Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Crossing Science–Policy–Societal Boundaries to Reduce Scientific and Institutional Uncertainty in Small-Scale Fisheries

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The governance of small-scale fisheries (SSF) is challenging due to the uncertainty, complexity, and interconnectedness of social, political, ecological, and economical processes. Conventional SSF management has focused on a centralized and top-down approach. A major criticism of conventional management is the over-reliance on ‘expert science’ to guide decision-making and poor consideration of fishers’ contextually rich knowledge. That is thought to exacerbate the already low governance potential of SSF. Integrating scientific knowledge with fishers’ knowledge is increasingly popular and is often assumed to help reduce levels of biophysical and institutional uncertainties. Many projects aimed at encouraging knowledge integration have, however, been unsuccessful. Our objective in this research was to assess factors that influence knowledge integration and the uptake of integrated knowledge into policy-making. We report results from 54 semi-structured interviews with SSF researchers and practitioners from around the globe. Our analysis is framed in terms of scientific credibility, societal legitimacy, and policy saliency, and we discuss cases that have been partially or fully successful in reducing uncertainty via push-and-pull-oriented boundary crossing initiatives. Our findings suggest that two important factors affect the science–policy–societal boundary: a lack of consensus among stakeholders about what constitutes credible knowledge and institutional uncertainty resulting from shifting policies and leadership change. A lack of training for scientific leaders and an apparent ‘shelf-life’ for community organizations highlight the importance of ongoing institutional support for knowledge integration projects. Institutional support may be enhanced through such investments, such as capacity building and specialized platforms for knowledge integration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allison EH, Ellis F (2001) The livelihoods approach and management of small-scale fisheries. Mar Policy 25:377–388. doi:10.1016/S0308-597X(01)00023-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baird IG (2000) Towards sustainable co-management of Mekong River Inland aquatic resources, including fisheries, in Southern Lao PDR. Evaluating Eden series discussion paper no. 15. International Institute for Environment and Development, Biodiversity and Livelihoods Group. Available online at http://pubs.iied.org/7818IIED.html

  • Baird IG (2007) Local ecological knowledge and small-scale freshwater fisheries management in the Mekong River in southern Laos. In: Haggan N, Neis B, Baird IG (eds) Fishers’ knowledge in fisheries science and management. UNESCO, Paris, pp 247–266

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes-Mauthe M, Oleson KLL, Zafindrasilivonona B (2013) The total economic value of small-scale fisheries with a characterization of post-landing trends: an application in Madagascar with global relevance. Fish Res 147:175–185. doi:10.1016/j.fishres.2013.05.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bavington D (2015) Marine and freshwater fisheries in Canada: uncertainties, conflicts, and hope on the water. In: Mitchell B (ed) Resource and environmental management in Canada. OUP, Canada

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkes F, Mahon R, McConney P, Pollnac R, Pomeroy R (2001) Managing small-scale fisheries. International Development Research Centre, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodin O, Crona BI (2008) Management of natural resources at the community level: exploring the role of social capital and leadership in a rural fishing community. World Dev 36:2763–2779. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyatzis R (1998) Transforming qualitative information: thematic and code development. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Bracken LJ, Oughton EA (2013) Making sense of policy implementation: the construction and uses of expertise and evidence in managing freshwater environments. Environ Sci Policy 30:10–18. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cash DW, Clark WC, Alcock F, Dickson NM, Eckley N, Guston DH, Jäger J, Mitchell RB (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 100:8086–8091. doi:10.1073/pnas.1231332100

