Workshop on accounting for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice (WKAFPA)

• Autor(a) principal: Angu, Chevonne
• Data de Publicação: 2023
• Outros Autores: Balestri, Elena, Ballesteros, Marta, Bloecker, Alexandra, Cadrin, Steve, Christensen, Helle, Curtis, David, Dandy, Rufus, Evan, Derek, Farrell, Edward, Gamaza, Maria, Gollock, Matthew, Haase, Stefanie, Hintzen, Niels, Jones, Andrew, Korsbrekke, Knut, Libun- gan, Lisa Anne, Luedemann, Karin, Macdonald, Paul, Mackinson, Steven, Merce, Anna, Murphy, Patrick, Napier, Ian, Pastoors, Martin, Peixoto, Ualerson, Rasmussen, Jens, Reedtz Sparrevohn, Claus, Roux, Marie-Julie, Rudd, Hannah, Schwermer, Heike, Seixas, Sónia, Steins, Nathalie, Tenbrink, Talya, Torreele, Els, Valeiras, Julio, Vallerani, Matilde, Wood, Peter
• Tipo de documento: Relatório
• Idioma: eng
• Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.2/15354
• topic: Stakeholder perception; Fishers perception; Fish stocks; Stakeholder; ICES Advice

The objective of the Workshop on accounting for fishers and other stakeholders’ perceptions of the dynamics of fish stocks in ICES advice (WKAFPA) was to identify where and how stake- holder information could be incorporated in the ICES fisheries advice process. It adopted an operational definition of the concept of perception, where perceptions result from observations, interpreted in light of experience, that can be supported by data, information and knowledge to generate evidence about them. Stakeholder information can be either structured (e.g. routinely collected information in a standardized format) or unstructured (e.g. experiential information) and either of those can inform decisions made during the production of ICES advice. Most notably, the group identified there was a need to engage with stakeholders earlier in the process, i.e. before benchmarks meetings take place and before preliminary assessment results are used as the basis to predict total allowable catches for upcoming advice (Figure 4.2). It was therefore recommended to include in the ICES process the organisation of pre-bench- mark/roadmap workshops where science and data needs of upcoming benchmarks can be iden- tified, followed by making arrangements how scientists and stakeholders can collaborate to ac- cess, prepare for use (where relevant) and document the structured and unstructured infor- mation well ahead of the benchmark meetings. It was also recommended to organise ‘sense-checking’ sessions with stakeholders when prelim- inary assessments are available but not yet used as the basis for advisory production. This would allow stakeholders and assessment scientists to verify available knowledge and data against stock perceptions and provide additional considerations relevant for the production of TAC ad- vice. Next to these two additional activities, it is recommended that communication on differ- ences in stakeholder perception or data derived perceptions are communicated within the ICES assessment reports as well as in the ICES advice in a transparent manner. Not only should dif- ferences or similarities be documented and communicated, in those cases where there are differ- ences in perception between ICES stock assessments and stakeholders, a working group, external to the assessment working groups, should evaluate these differences and describe whether these differences can be logically explained or require further investigation. This outcome of this pro- cess may potentially lead to new data collection or additional analyses suitable for input to benchmarks. Essential in this entire process is making sure the same language is spoken between scientists and stakeholders, that there are clear and transparent processes in place on how to deal with stakeholder information and communicate clearly how this information is used in the prepara- tion of ICES advice.