YYou are in: Activities and Management Work Packages and Tasks Work package 1 Tasks 1.10 and 1.11

Tasks 1.10 and 1.11

Task 1.10 "Communication"

This task will look critically at the effectiveness of the two way communication between fishery managers and researchers. It is proposed to look at two specific aspects on the delivery cycle:

1. How do managers communicate fisheries management questions to the researchers - that is their need for evidence, and
2. How do researchers communicate the research results back to fisheries managers - that is the evidence delivery.
   Partner 1 will use the knowledge gained from a. and b. to answer the question:
3. How can we enhance the communication between the two groups?

Information will be gathered through a series of face-to-face interviews carried out with a representative number of Partners. The research contractor will be interviewed first to establish how the contractor reaches an understanding of what the customer question is and the need for evidence, and what improvements could be made.  This will be followed by a meeting with the fisheries manager, firstly to consider the contractor’s suggestions on how to improve communication relating to the management question and need for evidence, and secondly to examine how the fisheries manager receives the output from the research evidence, and how this also might be improved.

A report will be produced setting out what has been learnt, recommending ways of enhancing communication between fishery managers and researchers, and suggesting guidelines on good practice. The report will feed into the planning and implementation of collaborative research undertaken in WP7 and WP8.

Task 1.11 "Knowledge Management"

This task will review the literature on knowledge management and make recommendations on how the KM techniques may be used by fishery managers, for example in keeping up to date with research news.

The range of the components of knowledge management techniques include:

• inter-personal links between experts and policy-makers as well as report-based knowledge
• systematic reviews, knowledge audits and synthesis for specific issues
• the different kinds of reports that may be relevant: technical reports, summaries, databases, informal reports
• considering the needs of a variety of stakeholders
• future research needs as well as past research results.

Summary of planned work

1. Review the knowledge management literature. There is much to be learned from an extensive literature about knowledge management, which draws on experiences in the private, public and charitable sectors. The reviewer will characterise the main approaches used and consider a range of components, including the role of: ICTs; networks; knowledge synthesis; face-to-face events; formal vs. informal interactions; and others.
2. ‘Map’ existing knowledge management practices. The aim of this task will be to develop an 'issue map' of the players in fisheries science and policy and the links between them. The initial work on this task will be done in collaboration with Cefas, mapping both the UK system and also starting to outline the wider European and international systems.
3. Case studies. A number of case studies will be conducted, focussing on people and organisations in the UK and elsewhere who have been involved in knowledge management in this field.
4. Discussion with MariFish Partners. Once the main part of the literature review is complete, and some progress on mapping work has been achieved, a discussion would be valuable, to trigger further inputs. The feedback will then be incorporated into a draft final 'issue map' for fisheries science and policy.
   
   A key question is around the possibility for more collaboration over research and policy-making in the fisheries area between countries across Europe. This question would be pursued as one aspect of our interactions with respondents from each member country. There are also plans to engage international stakeholders such as ICES, the European Commission, other ERA-NETs and other international bodies that may emerge as relevant. The focus would be two-way communication and engagement.
5. Final reporting: A report, including a brief summary for wide circulation to engender feedback, would be produced. However the main output of this task remains the engagement of a wide range of stakeholders around our findings.