Plenary meeting 2021-12-09

Slides

Presentation slides for the DFM plenary meeting of 2021-12-09. Much of the content of the presentation draws on the Midterm Report submitted to SSHRC.

Video

Recording of the Zoom meeting on our YouTube channel, with captions.

Discussion summary

PRATEEP: Very impressive, congratulations! Great achievements despite COVID.

RATANA: I like the point about the organic aspect of the project, which has inspired creativity. We have created space for collaboration -- visualization and e-book. WSSFC will happen but in-person meeting is uncertain: it may have to be a virtual conference, though we have experience doing that now. We are able to think outside the box for research and knowledge mobilization. We are appreciative of chances to meet in person (like Cox's Bazar, etc.)

We are driven by outputs -- specifically we have the e-book, but we need more outputs to guide us. We could think of MARE publication series, or a technical paper.

Visualization of value chains: we have talked a lot about mapping, which is a critical part, but we haven't discussed that yet here. We need to connect start to end point of the flows; we talked about this need during preparations for IMBeR. It would be good to channel funding to RA or postdoc to support this work.

I see the Scoping study as becoming more of an extended study. This is what is happening with Thailand -- "scoping study plus" -- and while the work has been slow, it is picking up now that Nova is on board.

For the exhibition, there is an opportunity to link this to IYAFA (International Year for Artisanal Fisheries and Aquaculture). This can be a travelling exhibition, maybe starting in Thailand, send to the next country where they will add to the collection, then it will go full circle and come back to the starting point. This would be quite fun to do.

MADU: It's amazing to hear the accomplishments, and how we reimagine the project, and about plans for fun initiatives in the works. I hope we can meet in person at the WSSFC. The IMBeR session was very recently completed. This gave us the opportunity to focus on ecology more centrally than in other activities, and also to put a lens on small fish.

NIREKA: I'm also glad to see the organic quality and the positive, unintended consequences, which would be evaluated positively in a project review. It's good that we were able to link the different themes, in a more holistic way than previously, through the templates at IMBeR. This data collection was a bit cumbersome and difficult, but it got us somewhere, and is a stepping stone to other things. In terms of visualization, we were talking about a virtual exhibition, and now a real exhibition as well, or something to be combined. The e-book is also a process.

Story maps would be an element in this work; we would look at life histories from the different countries, which would provide comparative dimension and a human focus; we can explore the movement of products; and we can undertake a few studies where we look at interconnections across countries, as in the link between Sri Lanka and Thailand in the anchovy trade. I like the idea of passing fish from place to place. Maybe we could do a cooking session in each country, where we could demonstrate how these things are eaten.

RATANA: We can turn this into a "dried fish festival", with an exhibition, cooking, and songs! It sounds very exciting.

DEREK: This fits with the organic quality of the project so far. These ideas tie together different components of DFM -- scoping research, e-book, visualization, etc. All this can certainly connect to the mapping goal. Like the idea of having an Indian chef in Japan, or Sri Lankan chef in Bangladesh -- thinking big about exchanges and connections.

SIDDIQUR: On "interventions", it would be good to think about the kind of intervention we are considering. Are we implementing the interventions ourselves, or do we get our partners to implement them? What are the resources available? If we know these parameters we can plan accordingly.

DEREK: The question of *what is possible* is for the Research Teams to answer. We can't really answer the question about resources.

ERIC: We have $112,000 allocated for stage 2 projects, but this needs to be allocated across the project initiatives, including interventions, future research, exhibitions, etc.

PRATEEP: We have project funds, but we can also partner with local partner organizations to mobilize the findings of the research. We have NGOs who are eager to craft their own hands-on, action-oriented activities over the long term. These should also be considered as part of the planning discussion, and could be part of the strategic planning and supports.

On the topic of ecology, mentioned earlier, we have Sisir working on Social-Ecological Systems in value chains, and has a paper almost ready to be published -- he is working on revisions.

DEREK: It was good to see Sisir at IMBeR. On the point of interventions, we have some resources that we could leverage to partner up with different organizations to find more funds and implement more comprehensive pilots.

SAI LEELA: Thanks for the interesting presentations. We are working on the e-book submission now (due January 15). We could have an exhibition on the beach road at Vishakhapatnam. That is something that would really attract the attention of the public.

DEREK: We have reached the end of the meeting time. Thanks to all for the discussion, which has added to some of the core points we made in our presentations. We will have an open forum, planning-focused meeting in January, after the e-book deadline. Please look through the questions and get back to us. We can circulate a document prior to the January meeting. Thanks to all, Happy New Year, talk to you soon!