1. EFIMAS focus groups Summary

2. The interviews  5 cases: Greece, Spain, UK, Ireland and Denmark  5 stakeholder groups: catching sector, onshore sector, women in fisheries, local managers and environmentalists  Focus group approach

3. Themes addressed  Science in general  Fisheries science  Science in fisheries management  Modelling in general  The EFIMAS modelling framework

4. Science in general

5. This is beyond us We really don’t have a lot more to say. We’re fishermen. I think that’s it. Greece catching sector Science in general

6. Fisheries science

7. Topical It [scientific data] has dictated precisely what we’ve done over the last 20-25 years. Ireland catching sector Fisheries science

8. Good fisheries science Fisheries science  is objective and independent …in an ideal world, science would provide the factual foundation. The problem is that over time we have become quite cynical about the use and abuse of science... Ireland local manager

9. Good fisheries science Fisheries science  is objective and independent  is modest They should just not take themselves so seriously. Spain onshore sector

10. Good fisheries science Fisheries science  is objective and independent  is modest  involves fishers We think the fishermen know best, they are there 24-7. Ireland women in fisheries

11. Scepticism Fisheries science

12. Scepticism Fisheries science  Technical failures … you get situations where consultants assess an area in a particular season and miss out on seasonal species … Ireland environmentalists

13. Scepticism Fisheries science  Technical failures  Political and personal bias … whoever pays, the piper calls the tune. Ireland local managers

14. Scepticism Fisheries science  Technical failures  Political and personal bias  Scientists’ attitudes They never talked to us but they talked down to us and told us what to do. Ireland local manager (former skipper)

15. Fishers’ involvement Fisheries science

16. Fishers’ involvement Fisheries science  …for scientific accuracy We need better communication between the scientist and the fishermen, because they study empirical information without going to sea. Spain catching sector

17. Fishers’ involvement Fisheries science  …for scientific accuracy  …for trust, compliance and legitimacy We … are not fully convinced that stock assessments is … sufficiently … rigorous for us to … bear the short-term pain … UK catching sector

18. Fishers’ involvement Fisheries science  …for scientific accuracy  …for trust, compliance and legitimacy  …for a democratic and just knowledge base The lobby groups on both sides should have the opportunity to conduct their own analyses. Ireland catching sector

19. Fishers’ involvement Fisheries science  …for scientific accuracy  …for trust, compliance and legitimacy  …for a democratic and just knowledge base  … for the integration of different scientific disciplines We need to take into account not only the fisheries stocks but also [the fishers’] wives and families.. Greek environmentalists

20. Science in fisheries management

21. Scientific backing …of fisheries management is important to:  make sure management measures have sound scientific support  legitimise management Science in fisheries management

22. Modelling in general

23. Alienation Excuse me, what? Model what? You should ask it another way, or move on to the next question, because this makes no sense to us. Spain women in fisheries Modelling in general

24. Models are useful… …for forecasting the effects of different scenarios. Modelling in general

25. Concerns about models  A model is only as good as what goes into it  Models are theoretical desk-work not allowing for experience-based inputs  Models tend to be ascribed too much authority  Models lack transparency  Different models, different outputs  Inappropriate uses Modelling in general

26. Recommendations  Do not take them too seriously  Supplement with other inputs Modelling in general

27. EFIMAS modelling framework

28. Accessibility I don’t understand the mechanics of it. Ireland environmentalists EFIMAS modelling framework

29. +  The integration of social, environmental and economic factors in one model  Forecasting effects of alternative scenarios  Potential tool for implementing the ecosystem approach  Faster data processing and decision making  Enables standardised basis for management all over Europe  More transparent EFIMAS modelling framework

30. ÷  Garbage in, garbage out EFIMAS modelling framework

31. ÷  Garbage in, garbage out  Too many parameters, too much information EFIMAS modelling framework … put it in and you get the answer 47 at the end of it. UK catching sector

32. ÷  Garbage in, garbage out  Too many parameters, too much information  Won’t tell you anything new EFIMAS modelling framework

33. ÷  Garbage in, garbage out  Too many parameters, too much information  Won’t tell you anything new  Misuse EFIMAS modelling framework

34. ÷  Garbage in, garbage out  Too many parameters, too much information  Won’t tell you anything new  Misuse  Does not offer any new management options EFIMAS modelling framework

35. Recommendations for EFIMAS  Involve stakeholders by including fishers’ knowledge and making models accessible  More simple  Two kinds of output: one for scientists and policy-makers and one non-technical for stakeholders EFIMAS modelling framework