Abstract

Scientific peer review plays an important role in ensuring the credibility and reliability of science used for the effective fisheries management for various nations and organizations. Therefore, fisheries stock assessments and other pertinent science used in the fisheries management decisions in the United States undergo a series of evaluations and review processes involving expertise from the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), advisory bodies of the regional Fishery Management Councils (FMCs), and independent peer reviewers such as expertise from the Center for Independent Experts (CIE). The NMFS-FMCs partnership in the development and evaluation of the best scientific information available provides a balance in expertise, bias, and perspective that accounts for the regional differences inherent in fisheries and fisheries management. The CIE process provides high standards for independence without perceived conflicts of interests. The independence and transparency of the overall review process using national standards provides verification that the best scientific information available is utilized in fisheries management decisions, and mollifies mistrusting stakeholders. Furthermore, we will discuss some comparisons between peer review processes utilized for fisheries management from other nations.

PDF Preview