scholarly journals Assessing marine spatial planning governmentality

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 269-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley Flannery ◽  
Ben McAteer
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Time Space ◽  
Planning Processes ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Government ◽  
Rational Process ◽  
Management Issues

Abstract Marine spatial planning (MSP) is advanced by its champions as an impartial and rational process that can address complex management issues. We argue that MSP is not innately rational and that it problematises marine issues in specific ways, often reflecting hegemonic agendas. The illusion of impartial rationality in MSP is derived from governmentalities that appear progressive but serve elite interests. By understanding the creation of governmentalities, we can design more equitable planning processes. We conceptualise governmentalities as consisting of problematisations, rationalities and governance technologies, and assess England’s first marine plans to understand how specific governmentalities de-radicalise MSP. We find that progressive framings of MSP outcomes, such as enhanced well-being, are deployed by the government to garner early support for MSP. These elements, however, become regressively problematised in later planning phases, where they are framed by the government as being difficult to achieve and are pushed into future iterations of the process. Eviscerating progressive elements from the planning process clears the way for the government to focus on implementing a neoliberal form of MSP. Efforts to foster radical MSP must pay attention to the emergence of governmentalities, how they travel through time/space and be cognisant of where difference can be inserted into planning processes. Achieving progressive MSP will require the creation of a political frontier early in the process, which cannot be passed until pathways for progressive socio-environmental outcomes have been established; advocacy for disenfranchised groups; broadening MSP evaluations to account for unintended impacts; and the monitoring of progressive objectives.

scholarly journals The social and political realities of marine spatial planning: some land-based reflections

2014 ◽  
Vol 71 (7) ◽  
pp. 1535-1541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Kidd ◽  
Dave Shaw
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Political Process ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Systems ◽  
Plan Implementation ◽  
Social Nature ◽  
Planning Processes

Abstract This paper highlights the value for marine spatial planning (MSP) of engaging with terrestrial planning theory and practice. It argues that the traditions of reflection, critique, and debate that are a feature of land-based planning can inform the development of richer theoretical underpinnings of MSP as well as MSP practice. The case is illustrated by tempering the view that MSP can be a rational planning process that can follow universal principles and steps by presenting an alternative perspective that sees MSP as a social and political process that is highly differentiated and place-specific. This perspective is discussed with reference to four examples. First, the paper considers why history, culture, and administrative context lead to significant differences in how planning systems are organized. Second, it highlights that planning systems and processes tend to be in constant flux as they respond to changing social and political viewpoints. Third, it discusses why the integration ambitions which are central to “spatial” planning require detailed engagement with locally specific social and political circumstances. Fourth, it focuses on the political and social nature of plan implementation and how different implementation contexts need to inform the design of planning processes and the style of plans produced.

scholarly journals Collaborative approach for coastal and marine spatial planning in Bangka Belitung Island Province

2021 ◽  
Vol 926 (1) ◽  
pp. 012006
Author(s):  
B Murtasidin ◽  
S Sujadmi
Keyword(s):  
Local Governments ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Water Area ◽  
Coastal Areas ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Small Islands ◽  
Collaborative Approach ◽  
Stakeholder Collaboration ◽  
The Government

Abstract Amendments to Law no. 27 of 2007 became Law no. 1 of 2014 concerning the Management of Coastal Areas and Small Islands has an impact on the coastal and marine spatial planning process in every region, including Bangka Belitung. This planning process requires stakeholder collaboration to carry out broader cross-sectoral coordination. Apart from being composed of more than 80% of the water area, the struggle for access and conflicts over the use of marine space also take place in a vertical and horizontal level. The dilemma of authority between levels of government and law enforcement authorities, as well as between local governments, communities, and state corporations, is a form of hierarchical conflict. Conflicts between governments at the street bureaucracy (Village) level and their citizens, or friction between pro and contra groups against marine mining are examples of horizontal conflicts. The complexity of this problem has demanded the government to be presented in a more powerful and most decisive position in the management of the coastal and marine areas of Bangka Belitung so that it does not drag on. Therefore, the government needs to formulate comprehensive resource optimization options in the coastal and marine zones. This study aims to map how a collaborative approach in coastal and marine spatial planning through Regional Regulation (Perda) Number 3 of 2020 concerning the Zoning Plan for Coastal Areas and Small Islands of the Bangka Belitung Islands Province. At least 3 dominant actors are involved and collaborate, namely the government, fishermen, and investors.

