Advertisement

Citizen-Science and Participatory Research as a Means to Improve Stakeholder Engagement in Resource Management: A Case Study of Vietnamese American Fishers on the US Gulf Coast

Abstract

This study examines the engagement of Vietnamese American commercial fisheries stakeholders in the US Gulf Coast with state and federal agencies and the role that citizen science and participatory research may play in improving this engagement. Using a mixed methods study including surveys, interviews, and focus groups, findings highlight language, lack of trust, and outreach misfit as key barriers to engaging Vietnamese American stakeholders as demanded for collaborative resource management or co-management. However, findings also demonstrate the potential role for citizen science and participatory research that collaboratively engages stakeholders in research to overcome some of these barriers to engaging diverse fishing stakeholders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Notes

  1. 1.

    The survey administrator training handbook is available on request.

  2. 2.

    Since focus groups were conducted with translators, quotes are often in third-person.

  3. 3.

    Question text read: “For each of the agencies I will list, please indicate how much you trust that agency on a scale from 1 to 3, with 1 meaning no trust at all, 2 meaning some trust, or 3 meaning a high amount of trust”.

  4. 4.

    Question text read: “Thinking about your relationship with different agencies, please tell me your PREFERRED way to communicate with them.” Possible responses were: public meeting, letter, dockside visit, or visit to my boat, VHF marine radio, phone call, text message, email, or other.

  5. 5.

    Gulf Coast fishers and industry members tend to refer to white, non-Hispanic fishers as “Anglo”. We have adopted this terminology throughout the paper.

References

  1. Alabama Marine Resources Division (2012) Phone interview with Alabama Marine Resources Division. Alabama Marine Resources Division

  2. Alabama Tourism Department (2017) The Alabama Tourism Department: economic impact 2017. Alabama Tourism Department. https://tourism.alabama.gov/content/uploads/2018EconomicImpactFY17.pdf. Retrieved 18 Aug 2019.

  3. Allen SD, Gough A (2007) Hawaii longline fishermen’s experiences with the observer program. NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service, Washington, DC

  4. Allen S, Gough A (2006) Monitoring environmental justice impacts: Vietnamese-American longline fishermen adapt to the Hawaii Swordfish Fishery Closure. Hum Organ 65:319–328

  5. d’Armengol L, Castillo MP, Ruiz-Mallén I, Corbera E (2018) A systematic review of co-managed small-scale fisheries: social diversity and adaptive management improve outcomes. Global Environ Change 52:212–225

  6. Austen GE, Bindemann M, Griffiths RA, Roberts DL (2016) Species identification by experts and non-experts: comparing images from field guides. Sci Rep 6:srep33634

  7. Bavinck M (2005) Understanding fisheries conflicts in the south—a legal pluralist perspective. Soc Nat Resour 18(9):805–820

  8. Berkes F (1994) Co-management: bridging the two solitudes. North Perspect 22(2–3):18–20

  9. Bernard HR (2006) Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. Rowman Altamira, Lanham, MD

  10. Bibb S, Bloom S, Brinson A, Chandler M, Davenport G, Denit K, Dinardo G, Gange J, Giordano S, Gutierrez A, Hoey J, Ignell S, Kosaka R, Park C, Rankin T, Sagar H, Silva R (2017) Cooperative research and cooperative management: a review with recommendations. NOAA technical memorandum. NMFS-F/SPO-156. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Policy, Washington, DC

  11. Boeije H (2002) A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant 36(4):391–409

  12. Bonney R, Cooper CB, Dickinson J, Kelling S, Phillips T, Rosenberg KV, Shirk J (2009) Citizen science: a developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific literacy. BioScience 59(11):977–984

  13. Brooke SG (2014) Federal fisheries observer programs in the United States: over 40 years of independent data collection. Mar Fish Rev 76(3):1–38

  14. Brossard D, Lewenstein B, Bonney R (2005) Scientific knowledge and attitude change: the impact of a citizen science project. Int J Sci Educ 27(9):1099–1121

  15. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2019) Industries at a glance: agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting: NAICS 11. https://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag11.htm

