Noëlle Boucquey

This chapter applies critical perspectives to the study of ocean data infrastructures. It draws on themes in political ecology, assemblage geographies, and critical infrastructures studies to highlight how to denaturalize ocean data infrastructures, how to reveal the ways ocean territories are imagined through data infrastructures for specific governance purposes, and how data infrastructures might also be used to increase more-than-human care work in ocean governance.

Individuals from many disciplines conduct research to understand the social dimension of recreational fisheries. This diverse inquiry has produced a comprehensive understanding of the behaviours of recreational fishers, the outcomes from fishing, and the relationships among fishers, others, and the natural and human environment. The associated body of research, however, is largely disconnected across disciplines. Our goals here are to help readers understand the similarities and differences among disciplines and to identify opportunities for interdisciplinary-based research on recreational fishers. Before addressing these goals, we begin by answering basic questions: What is a discipline? What are the primary disciplines used to study recreational fishers? And what is the genealogy of research on recreational fishers? Seven key disciplines are then classified by multi-criteria related to both focus and epistemological and methodological approaches. This classification reveals clear connections among: (i) ecological science and resource economics, and to a lesser extent historical ecology; (ii) environmental history and political ecology; and (iii) behavioural economics and social psychology. We next describe and provide possible remedies for barriers that inhibit interdisciplinary research, including different epistemologies, nomenclature, and reward bias. Finally, we highlight opportunities to conduct interdisciplinary research by describing the types of benefits that each discipline can provide when conducting interdisciplinary research on recreational fisheries.

Political ecology, and its core concern with how power shapes social– ecological relationships, has much to offer recreational fisheries analyses. Political ecologists bring critical questions about how different fishers may have uneven access to resources, how particular policy narratives affect fishers, and how fishing communities are entangled with broader social, economic, and ecological processes. We explain the origins, key theoretical tenets, and methodological approaches of the field, describe the ways political ecology theory has been applied to understand recreational fisheries, and explore ways it could be applied in future research and management. With its focus on making visible the often hidden, power-laden relationships that shape the character of recreational fishing in specific places, political ecology investigations reveal the ways recreational fishing grapples with its own role in shifting ecologies and is also interwoven with resource-use conflicts and political movements. We bring our diverse perspectives as academics and fisheries managers to illustrate key moments when the central themes of political ecology have helped us to better understand recreational fisheries dynamics. Finally, we offer a set of best practices for integrating a political ecology perspective into recreational fishing studies.

Carteret County is situated along the central coast of North Carolina (figures 13.1 and 13.2). When Edward Earll visited in the 1880s, he observed: Carteret County . . . is long and narrow. . . . Its shores are so frequently interrupted by bays, rivers, and creeks, and the whole country is so cut up by water-channels, that wagons are almost wholly dispensed with, and the communication between different sections is carried on by means of boats. (Earll 1884, 485) Despite the addition of cars and bridges in the intervening years, Earll’s physical description of the county remains apt. It

Down East, North Carolina is one of the few remaining rural stretches of the state's "Crystal Coast." The region has historically revolved around the fishing industry, although in recent years commercial fishing activity has declined dramatically. Some areas of Down East have experienced increases in second-home developments while other areas have seen population declines and local business losses. These trends have led to conflicts amongst different community members regarding the usage of existing natural resources and in planning for future development. In an attempt to understand residents' attitudes regarding the past, present, and future of their communities, these issues were explored in a random door-to-door survey of approximately five percent of Down East addresses conducted May through September 2008. This paper explores several themes arising from this initial survey, which reveals that most community members have a strong appreciation for the natural and cultural heritage of Down East, while also sharing concerns associated with the decline of the fishing industry and influx of "outsiders" to the region. Citizens express skepticism of government measures to protect local heritage through land use planning, as these measures are widely viewed as infringing on private property rights. By providing an understanding of the broad issues that concern residents of Down East, this research can inform efforts to engage community members in ongoing discussions about their options for shaping the future character of the region. These findings may also be compared with the concerns of similarly amenity-rich rural communities on the cusp of substantial development.