scholarly journals INSTITUTIONAL MAPPING TOWARDS DEVELOPING A FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE MARINE SPATIAL PLANNING

2016 ◽  
Vol XLII-4/W1 ◽  
pp. 159-166
Author(s):  
M. H. M. Yatim ◽  
A. H. Omar ◽  
N. M. Abdullah ◽  
N. M. Hashim
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Spatial Information ◽  
Initial Step ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Implementation Phase ◽  
Government Institutions ◽  
Evaluation Phase ◽  
Institutional Sustainability ◽  
The Government

Within few years before, the urge to implement the marine spatial planning is due to increasing numbers of marine activities that will lead into uncertainties of rights, restrictions and responsibilities of the maritime nations. Marine authorities in this situation that deal with national rights and legislations are the government institutions that engage with marine spatial information. There are several elements to be considered when dealing with the marine spatial planning; which is institutional sustainability governance. Providing the importance of marine spatial planning towards sustainable marine spatial governance, the focus should highlight the role marine institutions towards sustainable marine plan. The iterative process of marine spatial planning among marine institutions is important as the spatial information governance is scattered from reflected rights, restrictions and responsibilities of marine government institutions. Malaysia is one of the maritime nations that conjures the initial step towards establishing the sustainable marine spatial planning. In order to have sustainable institutions in marine spatial planning process, it involves four main stages; planning phase, plan evaluation phase, implementation phase and post implementation phase. Current situation has witnessed the unclear direction and role of marine government institutions to manage the marine spatial information. This review paper is focusing on the institutional sustainability upon interaction of marine government institutions in the marine spatial planning process based on Institutional Analysis Framework. The outcome of the integration of institutional sustainability and marine spatial planning process will propose a framework of marine institutional sustainable plan.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Carlos Nunes Silva
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Digital Technologies ◽  
Digital Tools ◽  
Broad Perspective ◽  
Planning Processes

The chapter discusses the background and topic of the book and offers a broad perspective of trends, opportunities, and challenges associated with the widespread use of new smart digital technologies to enhance and sustain citizen e-participation in the different phases of the urban e-planning process. The chapter identifies and discusses factors responsible for the changes in the role assigned to citizens in spatial planning processes, and explores new trends and opportunities for the development of a more citizen-responsive urban e-planning as a result of the use of these smart digital tools.

The Patronymic of Her Choice

2021 ◽  
pp. 21-55
Author(s):  
Mie Nakachi
Keyword(s):  
Population Growth ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Family Law ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Fundamental Change ◽  
Soviet Leadership ◽  
The Creation ◽  
New Vision ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Masses

As the victory over the Nazis came into sight and the demographic disaster became apparent, the Soviet leadership keenly felt the need to strengthen pronatalist policy. Several proposals submitted in 1943–1944 expanded existing pronatalist measures without a fundamental change in the vision of population growth. However, Khrushchev, proconsul of devastated Ukraine, submitted the most comprehensive overhaul based on a new vision for population and pronatalism. The government policy reveals a two-faced practice of Bolshevik language, claiming to “protect motherhood” when addressing the masses, and non-Bolshevik discourse, population engineering language, among the top leadership. In the final law, policymakers prioritized giving men the incentive to father extramarital children over assuring the overall well-being of unmarried mothers and their children. This chapter traces the creation of the 1944 Family Law, legislation that definitively shaped the postwar generation in a deeply gendered manner.

scholarly journals Bringing ‘Deep Knowledge’ of Fisheries into Marine Spatial Planning

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia Said ◽  
Brice Trouillet
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Knowledge Model ◽  
Deep Knowledge ◽  
Types Of Knowledge ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Planning Processes ◽  
Policy And Planning