  16. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (2017) By the numbers: port statistics for some of the largest U.S. ports. US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC

  17. Burrage D (2009) Addressing ethnic change in the Northern Gulf of Mexico seafood industry. J Ext 47:1–4

  18. Campi A (2005) From refugees to Americans: thirty years of Vietnamese immigration to the United States. Vietnamese and American veterans of the Vietnam war. http://www.vietamericanvets.com/page-diaspora-fromrefugeestoamericans.pdf

  19. Center for Energy Studies, Economics & Policy Research Group (2017). Gulf Coast Energy Outlook. Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA

  20. Chuenpagdee R, Jentoft S (2007) Step zero for fisheries co-management: what precedes implementation. Mar Policy 31(6):657–668

  21. Chuenpagdee R, Fraga J, Euan-Avila JI (2004) Progressing toward comanagement through participatory research. Soc Nat Resour 17(2):147–161

  22. Cigliano JA, Meyer R, Ballard HL, Freitag A, Phillips TB, Wasser A (2015) Making marine and coastal citizen science matter. Ocean Coast Manag 115:77–87

  23. Clay PM, Olson. J (2008) Defining ‘Fishing Communities’: vulnerability and the magnusun-stevens fishery conservation and mangement act. Hum Ecol Rev 15(2):143–160

  24. Conrad CC, Hilchey KG (2011) A review of citizen science and community-based environmental monitoring: issues and opportunities. Environ Monit Assess 176(1–4):273–291

  25. Conway FDL, Pomeroy C (2006) Evaluating the human—as well as the biological—objectives of cooperative fisheries research. Fisheries 31(9):447–454

  26. Cooper C, Dickinson J, Phillips T, Bonney R (2007) Citizen science as a tool for conservation in residential ecosystems. Ecol Soc 12:11

  27. Corburn J (2005) Street science: community knowledge and environmental health justice, 1st edn. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

  28. Crosson S (2013) The impact of Empowering Scientific Advisory Committees to Constrain Catch Limits in U.S. Fisheries. Sci Public Policy 40:261–273

  29. Allen SD, Gough A (2006) Monitoring environmental justice impacts: Vietnamese-American longline fishermen adapt to the Hawaii swordfish fishery closure. Hum Org 65:319–328

  30. Dang MT (2011) What comes next?: employment opportunities for Vietnamese American fisherfolk affected by the BP Gulf Oil Spill in Louisiana. M.S. Thesis in City Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

  31. Dean AJ, Church EK, Loder J, Fielding KS, Wilson. KA (2018) How do marine and coastal citizen science experiences foster environmental engagement? J Environ Manag 213:409–416

  32. Dickinson JL, Shirk J, Bonter D, Bonney R, Crain RL, Martin J, Phillips T, Purcell K (2012) The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Front Ecol Environ 10(6):291–297

  33. Dickinson JL, Zuckerberg B, Bonter DN (2010) Citizen science as an ecological research tool: challenges and benefits. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:149–172

  34. Ellwood ER, C TM, Miller-Rushing AJ (2017) Citizen science and conservation: recommendations for a rapidly moving field. Biol Conserv 208:1–4

  35. Evans L, Cherrett N, Pemsl D (2011) Assessing the impact of fisheries co-management interventions in developing countries: a meta-analysis. J Environ Manag 92(8):1938–1949

  36. Field DR, Paul RV, Kuczenski TK, Hammer RB, Radeloff VC (2003) Reaffirming social landscape analysis in landscape ecology: a conceptual framework. Soc Nat Resour 16(4):349–361

  37. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2019) FAO fisheries & aquaculture—co-management. http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/16625/en

  38. Frickel S, Gibbon S, Howard J, Ottinger G, Hess D (2009) Undone science: charting social movement and civil society challenges to research agenda setting. Sci Technol Hum Values. 35: 444–473

  39. Garrison G, Wakefield RL, Xu X, Kim SH (2010) Globally distributed teams: the effect of diversity on trust, cohesion and individual performance. SIGMIS Database 41(3):27–48

  40. Glaser BG, Strauss AL (2009) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Transaction Publishers, Piscataway, NJ

