essentialf engeering essentialf

8/12/2019 essentialf engeering essentialf

1/44

Project no. 003711

Project acronym: ECOST

Project title: Ecosystems, Societies, Consilience, Precautionary principle: Development of anassessment method of the societal cost for best fishing practices and efficient public policies

Instrument Specific Targeted Research Or Innovation Project

Thematic Priority PRIORITY A.2.2, Reconciling multiple demands on coastal zones

Report D13.4

Pre-Seminar Project Presentation Package

Due date of deliverable: May 2009

Actual submission date: May 2008

Start date of project: January 2005 Duration: 4 years

Organisation name of lead contractor for this deliverable: IRD/UVSQ

Revision [draft, 1]


2/44

DL 12.4 - Pre-Seminar ProjectPresentation Package

Authors:

Jean-Marc DOUGUET [email protected]

Aurlie [email protected]


3/44

IINNTTRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN

11..11.. EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN AANNDD SSUUSSTTAAIINNAABBIILLIITTYY IINN EECCOOSSTT PPRROOJJEECCTT Integrated fishery strategy demands the comparison of alternative metiers. Concern with economic, ecological andsocial sustainability brings the long term future into confrontation with the considerations of the present. Howshould we seek to reconcile preoccupations with the future with those of the present? How should the diversity ofstakeholder values be accommodated along the way?Sustainability Assessment (henceforth SA) is concerned with what sorts of guiding concepts, frameworks andinformation sets might be appropriate for decision support as we enlarge our scope of concern from economic affairsnarrowly defined, to the ecosystems of the planet and the long term. A large number of recent books and journalarticles have highlighted links between changes and challenges to accounting practices and decision support forsustainability. While this is a field of theoretical reflection and pragmatic experimentation whose ecologicaleconomics precursors go back more than 30 years (e.g., Victor 1972; Hueting 1980) and whose literature isfragmented across many different contexts and domains, there are nonetheless several signs that the field of enquiryis maturing. A wide range of approaches have by now been devised with a view to ensuring that various categoriesof social and environmental change are taken properly into account in the course of project and policy evaluation.Established economic valuation methodology has sought to extend concepts of rational and optimal resource use(including various forms of monetary cost-benefit analysis) to environmental systems, and also across time throughthe quantification of environmental damages and of cost-benefit trade-offs through time (raising the problem ofdiscounting). This is notwithstanding the fact that, given the distributional conflicts between present and future, andthe ethical and culturally-based disagreements between existing interested parties, a cost-benefit optimizingapproach based on a concept of inter-temporal efficiency is completely indecisive (on theoretical grounds alone) as adesideratum of societal choice. To this we might add that, as we turn our attention to the long-term, the evaluation ofbenefits and risks (due to accidents, pollutants and ecosystem disruption, among other things), pose difficulties ofhigh uncertainties and the irreversibility of many effects, fuelling the divergences of opinion within present day societyabout the basis for resolving questions of risk acceptability and fairness in exposure to risks.

Distributional concerns and the diversity of ethical positions, alongside system complexity and uncertainty, are thusoften cited, negatively, as reasons for the difficulty or inappropriateness of monetary valuation as a basis forsustainability assessments. It follows that these same features can also be declared positively, as properties of theworld that scientifically based SA procedures would like to represent and address.

A widespread portrayal of "sustainable development" since the 1970s is a symbiosis or co-evolution betweeneconomic production and ecological (re)production. In this view, our terrestrial habitats that are not just raw materialssources but veritable life-support systems that underpin the commodity production systems of industrial economics.These are also habitats in the sense of being the places of live, invested with social and community significance, ormeanings. Yet, the stakeholders in sustainability (human communities and otherwise, present and yet to come) arevery diverse. Sustainability Assessment means to reflect about choices that have been made or that will,intentionally or not, come to be made about which environmental features and functions, which ecosystems andhabitats, which spectra of economic opportunities, and which systems of meaning, might be sustained or


4/44

being made all around the world for the development of tools to assist in decision-making to support sustainabledevelopment initiatives. Among the many questions on the Sustainability Assessment agenda, let us note:

Despite more than 30 years of academic (aid wider societal) debates and notwithstanding the wide recognition of

limits to CBA, the question of the relative roles for money and non-money, quantitative and non-quantitative indicatorsan accounting still remains unresolved, (and, more curiously, there does not seem even to be much commonagreement about the reasons for this question remaining unresolved!).

The question of the roles for valuation (monetary and otherwise) is inseparable from the concepts of sustainability thatare adopted to inform the systems of accounts or the frameworks of sustainability assessment. This has importantconsequences for the developments of norms for scientific and statistical quality assessment and for the types of multi-disciplinary partnerships needing to be built between (among others) statisticians, accountants, environmentalengineers, systems scientists, economists, social policy experts and political theorists.

