Community-Based Scallop Restoration: A Model for Knowledge Circulation Theory

  • Michael P. CrosbyEmail author
  • Barbara Lausche
  • Jim Culter
Part of the Ecological Research Monographs book series (ECOLOGICAL)


The transdisciplinary (TD) approach is a key tool for knowledge translation and circulation among various communities of knowledge, including scientists from different disciplines and non-academic stakeholders from diverse backgrounds, participating collaboratively to address local social-ecological challenges. This chapter analyzes the transdisciplinary approach used by Mote Marine Laboratory, a Florida residential research institute, to achieve collaboration among scientists and local stakeholders for restoring fisheries’ resources and a local environmental icon, the bay scallop. These activities generated knowledge production and integration among stakeholders with different values, interests, and knowledge contributions. The mechanisms of knowledge-based collaboration among diverse stakeholders are discussed along with key strategies used to promote effective interactions and mutual learning among all knowledge holders, from traditional to formal science practitioners.


  1. Arnold WS (2009) The bay scallop, Argopecten irradians, in Florida coastal waters. Mar Fish Rev 71(3):1–7Google Scholar
  2. Arnold WS, Blake NJ, Harrison MM, Marelli DC, Parker ML, Peters SC, Sweat DE (2005) Restoration of bay scallop (Argopecten irradians) (Lamarck) populations in Florida coastal waters: planting techniques and the growth, mortality and reproductive development of planted scallops. J Shellfish Res 24(4):883–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bjergo C, Boydston C, Crosby MP, Kokkanakis S, Sayer R Jr (1995) Non-native aquatic species in the United States and coastal waters. In: LaRoe ET, Farris GS, Puckett CE, Doran PD, Mac MJ (eds) Our living resources – A report to the Nation on the distribution, abundance, and health of U.S. plants, animals, and ecosystems. U.S. Dept. of Interior- National Biological Service, Washington, DC, pp 428–431Google Scholar
  4. Brooks A, Bell WH, Greer J (1996) Our coastal seas: what is their future?: the environmental management of enclosed Coastal Seas: summary of an international conference. Maryland Sea Grant College, College Park, 180ppGoogle Scholar
  5. Cosper EM, Dennison WC, Carpenter EJ, Bricelj VM, Mitchell JG, Kuenstner SH, Colflesh DC, Dewey M (1987) Recurrent and persistent ‘brown tide’ blooms perturb coastal marine ecosystems. Estuaries 10:284–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crosby MP (1994) A proposed approach for studying ecological and socio-economic impacts of alternative access management strategies in marine protected areas. In: Brunkhorst DJ (ed) Marine protected areas and biosphere reserves: ‘Towards a new paradigm. Australian Nature Conservation Agency, Canberra, pp 45–65Google Scholar
  7. Crosby MP (1997) Moving towards a new paradigm for interactions among scientists, managers and the public in marine and coastal protected areas. In: Crosby MP, Laffoley D, Mondor C, O’Sullivan G, Geenen K (eds) Proceeding of the Second International Symposium and Workshop on Marine and Coastal Protected Areas, July, 1995. Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Silver Spring, pp 10–24 247 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Eichbaum WM, Crosby MP, Agardy MT, Laskin SA (1996) The role of marine and coastal protected areas in the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. Oceanography 9:60–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Estevez ED, Bruzek DA (1986) Survey of mollusks in southern Sarasota Bay, Florida, emphasizing edible species. Mote Marine Laboratory Technical Report, 102. Accessed 6 May 2018
  10. Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission web site. Accessed 12 Dec 2016
  11. Gilman EL (1997) Community based and multiple purpose protected areas: a model to select and manage protected areas with lessons from the Pacific Islands. Coast Manag 25:59–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hallegraeff GM (1993) A review of harmful algal blooms and their apparent global increase. Phycologia 32(2):79–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hardin G (1966) Biology: its principles and implications, 2nd edn. W.H. Freeman & Co., San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  14. Kelleher G, Kenchington R (1992) Guidelines for establishing marine protected areas. A marine Comservation and development report. IUCN, Gland, 79 ppGoogle Scholar
  15. Kelleher G, Bleakley C, Wells S (1995) A global representative system of marine protected areas. The World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  16. Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann N, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M, Thomas CJ (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainable Science 7(1):25–43.
  17. Leverone JR, Geiger SP, Stephenson SP, Arnold WS (2010) Increase in bay scallop (Argopecten irradians) populations following releases of competent larvae in two West Florida estuaries. J Shellfish Res 29(2):395–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Local Science Network for Environment and Sustainability web site. Accessed 27 Dec 2017
  19. Ludwig D, Helborn R, Walters C (1993) Uncertainty, resource exploitation, and conservation: lessons from history. Science 260:17–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Maragos JE, Crosby MP, McManus J (1996) Coral reefs and biodiversity: a critical and threatened relationship. Oceanography 9:83–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Muzyczka Z (2015) Synopsis and Progress Report on Survey Work for the Mote Community Partnership: Scallop Restoration Initiative (Mote intern and 4th year university student) (Mote Technical Report 1897)Google Scholar
  22. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (2010) Ecosystem concepts for sustainable bivalve Mariculture. National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 180 ppGoogle Scholar
  23. National Research Council (NRC) (1995) Science, Policy, and the Coast: improving decision making. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Norse EA (1993) Global marine biological diversity: a strategy for building conservation into decision making. Island Press, Washington, DC, 383 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Safina C (1995) The World’s imperiled fish. Sci Am 273(5):46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Solbrig O (1991) From genes to ecosystems: A research agenda for biodiversity. International Union for Biological Sciences (IUBS), Paris, 124ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Stevens T, Adams C, Hodges A, Mulkey D (2004) Economic impact on the re-opened scalloping area for citrus County, Florida – 2003. Gainesville: University of Florida. EDIS Document FE493. Accessed 6 May 2018
  28. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG) (2015). Accessed 6 May 2018
  29. White NM (1996) Spatial analysis of local coliform bacteria fate and transport. Ph.D. Dissertation, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, 145ppGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael P. Crosby
    • 1
    Email author
  • Barbara Lausche
    • 1
  • Jim Culter
    • 1
  1. 1.Mote Marine LaboratorySarasotaUSA

Personalised recommendations