Transdisciplinarity in transformative ocean governance research - reflections of early career researchers

This paper interrogates the concept of transdisciplinarity, both theoretically and practically, from a perspective of early career researchers (ECRs) in transformative ocean governance research. Aiming to advance research methodologies for future complex sustainability challenges, the paper seeks to illuminate some common uncertainties and challenges surrounding transdisciplinarity from a marine science perspective. Following a literature review on transdisciplinary research, workshops, and a series of surveys, we determine that transdisciplinarity appears to be a concept in search of definition, and that there is a need to explore transdisciplinarity specifically from an ocean research perspective. The paper discusses a number of challenges experienced by ECRs in conducting transdisciplinary research and provides recommendations for both ECRs wishing to undertake more equitable transdisciplinary research and for the UN Decade for Ocean Science to support ECRs in this endeavour (Figure 1). Based on our findings, we interrogate the role of non-academic collaborators in transdisciplinary research and argue that future transdisciplinarity will need to address power imbalances in existing research methods to achieve knowledge co-production, as opposed to knowledge integration

Issues of context, capacity and scale: Essential conditions and missing links for a sustainable blue economy

Funding: This work was supported by the United Kingdom Research and Innovation (UKRI), Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF), One Ocean Hub (Grant Ref: NE/S008950/1).The blue economy has roots in the international arena of sustainable development and sets out to unlock opportunities for economy and society whilst protecting and enhancing marine environments. To date there has been no analysis of how this overarching intention for sustainability has influenced the rapid development of blue economy policies at national and regional scales. In this article, we analyse the synergies and conflicts between blue economy policies from a diversity of national and regional policies and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. We show that to maintain critical alignment with targets for sustainability, place-based contextual development of blue economies that meet the needs of all actors is necessary. These needs relate to ensuring resilience against future environmental and political shocks, the maintenance of the ecological basis for thriving blue economies, and capacity development at all levels to support effective and equitable governance. Results indicate that co-production will be important to achieve sustainable blue economies.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Destructive fishing: An expert-driven definition and exploration of this quasi-concept

Data availability statement: Data that breaches the anonymity of responses in this study cannot be made available. Some anonymised and summary data can be found in the Supplementary Information.Data Availability Statement: Data that breaches the anonymity of responses in this study cannot be made available. Some anonymized and summary data can be found in the Supplementary Information.Code Availability Statement: Code for the figures and certain analyses used in this manuscript can be found at https://github.com/arlie-m/destructive_fishing_defintion_delphi.Supporting Information is available online at: https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.13015#support-information-section .Numerous policy and international frameworks consider that “destructive fishing” hampers efforts to reach sustainability goals. Though ubiquitous, “destructive fishing” is undefined and therefore currently immeasurable. Here we propose a definition developed through expert consultation: “Destructive fishing is any fishing practice that causes irrecoverable habitat degradation, or which causes significant adverse environmental impacts, results in long-term declines in target or nontarget species beyond biologically safe limits and has negative livelihood impacts.” We show strong stakeholder support for a definition, consensus on many biological and ecological dimensions, and no clustering of respondents from different sectors. Our consensus definition is a significant step toward defining sustainable fisheries goals and will help interpret and implement global political commitments which utilize the term “destructive fishing.” Our definition and results will help reinforce the Food and Agricultural Organization's Code of Conduct and meaningfully support member countries to prohibit destructive fishing practices.Cambridge Conservation Initiative. Grant Number: CCI-05-20-009; Helmholtz Institute for Functional Marine Biodiversity (HIFMB) at the University of Oldenburg; Brunel University London; Alfred-Wegener-Institute for Polar and Marine Research; Arcadia; Rothschild Foundation; A.G. Leventis Foundation; Isaac Newton Trust; Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation

Destructive fishing: An expert-driven definition and exploration of this quasi-concept

Publication status: PublishedFunder: Helmholtz Institute for Functional Marine Biodiversity (HIFMB) at the University of OldenburgFunder: Brunel University London; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007914Funder: Alfred‐Wegener‐Institute for Polar and Marine ResearchFunder: Arcadia; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012088Funder: Rothschild FoundationFunder: A.G. Leventis Foundation; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004117Funder: Isaac Newton Trust; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100004815Funder: Prince Albert II of Monaco Foundation; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100011592AbstractNumerous policy and international frameworks consider that “destructive fishing” hampers efforts to reach sustainability goals. Though ubiquitous, “destructive fishing” is undefined and therefore currently immeasurable. Here we propose a definition developed through expert consultation: “Destructive fishing is any fishing practice that causes irrecoverable habitat degradation, or which causes significant adverse environmental impacts, results in long‐term declines in target or nontarget species beyond biologically safe limits and has negative livelihood impacts.” We show strong stakeholder support for a definition, consensus on many biological and ecological dimensions, and no clustering of respondents from different sectors. Our consensus definition is a significant step toward defining sustainable fisheries goals and will help interpret and implement global political commitments which utilize the term “destructive fishing.” Our definition and results will help reinforce the Food and Agricultural Organization's Code of Conduct and meaningfully support member countries to prohibit destructive fishing practices.</jats:p