Regional Inshore Fisheries Group: evaluation

Executive Summary

Inshore fishing remains part of the fabric of many coastal towns and villages around Scotland. Regional Inshore Fisheries Groups (RIFGs), in some form, have been part of the framework for inshore fisheries management since 2009. This evaluation asks how well they are working and if they are fit for the future.

Evidence was gathered over the first half of 2024 and involved an online survey and one-to-one interviews both online and in-person in coastal areas. Stakeholders who provided input to the evaluation included inshore fishers, fisheries bodies and associations, environmental groups, and current and past RIFG Chairs.

The RIFG network has changed over the 15 years of operation. They began as pilot ‘Inshore Fisheries Groups’ (IFGs) in 2009 covering small coastal regions, before being formalised in 2013 covering the whole coastline and islands of Scotland. They were then refreshed in 2016 and 2023. This evaluation covers the last 5 years of operation, however many stakeholders also provided information stretching back to 2009. This information has also been incorporated.

The evidence is presented in ten themes which are separated into four categories:

• The context within which RIFGs operate: System
• What RIFGs go: Remit, Delivery, Monitoring and Reporting
• Who is involved: Leadership, Engagement, Membership
• How RIFGs operate: Power, Resources, Regions

The evaluation found that there is a specific need for clarity around what the RIFGs do and transparency around how they operate. There remains a desire across the majority of stakeholders to have a forum where fishers can feed directly into fisheries management decisions. Stakeholders want to be assured of the process of how information is incorporated into decision making and how to engage in that process. There was an overall understanding from the evidence gathered that stakeholders were aware that the Marine Directorate is under pressure to balance views of a wide range of stakeholders perhaps more than ever before, and therefore there is an increased need that any processes used for inshore management need to be clear and transparent.

The Chair was often noted by respondents as the cornerstone to the success of a RIFG. The most vital characteristics highlighted for a Chair was that they are knowledgeable about inshore fisheries and empowered to encourage locally led approaches to inshore management.

When asked ‘Do you think RIFGs play a role in the future of inshore fisheries management?’ there was a mixed response from respondents. Overall, it was clear that incorporating stakeholders’ views into fisheries management continues to be a priority for all respondents. A stakeholder group like the RIFGs would be supported by the majority of respondents if the remit was clear and deliverable, and the decision making process for inshore management was understandable and allowed stakeholders to feed in views and ideas.

Key insights emerged from the evaluation. These are presented across 10 themes below.

System: Clarity on the governance landscape of inshore fisheries management will help stakeholders know where to engage and where decisions are taken.

Remit: The remit should be specific, achievable, and measurable. Key elements should include: a Chair-led forum for discussing local issues and potential solutions; ensuring inshore fishers’ voices are heard by government; and supporting sustainability of the sector.

Delivery: Tangible deliverables that align with the remit are essential to ensure value and best use of resources.

Monitoring and reporting: Accountability should be delivered via a monitoring and reporting plan and regular published reports.

Leadership: Direction should be set by the Marine Directorate and local leadership provided by regional Chairs. The Marine Directorate should maintain oversight of delivery, with Chairs taking initiative for local projects and enabling the voice of fishers to be heard by government.

Engagement: Chairs should engage with all relevant stakeholders and prioritise regular interactions with inshore fishers. Removing barriers to the involvement of fishers should be a key priority.

Membership: There is strong support for a forum designed for only fishing representatives, however, stakeholders recognise that the marine space is a shared resource so other marine stakeholders should be brought into management discussions. A more formal membership would improve transparency.

Power: Groups should be enabled by the Marine Directorate to achieve their remit including encouraging locally led approaches that have the potential to become legislation.

Resources: Chairs must be knowledgeable about inshore fisheries and empowered to initiate regional ideas and solutions to inshore management. Chairs should have access to science evidence to ensure it is incorporated into local discussions.

Regions: The regions of the Outer Hebrides and Orkney were deemed suitable to have their own RIFGs. Clarity is needed on the role of a RIFG in Shetland owing to the Shetland Islands Regulated Fishery (Scotland) Order 2012. Mainland regions were deemed too large, with the North West RIFG and the North and East Coast RIFG suggested as needing new regional lines drawn.