Mediation for Fishery Management in the Irish Sea

1. Mediation for Fishery Management in the Irish Sea Penang, April 16, 2009 Ortwin Renn University of Stuttgart And DIALOGIK gGmbH

2. Fishery Management Models • Traditional methods • Quotas (enforced by governments) • Property rights on the resource • Tradeable certificates (market auction) • New cooperative methods • Decision analytic methods (utils) • Round Tables • Mediation • Other participatory forms of decision making

3. Problem of Irish – Sea Fisheries • Overfishing • High diversity of fish • Impossibility to target one fish species only • Increase of catch in spite of declining number of fishing businesses • Widely ineffective regulation • Quotas are highly contested • Quotas lead to high discart and bycatch • EU competitors inside the area • Conflicts among and between fisheries

4. The Project: Investinfish • Characteristics • Initiated by WWF • Financed by EU, British and Irish Government • Model of Round Table (Mediation) • Process • Round Table from 2003 to 2006 • Intensive scientific modelling in 2004-2006 • External facilitator of the Round Table • Final agreement in October 2006

5. The model of deliberation • Round Table • Participants: Stakeholders • Method: Analytic-deliberative discourse • Supervision: Scientific Advisory Council • Scientific Modelling • Research questions framed by Round Table • Iterative process between modellers and stakeholders

6. Participants of the Steering Committee: • Fishing Industry (small and large) • Angler Association • Fish Processing Industry • Environmental Groups (4 groups) • Retailers • Restaurateurs • Community development agency • Observers: EU, British, Irish Officials

7. Participants of the Project: • Bass Anglers’ Sportfishing Society (B.A.S.S.) • CornishFish Producers’ Organisation (CFPO) • Cornwall County Council • English Nature • EsméeFairbairn Foundation • Falfish • Marks & Spencer • MoshiMoshi • National FederationofFishermen’sOrganisations (NFFO)

8. Participants of the Project: • South Western Fish Producers Organisation • National FederationofSea Anglers (NFSA) • SEAFISH • South West Regional Development Agency • The Wildlife Trusts • Worshipful Company ofFishmongers • WWF-UK • European Union AS AN OBSERVER • Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA) AS AN OBSEVER

9. Background: Round Table • Theoretical Foundations • Mediation • Formal decision making aids • Deliberative style of decision making • Practical implementation • 12 plenary meetings in three years • 16 group meetings • Accompanied by regional community assemblies and public opinion polls

10. Crucial questions for decision making • Inclusion • Who: stakeholder definition • What: options, scenarios, etc. • Why: problem representation, framing • Closure • What counts: selection process • What is more convincing: argumentation process • What option is selected: balancing process

11. Combination of formal and discursive methods • Formal component • Structuring tool (options, criteria, performance and weights) • Quantification as “educational” tool • Quantification as “first cut” • Quantification as result to be discussed • Deliberative component • Argumentation over structured options • Argumentation over options enlightened by quantitative analysis • Juxtaposition of holistic and numerical results • Argumentation over numerical results

12. Modelling Structure: Overview • What matters? • Dependent variables (what is the problem?) • Criteria of concern (value tress with criteria) • What are the options? • Business as usual • Management options • How do the option perform on the criteria? • Modelling • Uncertainty analysis • How do you interpret the results? • Quality • Relevance • How do you assign relative weights? • What decision rule are you going to employ? • Expected values • others • Sensitivity analysis • Redefining options • Final decision

13. Specific Requirements for Multi-Actor and Multi-Dimensional DM • Clear mandate and time frame • Agreement on available and suitable options • Willingness of legal decision makers to give product of deliberation serious attention • Willingness of all parties to engage in mutual learning process • Refraining from moralizing other parties or their positions

14. Value Tree Analysis • Single value trees • Representation of each stakeholder’s concerns • Structured in hierarchical order • Validated for comprehensiveness and representativeness • Joint value tree • Representation of all stakeholders’ concerns • Structured in hierarchical order • Non zero-sum-game because all concerns can be integrated (possibility of zero weights)

15. Purpose of value trees • Assistance to each group in articulating its own: • Criteria of concern • Evaluation criteria • Preferred options • Diagnostic tool to identify: • Areas of consensus • Conflicting values or criteria • Win-win solutions • Input for scientific modelling: • What factors to consider • What options to consider • Criteria for choosing performance criteria

