National Academies Press: OpenBook

Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board (2005)

Chapter: Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 1

« Previous: General Committee Comments on the NPRB Draft Science Plan
Suggested Citation:"Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 1." National Research Council. 2005. Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11235.
×

Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 1

Chapter 1 was generally well done and the committee applauds the effort and commitment that the NPRB is demonstrating toward organizing its Science Plan. In particular, the committee agrees with the NPRB that a useful step toward success will be to support some focused organizational workshops. Workshops can be an effective way for the NPRB to obtain the advice it needs to move from the broad ideas presented in the Science Plan to a more focused Implementation Plan that provides specific guidance on what work will be done and how it will be accomplished. Workshops will use program funds that otherwise would support research, so they should be used judiciously and with clear purposes.

But how the workshops will be used and the relationship to the IERPs is somewhat unclear in the NPRB draft Science Plan. In the committee’s view, to provide a basis for resource management, the first step is for the NPRB administration (Executive Director with guidance from the Board and Science Panel) to identify the most pressing management needs and questions; that is, to ask “What are the greatest management issues now and in the foreseeable future for the North Pacific/Bering/Arctic regions." An example of two possible question might be “What limits the abundance and distribution of salmon” or “What determines salmon escapement/survival?” The subject might be groundfish, or it might be bowhead whales. With a need in mind, NPRB can identify an IERP to provide the integrated scientific information required to answer the question. And at the same time, the geographic focus becomes clear, when planners ask “Where do we go to get that information?”

The next step is difficult: the total list of possible management needs and associated IERPs will likely be long, and with its limited resources the NPRB needs to keep focused or its work will be diluted and not useful. It should be the role of the NPRB Executive Director, with guidance from the advisory bodies to make balanced judgments and prioritize the IERPs, selecting a set for attention now (and recognizing that others will need to be set aside for another time). Once the priority IERPs are identified, then NPRB can organize a workshop specific to that question, with the right participants and a clear mandate for the group to define what needs to be measured, where, and what hypotheses to test. In this way, the workshops define the specific science questions and approaches for implementation of the IERPs.

As noted in the following section, the committee believes that NPRB must limit its geographic focus to one or two key areas, for a period of time long enough to build a body of knowledge. Multiple IERPs can be addressed in this region or regions, but care should be taken not to select multiple IERPs in multiple regions, or the program’s impact

Suggested Citation:"Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 1." National Research Council. 2005. Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11235.
×

will be diluted and likely not useful to resource managers. The more focused NPRB activities can be, the more they will accomplish.

Given the key role the IERPs will serve in organizing NPRB science activities, the committee feels strongly that the concept of IERPs should be introduced early in Chapter 1 (with their detailed description still remaining in Chapter 3). In this way, the intent of the workshops, which is to provide targeted information that helps bring the IERPs to fruition, can be made explicitly clear. If this is not clear, the workshops will appear unrelated and fragmented, and in the end they will not be very useful to the Science Panel or support the success of the NPRB overall.

Along with the concept of IERPs, the committee believes that the IERP discussion in Chapter 2 section 3 contains information that actually belongs in Chapter 1, where it would be given more prominent attention. Chapter 1 is where the NPRB’s overarching premises, goals, and philosophies are explained and the IERP concept belongs as part of this description of the program’s foundation ideas, and not buried at the end of Chapter 2.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

  • Revise the organization by moving Section 2.3 to Chapter 1 and introduce the IERP concept early in Chapter 1.

  • Planning workshops should be used where additional, focused scientific input is needed, such as to outline the scientific issues, research components, and estimated resource needs for the IERPs.

  • The NPRB (Executive Direction with guidance from the Board, and Science Panel) should identify pressing management needs and select the priority IERPs for study.

Suggested Citation:"Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 1." National Research Council. 2005. Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11235.
×
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 1." National Research Council. 2005. Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/11235.
×
Page 7
Next: Comments on NPRB Draft Science Plan - Chapter 2 »
Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board Get This Book
×
 Final Comments on the Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board
Buy Paperback | $21.00 Buy Ebook | $16.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The North Pacific Research Board (NPRB) was established by Congress in 1997 to recommend marine research activities to the Secretary of Commerce on or relating to the fisheries or marine ecosystem in the North Pacific Ocean, Bering Sea, Arctic Ocean, and related bodies of water. NPRB called on the National Academies to develop a comprehensive long range science plan pertaining to its research activities. This assistance has been provided in two phases. In phase one, beginning in early 2003, a National Academies committee worked to understand the purpose of the NPRB, gather information to help identify research needs, and provide advice on the components of a sound science plan. The committee's assessment is contained in a report released in early 2004, Elements of a Science Plan for the North Pacific Research Board. With this guidance as a tool, the NPRB staff, Science Panel, and Advisory Panel worked together to write a draft science plan to steer the program in the coming decade. During the second phase, the same committee reviewed the NPRB's draft science plan and provided final feedback to the NPRB. It is a focused review, generally following the organization of the NPRB document. This report is intended primarily as a direct communication from the committee to those planning the NPRB's programs, to help them improve the science plan and ensure successful implementation.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!