In the business world, corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting and related activities of indicator development

often address sustainability agendas through reference to a triple bottom line but, this link is often only implicit,sometimes is made in opportunistic ways and without clear reconciliation with wider societal frames of reference. There is increasing emphasis on integrated assessment approaches and (inter alia) on the use of batteries of

indicators to evaluate policy options and to highlight progress (or lack of it) relative to multiple objectives. Thisintegrative perspective highlights the interfacing of business (and consumer), public administration, civil society andresearch perspectives on performance and information, and raises the challenge of finding, and using, effectivemethods for this interfacing.

Indicator development work and accounting is carried out at many different scales (e.g., company accounts, CSRreporting, regional planning, national accounts) and there is no ready-made bridge between the micro (household,

firm) and macro levels of sustainability accounting. The importance of building stakeholder dialogues for robust evaluations and policy assessments is widely affirmed but,

despite interesting experiments and case studies for more than 20 years, there is not yet a set of clear signals oneffective ways to integrate formal accounting, modeling, spatial analysis, and evaluation methods with social processesof deliberation.

Taking stock of these several and somewhat disparate considerations, we seek to make a contribution boththeoretical and practical to building the dialogues between the different fields of SA theory and practice. We willdevelop the argument that Sustainability Assessments can and should be developed through mobilising arepresentative diversity of indicators (qualitative and quantitative, monetary and non-monetary) with reference tomultiple bottom lines. Both the agreed set of multiple bottom lines and the selection of indicators must be validatedby reference to the full spectrum of stakeholders in sustainability.This notion of a representative diversity of indicators relative to multiple bottom lines will be set in dialecticalopposition (along both methodological and epistemological planes) to the notion of an inventory of costs andbenefits, or of direct and indirect impacts of a project, or of changes in capital stocks (etc.) that is necessary for theconstruction of any single-bottom line or aggregate SA indicator (such as CBA based measures, or macroeconomicgenuine savings, etc.). The approach in terms of representative diversity accepts pragmatically that, in prevailingconditions of complexity and stakeholder diversity, many significant SA concerns cannot be made the object ofreliable quantification. It accepts that, although useful systems measurements and model-based quantifications canbe obtained for a great variety of features, there is a need to work synthetically with an amalgam (and not anaggregation) of qualitative as well as quantitative elements of description and judgment.In effect, we are asserting that prospects for socially satisfactory responses to the question sustainability of what,for whom and why? may be explored and often enhanced through bringing stakeholder perspectives intoconstructive dialoguewith each other in order to search for common ground This is not really a very newargument


5/44

11..33.. PPLLAANN OOFF TTHHEE DDEELLIIVVEERRAABBLLEE The contribution of WP12 within the overall ECOST work programme is centred on proposals for the mobilisation ofstakeholders in deliberation for fishery strategy assessment relative to sustainability considerations. The mainoperational recommendations in this regard are contained in PART ONE of this deliverable, referring to the on-lineKERDST deliberation support tool, and accompanied by case study illustrations. However, it is necessary to situatethese recommendations against a background of evaluation theory and sustainability assessment considerations(see also Deliverables 12.1 and 12.2 of WP12).In particular, we insist that the conditions for achieving the common ground across the spectrum of stakeholders inSA that is necessary for robust and legitimate evaluations are not merely analytical, they are also cognitive andsocial. In this regard, we do not set analytical tools in opposition to deliberative methods. Nor do we set qualitativein opposition to quantitative considerations, nor do we set monetary data in opposition to other dimensions ofmeasure and meaning. Our argument is that whatever their character , quantified data and analytical assessmenttools must, and can, be used deliberatively if they are to respond to their main vocation, which is to highlight thedilemmas of sustainability decision-making and policy and to support the social processes of framing, debating andmaking difficult choices whose basis cannot be resolved by analysis alone.

PART TWO of the deliverable, titled KER-ECOST, an science-policy interface, gives a brief description of theKER-ECOST website framework.

The deliverable is completed by a set of References that, in complement to the present report, make up the writtendocumentation of the C3EDs WP12 contribution to ECOST. For convenience, we list the principal such documentsbelow. We also mention the website addresses for the two current prototypes of the KERDST deliberation supporttool; it should be noted that these on-line creations are currently Beta-versions and subject to ongoing developmentsand change.

