AUTHOR=Ogier Emily , Jennings Sarah , Fowler Anthony , Frusher Stewart , Gardner Caleb , Hamer Paul , Hobday Alistair J. , Linanne Adrian , Mayfield Stephan , Mundy Craig , Sullivan Andrew , Tuck Geoff , Ward Tim , Pecl Gretta TITLE=Responding to Climate Change: Participatory Evaluation of Adaptation Options for Key Marine Fisheries in Australia’s South East JOURNAL=Frontiers in Marine Science VOLUME=7 YEAR=2020 URL=https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/marine-science/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.00097 DOI=10.3389/fmars.2020.00097 ISSN=2296-7745 ABSTRACT=

Planned adaptation to climate impacts and subsequent vulnerabilities will necessarily interact with autonomous responses enabled within existing fisheries management processes and initiated by the harvest and post-harvest components of fishing industries. Optimal adaptation options are those which enable negative effects to be mitigated and opportunities that arise to be maximized, both in relation to specific climate-driven changes and the broader fisheries system. We developed a two-step participatory approach to evaluating adaption options for key fisheries in the fast-warming hotspot of south-eastern Australia. Four fisheries (southern rock lobster, abalone, snapper, and blue grenadier) were selected as case studies on the basis of their high to moderate vulnerability to climatic effects on species distribution and abundance. Involved stakeholders undertook a “first pass” screening assessment of options, by characterizing and then evaluating options. In the characterization step potential adaptation options for each fishery, contextualized by prior knowledge of each species’ climate change exposure and sensitivity, were described using a characterization matrix. This matrix included: the specific climate vulnerability/challenges, the implications of each option on the fishery system as a whole, the temporal and spatial scales of implementation processes, and realized benefits and costs. In the evaluation step, semi-quantitative evaluation of options was undertaken by stakeholders scoring the anticipated performance of an option against a pre-determined set of criteria relating to perceived feasibility, risk (inclusive of potential costs), and benefit. Reduction of the total annual commercial catch as well as reductions in both effort and catch through spatial and temporal closures were the options scored as having the highest level of expected benefit and of feasibility and the lowest level of risk of negative outcomes overall. Our screening assessment represents a pragmatic approach to evaluate and compare support for and the effects of alternative adaptation options prior to committing to more detailed formal and resource intensive evaluation or implementation.