Benjamin L. H. Jones, Rolando O. Santos, W. Ryan James, Sophia V. Costa, Aaron J. Adams, Ross E. Boucek, Lucy Coals, Leanne C. Cullen-Unsworth, Samuel Shephard, Jennifer S. Rehage
{"title":"New directions for Indigenous and local knowledge research and application in fisheries science: Lessons from a systematic review","authors":"Benjamin L. H. Jones, Rolando O. Santos, W. Ryan James, Sophia V. Costa, Aaron J. Adams, Ross E. Boucek, Lucy Coals, Leanne C. Cullen-Unsworth, Samuel Shephard, Jennifer S. Rehage","doi":"10.1111/faf.12831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Social-ecological systems like fisheries provide food, livelihoods and recreation. However, lack of data and its integration into governance hinders their conservation and management. Stakeholders possess site-specific knowledge crucial for confronting these challenges. There is increasing recognition that Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) is valuable, but structural differences between ILK and quantitative archetypes have stalled the assimilation of ILK into fisheries management, despite acknowledged bias and uncertainty in scientific methods. Conducting a systematic review of fisheries-associated ILK research (<i>n</i> = 397 articles), we examined how ILK is accessed, applied, distributed across space and species, and has evolved. We show that ILK has generated qualitative, semi-quantitative and quantitative information for diverse taxa across 98 countries. Fisheries-associated ILK research mostly targets small-scale and artisanal fishers (70% of studies) and typically uses semi-structured interviews (60%). We revealed large variability in sample size (<i>n</i> = 4–7638), predicted by the approach employed and the data generated (i.e. qualitative studies target smaller groups). Using thematic categorisation, we show that scientists are still exploring techniques, or ‘validating’ ILK through comparisons with quantitative scientific data (20%), and recording qualitative information of what fishers understand (40%). A few researchers are applying quantitative social science methods to derive trends in abundance, catch and effort. Such approaches facilitate recognition of local insight in fisheries management but fall short of accepting ILK as a valid complementary way of knowing about fisheries systems. This synthesis reveals that development and increased opportunities are needed to bridge ILK and quantitative scientific data.</p>","PeriodicalId":169,"journal":{"name":"Fish and Fisheries","volume":"25 4","pages":"647-671"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fish and Fisheries","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/faf.12831","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"FISHERIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Social-ecological systems like fisheries provide food, livelihoods and recreation. However, lack of data and its integration into governance hinders their conservation and management. Stakeholders possess site-specific knowledge crucial for confronting these challenges. There is increasing recognition that Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) is valuable, but structural differences between ILK and quantitative archetypes have stalled the assimilation of ILK into fisheries management, despite acknowledged bias and uncertainty in scientific methods. Conducting a systematic review of fisheries-associated ILK research (n = 397 articles), we examined how ILK is accessed, applied, distributed across space and species, and has evolved. We show that ILK has generated qualitative, semi-quantitative and quantitative information for diverse taxa across 98 countries. Fisheries-associated ILK research mostly targets small-scale and artisanal fishers (70% of studies) and typically uses semi-structured interviews (60%). We revealed large variability in sample size (n = 4–7638), predicted by the approach employed and the data generated (i.e. qualitative studies target smaller groups). Using thematic categorisation, we show that scientists are still exploring techniques, or ‘validating’ ILK through comparisons with quantitative scientific data (20%), and recording qualitative information of what fishers understand (40%). A few researchers are applying quantitative social science methods to derive trends in abundance, catch and effort. Such approaches facilitate recognition of local insight in fisheries management but fall short of accepting ILK as a valid complementary way of knowing about fisheries systems. This synthesis reveals that development and increased opportunities are needed to bridge ILK and quantitative scientific data.
期刊介绍:
Fish and Fisheries adopts a broad, interdisciplinary approach to the subject of fish biology and fisheries. It draws contributions in the form of major synoptic papers and syntheses or meta-analyses that lay out new approaches, re-examine existing findings, methods or theory, and discuss papers and commentaries from diverse areas. Focal areas include fish palaeontology, molecular biology and ecology, genetics, biochemistry, physiology, ecology, behaviour, evolutionary studies, conservation, assessment, population dynamics, mathematical modelling, ecosystem analysis and the social, economic and policy aspects of fisheries where they are grounded in a scientific approach. A paper in Fish and Fisheries must draw upon all key elements of the existing literature on a topic, normally have a broad geographic and/or taxonomic scope, and provide general points which make it compelling to a wide range of readers whatever their geographical location. So, in short, we aim to publish articles that make syntheses of old or synoptic, long-term or spatially widespread data, introduce or consolidate fresh concepts or theory, or, in the Ghoti section, briefly justify preliminary, new synoptic ideas. Please note that authors of submissions not meeting this mandate will be directed to the appropriate primary literature.