1. OConnor, M. (2006), Deliberative Sustainability Assessment: Multiple Scales, Multiple Stakeholders,Multidisciplinarity and Multiple Bottom Lines. Methodological Study for Work Package WP6 of the SRDTOOLS Project(Methods and tools for evaluating the impact of cohesion policies on sustainable regional development, EC 6th FrameworkProgramme, Contract No.502485, 2005-2006), available as Rapport de Recherche du C3ED, Guyancourt : Universit deVersailles St-Quentin-en-Yvelines, France. 2. Bureau P., Legrand F., OConnor M., Reichel V. (2006), How To Do It: Users Guide to the on-line DeliberationSupport Tool kerDST (English version); Manuel dUtilisateur pour le systme multimdia daide la dlibrationkerDST (version franaise). Available in the series Cahiers du C3ED, Guyancourt : Universit de Versailles St-Quentin-en-Yvelines, France, December 2006. (Note: the English and French versions are self-contained, and available separately). 3. Reichel V., Bureau P., OConnor M., Sunde, C. (2007[A,B]), Lessons Learned with use of the multimedia deliberationsupport tool kerDST in the SRDTOOLS Project (A = English version); Retours sur Exprience : Remarques sur lutilisationdu systme multimdia daide la dlibration kerDST dans le projet SRDTOOLS (B = version franaise). Rapport deRecherche du C3ED No.2007-01, Universit de Versailles St-Quentin-en-Yvelines, Guyancourt, France, January 2007.

4. O'Connor, M. (2007). "The four spheres framework for sustainability." Ecological complexity (In press).5. Douguet J.-M., OConnor M., van der Sluijs J.P. (2007), Tools to assess uncertainty in a deliberative perspective. ACatalogue , A. Pereira Guimaraes & S. Funtowicz (eds), Science for Policy: Opportunities and Challenges, OxfordUniversity Press, India.


6/44

PPAARRTT 11:: DDEELLIIBBEERRAATTIIOONN MMAATTRRIIXX WWOORRKKSSHHOOPP

1. Using the Deliberation Matrix

One objective of this workshop was to demonstrate the Kerbabel TM Deliberation Matrix to ECOST partners, and tosee how this tool could be applied to the project problems. This was realised in two steps: first by a presentation ofthe tool and then by a workshop during which partners applied the Matrix to their problems.

11..11.. PPr r eesseennttaattiioonn The objective of the presentation of the Kerbabel TM Deliberation Matrix was to make the ECOST partners think abouthow they could use the tool for dealing with their own problems. The presentation was held on Tuesday the 13 th ofNovember 2007, in the afternoon, during the Work Package 12 presentation.The first step was to introduce the tool in a simple way explaining how it worked and how it had to be built.Then, to be more concrete, two different examples were developed based on partners presentations during themeeting.

11..11..11.. TTHHEE RREEGGIIOONNAALL EEXXAAMMPPLLEE The first example was based on the Vietnamese partners presentation showing how the fishery sector wasorganised in their country. This examples objective was to show the potential use of the Matrix for organising thefishery problems at the regional scale.The following steps had been done for structuring the problem:

- First, performance issue categories had been analysed and organised using the Tetrahedron framework(O'Connor, 2007). From this, five performance issue categories were defined:

o Economic performance of the fishery sector (production, transport, processing, final market,quality)

o Redistribution issues (on society, economic and ecological parts)o Pressure on fish stockso Social values of fisherieso Sector regulation on economic, social and ecological aspects

- then, stakeholders were organised using a framework highlighting five main categories:o Internal stakeholders that have direct interests in companies (fishermen, employees, unions)o Traditional external stakeholders identified as the firm's partners, that all have direct commercial

importance for the company (processors, output traders, suppliers, customers, banks, privatelenders and insurers)

o Enlarged external stakeholders, identified as dialogue partners that have an interest orrequirements concerning the performances of a plant, a company or an industrial sector, and havea direct influence on commercial success (local population, media, NGOs, associations, andpartner firms)


7/44

11..11..22.. TTHHEE JJOOBB SSAATTIISSFFAACCTTIIOONN EEXXAAMMPPLLEE During the meeting, Marteen Bavinck (WP3a) presented his work on the Job satisfaction model which aims to assessthe fishermens contentment with their work. This assessment should be realised by all the regional partners in theirown countries. At the end of his presentation Marteen Bavinck highlighted that this model was quite powerful as itenables comparisons between countries, but it is also limited as it cannot take into account the metier or the countryspecificities. From these remarks, it appeared that the Kerbabel TM Deliberation Matrix could find an application in thismodel. The idea was that the satisfaction categories would remain the same for all the countries and all the metiers(providing for comparison) but that inside each category, stakeholders would be able to choose the indicators thatmake the most sense for them and even to propose new indicators that seemed more relevant for their situation(providing for customization).For this, the Matrix was organised as follows:

- First axis represented the Metiers- Second axis represented the job satisfaction categories, viz.:

o Basic needso Social needso Self-realizationo Managemento Valuation of Nature

- And the third axis was used for the countries- Indicators used for the survey were filled up in the Matrix.- The example was developed using Marteen Bavincks results on a survey carried out in India.


