-sustainably caught seafood.• Increase transparency in how data submissions are used to increase data accuracy• Improve monitoring of wholesale markets.It should be acknowledged that the current approaches to improving traceability in seafood supply chains are already implementing some of the recommendations highlighted in this report. The recommendations from this report should serve to strengthen areas of traceability work that are already ongoing and to provide further impetus for development of best practice across UK seafood supply chains

Traceability in the UK Seafood chain

Traceability in seafood supply chains is vital for ensuring food safety, proving legality and tackling illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing, and verifying sustainability. UK seafood supply chains vary in complexity. As complexity across a supply chain increases, the importance of seafood transparency and traceability at each stage of the supply chain increases.The project sought examples of different supply chains of seafood landed in the UK to examine the current levels of traceability across the supply chain, examples of best practice, challenges to traceability and improvements that could be recommended for implementation in UK seafood supply chains. Case studies were sought from three UK seafood supply chains: i) Case study A: (Demersal) Dover (common) sole landed into ports in South West England; ii) Case Study B: (Pelagic) Mackerel from vessels landing into Peterhead, Scotland; and iii) Case Study C: (Shellfish) Brown crab / lobster from vessels landing into Bridlington, England. An initial seafood supply chain mapping exercise was undertaken for each case study through stakeholder structured interviews followed by in-depth semi structured interviews with actors across the supply chain.Key recommendations for improving traceability within the UK seafood supply chain include:• Focus on improving traceability up to the point of first sale.• Definitions of traceability need to more clearly stated to stakeholders.• Digitalise and integrate information systems.• Improve stakeholder engagement around data submission.• Minimise duplication of catch reporting by MMOs and IFCAs• Improvements to traceability systems are needed to allow for the distinction between sustainable versus non-sustainably caught seafood.• Increase transparency in how data submissions are used to increase data accuracy• Improve monitoring of wholesale markets.It should be acknowledged that the current approaches to improving traceability in seafood supply chains are already implementing some of the recommendations highlighted in this report. The recommendations from this report should serve to strengthen areas of traceability work that are already ongoing and to provide further impetus for development of best practice across UK seafood supply chains

Improved traceability in seafood supply chains is achievable by minimising vulnerable nodes in processing and distribution networks

Seafood is a globally traded commodity, often involving complex supply chains which have varying degrees of traceability. A robust traceability system for seafood supply chains enables the collection and communication of key information about catch and fisheries origins vital for assurance of the legality and sustainability of seafood products. End-to-end traceability is increasingly demanded by retailers, consumers, NGOs and regulatory bodies to ensure food safety, deter IUU fishing and verify sustainable and ethical credentials. Here, we map three UK seafood supply chains and evaluate traceability performance in: Dover sole landed in the south west of England, North-East Atlantic (NEA) mackerel landed at Peterhead, Scotland, and brown crab and European lobster, landed at Bridlington, England. Through a comparative analysis of traceability performance, this study suggests improvements to the technologies, processes, and systems for traceability in the seafood sector. The application of monitoring technologies and regulatory changes across the sector have increased traceability and potentially reduced instances of IUU fishing. While shorter supply chains are more likely to achieve end-to-end traceability, vulnerable nodes in processing and distribution networks may result in a loss of seafood traceability. While traceability systems may provide sustainability information on seafood, a high level of traceability performance does not necessarily equate to a sustainable source fishery. Encouragingly, while UK seafood supply chains are meeting minimum regulatory requirements for traceability, in the present study, many stakeholders have indicated ambitions towards traceability best practice in order to provide confidence and trust in the UK fishing industry

Structure and spatio-temporal dynamics of the artisanal small-scale fisheries at the future MPA of "Taza" (Algerian coast, SW Mediterranean)

Artisanal Small-Scale Fisheries (SSFs) are a primordial and very diverse activity in the Mediterranean, also within Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). This diversity is explained in terms of target species, gears, and fishing strategies. The main objective of this work was to investigate the spatio-temporal dynamics of artisanal SSFs of the future MPA of "Taza" (Algeria, SW Mediterranean). Data were collected through direct assessment of daily landings and using questionnaires. They were the subject of multivariate analyses that allowed us to identify the métiers practiced by artisanal fishers. During the one year (May 2013 to April 2014) field work period, 1330 fishing trips and 1613 fishing operations in 16 fishing grounds were recorded in the Ziama fishing harbor, where 15.2 tons of total catch was assessed. Our results show that, in the study area, the boats are predominantly gillnetters and that among the five métiers characterized by target species, gear type, fishing grounds, and fishing seasons, two métiers ("Mullus surmuletus trammel net" and "Sparids monofilament gillnet") are practiced throughout the year, while the remaining three ("Sarda sarda driftnet", "Merluccius merluccius set gillnet", and "Pagellus set gillnet") are specific to a determined period of the year. The 'Mullus surmuletus trammel net' métier represents 40% of the total fishing operations, of which 57.5% are carried out in the coastal sector at - 25 m. This study could contribute to defining the appropriate management approaches for SSFs in the future MPA of "Taza" by providing baseline information to build a sound management plan. In Algeria, it will certainly serve as a scientific reference in terms of zoning, protection of biodiversity, and specific monitoring at particular locations and periods of the year for the sustainable management of MPAs