Oceanography | March 2011 167 
2003; Pontecorvo, 2003), and when it is, 
it is under pressure to offer integrated 
ecosystem advice and assessments 
(Sissenwine and Murawski, 2004). Have 
the recent developments in operational 
oceanographic products addressed the 
needs of this community, and are the 
producers really talking to the users? 
The International Council for the 
Exploration of the Sea (ICES) is an 
umbrella organization for marine scien 
tists working in the North Atlantic. Apart 
from its role in stimulating and enabling 
science, it also offers operational fisheries 
advice and is moving toward providing 
ecosystem advice. It also provides a 
focus for oceanographers in Europe and 
North America. The Working Group on 
Operational Oceanographic products for 
Fisheries and Environment (WGOOFE) 
was established to encourage communi 
cation among fisheries, environmental, 
and oceanographic researchers and to 
ensure that the needs of potential users 
of oceanographic products were being 
heard. Addressing the lack of communi 
cation among marine scientists working 
in various disciplines is viewed as a core 
step toward achieving an “ecosystem 
approach.” This lack of communication 
has been cited as one of the origins of the 
possible failure of fisheries management 
(Pontecorvo, 2003). 
Through the work of WGOOFE, it 
became apparent that a mismatch existed 
between user (environmental and fish 
eries scientists) requirements and the 
perceived requirements identified by the 
producers of oceanographic data prod 
ucts (ICES, 2009). To gain more infor 
mation, a questionnaire was launched 
across the ICES science and advisory 
community to investigate oceanographic 
data requirements. These results now 
need to be widely and openly commu 
nicated to the producers of operational 
products, especially as the survey high 
lighted differences between the average 
ICES user’s needs and current provision. 
This survey is timely as several new 
initiatives aimed at improving dissemi 
nation of oceanographic products to 
the user community are beginning. 
There is also a drive across the applied 
marine science world to produce inte 
grated ecosystem assessments. We feel 
Barbara Berx (b.berx@marlab.ac.uk) is Research Scientist, Marine Scotland Science, 
Aberdeen, UK. Mark Dickey-Collas is Senior Fisheries Scientist, Institute for 
Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES), IJmuiden, The Netherlands. 
Morten D. Skogen Is Principal Scientist, Institute of Marine Research (IMR), Bergen, Norway. 
Yann-Hervé De Roeck Is Research Scientist, Institut français de recherche pour l’exploitation 
de la mer (Ifremer), Brest, France. Holger Klein Is Flead, Operational Oceanography Section, 
Bundesamtfür Seeschlfffahrt und Flydrographie (BSFI), Flamburg, Germany. Rosa Barciela 
is Scientific Manager of Applied Modelling Research, Ocean Forecasting Research & 
Development, Met Office, Exeter, UK. Rodney M. Forster Is a researcher at Centre for 
Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Lowestoft, UK. Eric Dombrowsky 
Is Scientific and Technical Director, Mercator Océan, Ramonvllle-Salnt-Agne, France. 
Martin Huret Is Research Scientist, Ifremer, Nantes, France. Mark Payne is Research 
Scientist, Technical University of Denmark, National Institute of Aquatic Resources, 
Copenhagen, Denmark. Yolanda Sagarminaga Is Principal Investigator, AZTI-Tecnalia, 
Pasala, Spain. Corinna Schrum Is Professor, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 
that while the questionnaire may not 
be representative of the marine science 
community as a whole, it does provide a 
strong reflection of the needs of fisheries 
and environmental scientists. 
THE QUESTIONNAIRE 
A questionnaire (http://www.wgoofe.org/ 
objectives) was circulated to members 
of the ICES community involved in 
research and advice in fisheries and the 
marine environment. The majority of 
the questionnaires were completed in 
the presence of a member of WGOOFE, 
allowing questions about interpretation 
to be addressed. The questionnaire was 
split into three main topics: 
1. Respondents’ research backgrounds 
(their subject areas, roles and 
expertise, data handling skills, and 
software knowledge) 
2. Data products they require (variables, 
resolution, spatial and temporal 
horizons)—respondents were asked 
to choose their required oceano 
graphic variables from a predeter 
mined product list 
3. Preferred data-delivery mecha 
nism (ease of access, time scales, 
and formats) 
For most of the questions, respondents 
could check more than one answer. 
The majority of questionnaires were 
completed during meetings devoted 
to discussing data requirements. 
Respondents remained anonymous. 
The data were collated and the survey 
results (by category) tested against the 
likelihood of respondents choosing 
categories in a random manner using a 
chi-squared test with William’s correc 
tion (Sokal and Rohlf, 1995).