Abstract In marine spatial planning (MSP), the production of knowledge about marine-based activities is fundamental because it informs the process through which policies delineating the use of space are created and maintained. This paper revises our view of knowledge—developed during the mapping and planning processes—as the undisputed factual basis on which policy is developed. Rather, it argues that the construction, management, validation, and marginalisation of different types of knowledge stemming from different stakeholders or disciplinary approaches is at the heart of policy and planning processes. Using the case of fisheries-generated knowledge in the implementation of MSP, we contend that the fisheries data informing the MSP process are still very much streamlined to classical bio-economic metrics. Such metrics fall short of describing the plural and complex knowledges that comprise fisheries, such as localised social and cultural typologies, as well as the scale and dynamics, hence, providing incomplete information for the decision-making process of MSP. In this paper, we provide a way to move towards what we conceptualize as ‘Deep Knowledge’ and propose a model that brings together of the existing datasets and integrates socio-cultural data as well as complex spatiotemporal elements, to create dynamic rather than static datasets for MSP. We furthermore argue that the process of knowledge production and the building of the parameters of such datasets, should be based on effective stakeholder participation, whose futures depend on the plans that eventually result from MSP. Finally, we recommend that the ‘Deep Knowledge’ model is adopted to inform the process of knowledge production currently being undertaken in the diverse countries engaging in the MSP process. This will result in policies that truly reflect and address the complexities that characterise fisheries, and which are legitimized through a process of knowledge co-production.

scholarly journals Integrating scientific guidance into marine spatial planning

2014 ◽  
Vol 281 (1781) ◽  
pp. 20132252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Rassweiler ◽  
Christopher Costello ◽  
Ray Hilborn ◽  
David A. Siegel
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Dynamic Models ◽  
Recent Literature ◽  
Spatially Explicit ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Rules Of Thumb ◽  
Planning Processes ◽  
Explicit Dynamic

Marine spatial planning (MSP), whereby areas of the ocean are zoned for different uses, has great potential to reduce or eliminate conflicts between competing management goals, but only if strategically applied. The recent literature overwhelmingly agrees that including stakeholders in these planning processes is critical to success; but, given the countless alternative ways even simple spatial regulations can be configured, how likely is it that a stakeholder-driven process will generate plans that deliver on the promise of MSP? Here, we use a spatially explicit, dynamic bioeconomic model to show that stakeholder-generated plans are doomed to fail in the absence of strong scientific guidance. While strategically placed spatial regulations can improve outcomes remarkably, the vast majority of possible plans fail to achieve this potential. Surprisingly, existing scientific rules of thumb do little to improve outcomes. Here, we develop an alternative approach in which models are used to identify efficient plans, which are then modified by stakeholders. Even if stakeholders alter these initial proposals considerably, results hugely outperform plans guided by scientific rules of thumb. Our results underscore the importance of spatially explicit dynamic models for the management of marine resources and illustrate how such models can be harmoniously integrated into a stakeholder-driven MSP process.

scholarly journals If you start it, they may not come: Why some stakeholders did not participate in a marine spatial planning process

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
OCTO
Keyword(s):  
Focus Group ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Process ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Massachusetts Bay ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Northeast

Using the recent ocean planning process in the US Northeast, this paper assesses the perspectives of stakeholders who did not participate in a marine spatial planning (MSP) process. Since it is more challenging to find and survey stakeholders who did not participate in a process than ones who did, the authors chose a smaller study area – Massachusetts Bay – to examine. They conducted a scoping survey (235 respondents) to understand respondents’ relationships with the marine environment, their understanding of MSP, and why they did or did not participate in the Northeast regional ocean planning process. In addition, the authors held three focus groups (21 participants total) to further explore participants’ understanding of the planning process and their perceptions of the process. The scoping survey was “not intended to be representative”, and focus group participants were chosen from scoping survey respondents.

Remaking Oceans Governance

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Fairbanks ◽  
Noëlle Boucquey ◽  
Lisa M. Campbell ◽  
Sarah Wise
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Relational Theory ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Governance System ◽  
Critical Social Science ◽  
Critical Literature

Marine spatial planning (MSP) seeks to integrate traditionally disconnected oceans activities, management arrangements, and practices through a rational and comprehensive governance system. This article explores the emerging critical literature on MSP, focusing on key elements of MSP engaged by scholars: (1) planning discourse and narrative; (2) ocean economies and equity; (3) online ocean data and new digital ontologies; and (4) new and broad networks of ocean actors. The implications of these elements are then illustrated through a discussion of MSP in the United States. Critical scholars are beginning to go beyond applied or operational critiques of MSP projects to engage the underlying assumptions, practices, and relationships involved in planning. Interrogating MSP with interdisciplinary ideas drawn from critical social science disciplines, such as emerging applications of relational theory at sea, can provide insights into how MSP and other megaprojects both close and open new opportunities for social and environmental well-being.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document