Knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of management strategies and regulations of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary by commercial fishers, dive operators, and environmental group members: A baseline characterization and 10-year comparison

This research is part of the Socioeconomic Research & Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS), which was initiated in 1998. In 1995-96, a baseline study on the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of proposed FKNMS management strategies and regulations of commercial fishers, dive operators and on selected environmental group members was conducted by researchers at the University of Florida and the University of Miami’s Rosenstiel School of Atmospheric and Marine Science (RSMAS). The baseline study was funded by the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, and components of the study were published by Florida Sea Grant and in several peer reviewed journals. The study was accepted into the Socioeconomic Research & Monitoring Program at a workshop to design the program in 1998, and workshop participants recommended that the study be replicated every ten years. The 10-year replication was conducted in 2004-05 (commercial fishers) 2006 (dive operators) and 2007 (environmental group members) by the same researchers at RSMAS, while the University of Florida researchers were replaced by Thomas J. Murray & Associates, Inc., which conducted the commercial fishing panels in the FKNMS. The 10-year replication study was funded by NOAA’s Coral Reef Conservation Program. The study not only makes 10-year comparisons in the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions of FKNMS management strategies and regulations, but it also establishes new baselines for future monitoring efforts. Things change, and following the principles of “adaptive management”, management has responded with changes in the management plan strategies and regulations. Some of the management strategies and regulations that were being proposed at the time of the baseline 1995-96 study were changed before the management plan and regulations went into effect in July 1997. This was especially true for the main focus of the study which was the various types of marine zones in the draft and final zoning action plan. Some of the zones proposed were changed significantly and subsequently new zones have been created. This study includes 10-year comparisons of socioeconomic/demographic profiles of each user group; sources and usefulness of information; knowledge of purposes of FKNMS zones; perceived beneficiaries of the FKNMS zones; views on FKNMS processes to develop management strategies and regulations; views on FKNMS zone outcomes; views on FKNMS performance; and general support for FKNMS. In addition to new baseline information on FKNMS zones, new baseline information was developed for spatial use, investment and costs-and-earnings for commercial fishers and dive operators, and views on resource conditions for all three user groups. Statistical tests were done to detect significant changes in both the distribution of responses to questions and changes in mean scores for items replicated over the 10-year period. (PDF has 143 pages.)

Maintaining the "public good" nature of improved fish strains: dissemination of knowledge and materials

Many sources of information that discuss currents problems of food security point to the importance of farmed fish as an ideal food source that can be grown by poor farmers, (Asian Development Bank 2004). Furthermore, the development of improved strains of fish suitable for low-input aquaculture such as Tilapia, has demonstrated the feasibility of an approach that combines “cutting edge science” with accessible technology, as a means for improving the nutrition and livelihoods of both the urban poor and poor farmers in developing countries (Mair et al. 2002). However, the use of improved strains of fish as a means of reducing hunger and improving livelihoods has proved to be difficult to sustain, especially as a public good, when external (development) funding sources devoted to this area are minimal1. In addition, the more complicated problem of delivery of an aquaculture system, not just improved fish strains and the technology, can present difficulties and may go explicitly unrecognized (from Sissel Rogne, as cited by Silje Rem 2002). Thus, the involvement of private partners has featured prominently in the strategy for transferring to the public technology related to improved Tilapia strains. Partnering with the private sector in delivery schemes to the poor should take into account both the public goods aspect and the requirement that the traits selected for breeding “improved” strains meet the actual needs of the resource poor farmer. Other dissemination approaches involving the public sector may require a large investment in capacity building. However, the use of public sector institutions as delivery agents encourages the maintaining of the “public good” nature of the products.