8/44

- The eco-regional scale- The international scale.

In addition to these three scales, the Matrix was applied to Marine Protected Areas (Work Package n8).

Seven people attended the workshop, coming from different Work Packages. Five applications had been realised:- At the national scale: Vietnam and Thailand- At the eco-regional scale: Caribbean- At the international scale: International Fishery Policy (WP 10)- Marine Protected Areas.

To help participants, an exercise book had been prepared (see Annex n1), identifying the main steps necessary tobuild their Matrix, viz.:

- Step 1: What is your problem?- Step 2: Who are the stakeholders?- Step 3. What are the issues?- Step 4. What are the metiers?- Step 5. Filling up the matrix without indicators- Step 6. Identifying relevant indicators- Step 7. Filling the Matrix with indicators

The workshop last three hours, composed as following:- 20 minutes presentation of the work to be done- 2 hours of group work- 40 minutes for a debriefing point

11..22..22.. WWOORRKKSSHHOOPPSS RREESSUULLTTSS One of the encouraging results of this workshop is that all participants easily completed the steps, which appears to

show the process is easily adopted by new users even if this can be attributed to the participants scientificbackground, and the resultant mind-set. Due to time constraints, participants had to stop at the 5 th step. According tothe scales dealt with, results 1 were somewhat different, as is shown in the table above 2. Four matrix have beendeveloped.

Some of the main comments from the participants, at the end of the workshop, include:- There were difficulties encountered by the eco-regional group due to the specificities of each country in the

area-

The Caribbean group were surprised to see that their judgements were mainly negative- The Caribbean Group found few differences between the metiers- As scientists, participants were often tempted by the so-so judgement- It helps to organize scientific information- The political dimension of the decision is clearly highlighted in the use of the Kerbabel TM deliberation matrix- Scientist is one category of stakeholders

Ith l t f th bl ifth fi t ti i h dt (Wh ti th bl ?) Thi


9/44

National scaleVietnam Thailand

Eco-regional scale Marine protectedareas

Problem-

Large number offishing boats arefishing inshore

- Fisheriesresources aredecreasing

- Difficult tomanage fishingactivities

Fishery resourcesdegradation due toover exploitation

The sustainablemanagement of thefisheries and theharmonisation ofmany, sometimesconflicting,objectives

- The comparison ofMPAs with nonMPA zones

- The comparisonbetween eco-regions both fromthe societal cost offishing activitiesand policies pointof view

Stakeholders - Fishermen- Sellers- Processors- Fisheries officers- Local consumers- Scientist

- Fishermen- Fish processor- Insurers- Governmental

officials- Traders

- Fishermen andtheir families

- Upstream industry(boat builders,providers of gear,etc.)

- Downstreamindustry(processingplants)

- Civil society (localpopulation,NGOs)

- Local consumer- Internationalconsumer- Tourism

companies- National

government- International

community and

internationalpolicy makers

- Fishermen insideMPAs

- Fishermen outsideMPAs

- Tourismprofessional

- Scientists- Local politicians- National politicians- Consumers (local,

regional)- NGOs- Non professional

users (non market

users)- International

organisations- MPAs

administration- Government- Traditional

authorities-

World marketoperators- Communities

organisations(cooperative)


10/44


11/44

Workshop outcomes and forthcoming tasksFollowing the workshop, several tasks have been identified for the Deliberation Matrix adaptation to the ECOSTproject. Some of these tasks are transversal to the whole work package 12 tasks (especially concerning the

dodecahedron):

Task Task objective Task description Partners TimescaleDefinition ofperformanceissues categories

To define a genericissue framework toenable comparisonsbetween case studiesand scales

This task will be realised through acombination / comparison between localissues coming from the case studiesand international issues coming from ananalysis of international frameworks(Agenda 21, Johannesburg, etc.).

WP 3a,WP 10,WP 6, WP8

April 2008

Definition ofstakeholderscategories

To define a genericissue framework toenable comparisonsbetween case studiesand scales

This task will be realised through acombination / comparison between localissues coming from the case studiesand literature frameworks.

Regionalpartners

April 2008

Identification ofindicators

To identify a set ofrelevant indicators

This task will mainly consist oftransferring indicators that are used inthe ECOST model to the KIK.

WP 2 April 2008

Application of theDeliberation Matrixat the eco-regionalscale

To see how theDeliberation Matrixcould be relevant todeal with eco-regionalissues.

This task will consist of four applicationsof the Deliberation Matrix to ECOSTeco-regions.

