1. Formalizing expert knowledge to compare alternative management plans: sociological perspective to the future management of Baltic salmon stocks Päivi Haapasaari Fisheries and Environmental Management Group (FEM) University of Helsinki, Finland and Timo P. Karjalainen Thule Institute University of Oulu, Finland 1 Game and Fisheries Research Institute

2. Baltic salmon  Originally spawned in 80-120 rivers  During 1900s the number of salmon rivers decreased rapidly  About 40 rivers left

3. 2 Salmon Action Plan, (SAP) 1997-2006 (IBSFC)  Goal: to restore salmon populations of selected rivers to at least 50% of the potential smolt production capacity by year 2010  extensive stocking  stream restoration  fishery regulations

4. SAP (expired 2006) Partially successful;  Best results in the rivers of Bothnian Bay  Share of wild stocks in catch increased compared to reared salmon During SAP, total salmon catch decreased from 2395 to 913 tn From 2005: catches under TAC (2007: 40%) - Fin & Swe: national technical measures, damages by seals (coastal fishery) - Den & Lat: dioxin regulations - 2005 – 2008 driftnet phasing out (offshore)

5. Planning for the future  EU Commission: plan to revise the SAP and to develop a new management framework  2007: Call for an evaluation of the socio-economic impacts of SAP and new management objectives and options for the future  Bio-economic modelling  Economic valuation study  Sociological study concentrating on stakeholders point of view

6. Sociological evaluation of four alternative management options for Baltic salmon  Study of stakeholders’ potential commitment to four management alternatives  Commitment = source of implementation uncertainty  Approach key informants (experts!) representing 3 stakeholder groups in 8 Baltic Sea countries (29 experts from 6 countries) expert-knowledge to assess management options and to express the views of stakeholder groups cost-effective  Questionnaire, structured and open questions  Analysis: quantitative (Bayesian nets) and qualitative (triangulation)

7. 4 Bayesian networks: why?  Enable the comparing of the stakeholders’ preferences in quantitative terms  Deal explicitly with uncertainties, and thus allow  small data sets  subjective experience-based qualitative knowledge

8. Four options evaluated for the future management of Baltic salmon stocks A: Continuation of the SAP as it was conducted in 1997-2006 B: Current situation with no specified long-term plan C: New management plan I with an objective of 75% of potential smolt production for each river; TAC for sea and rivers D: New management plan II with river specific smolt production targets of 50% and 75% of the potential; TAC for sea and rivers

9. The BN for commitment

10. Qualitative analysis to interpret and check the modelling results The commercial sector  Decreased profitability, decreasing number of fulltime professionals.  Disappointed because restrictions have not been relieved after the SAP  Expectable restrictions related to different management optios critical  Options with lower smolt production targets sound safer The recreational sector  Number of salmon in rivers too low because of commercial fishing  Maximise socio-economic value of salmon  Maximise smolt production  Smolt production target as high as possible 15

11. Summarising commitment utility Option D River specific smolt production targets 50 and 75% of potential For commercial fishers the threat of restrictions emerging from option D appears less critical compared to option C For recreational sector D is the second best alternative

12. Summarizing commitment utility Option C Smolt production target 75% of potential Favoured by recreational fishing sector which believes it would have a very positive impact on fishing tourism. Commercial fishers do not accept nor believe, and see it as a potential risk to cease their livelihood.

13. Summarizing commitment utility Option A Continuation of the SAP as it was conducted in 1997-2006 Seen as a quite stable option with regard to the state of the salmon stocks. Those who want to see improving salmon stocks do not accept it while those who are afraid of restrictions would commit to it.

14. Summarizing commitment utility Option B Current situation with no specified long-term plan Believed to maintain salmon stocks at the currnt state or deteriorate them. Potentially cease both commercial and recreational fishing and the development of fishing tourism industry.

15. Conclusions  The BNs allowed to couple different viewpoints and to lay foundation for a compromise, in terms of utility.  Stakeholders prefer management option in which smolt production target is adjusted to each river (50% and 75% of potential) and in which international TAC covers sea and rivers  Including this information in planning increases controllability of the system  The probabilistic language of the BNs makes it possible to integrate information collected by different disciplines in a same model, to build a holistic decision support system

16. Thank you !