MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944262188 · doi:10.3354/meps12972

Value- and ecosystem-based management approach: the Pacific herring fishery conflict

2019· article· en· W2944262188 on OpenAlexaff
ME Lam, TJ Pitcher, Szymon Surma, J. Anthony G. Scott, Matthias Kaiser, ASJ White, EA Pakhomov, L. Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Ecology Progress Series · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsTula FoundationUniversity of British ColumbiaFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHerringEcosystem-based managementFisheryPacific herringFisheries managementFisheries scienceGeographyMarine conservationFishingValue (mathematics)ClupeaEcosystemIndigenousEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An innovative value-and ecosystem-based management approach (VEBMA) is introduced that aims to expose policy tradeoffs, resolve resource conflicts, and foster ethical governance.VEBMA is applied to the Pacific herring Clupea pallasii fishery in British Columbia, Canada, which is mired in conflict between local and indigenous communities and the fishing industry over the management of herring, a forage fish with significant ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural value.VEBMA integrates an ecosystem-based approach (ecological modelling) with a valuebased approach (practical ethics) to examine the ecological viability, socioeconomic feasibility, and societal desirability of alternative fishery management scenarios.In the socioecosystem-based approach, we applied the Management Strategy Evaluation module within the Ecopath with Ecosim modelling framework to explore scenarios with harvest-control rules specified by various herring fishing mortalities and biomass cutoff thresholds.In the value-based approach, Haida Gwaii community and herring industry participants ranked a set of values and selected preferred scenarios and cutoff thresholds to open the fishery.The modelled ecological and socioeconomic impacts and risks and stakeholder preferences of the scenarios are synthesized in a deliberation and decision-support tool, the VEBMA science-policy table.VEBMA facilitates inclusive, transparent, and accountable decision-making among diverse stakeholders, such as local communities, industries, scientists, managers, and policy-makers.It promotes ethical governance in pluralistic societies via compromise, rather than consensus solutions to resolve 'wicked' problems at the science-policy interface.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.015
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.203 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Ecology Progress SeriesSame topicMarine and fisheries researchFrench-language works237,207