Regionalpartners

Dakar(2008)Bangkok(April 2008)Jamaica(July 2008)Globalforum on

Ocean(2009)

Application of theDeliberation Matrixto the Jobsatisfaction survey

To see how theDeliberation Matrixcould be relevant forthe Job satisfactionsurvey

This task will essentially consist ofworking closely with Marteen Bavinck.One education application in theUniversity of Amsterdam is underdiscussion for March 2008.

WP 3a March 2008


12/44

PPAARRTT TTWWOO TThhee KKeer r --EECCOOSSTT WWeebbssiittee Ker-ECOST is a Deliberation Support Tool Ker-ECOST that aims to develop on-line documentation, evaluation andcommunication interface for fishery. It is a fishery DST is a design concept for an interactive on-line deliberationsupport tool for discovery and analysis of the fishery challenges facing public policy makers, the business world,scientists and civil society. The 12 Discovery Spaces of the DST Ker-ECOST

Area Acronym Area Acronym

1 Ker-ECost Home Page 7 Consult the CUBE

2 Virtual Visit 8 Indicator Dialogue Box

3 Methodology 9 Metiers

4 The Projects ECOST, etc 10 Maps & Data

5 Performance Issues 11KQA Knowledge Quality

Assessment

6 Actors [stakeholders] 12 Documentation

12

Area Acronym Area Acronym

Four main contributions are identified using the KER-ECOST interface.

1 Th TOOLS & METHODS


13/44

2. DISCOVERY and LEARNING: Learn about the reasons for being concerned about damage to ecosystemfunctions and the benefits of fish resources loss.

Take a promenade along the Virtual Visit to appreciate the variety and significance for human society of theresources of coastal zones. Discover the variety of human exploitations (rural and urban), the variety offauna and flora (including inland and coastal waters, and the tensions on the interfaces of marine andterrestrial ecosystems.

Explore the spectrum of Performance issues such as: Maintenance of Biological Richness; EcosystemServices to the Economy; Economic Performance; Social Cohesion; Power Structures & Political Models;Economic Regulation; Environmental Governance; Community & Local Identity; Quality of Landscape;Status of Nature.

Build bridges between different points of views on fishery and what needs to be done.

3. THE POLICY CHALLENGES: Become a participant in local and international science-policy dialogues.

What are the factors determining current and possible future stresses on fisheries resources?

What governance can, and should, be influenced over fisheries?

Who are the key players and classes of stakeholders for fishery?

Who might be interested in learning from the results of ECOST? What are the communication challenges the gaps to be bridged to link the actors in the scientific

world with those in public policy and administration, the business world and civil society?

4. CONTRIBUTIONS FROM SCIENCE: Travel in a virtual world in order to gain new insights about our real one.Walk through the doorway to the ECOST Projects multi-disciplinary scientific results.

Explore metiers of fishery strategies for Case Study regions with the help of models, images, maps, graphsand texts from the ECOST scientific community.

Link to the ECOST Projects Data Warehouse for the complete spectrum of scientific data produced andmade available by the ECOST scientific community.

Exploit hyperlink access to comprehensive documentation of the Ker-ECOST system itself and informationabout the outside world.


14/44

22..11

DDEETTAAIILLEEDD PPRREESSEENNTTAATTIIOONN OOFF KKEERR--EECCOOSSTT:: DDEESSCCIIPPTTIIOONN,, TTAASSKKSS ((oonn--ggooiinngg wwoor r kk)) This part aims to present the framing of each area of the dodecahedron. For each area, a set of pages is proposed,using information and outputs of ECOST Project (mainly during the Punta Cana Meeting).

22..11..11 AARREEAA 11:: HHOOMMEE PPAAGGEE

Pages Description Existing Elements Tasks Links between areas1. Home page Use of the

dodecahedron frame fora first access to thetwelve areas

1.2

2. Credits Presentation of allelements concerningthe production, IPR

- Identification of theelements for credits(IACA/IRD)

3. User guide page:technical part

Presentation of basicelement for the use ofthe KER-ECOSTwebsite

- Development of theuser guide (IACA/IRD)

4. User guide page:scientific part

Presentation of basicelement for theunderstanding of theKER-ECOST website

- Development of theuser guide (IACA/IRD)

Methodology Area p.5.???

5. Short presentationto each area

Short description ofeach area.