  41. Gutiérrez NL, Hilborn R, Defeo O (2011) Leadership, Social Capital and Incentives Promote Successful Fisheries. Nature 470(7334):386–389

  42. Hartley T, Robertson RA (2008) Cooperative research program goals in New England: perceptions of active fishermen. Fisheries 33(11):551–559

  43. Hartley TW, Robertson RA (2006) Emergence of multi-stakeholder-driven cooperative research in the Northwest Atlantic: the case of the Northeast Consortium. Mar Policy 30(5):580–592

  44. Jones A, Slade SJ, Williams AJ, Mapstone BD, Kane KJ (2007) Pitfalls and benefits of involving industry in fisheries research: a case study of the live reef fish industry in Queensland, Australia. Ocean Coast Manag 50:428–442

  45. Jones Al (2008) Oystering shows signs of recovery—$3M to restore 1080 acres of oyster reefs. Sun Herald

  46. Jones C (2017) Coast Guard cites fishing boat for illegal foreign captain. AP NEWS

  47. Kinchy AJ, Perry SL (2011) Can volunteers pick up the slack—efforts to remedy knowledge gaps about the watershed impacts of marcellus shale gas development. Duke Environ Law Policy Forum 22:303–340

  48. Kirkham C (2008) Aid for fishing industry is on its way—state is deciding how to dole it out. The Times-Picayune

  49. Kitzinger J (1995) Qualitative research. introducing focus groups. Br Med J 311(7000):299–302

  50. Kooiman J (2005) Fish for life: interactive governance for fisheries. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands

  51. Krumpal I (2013) Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: a literature review. Qual Quant 47(4):2025–2047

  52. Mackinson S, Wilson DC, Galiay P, Deas B (2011) Engaging stakeholders in fisheries and marine research. Mar Policy 35(1):18–24

  53. Maliao RJ, Pomeroy RS, Turingan RG (2009) Performance of Community-Based Coastal Resource Management (CBCRM) Programs in the Philippines: a meta-analysis. Mar Policy 33(5):818–825

  54. Marvasti A, Carter DW (2016) Domestic and imports sources of supply to the US shrimp market and anti-dumping duties. J Econ Stud 43(6):1039–1056

  55. McCay BJ, Jentoft S (1996) From the bottom up: participatory issues in fisheries management. Soc Nat Resour 9(3):237–250

  56. Mulvany L (2015) Shrimp imports chew up U.S. suppliers amid slump—Chicago Tribune. Chicago Tribue

  57. National Research Council (2004) Cooperative research in the national marine fisheries service. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

  58. Newman G, Wiggins A, Crall A, Graham E, Newman S, Crowston K (2012) The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Front Ecol Environ 10(6):298–304

  59. NOAA (2015) NOAA news online (story 2688). http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2006/s2688.htm

  60. NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service (2010) Gulf of Mexico Summary. Washington, DC

  61. NOAA, National Marine Fisheries Service (2017) Commercial fishing annual landings. Commercial-Sub Level. http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/commercial-fisheries/commercial-landings/annual-landings/index

  62. O’Keefe CE, DeCelles GR (2013) Forming a partnership to avoid bycatch. Fisheries 38(10):434–444

  63. Ospina SM, Saz-Carranza A (2010) Paradox and collaboration in network management. Adm Soc 42(4):404–440

  64. Ottinger G (2010a) Buckets of resistance: standards and the effectiveness of citizen science. Sci Technol Hum Values 35(2):244–270

  65. Ottinger G (2010b) Constructing empowerment through interpretations of environmental surveillance data. Surveill Soc 8(2):221–234

  66. Ottinger G, Cohen BR (2011) Technoscience and environmental justice: expert cultures in a grassroots movement. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

  67. Ovando DA, Deacon RT, Lester SE, Costello C, Van Leuvan T, McIlwain K, Strauss CK, Arbuckle M, Fujita R, Gelcich S, Uchida H (2013) Conservation incentives and collective choices in cooperative fisheries. Mar Policy 37:132–140

  68. Pomeroy RS, Katon BM, Harkes I (2001) Conditions affecting the success of fisheries co-management: lessons from Asia. Mar Policy 25(3):197–208