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Castrejón M, Charles A (2013) Improving fisheries co-management through ecosystem-based spatial management: the Galapagos Marine Reserve. Mar Policy 38:235–245. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.05.040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caveen AJ, Gray TS, Stead SM, Polunin NVC (2013) MPA policy: what lies behind the science? Mar Policy 37:3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chuenpagdee R, Bundy A, Charles A, Christie P, Fanning LP, Gonzales P, Houston J, Liguori L, Nandakumar D, Ricard D, Rudd MA, Pauly D, Salas S, Smith J, Sumaila UR, Turnipseed M, Tyedmers P, Vanderzwaag D, Zwanenburg KCT (2005) Creating a positive future for fisheries and coastal communities worldwide. In: Chuenpagdee R, Bundy A (eds) Innovation and outlook in fisheries. UBC Fisheries Centre, Vancouver. Fisheries Centre Research Report 13(2), pp 77–88

  • Cinner JE, McClanahan TR, MacNeil MA, Graham NAJ, Daw TM, Mukminin A, Feary DA, Rabearisoa AL, Wamukota A, Jiddawi N, Campbell SJ, Baird AH, Januchowski-Hartley FA, Hamed S, Lahari R, Morove T, Kuange J (2012) Co-management of coral reef social-ecological systems. PNAS 109:5219–5222. doi:10.1073/pnas.1121215109

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dentoni D, Klerkx L (2015) Co-managing public research in Australian fisheries through convergence–divergence processes. Mar Policy 60:259–271. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.07.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewulf A, Craps M, Bouwen R, Taillieu T, Pahl-Wostl C (2005) Integrated management of natural resources: dealing with ambiguous issues, multiple actors and diverging frames. Water Sci Technol 52:115–124. Available online at http://wst.iwaponline.com/content/52/6/115

  • Edelenbos J, van Buuren A, van Schie N (2011) Co-producing knowledge: joint knowledge production between experts, bureaucrats and stakeholders in Dutch water management projects. Environ Sci Policy 14:675–684. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2011.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer F (2003) Reframing public policy: discursive politics and deliberate practices. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Folke C, Hahn T, Olsson P, Norberg J (2005) Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:441–473. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.30.050504.144511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney O (2014) Sustainable development goals: improving human and planetary wellbeing. Glob Change 82:20–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Galappaththi EK, Berkes F (2014) Institutions for managing common-pool resources: the case of community-based shrimp aquaculture in northwest Sri Lanka. Marit Stud 30:13. doi:10.1186/s40152-014-0013-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galappaththi EK, Berkes F (2015a) Can co-management emerge spontaneously? Collaborative management in Sri Lankan shrimp aquaculture. Mar Policy 60:1–8. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.05.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galappaththi EK, Berkes F (2015b) Drama of the commons in small-scale shrimp aquaculture in northwestern, Sri Lanka. Int J Commons 9:347–368. doi:10.18352/ijc.500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia SM, Charles AT (2007) Fishery systems and linkages: from clockworks to soft watches. ICES J Mar Sci Journal du Conseil 64:580–587. doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsm013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia SM, Rosenberg AA (2010) Food security and marine capture fisheries: characteristics, trends, drivers and future perspectives. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 365:2869–2880. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giberson TR, Resick CJ, Dickson MW (2005) Embedding leader characteristics: an examination of homogeneity of personality and values in organizations. J Appl Psychol 90:1002–1010. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilmour PW, Dwyer PD, Day RW (2013) Enhancing the agency of fishers: a conceptual model of self-management in Australian abalone fisheries. Mar Policy 37:165–175. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.04.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gutierrez NL, Hilborn R, Defeo O (2011) Leadership, social capital and incentives promote successful fisheries. Nature 470:386–389. doi:10.1038/nature09689

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hackmann H, Moser SC, St. Clair AL (2014) The social heart of global environmental change. Nat Clim Change 4:653–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hind EJ (2012) Last of the hunters or the next scientists? Arguments for and against the inclusion of fishers and their knowledge in mainstream fisheries management. PhD dissertation, The National University of Ireland Galway, Ireland

  • Hisschemöller M, Hoppe R (1995) Coping with intractable controversies: the case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis. Knowl Policy 8:40–60. Available online at http://works.bepress.com/robert_hoppe1/7/