- Development of theshort presentation(IACA/IRD)

Link each shortdescription to eacharea

6. Brochure The brochure presentthe concept of Ker-ECOST

- Development of thebrochure (IACA/IRD)

7. Menu Access to the menu onthe left part of thescreen

- make the link from themenu to each area(IACA/IRD)

Link to each area

8. Log-in Make the log-in systemwork for the website

- Develop the accesssystem and user namefor the administrationand the use of thewebsite (IACA/IRD)

9. Bug report Make accessible thesystem for an automaticbug report.

- make the link from themenu to each area(IACA/IRD)


15/44

22..11..22 AARREEAA 22:: VVIIRRTTUUAALL VVIISSIITT

Pages Description Existing Elements Tasks Links betweenareas1. Presentation of thearea

Short presentation ofthe theme and thecontent of the area

- develop thispresentation (IACA/IRD)

brochure

2. Presentation to the 9case study

Presentation of the 9case study of ECOST,by eco-region. Use ofimage gallery for

pictures, movies, etc.

Description of eachcase study alreadyexist on ECOSTwebsite

- develop the genericframework for casestudy, use the existingphotos, video, maps

existing for each casestudy- The possible items are:Location: Vietnam (seealso maps)Surface:Categories ofstakeholders: (link to thearea Actor)Types of metiers: (link tothe area Metiers)Production: (link to datasets)Transportation: (link todata sets)Processing: (link to datasets)Final Market: (link todata sets)Job satisfaction:??- develop the picturecatalogue for presentingmtier in eauch casestudy or other pictureand movie on casestudies- Fill in all theinformation for eachcase study

3. Social Value Presentation ofdifferent element onsocial value

- use the picture showdeveloped by S. Colleton fishery in Senegal- Possible use ofThierry Caroff

- Identify all the existingelement of this theme- See with Thierry Caroffof the possible use of hispainting.


16/44

22..11..33 AARREEAA 33:: AACCTTOORRSS

Pages Description Existing Elements Tasks Links between areas1. Presentation of thearea


- develop thispresentation(IACA/IRD)

brochure

2. Classification ofeach case study actor

Classification of eachcase study actor, byeco-region, using ageneric framework. Foreach case study, ashort descriptionshould exist.

- Existing framework inD.2


Link to each casestudy presentation

3. Presentation ofchain value

Presentation ofstakeholder interactionform production to thefinal market

- Existing presentationof the chain value forcase studies

- identify whichpresentation exist andtransform it for internetpresentation(IACA/IRD)

Link to each casestudy presentation

4.5.6.7.8.


17/44

22..11..44 AARREEAA 44:: MMEETTIIEERRSS




brochure

2. Metier description Presentation of theconcept of Metier

- article from F. Lalo - Presentationdevelopment by F.Lalo

Link to article of F.Lalo

3. Classification of casestudies

Classification of casestudies, by eco-region,using metier concepts.For each case study, ashort descriptionshould exist.

- See deliverable D.2 - Work to do with F.Lalo

Link to case studypresentation

4.5.6.7.8.


18/44

22..11..55 AARREEAA 55:: PPEERRFFOORRMMAANNCCEE IISSSSUUEESS

Pages Description Existing Elements Tasks Links betweenareas

1. Presentation of thearea



brochure

2. Classification ofcase, by eco-region, byissues

Classification of case,by eco-region, byissues. For each casestudy, a shortdescription shouldexist.

- Article of Marteen ofJohannesburg, Agenda21 and Guide for goodfishing practices,millennium goals.

- Development themain issuesclassification (as social

justice, restoration ofecosystem, foodsecurity)

Link to each casestudy.

3.4.5.6.7.8.


19/44

22..11..66 AARREEAA 66:: MMEETTHHOODDOOLLOOGGYY


Short presentation of thetheme and the content ofthe area


brochure

2. Presentation ofmodeling methodology

Short presentation ofmodeling methodology

- see work of Villy - Presentationdeveloped by Villy

- to articles onmodeling developedin ECOST or other

3. Organization of thework

Presentation of theorganization of the workin Ker-ECOST

- Presentation to bedeveloped by P. failler,S. Collet, GuanLuca(forthcoming in April2008)

4. DeliberativeSustainabilityassessment

Presentation of thecomplementarydimension ofassessment and socio-political context

- DL12.2 - Presentation to bedeveloped byIACA/IRD

5. KnowledgeMediation Tools

Presentation of themultimedia tools forknowledge mediation

- DL12.2 - Presentation to bedeveloped byIACA/IRD

6. Social Cost Concept Presentation of thesocial cost concept andthe literature on thetheme

- Presentation to bedeveloped by P. Failler(& other partners asIACA/IRD)

7. Interpretation of theDeliberation Matrix

Using the deliberationMatrix developed duringfour different workshops,what are the mainconclusion (and link tothe Agenda 21.)

- Work to do with P.Failler, IACA/IRD andLeuven University

8.


20/44

22..11..77 AARREEAA 77:: KKEERRBBAABBEELL IINNDDIICCAATTOORR KKIIOOSSKK





brochure

2. Indicators frommodelling

Access to generalinformation concerningthses indicators(acronym anddescription)

- see modelling (J.Moreau, Villy)

- Fill in the information(uder the control ofIACA/IRD)

3. Indicator from theinformation platform


- See informationplatform (P. Morand)


4. Indicators from casestudies


- See each case studyresponsible


5.6.7.8.


