Does ICES have a unified philosophy of the development and application of evidence-based ecosystem advice? What would this look like? How can data, models, stakeholder knowledge, societal insight and legal frameworks affect ecosystem management questions, policy and scientific advice? These are the broad, central questions in this workshop.
Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (IEA) is a framework for organizing science in order to inform decision makers in marine Ecosystem-Based Management (EBM) at multiple scales and across sectors. However, integration of data at this level. Within the ICES science and advice community, the work is dependent on networks and integration. However, there is not a clear fundamental understanding of how "integration" should proceed in the framework of IEAs. Multi-, cross-, inter,- and transdisciplinary work is often named, but what do these prefixes mean in practice for ICES Expert Groups and the important product of ICES advice?
This workshop will discuss leading scholars in philosophy of science, science and technology studies (STS) for new insights on how IEAs should work to meet the needs of credibility, legitimacy and saliency. We seek answers into several questions.
Scale and complexity are important issues in IEAs, but what are the conceivable management actions that managers can actually act upon?
How should the Science Steering Groups affect integration and those managing the ICES system like EU Commission and Member Countries?
What does integration mean for the practice of ICES scientists in the ICES Working Group network?
There are practical challenges facing scientists and managers as they strive to anticipate forthcoming legal frameworks and develop best practices for shaping the procedural and material content of the management norms.
How should ICES link the necessary interdisciplinary knowledge with the pragmatic management application of such knowledge?