  • Hoppe R (2009) Scientific advice and public policy: expert advisers’ and policymakers’ discourses on boundary work. Poiesis Prax 6:235–263. doi:10.1007/s10202-008-0053-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppe R (2010) Lost in translation? Boundary work in making climate change governable. In: Driessen PPJ, Leroy P, van Vierssen W (eds) From climate change to social change: perspectives on science-policy interactions. International Books, Utrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Jentoft S (1989) Fisheries co-management: delegating government responsibility to fishermen’s organisations. Mar Policy 13:137–154. doi:10.1016/0308-597X(89)90004-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jentoft S (2004) Institutions in fisheries: what they are, what they do, and how they change. Mar Policy 28:137–149. doi:10.1016/S0308-597X(03)00085-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jentoft S, Bavinck M (2014) Interactive governance for sustainable fisheries: dealing with legal pluralism. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 11:71–77. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johannes RE, Freeman MMR, Hamilton RJ (2000) Ignore the fishers’ knowledge and miss the boat. Fish Fish 1:257–271. doi:10.1111/j.1467-2979.2000.00019.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson TR (2010) Cooperative research and knowledge flow in the marine commons: lessons from the Northeast United States. Int J Commons 4:251–272. doi:10.18352/ijc.110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson TR (2011) Fishermen, scientists, and boundary spanners: cooperative research in the U.S. Illex Squid Fishery. Soc Nat Resour 24:242–255. doi:10.1080/08941920802545800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson TR, van Densen WLT (2007) Benefits and organization of cooperative research for fisheries management. ICES J Mar Sci Journal du Conseil 64:834–840. doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsm014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan IM, McCay BJ (2004) Cooperative research, co-management and the social dimension of fisheries science and management. Mar Policy 28:257–258. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2003.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolding J, van Zwieten PAM (2011) The tragedy of our legacy: how do global management discourses affect small scale fisheries in the south? Forum Dev Stud 38:267–297. doi:10.1080/08039410.2011.577798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuuwis C (2004) Communication for rural innovation. Rethinking agricultural extension. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell AN, Deadman P, Kratz T, Lubchenco J, Ostrom E, Ouyang Z, Provencher W, Redman CL, Schneider SH, Taylor WW (2007) Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317:1513–1516

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Longhurst R (2010) Semi-structured interviews and focus groups. In: Clifford N, French S, Valentine G (eds) Key methods in geography. Sage Publications, London, pp 117–132

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahon R, McConney P, Roy RN (2008) Governing fisheries as complex adaptive systems. Mar Policy 32:104–112. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2007.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marín A, Berkes F (2010) Network approach for understanding small-scale fisheries governance: the case of the Chilean coastal co-management system. Mar Policy 34:851–858. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2010.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Njaya F (2007) Governance challenges for the implementation of fisheries co-management: experiences from Malawi. Int J Commons 1:137–153. doi:10.18352/ijc.21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nursey-Bray MJ, Vince J, Scott M, Haward M, O’Toole K, Smith T, Harvey N, Clarke B (2014) Science into policy? Discourse, coastal management and knowledge. Environ Sci Policy 38:107–119. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2013.10.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OMNRF (2014) Lake nipissing fisheries management plan: “valuing a diverse fishery”. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry, Toronto. Available online at https://dr6j45jk9xcmk.cloudfront.net/documents/4387/lake-nipissing-final-fishmp-rd-approval-2014-09.pdf

  • Orensanz JM, Parma AM, Ciocco N, Cinti A (2007) Achievements and setbacks in the commercial diving fishery of San José Gulf, Argentine Patagonia, Fisheries Management. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, pp 68–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (1996) Crossing the great divide: co-production, synergy, and development. World Dev 24:1073–1087. doi:10.1016/0305-750X(96)00023-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E (2009) A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 325:419–422. doi:10.1126/science.1172133

