Simultaneously report costs and benefits of fisheries modelling

Establish studies that simultaneously quantify and report both the costs and the benefits of using fisheries models to enable evidence-based cost–benefit analyses rather than relying on hypothetical examples.

Background

To demonstrate cost–benefit analysis, the authors construct a hypothetical example because empirical studies jointly reporting modelling costs and benefits are lacking. This gap prevents rigorous assessment of model complexity choices and trade-offs in real-world fisheries management.

They emphasize the importance of systematically reporting both costs and benefits for each modelling approach attempted, so that future decisions can be based on empirical evidence rather than assumptions.

References

In fact, the reason why our example in Fig. 3 is hypothetical is because we are aware of no study that has ever reported simultaneously, both the costs and benefits of using a model.

— Cost-benefit analysis of ecosystem modelling to support fisheries management  (2403.17446 - Holden et al., 2024) in Conclusion (Step 4)