1,720,992 research outputs found
Fishing industry and related perspectives on the issues raised by no-take marine protected area proposals
No full textIn the face of growing calls for no-take marine protected areas (NTMPAs), the views of fishing industry representatives in south-west (SW) England on related issues are analysed. Only 23% thought NTMPAs were the way forward and a range of concerns were expressed, e.g. that the 'terrestrial' protected areas approach and related biodiversity conservation objectives will be extended to the seas, and that fish yield reductions from the loss of access to NTMPAs are very unlikely to be compensated for through spillover/export. Some interesting approaches to ameliorating these concerns emerged, such as being open and honest that NTMPAs are primarily intended to achieve biodiversity conservation benefits, reducing uncertainty concerning the potential for any secondary fisheries spillover/export benefits, justifying NTMPAs on an objective, rational basis rather than on a subjective, precautionary basis, and the quid pro quo streamlining of wider fisheries management approaches. This research reveals a more diverse range of perspectives amongst fishing industry representatives on the issues raised by NTMPA proposals than is often assumed. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?
No full textRecent arguments for conventional fisheries management approaches (CFMAs) and against no-take marine protected areas (NTM-PAs) are reviewed, i.e. CFMAs are more effective, density-dependent factors will lead to reduced fish stock production in and around NTMPAs, rights-based approaches in combination with CFMAs will be more effective, and natural refuges from fishing already exist. It is concluded that these are largely valid but only from a fisheries management perspective. The arguments of proponents of NTMPAs and those of proponents of CFMAs are considered as contrasting storylines, the divergences between which are based on two key factors: different objectives and different science. In relation to different objectives, it is concluded that the arguments against NTMPAs based on their lack of fisheries management benefits must be considered as only applying to the secondary resource conservation objectives of such designations and not to the primary marine biodiversity conservation objectives. On this basis it is argued that it is counter-productive for NTMPAs to be 'sold' on a win-win basis, including their potential to deliver fisheries management benefits, as this detracts from their marine biodiversity conservation objectives and leaves such calls open to arguments that CFMAs are better able to deliver fisheries management objectives. In relation to different science, it is concluded that criticisms of NTMPAs and support for CFMAs implicitly resist the shift from Mode 1 (reductive, intradisciplinary) to Mode 2 (holistic, trans-disciplinary) science that is inherent in calls for NTMPAs as part of an ecosystem approach. Mode 2 science attempts to accommodate both uncertainty and wider societal values and preferences, and it is argued that arguments for NTMPAs should be more explicitly focussed on this potential. It is difficult, if not impossible and inappropriate, to extend the reductive approach inherent in CFMA analyses to encompass the broader ethical and scientific concerns for the health of marine ecosystems and their component populations and habitats that arguments for NTMPAs reflect. NTMPA proponents might focus on stressing that arguments against such designations and in favour of CFMAs do not encompass such valid concerns, therefore they tell only half of the story
Collective action problems posed by no-take zones
No full textAround 0.04% of the world's marine area is presently designated as no-take zone (NTZ), in which all fishing is banned. The IUCN, backed by many marine fisheries and ecology scientists, has called for this to be increased to 20-30% by 2012 in order to conserve fish stocks and marine biodiversity. This ambitious target presents a number of collective action problems (CAPs) that must be addressed and overcome if fishers and other relevant actors are to collaborate towards its achievement. These are discussed, drawing on the common-pool resource (CPR) literature, with particular reference to those raised by divergent aims, predictability, different knowledges, role of advocacy, locality, level of decision-making and enforceability. As NTZs are ultimately about altering the behaviour of humans, it is argued that studies based on social sciences, on how NTZs can be designed, implemented and enforced on a collective basis, are essential. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved
Governing Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in California: Analysis of the MLPA Implementation process
No full textNeoliberal governance strategies have been hegemonic in shaping global policy toward Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) over the past two decades. This impact has manifested itself in two key dimensions: the prominence given to public-private partnerships (PPPs) and the dependency upon civil society, particularly in the form of non-governmental organisations (NGOs). As a result, it is necessary to give primacy to the implication of PPPs and the role of NGOs in considering how best to govern MPAs. This is particularly the case in relation to efforts which seek the ‘right’ combination of ‘the market’, ‘the people’ and ‘the state’. This thesis investigates the California Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) implementation process, and particularly the MLPA Initiative, which is widely publicised as a successful case of a science-based stakeholder-driven process through PPP. The thesis involves a thorough exploration of how an ideal combination could be achieved based on the Central Coast Study Region (CCSR) MLPA implementation process. Number of literary sources identified four key factors which have significantly contributed to the implementation of MLPA: 1) A strong legal mandate 2) Strong political will 3) A substantial level of stakeholder participation 4) Effective PPPs However, despite the widely publicised claims, research findings suggest that finding the ‘right’ combination for the MLPA implementation process remains a difficult task. The strong legal mandate, which has provided the foundation for the science used, constrained the stakeholder participation process. Indeed, it suggests that the terms ‘science-based’ and ‘stakeholder-driven’ could be to some extent, oxymorons, whilst strong political will could potentially compromise stakeholder participation. Effective PPPs for the MLPA Initiative represent a conundrum for PPP, since NGOs, including philanthropic foundations, increasingly exercise their influence on public policy to push through their agendas. Subsequently, PPP could potentially compromise the legitimacy of the process. Finally, the research findings suggest that the substantial level of stakeholder participation may not be a panacea for designating MPAs
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
- …
