The scope of fisheries learning exchanges for conservation |
| |
| Institution: | 1. University of Washington, School of Marine and Environmental Affairs, 3707 Brooklyn Avenue Northeast, Seattle, WA 98105 United States;2. Independent Consultant in Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture, Puerto Morelos, Quintana Roo, Mexico;3. Center for Ocean Solutions, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, CA 93950 United States;1. MRC/Wits Rural Public Health and Health Transitions Research Unit, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa;2. Institut de Recherche pour le Développement, UMI Résiliences, Bondy, France;3. Institut Pasteur, Epidémiologie des Maladies Emergentes, Paris, France;4. INDEPTH Network, Accra, Ghana;5. Umeå Centre for Global Health Research, Division of Epidemiology and Global Health, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden;1. Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts, University of Girona, Plaça Ferrater Mora 1, 17071 Girona, Spain;2. Laboratoire SET, Institut Claude Laugénie, Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, Avenue du Doyen Poplawski, 64000 Pau, France;1. University of Santiago de Compostela, Faculty of Political Sciences, Department of Applied Economics, Av Angel Echevarry s/n, 15782 Santiago de Compostela, Spain;2. Campus Do⁎Mar, International Campus of Excellence, Spain;3. Marine Research Division, AZTI, Txatxarramendi ugartea z/g, Sukarrieta, E-48395 Bizkaia, Spain;4. University of Açores, Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre, Departamento de Oceanografia e Pescas, 9901-862 Horta, Azores, Portugal;5. University of Minho, CBMA-Molecular and Environmental Biology Centre, Campus de Gualtar, 4710-074 Braga, Portugal;6. Centro de Estudios Avanzados de Blanes (CEAB, CSIC), Accés a la Cala S. Francesc 14, 17300 Blanes, Spain;7. Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science, Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk NR33 0HT, UK;8. Direcção Geral de Recursos Naturais, Segurança e Serviços Marítimos, Av. Brasilia, 1449-030 Lisboa, Portugal;9. Instituto Português do Mar e da Atmosfera, Av. Brasília, s/n, 1400-038 Lisboa, Portugal;10. Department of Environment and Planning & Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies (CESAM), University of Aveiro, Portugal;11. Centre of Marine Sciences (CCMAR), University of Algarve, FCT-7, Campus de Gambelas, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal;12. International Forum for Sustainable Underwater Activities, C/ Valencia 231, Bajos, Apartado de Correos 36003, 08007 Barcelona, Spain;1. Department of Geography, National University of Singapore, 1 Arts Link, Singapore 117570, Singapore;2. Community-Based Mangrove Rehabilitation Project, Zoological Society of London, 132 Quezon St., Iloilo City, Philippines |
| |
| Abstract: | Over the past decade, fisheries learning exchanges (FLEs), in which representatives from different fisher communities come together to share marine conservation challenges and solutions, have been produced by a range of non-government organizations (NGOs) and federal agencies. This paper presents an overview of the history and scope of FLEs. A literature review, questionnaire, expert workshop, and key informant interviews were conducted. A content analysis was performed of the key informant interviews using a grounded theory approach. This paper offers a formal definition of a FLE, describes different configurations of FLEs, discusses the utility, common objectives, and common outcomes of FLEs, and outlines a research agenda for future work on FLEs. Organizers have found FLEs to have four main utilities: 1) FLEs leverage peer-to-peer sharing so that participants open each other's horizons for improving fisheries and fishing 2) FLEs catalyze and speed change, 3) FLEs are good for sharing thoughts that are difficult to receive and accept, 4) FLEs facilitate involvement and commitment from relevant parties needed for change. The most commonly documented purposes of FLEs were related to marine reserves, fisheries management strategies, bycatch reduction, and alternative livelihoods to fishing. The most common objectives among the FLEs surveyed were to encourage action or behavior, to openly exchange ideas, and to introduce new technology. As a result of FLEs the common outcomes were that participants were inspired to make changes, new programs were implemented, relationships were built and connections made, and participants enhanced their understanding of marine management strategies. |
| |
| Keywords: | Fisheries learning exchanges Fisheries management Marine conservation Natural resources management Knowledge exchange |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