21/44

22..11..88 AARREEAA 88:: KKEERRBBAABBEELL DDEELLIIBBEERRAATTIIOONN MMAATTRRIIXX



Short presentation of thetheme and the content ofthe area


brochure

2. Exercice matrix Presentaiton of thematrix developed inPunta Cana as anexercice

- Paper Matrix forVietnam, Thailand,Caribbean eco-regionand Protected Marine

Area

- Development of theMatrix on line(IACA/IRD)

3. Asian eco-regionMatrix

Presentation of thematrix of the eco-region(Bangkok, April 2008)

- to prepare from anscientific and technicalpoints of view thedevelopment of the online matrix (IACA/IRD)

4. African eco-regionMatrix

Presentation of thematrix of the eco-region(Senegal/CLME Project)


5. Caribbean eco-region Matrix

Presentation of thematrix of the eco-region(Jamaica, july 2008)


6. Global Forum onOcean Matrix

Presentation of thematrix of the forum(2009)


7.8.


22/44

22..11..99 AARREEAA 99:: DDAATTAAWWAARREE HHOOUUSSEE




brochure

2. Link to theinformation platform

Make o link to theplatform of information

- see the accesssystem (P. Morand)

- see with P. Morand tomake the link(IACA/IRD)

3. Link to the mapserver

Make o link to the mapserver

- see existing mapswith Mickael in Dakar

- see with P. Morand tomake the link(IACA/IRD)

4. Make the link toother data sets

Make the link to datasets produced in themodeling activity

- see J. Moreau andVilly

- see J. Moreau andVilly to make a link(IACA/IRD)

5.6.7.8.


23/44

22..11..1100 AARREEAA 1100:: EECCOOSSTT WWEEBBSSIITTEE && CCOO





brochure

2. Presentation toECOST project

Ecost website - Ecost-website:http://www.ecostproject.org/

- Make a link to thewebsite (IACA/IRD)

- Make a link to thepicture catalogue ofECOST members(IACA/IRD)

3. Presentation ofother internet website

Presentation of otherinternet website byeco-region (localpartner) and atinternational level (to

European project orothers)

- list of website on the ECOSTwebsite

- Make a link to thelist on ECOSTwebsite (IACA/IRD)- Make eco-regionpartner fill in the part

4.5.6.7.8.


24/44

22..11..1111 AARREEAA 1111:: KKNNOOWWLLEEDDGGEE QQUUAALLIITTYY AASSSSEESSSSMMEENNTT





brochure

2. ALREADYDEVELOPED

3.4.5.6.7.8.


25/44

22..11..1122 AARREEAA 1122:: DDOOCCUUMMEENNTTAATTIIOONN





brochure

2. ECOST Projectdocumentation

ECOST Projectdocumentation

- ECOST Projectdocumentation on ecost

website

- Make the link to theecost documentation

(IACA/IRD)3. Identification of otherkind of documentation

Identification of otherkind of documentation

- Work to do with P.Failler and IACA/IRD

4. Pedagogic supports Make a link topresentation and/or on-line pedagogic supports

- All partners

5. Kerbabel Use of the Kerbabelportal for the access ofdocumentation stored

(video, pictures,articles)

- IACA/IRD and allpartners

6.7.8.


26/44

22..22 CCr r oossss--ccuuttttiinngg qquueessttiioonnss In order to highlight learning pathways to discover information, knowledge and outputs of ECOS project, a

set of questions has been identified and a progressive disclosure is proposed. These questions are the oneidentifies within ECOST Project.

22..22..11 QQUUEESSTTIIOONN 11:: WWHHAATTSS FFIISSHHIINNGG PPRROOBBLLEEMM?? The first question is related to the understanding of fishery problem. A navigation pathway is proposed in order tofind different element to answer to the question.

Area Description Page Weight1. Home 62. Virtual Visit 23. Actors 34. Metiers

45. Issues Discovering Ecosystem alteration, theimportance of commercial capture, thecost of production, job, conflicts, foodsecurity issues, redistribution issues,

international fishing fleet

1

6. Methodology

7. KIK

8. Cube 59. Data & Maps

10. ECOST

11. KQA

12. Documentation


27/44

22..22..22

QQUUEESSTTIIOONN 22:: SSOOCCIIAALL CCOOSSTTSS EEVVAALLUUAATTIIOONN The second question is related to the evaluation to assess the social cost of fisheries. This part aims to presentdifferent dimension of the social cost assessment (economic, social) in the perspective of sustainable developmentand the process of contextualization of this information, knowledge and outputs of ECOST Project.

