The burden of proof in co-management and results-based management: the elephant on the deck!

Abstract

Results-based management requires that outcomes can be demonstrated by industry and verified by managers on behalf of society. The core questions are: what outcomes, and how can they be proved? Existing fishery approaches to reversing the burden of proof are examined with focus on how proof is demonstrated. Outcomes can be measured in situ (on the vessel) or ex situ (at the stock or ecosystem level). In situ measures are preferable because they give direct measurements, although they can be invasive and costly. Ex situ results are only observable on scales that make it difficult to attribute them to specific management measures, or they may be influenced by external factors. Three main environmental impacts caused by fishing are assessed with respect to how industry can assume the burden of proof. The combined use of vessel-monitoring systems and benthic-impact models may offer a practical solution to the problem of managing fishery impacts on the benthos. Three Irish fisheries are assessed in terms of the feasibility of reversing the burden of proof. There are limits to the extent to which industry can assume the burden of proof, and the concept of sharing the burden of proof could be more realistic