Paper short abstract:

In Japan, major research on fisheries is conducted by the Fisheries Research Agency (FRA), an independent administrative body established in 2001. The paper analyzes, how the FRA negotiates its "objective knowledge" vis-à-vis the fishermen's "traditional knowledge" in the policy-making process.

Paper long abstract:

Policy decisions in the field of fisheries, especially with regards to resource management are almost always based on scientific evidence and advice. While the collection of the data and the consecutive advice on specific catch recommendations follow bio-economic models, the actual decisions on management objectives, the setting of total allowable catch levels and other measures are the result of negotiations between policy makers, fisheries and industry representatives and experts. In the course of these negotiations political interests often override the science-based advice. Moreover, the role of the experts becomes blurred, since they, involved in these policy decisions, are no longer impartial or objective, as they often claim.

In Japan, major research on fisheries resources, development and technology is conducted by the Fisheries Research Agency (FRA), an independent administrative body run by the central government, which was established in 2001. Consisting of nine research institutes, one center and the National Fisheries University, the FRA is not only engaged in research on such diverse subjects such as economic analysis of the fishing industry, resource assessment, genetic research or aquaculture technology, but also actively involved in policy formulation. In 2008, for instance the FRA conducted research requested by the Fisheries Agency on possible management and policy frameworks, which was published as a report in 2009. Furthermore, it regularly prepares medium- and long-term plans based on the objectives proclaimed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries. The paper analyzes, how the FRA negotiates its "objective knowledge" vis-à-vis the fishermen's "traditional knowledge" in the policy-making process. By examining these aspects, the paper also contributes to the broader question of possible roles of "experts" in policy-making in Japan.