  69. QSR International (2010) Nvivo 9. QSR International PL, Melbourne, Australia

  70. Qualtrics (2018) Qualtrics. Qualtrics, Provo, UT

  71. Ross CE, Mirowsky J (1984) Socially-desirable response and acquiescence in a cross-cultural survey of mental health. J Health Soc Behav 25(2):189–197

  72. Satria A, Matsuda Y (2004) Decentralization of fisheries management in Indonesia. Mar Policy 28(5):437–450

  73. Schewe RL, Dutton. C (2018) NOAA fishery observers and Vietnamese American Fishers in the Southeastern US. Mar Policy 96:145–151

  74. Scholz A, Bonzon K, Fujita R, Benjamin N, Woodling N, Black P, Steinback C (2004) Participatory socioeconomic analysis: drawing on fishermen’s knowledge for marine protected area planning in California. Mar Policy 28(4):335–349

  75. Siddiki S, Kim J, Leach WD (2017) Diversity, trust, and social learning in collaborative governance. Public Adm Rev 77(6):863–874

  76. Simpson L (2008) Emergency disaster recovery program and coastal recovery. Presented at the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Council, Marine Fisheries Advisory Council annual meeting, Ocean Springs, MS

  77. Søreng SU (2006) Moral discourse in fisheries co-management: a case study of the Senja Fishery, Northern Norway. Ocean Coast Manag 49(3–4):147–163

  78. Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN (2014) Focus groups: theory and practice. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

  79. Stöhr C, Lundholm C, Crona B, Chabay I (2014) Stakeholder participation and sustainable fisheries: an integrative framework for assessing adaptive comanagement processes. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol19/iss3/art14/

  80. Theobald EJ, Ettinger AK, Burgess HK, DeBey LB, Schmidt NR, Froehlich HE, Wagner C, HilleRisLambers J, Tewksbury J, Harsch MA, Parrish JK (2015) Global change and local solutions: tapping the unrealized potential of citizen science for biodiversity research. Biol Conserv 181:236–244

  81. Trimble M, de Araujo LG, Seixas CS (2014) One party does not tango! fishers’ non-participation as a barrier to co-management in Paraty, Brazil. Ocean Coast Manag 92:9–18

  82. Trimble M, Berkes F (2013) Participatory research towards co-management: lessons from artisanal fisheries in Coastal Uruguay. J Environ Manag 128:768–778

  83. Trimble M, Berkes F (2015) Towards adaptive co-management of small-scale fisheries in Uruguay and Brazil: lessons from using ostrom’s design principles. Marit Stud 14(1):14

  84. US Census Bureau, American Community Survey (2017) Language spoken at home by ability to speak english for the population 5 years and older. US Census Bureau, Washington, DC

  85. US Department of Commerce (2007) Magnuson-Stevens fishery conservation and management act

  86. Wiber M, Berkes F, Charles A, Kearney J (2004) Participatory research supporting community-based fishery management. Mar Policy 28(6):459–468

  87. Wiber M, Charles A, Kearney J, Berkes. F (2009) Enhancing community empowerment through participatory fisheries research. Mar Policy 33(1):172–179

  88. Wiggins A, Crowston K (2011) From conservation to crowdsourcing: a typology of citizen science. In: Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS). IEEE, pp 1–10

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Rebecca L. Schewe.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

This project received funding under award NA15NMF4270343 from NOAA Fisheries Service, in cooperation with the Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program. The statements, findings, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of NOAA Fisheries. This publication was made possible through the support provided by the U.S. Dept. of Commerce/NOAA through the University of Southern Mississippi under the terms of the Agreement No. USM-GR05007-R/SFA-04-PD. The opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Dept. of Commerce/NOAA of the University of Southern Mississippi.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schewe, R.L., Hoffman, D., Witt, J. et al. Citizen-Science and Participatory Research as a Means to Improve Stakeholder Engagement in Resource Management: A Case Study of Vietnamese American Fishers on the US Gulf Coast. Environmental Management 65, 74–87 (2020) doi:10.1007/s00267-019-01223-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Citizen science
  • Stakeholder engagement
  • Collaborative management