Abstract
Funding and priorities for ocean research are not separate from the underlying sociological, economic, and political landscapes that determine values attributed to ecological systems. Here we present a variation on science prioritisation exercises, focussing on inter-disciplinary research questions with the objective of shifting broad scale management practices to better address cumulative impacts and multiple users. Marine scientists in New Zealand from a broad range of scientific and social-scientific backgrounds ranked 48 statements of research priorities. At a follow up workshop, participants discussed five over-arching themes based on survey results. These themes were used to develop mechanisms to increase the relevance and efficiency of scientific research while acknowledging socio-economic and political drivers of research agendas in New Zealand’s ocean ecosystems. Overarching messages included the need to: 1) determine the conditions under which ‘surprises’ (sudden and substantive undesirable changes) are likely to occur and the socio-ecological implications of such changes; 2) develop methodologies to reveal the complex and cumulative effects of change in marine systems, and their implications for resource use, stewardship, and restoration; 3) assess potential solutions to management issues that balance long-term and short-term benefits and encompass societal engagement in decision-making; 4) establish effective and appropriately resourced institutional networks to foster collaborative, solution-focused marine science; and 5) establish cross-disciplinary dialogues to translate diverse scientific and social-scientific knowledge into innovative regulatory, social and economic practice. In the face of multiple uses and cumulative stressors, ocean management frameworks must be adapted to build a collaborative framework across science, governance and society that can help stakeholders navigate uncertainties and socio-ecological surprises.
Highlights
Our goal was to identify key research priorities and link them to over-arching themes of institutional frameworks, governance and decision-making, i.e., what does science need to contribute to the science-policy interface to enable economic use while maintaining environmental health
While anonymity prevented analysis by discipline or institution, consistencies were apparent with a combination of both biophysical and social science research topics being highly ranked by most respondents (Table 2)
Other highly ranked statements included a broad selection of transdisciplinary research, with management institutions, governance, societal and customary values, and other topics
Summary
Horizon scanning methodologies have more recently been applied to environmental and conservation sciences (Sutherland et al, 2006, 2009, 2014), including both national and global evaluations for ocean ecosystems (Rudd et al, 2011; Rudd and Lawton, 2013; Parsons et al, 2014). These exercises envision development of strategies that are pre-emptive rather than reactive, and that develop policy-relevant research to match the needs of managers and practitioners to facilitate evidence-based policy decisions in a timely fashion (Sutherland and Woodroof, 2009; Sutherland et al, 2009, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
