Petter Holm - Collaborative Research in Fisheries: Co-creating Knowledge for Fisheries Governance in Europe

This book completes more than 10 years of research on the role and value of stakeholder-driven science in support of effective fisheries governance. The aim of the book is to demonstrate how stakeholder knowledge can be complementary to scientific knowledge. New research practices and advice frameworks are being developed in support of the ongoing transition in fisheries governance focusing on co-creation processes and establishing a common knowledge base for fisheries management in Europe.

The European experiences can be inspirational and provide insight to how stakeholder-driven science can be implemented across the globe. In Canada, the USA and Australia, participatory research is already on the move; these countries are also searching for better ways to set up co-creation processes to integrate stakeholder-driven science into the advice process and subsequent policy-making.

This book has grown from the EU-funded FP7 research project Bridging the Gap Between Science and Stakeholders (GAP) and provides experiences on collaborative research by presenting the findings from 14 fisher-scientist partnerships across 12 European countries. The research has been conducted by interdisciplinary teams each composed of social and natural scientists working closely together. These researchers and fishers had to cross disciplinary boundaries and developed a common language to communicate and share their deep and thorough understanding to improve fisheries management in the specific settings.

The genesis of the research idea goes way back and was inspired by the ICES Fishery Systems Working Group and an increasing acknowledgement in the fisheries science community to strengthen collaboration between scientists and stakeholders in the production of knowledge to support fisheries management decision-making. I have had the pleasure to observe the development of the GAP research project in its formulation and later to be involved as co-supervisor for one of the PhD students associated with GAP. I am very impressed by the depth of the case studies and the way they present existing knowledge gaps. The case studies demonstrate great variety in types of co-creation processes and approaches to fill the gaps in understanding and applying different types of knowledge.

The underlying theme in most chaptersif not allis the emergence of a new type of scientifically literate fisher. It would be naive to ignore that this fisher is also a political actor. Through the co-creation process, the fisher forms new alliances and enters new networks enabling him/her to influence the management discourse to pursue his/her own interest. Thus, the cases indirectly indicate a need for a knowledge broker, who on the one hand has the scientific depth and on the other hand understands the practicalities of fisheries and has the respect of the fishers. The way forward is neither to make a fisher into a scientist nor to make a scientist into a fisher, and it is impossible to clone the two breeds. The recipe to create a knowledge broker institution has not yet been found, but an interesting spinoff of the GAP project might show the way forward. Two highly respected scientistsfrom national research institutes, both instrumental in the formulation of the GAP project and heavily involved in science-stakeholders collaborationhave changed positions and career patterns by taking positions as chief scientific advisors for, respectively, Dutch and Scottish pelagic fisheries associations and in that capacity have undertaken a knowledge broker role.