Review: (Campbell et al., 2009) Beyond Baselines: Rethinking Priorities for Ocean Conservation

Campbell, L.M., N.J. Gray, E.L. Hazen and J.M. Shackeroff. 2009. Beyond baselines: rethinking priorities for ocean conservation. Ecology and Society 14(1): 14 Key Terms - SBS = refers to both concept and work it has inspired in marine historical ecology - marine historical ecology = a field of study that uses historical data sets and ecological modeling to describe what marine ecosystems might have looked like in the past - distinct from historical ecology due to marine historical ecology : natural sciences :: historical ecology : social sciences - “Stealth policy advocacy” (Lackey 2007) = policy preferences are implicit in the science instead of debated outside of it (should be avoided) What was/were the main objective(s) of the paper? - prove that impact of SBS on ocean mngmt will be limited by underlying and interrelated problematic assumptions about ecology and human-environment relations and prescriptions that these assumptions support - consider conceptual and operational merit of SBS and some problematic assumptions - assumptions relate to ecology and human-environment relations - suggesting ways to overcome limitations and capitalize on merits of SBS, toward goal of improved ocean management What were the important results and conclusions? - promote expanded discussion of SBS that engages broader range of social scientists, ecologists and resource users - explicitly recognize value judgments inherent in deciding what past ecosystems looked like and whether or not and how we might reconstruct them - Potential for interdisciplinary work is strong and unrealized for SBS o Enhance analysis of both problems and potential solutions, avoid divide between marine and terrestrial a.k.a. social science and natural science o Resilience and complex system theories: humans and nature are coupled and coevoloving in social-ecological systems (SES) (Berkes et al 2003, Folke 2004, 2006 Walker et al. 2006) • Rather than asking people to participate in SBS-defined vision of conservation, think how social-ecological systems work and structure participation in related and appropriate ways • Resilience asks how to strengthen capacity of ecosystems to support social and economic development and sustain desirable pathways and ecosystem states in the face of continuous change (Folke et al. 2002, Gunderson and Holling 2002) • Governance is a part of SES rather than external institutional structure imposed on ecological system o Resource users themselves • Who has the experience to warrant inclusion? - Expand SBS & related work in marine historical ecology to include resilience and SES theory + engage with resource users will do 2 things: 1. improve understanding of marine SES as existed in various times in the past 2. facilitate a more direct recognition of the value judgments inherent in deciding both what past states are most desirable (and to whom) and if, how and why we might try to recreate these in the future - *”… marine historical ecology is not the “natural” authority for determining the direction of ocean policy,” - have a place at the table, but one set considered among many Errors in experimental design, statistical analyses or analytical approaches? - consequences of conceptual separation of nature and culture in Western society (Cronon 1995, Castree and Braun 2001) - SBS calls to abandon sustainability as a management goal and instead work to reestablish historic baselines by reducing fleets, target species, establish MPAs; problematic because … 1. Without detailed understanding of consequences prescriptions may have negative results without looking at complexity of benefits and costs 2. Focus on economic gains assumes neoclassical profit-maximization driven by rational choice, ironically heavily looked to for modeling despite calls for interdisciplinary research 3. Natural baselines are not self evident and involve value judgment, must include all stakeholders 4. Ignores the role of fishers and other resources users in formation, uptake, monitoring and enforcement of policy change a. Overlooks co-management b. Opportunity to nurture diversity of uses and knowledge systems c. Participation occurs in a political vacuum with no consideration of power at work in participatory activities d. Breakdown TEK into simple choices of presence/absence and place & time Assumptions made with the data, calculations, models? Reasonable? - concept used for environmental advocacy outside of academia - interdisciplinary research hampered by epistemological one that distinguish between social and natural sciences and definition of what is data and science - 3 ecological assumptions that underlie SBS 1) a natural baseline exists and can be identified and agreed upon, ecologists make judgments about where to set baselines, suggesting there is noting “natural” or self-evident about hem (p.3) 2) once agreed upon baselines can be described accurately, problematic because … a) existing data about valuable & accessible species, not ecosystems b) good data is in context of contemporary understanding, can always be updated c) mass balance models rely on accuracy and completeness of inputs & simply processes thus still estimates rather than uncertainties 3) once described, baselines can be restored, “there and back again” ecology - Berkes and Folke (1998:12) argue “complex, non-linear, multi-equilibrium and self-organizing … permeated by uncertainty and discontinuities” - Holling et al (1998:354) argue “linear, equilibrium-centered view of nature no longer fits the evidence” - Resilience Theory (Holling 1973, Scheffer and Carpenter 2003, Folke et la. 2004) argues an ecosystem can occupy multiple stable states and can undergo dramatic regime shifts due to both anthropogenic and non-anthropogenic forcers - climate plays an important role, anchovy vs. sardine (Pinnegar and Engelhard 2008) or unidirectional, single, stable state (Carscadden et al. 2002) - Pitcher (2005) “ecosystems do not rewind” - human-environment relations - Frank et al (2005) Canadian East Coast cod fishery 1992 fishing moratorium, possibly no recovery due to changes in physical environmental (temp and stratification) - humans are outside of nature, i.e. defining baselines as “pre-human intervention” - consequences: 1) if humans are “naturally” outside of marine nature, enter ecological equation as problem and overlooks role of non-antrhopogenic variability in marine ecosystems - also suggests humans behave the same way, overlooking individuals, groups & institutions degrade AND restore oceans 2) ecological baselines become only ones of interest, assuming human-free baseline is correct - call for few fishers, smaller fleets, economic benefit through more productive fisheries without giving context to fishers nationality, gender, community, society or culture Main conclusions supported by data? Why or why not? References? Meet stated objectives? Number of times cited? Impact on field? Opinion