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Parry S, Murphy J (2013) Towards a framework for analysing interactions between social science and environmental policy. Evid Policy 9:531–546. doi:10.1332/174426413X13836455133196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perez de Oliveira L (2013) Fishers as advocates of marine protected areas: a case study from Galicia (NW Spain). Mar Policy 41:95–102. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera A, Gelcich S, García-Florez L, Alcázar JL, Acuña JL (2014) Co-management in Europe: insights from the gooseneck barnacle fishery in Asturias, Spain. Mar Policy 50(Part A):300–308. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2014.07.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera A, Gelcich S, García-Flórez L, Acuña JL (2016) Assessing the sustainability and adaptive capacity of the gooseneck barnacle co-management system in Asturias, N. Spain. Ambio 45:230–240. doi:10.1007/s13280-015-0687-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudd MA (2011) How research-prioritization exercises affect conservation policy. Conserv Biol 25:860–866. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01712.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudd MA (2015) Scientists’ framing of the ocean science–policy interface. Glob Environ Change 33:44–60. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudd MA, Ankley GT, Boxall A, Brooks BW (2014) International scientists’ priorities for research on pharmaceutical and personal care products in the environment. Integr Environ Assess Manag 10:576–587. doi:10.1002/ieam.1551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schut M, van Paassen A, Leeuwis C (2013) Beyond the research–policy interface. Boundary arrangements at research–stakeholder interfaces in the policy debate on biofuel sustainability in Mozambique. Environ Sci Policy 27:91–102. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2012.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon D, Schiemer F (2015) Crossing boundaries: complex systems, transdisciplinarity and applied impact agendas. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 12:6–11. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2014.08.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soto CG (2006) Socio-cultural barriers to applying fishers’ knowledge in fisheries management: an evaluation of literature cases. PhD Thesis, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. Available online at http://summit.sfu.ca/item/2401

  • Sowles J (2011) Evaluation of a community ecosystem-based natural resource management plan for Taunton Bay, Maine. Available online at http://www.maine.gov/dmr/council/tauntonbay/finalrptsowles.pdf

  • Sutton AM, Rudd MA (2014) Deciphering contextual influences on local leadership in community-based fisheries management. Mar Policy 50(Part A):261–269. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2014.07.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton AM, Rudd MA (2015) The effect of leadership and other contextual conditions on the ecological and socio-economic success of small-scale fisheries in Southeast Asia. Ocean Coast Manag 114:102–115. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.06.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton AM, Rudd MA (2016) Factors influencing community fishers’ leadership engagement in international small-scale fisheries. Front Mar Sci 3:116. doi:10.3389/fmars.2016.00116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Paassen A, Werkman R, Pedroli B, van den Berg J, Steingrover E, Leeuwis C (2011) Conclusion: from knowledge for action to knowledge in action. In: van Paassen A, van den Berg J, Steringrover E, Werkman R, Pedroli B (eds) Knowledge for action. The search for effective collaborative research for sustainable landscape development. Wageningen Publishers, Wageningen

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver CP, Mooney S, Allen D, Beller-Simms N, Fish T, Grambsch AE, Hohenstein W, Jacobs K, Kenney MA, Lane MA, Langner L, Larson E, McGinnis DL, Moss RH, Nichols LG, Nierenberg C, Seyller EA, Stern PC, Winthrop R (2014) From global change science to action with social sciences. Nat Clim Change 4:656–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weible CM, Sabatier PA (2005) Comparing policy networks: marine protected areas in California. Policy Stud J 33:181–201. doi:10.1111/j.1541-0072.2005.00101.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank all interviewees who generously contribute their time to this work. AMS was funded in part by a University of York doctoral teaching fellowship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environment Department, University of York, York, UK

    Abigail M. Sutton

  2. Department of Environment Sciences, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

    Murray A. Rudd

Authors
  1. Abigail M. Sutton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Murray A. Rudd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Murray A. Rudd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sutton, A.M., Rudd, M.A. Crossing Science–Policy–Societal Boundaries to Reduce Scientific and Institutional Uncertainty in Small-Scale Fisheries. Environmental Management 58, 565–584 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0737-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-016-0737-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation