Shellfish aquaculture and First Nations' sovereignty: The quest for sustainable development in contested sea space

Aquaculture tenures or leases have become an increasingly important management tool for regulating access rights to coastal and offshore marine habitat. Tenure, as a form of private property rights to marine space, is generally considered a prerequisite for aquaculture development, as are the associated exclusive access rights which provide necessary incentives for producers to invest in infrastructure. The shellfish industry in British Columbia (BC), Canada, is presented as a case study of a transition from a primarily common property wild fishery to a rights‐based system for aquaculture. In BC, seafood production has grown substantially during the past two decades as a result of aquaculture production. However, despite the inherent economic advantages of the tenuring system for increasing seafood production, rights to aquaculture sites in BC remain highly controversial, particularly in response to environmental concerns and infringements on Aboriginal territorial claims. Shellfish farming has, to‐date, been far less controversial than salmon farming; however, shellfish aquaculture has not been uniformly adopted across the province, and analyses of industry capacity or economic opportunities for coastal communities have failed to adequately explain development patterns. This paper, which identifies perceptions of the risks and benefits of the shellfish aquaculture tenuring system, presents the results of 56 interviews conducted with individuals involved in shellfish production in BC. Results indicate that heightened perceptions of risk about shellfish aquaculture tenuring are related to unresolved Aboriginal territorial claims, economic dependence on wild shellfish resources, as well as place‐based values favouring access to wild resources. Underlying values and cultural understandings also strongly shape public perceptions of the risks of aquaculture, and as such, influence local decisions to either accept or resist industry growth. In this case, interviewees' risk perceptions were found to be more important indicators of the potential for industry expansion than studies of capacity or economic cost‐benefit analyses.     

Sea otters,social justice,and ecosystem‐service perceptions in Clayoquot Sound,Canada

We sought to take a first step toward better integration of social concerns into empirical ecosystem service (ES) work. We did this by adapting cognitive anthropological techniques to study the Clayoquot Sound social‐ecological system on the Pacific coast of Canada's Vancouver Island. We used freelisting and ranking exercises to elicit how locals perceive ESs and to determine locals’ preferred food species. We analyzed these data with the freelist‐analysis software package ANTHROPAC. We considered the results in light of an ongoing trophic cascade caused by the government reintroduction of sea otters (Enhydra lutris) and their spread along the island's Pacific coast. We interviewed 67 local residents (n = 29 females, n = 38 males; n = 26 self‐identified First Nation individuals, and n = 41 non‐First Nation individuals) and 4 government managers responsible for conservation policy in the region. We found that the mental categories participants—including trained ecologists—used to think about ESs, did not match the standard academic ES typology. With reference to the latest ecological model projections for the region, we found that First Nations individuals and women were most likely to perceive the most immediate ES losses from the trophic cascade, with the most certainty. The inverse was found for men and non‐First Nations individuals, generally. This suggests that 2 historically disadvantaged groups (i.e., First Nations and women) are poised to experience the immediate impacts of the government‐initiated trophic cascade as yet another social injustice in a long line of perceived inequities. Left unaddressed, this could complicate efforts at multistakeholder ecosystem management in the region.     

Social comfort zones for transformative conservation decisions in a changing climate

Novel management interventions intended to mitigate the impacts of climate change on biodiversity are increasingly being considered by scientists and practitioners. However, resistance to more transformative interventions remains common across both specialist and lay communities and is generally assumed to be strongly entrenched. We used a decision-pathways survey of the public in Canada and the United States (n = 1490) to test two propositions relating to climate-motivated interventions for conservation: most public groups are uncomfortable with interventionist options for conserving biodiversity and given the strong values basis for preferences regarding biodiversity and natural systems more broadly, people are unlikely to change their minds. Our pathways design tested and retested levels of comfort with interventions for forest ecosystems at three different points in the survey. Comfort was reexamined given different nudges (including new information from trusted experts) and in reference to a particular species (bristlecone pine [Pinus longaeva]). In contrast with expectations of public unease, baseline levels of public comfort with climate interventions in forests was moderately high (46% comfortable) and increased further when respondents were given new information and the opportunity to change their choice after consideration of a particular species. People who were initially comfortable with interventions tended to remain so (79%), whereas 42% of those who were initially uncomfortable and 40% of those who were uncertain shifted to comfortable by the end of the survey. In short and across questions, comfort levels with interventions were high, and where discomfort or uncertainty existed, such positions did not appear to be strongly held. We argue that a new decision logic, one based on anthropogenic responsibility, is beginning to replace a default reluctance to intervene with nature.     

The Challenges of Incorporating Cultural Ecosystem Services into Environmental Assessment

The ecosystem services concept is used to make explicit the diverse benefits ecosystems provide to people, with the goal of improving assessment and, ultimately, decision-making. Alongside material benefits such as natural resources (e.g., clean water, timber), this concept includes—through the ‘cultural’ category of ecosystem services—diverse non-material benefits that people obtain through interactions with ecosystems (e.g., spiritual inspiration, cultural identity, recreation). Despite the longstanding focus of ecosystem services research on measurement, most cultural ecosystem services have defined measurement and inclusion alongside other more ‘material’ services. This gap in measurement of cultural ecosystem services is a product of several perceived problems, some of which are not real problems and some of which can be mitigated or even solved without undue difficulty. Because of the fractured nature of the literature, these problems continue to plague the discussion of cultural services. In this paper we discuss several such problems, which although they have been addressed singly, have not been brought together in a single discussion. There is a need for a single, accessible treatment of the importance and feasibility of integrating cultural ecosystem services alongside others.     

A protocol for eliciting nonmaterial values through a cultural ecosystem services frame

Stakeholders’ nonmaterial desires, needs, and values often critically influence the success of conservation projects. These considerations are challenging to articulate and characterize, resulting in their limited uptake in management and policy. We devised an interview protocol designed to enhance understanding of cultural ecosystem services (CES). The protocol begins with discussion of ecosystem‐related activities (e.g., recreation, hunting) and management and then addresses CES, prompting for values encompassing concepts identified in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) and explored in other CES research. We piloted the protocol in Hawaii and British Columbia. In each location, we interviewed 30 individuals from diverse backgrounds. We analyzed results from the 2 locations to determine the effectiveness of the interview protocol in elucidating nonmaterial values. The qualitative and spatial components of the protocol helped characterize cultural, social, and ethical values associated with ecosystems in multiple ways. Maps and situational, or vignette‐like, questions helped respondents articulate difficult‐to‐discuss values. Open‐ended prompts allowed respondents to express a diversity of ecosystem‐related values and proved sufficiently flexible for interviewees to communicate values for which the protocol did not explicitly probe. Finally, the results suggest that certain values, those mentioned frequently throughout the interview, are particularly salient for particular populations. The protocol can provide efficient, contextual, and place‐based data on the importance of particular ecosystem attributes for human well‐being. Qualitative data are complementary to quantitative and spatial assessments in the comprehensive representation of people's values pertaining to ecosystems, and this protocol may assist in incorporating values frequently overlooked in decision making processes.