Area Description Page Weight1. Home

2. Virtual Visit

3. Actors

4. Metiers

5. Issues

6. Methodology 17. KIK 38. Cube 29. Data & Maps 410. ECOST

11. KQA

512. Documentation 6


28/44

22..22..33 QQUUEESSTTIIOONN 33:: PPRROODDUUCCTTIIOONN OOFF CCOOSSTTSS The third question is related to the cost calculation item. It is mainly linked to the problem of information andknowledge production, quality and pertinence


2. Virtual Visit

3. Actors

4. Metiers

5. Issues

6. Methodology 27. KIK 58. Cube

9. Data & Maps 310. ECOST 111. KQA 412. Documentation 6


29/44

22..22..44 QQUUEESSTTIIOONN 44:: SSOOCCIIAALL CCOOSSTTSS AANNDD DDEECCIISSIIOONN The fourth question is related to the decision process using social cost information. This part is mainly linked to theprocess of integration of knowledge in the decision process.


2. Virtual Visit

3. Actors 54. Metiers 45. Issues 36. Methodology 17. KIK 68. Cube 29. Data & Maps 710. ECOST

11. KQA 812. Documentation


30/44

Annex 1: KerDST Deliberation Matrix Workshop Exercise book


31/44

Step 1 : What is your problem ?

Describe the problem you want to deal with (in one sentence or a small paragraph):


32/44

Step 2: Who are the stakeholders?

Stakeholder category Description


33/44

Stakeholder category Description


34/44


35/44

Issues Description


36/44


37/44


38/44


39/44

Step 6: Building a set of indicators

Name of the indicator Description


40/44

Name of the indicator Description


41/44

Step 6: Filling the Matrix with indicators

CCCOOOLLLOOOUUURRR TTTHHHEEE CCCUUUBBBEEE /// CCCOOONNNSSSUUULLLTTT TTTHHHEEE CCCUUUBBBEEE TTTHHHEEE MMMEEETTTHHHOOODDD OOOFFF KKKEEERRRDDDSSSTTT Define the 3-D array of (1) actors, (2) performance issues and (3) options or situations to be evaluated, then COLOUR THE CELLS of the Deliberation Matrix using a code such as

( red = bad ), ( yellow = not so bad ), (green = good), ( ), ( blue = dont care or not applicable ) .

Note: TheKERDST system proposes certain judgement categories and colours as default options; but the user can modify both the categories and the colours if desired.

It is permitted to choose UP TO 5 DISTINCT INDICATORS for each basket corresponding to an individual Cell.

For each indicator placed in a basket, the user must specify the JUDGEMENT (by choice of colour code) and the relative WEIGHT compared with otherindicators

Reflecting on the pattern of judgements built up, the user is encouraged to appreciate the PROS & CONS of each option (or the relative merits and deficiencies of each situation) and, thus, toIDENTIFY A GOOD DECISION OR TO CONVEY EFFECTIVELY AN ASSESSMENT.


42/44

KKKEEERRRBBB A A ABBBEEELLL IIINNNDDDIIICCC A A ATTTOOORRR BBB A A ASSSKKKEEETTT

Indicator Label(Short name)

Description R EFERENCE V ALUES (or range, etc.)

ESTIMATE OF V ALUE for Scenario/Situation

COLOUR CODE

Weight( % )

SPECIFY THE EVALUATION QUESTION BEING ADDRESSED

Name/Description of the Debate :

Person(s) or Organisations Responsible:

Date:

SPECIFY THE CELLOF THEDELIBERATIONM ATRIX

Actor:

Evaluation Issue:

Scenario or Situation:

PERSON(S) COMPOSING THEINDICATORB ASKET:

GOOD SO-SO BAD DONT KNOW N.A. OTHER

Register OverallJudgement for Cell

KerDST Deliberation Matrix Workshop - Exercise Book


43/44

C3ED (UVSQ/IRD) ECOST 5 th Meeting 12/16 Nov. 2007 Page 43 of 44



Description R EFERENCE V ALUES (or range, etc .)


COLOUR CODE

Weight( % )


Name/Description of the Debate:


Date:


Actor:

Evaluation Issue:




Register OverallJud ement for Cell

KerDST Deliberation Matrix Workshop - Exercise Book


44/44

C3ED (UVSQ/IRD) ECOST 5 th Meeting 12/16 Nov. 2007 Page 44 of 44



Description R EFERENCE V ALUES (or range, etc .)


COLOUR CODE

Weight( % )


Name/Description of the Debate:


Date:


Actor:

Evaluation Issue:




Register OverallJudgement for Cell

essentialf engeering essentialf

Documents