Fig 1.
Map of the U.S. Caribbean showing fishery management subdivisions (ACL subdivisions) for each island and the boundaries of the exclusive economic zone ([5]).
Fig 2.
FEP loop (Levin et al. 2018).
Table 1.
Summary information about different workshops held to develop conceptual models with multiple U.S. Caribbean fisheries stakeholder group.
Fig 3.
A. Consensus conceptual model for the U.S. Caribbean, merging all conceptual models for the seven stakeholder groups for all island/island groups. B. Consensus conceptual model for the U.S. Caribbean showing only relationships present in at least four stakeholder group’s conceptual models. Arrow direction characterizes components as drivers (affecting other components) or receivers (being affected by other components). Red, green, and yellow lines represent negative, positive, and neutral relationships, respectively. Letter size is reflective of the frequency with which component was mentioned by stakeholders and thickness of the lines reflects agreement, i.e., the number of stakeholder groups that mentioned each relationship.
Table 2.
List of top relationships by stakeholder agreement level and respective stakeholder groups for the U.S. Caribbean.
Number of groups refer to the total number of stakeholder groups that identified each relationship in their conceptual model(s).
Fig 4.
nMDS ordination of stakeholder groups and U.S. Caribbean islands based on a simple matching coefficient between relationships of ecosystem components identified in conceptual models.
(MAN = managers; EXP = academics; DAP = District Advisory Panels; BUS = businesses; NGO = Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations; FISH = commercial fishers; SSC = Scientific and Statistical Committee; PR = Puerto Rico; STTJ = St. Thomas/St. John, STX = St. Croix; Ellipses = statistically significant groups defined by SIMPROF).
Fig 5.
Two-mode network diagram showing all components identified as important drivers (A) or Receivers (B) of relationships (circles) by each stakeholder group (grey squares) in the U.S. Caribbean. The size of the circles is indicative of frequency with which component was mentioned by stakeholders. Circles color scheme indicates the number of stakeholder groups mentioning the component: red = 7; orange = 6; yellow = 5; light green = 4; dark green = 3; blue = 2; pink = 1.
Table 3.
Components identified by all seven stakeholder groups as being important drivers (D) and/or receivers (R) in the U.S. Caribbean fishery ecosystem.
Table 4.
Major threats—characterized by the highest level of agreement between stakeholder groups—that affect the most significant receivers identified by all stakeholder groups.