16. Steps of Value Tree Exercise • Generation of individual trees • Interviews with representatives of each group • Suggestion of value tree by analyst • Iterative process of validation • Authorization by respective group • Generation of joint value tree • Presentation of individual value trees to steering group • Proposal by analyst for a joint tree • Discussion in the Steering Group • Iterative process of validation • Authorization

17. Results of Value Trees I • Positive economic outlook for fishing industry • Sustained profitability • Long term viability for small and medium size fishing businesses • Improved attractiveness and image • Sustained ocean environments • Healthy and abundant fish stocks • Equilibrium between fishing and stock recovery • Restoration of biodiversity • Effective, fair and reliable regulatory regime • Emphasis on regional self-governance and self-control (empowerment) • Guarantee for coexistence of commercial fishing and sports fishing • Emphasis on flexibility • Emphasis on inclusive governance (all relevant parties)

18. Results of Value Trees II • Positive contribution to community development • Fishing as integral part of the community • Sustainable economic development prospects for fishing communities • Harmony with partners in value chain • Effective reporting system • Satisfaction of the end consumers

19. Science modelling • Results of computer models between: (Input) • Zoning • Seasonal restrictions • Quotas and licenses • Gear and technology • And outcome of modelling • Fish stock development • Biodiversity development (with large uncertainties) • Potential income development and probably distribution • Effects on fish that anglers value • Options that could not be modelled • Different governance structures (regional empowerment) • Self-policing and compliance management • Organisational and behavioural changes

20. Accomplishments I • Assigning performance values for each criterion of the value tree • Based on data from the scientific models • Based on experiential and local knowledge • Based on legal and administrative constraints and opportunities • Based on remaining uncertainties • Assignment of relative weights for each criterion • For each stakeholder group separately • For the whole Steering Group • Selection of decision rule • Expected values • Minimax, Maximin, Min regret

21. Further Accomplishments • Sensitivity analysis • Data uncertainties • Model uncertainties • Relative weights • Change of option structure • Redefining options • Compensation for negative impacts • Combination of options • Final decision • On preferred option package • On implementation plan • On monitoring

22. Trends on option selection • Overriding dissatisfaction with present quota system • Acceptance for seasonal, regional or other type of closures (no take zones), if control remains on the local or regional level • Overall acceptance for minimum and maximum landings if effect is proven • Joint fact finding missions with scientists and fishermen (Norwegian Model) • Need for new solution on bycatch and discart (several proposals were made)

23. Selected Options • Five substantive options (core group) • Decommissioning • Technical (Mesh size) • Area based measures • Reduction of bycatch (inter-fishermen-arrangements) • Others • Process options • Recommendations on process • Recommendations on procedures

24. Process Options • Local Governance • Local-regional coordination boards • Self-regulation among fishing boats (compliance) • Accommodation to situation (flexibility) • Inclusion of local interests • Link to vertical governance • Implication for national policies (UK and Ireland) • Implications for RACS (European component) • Joint fact finding with scientists and fishing industry

25. Final NoteDeliberative processes for involving stakeholders are instruments of art and science: They require a solid theoretical knowledge, a personal propensity to engage in group interactions, and lots of practical experience

26. Review of Cooperative Models • Organized stakeholders • Hearing • Round Tables (Forum, Dialogue Processes) • Negotiated Rulemaking • Mediation and Alternate Conflict Resolution • General public • Ombudsperson • Public Hearings • Citizen Advisory Committees • Citizen Forum, Planning Cells, Citizen Juries • Consensus Conferences (Danish Model)

27. The Risk Management Escalator (from simple via complex and uncertain to ambiguous phenomena) Risk Tradeoff Analysis and Deliberation Necessary Risk Balancing Necessary Risk Assessment Necessary Types of Conflict: cognitive evaluative normative Actors: Risk Managers External Experts Stakeholders such as Industry, Directly Affected Groups Representatives of the Public(s) Discourse: participatory Ambiguous Risk Balancing Necessary Risk Assessment Necessary Types of Conflict: cognitive evaluative Actors: Risk Managers External Experts Stakeholders such as Industry, Directly Affected Groups Discourse: reflective Uncertain Scientific Risk Assessment Necessary Types of Conflict: cognitive Actors: Risk Managers External Experts Discourse: cognitive Complex Routine operation Actors: Risk managers Discourse: internal Simple