scholarly journals Exclusion and non-participation in Marine Spatial Planning

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wesley Flannery ◽  
Noel Healy ◽  
Marcos Luna
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Stakeholder Engagement ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Management ◽  
The Us ◽  
Spatial Decision Making

Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) offers the possibility of democratising management of the seas. MSP is, however, increasingly implemented as a form of post-political planning, dominated by the logic of neoliberalism, and a belief in the capacity of managerial-technological apparatuses to address complex socio-political problems, with little attention paid to issues of power and inequality. There is growing concern that MSP is not facilitating a paradigm shift towards publicly engaged marine management, and that it may simply repackage power dynamics in the rhetoric of participation to legitimise the agendas of dominant actors. This raises questions about the legitimacy and inclusivity of participatory MSP. Research on stakeholder engagement within MSP has predominately focused on assessing experiences of active MSP participants and has not evaluated the democratic or inclusive nature of these processes. Adopting the Northeast Ocean Planning initiative in the US as a case study, this paper provides the first study of exclusion and non-participation of stakeholders in an MSP process. Three major issues are found to have had an impact on exclusion and non-participation: poor communication and a perception that the process was deliberately exclusionary; issues arising from fragmented governance, territorialisation and scale; and lack of specificity regarding benefits or losses that might accrue from the process. To be effective, participatory MSP practice must: develop mechanisms that recognise the complexity of socio-spatial relationships in the marine environment; facilitate participation in meaningful spatial decision-making, rather than in post-ideological, objective-setting processes; and create space for debate about the very purpose of MSP processes.

Did Groupthink or Polythink Derail the 2016 Raqqa Offensive?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kasey Barr ◽  
Alex Mintz
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Group Dynamics ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Islamic State ◽  
Study Analysis ◽  
Strategic Decisions ◽  
Case Study Analysis ◽  
The Us ◽  
Tactical Decisions

This chapter examines the effect of group dynamics on the 2016 decision within the administration of President Barack Obama to lead the international coalition in a mission to liberate Raqqa, Syria, from the Islamic State. The authors show that whereas the groupthink syndrome characterized the decision-making process of the US-led coalition’s decision to attack Raqqa, it was polythink that characterized the decision-making dynamics both in the US-led coalition and within the inner circle of Obama’s own foreign policy advisors. Through case-study analysis, the authors illustrate that groupthink is more likely in strategic decisions, whereas polythink is more likely in tactical decisions.

scholarly journals Coupling Fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making and Clustering Algorithm for MSW Landfill Site Selection (Case Study: Lanzhou, China)

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 403
Author(s):  
Jiamin Liu ◽  
Yueshi Li ◽  
Bin Xiao ◽  
Jizong Jiao
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clustering Algorithm ◽  
Fuzzy Membership Function ◽  
Multi Criteria Decision Making ◽  
Landfill Site Selection ◽  
Spatial Distribution Characteristics ◽  
Criteria Weights ◽  
Spatial Decision Making ◽  
Complex Decision

The siting of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) landfills is a complex decision process. Existing siting methods utilize expert scores to determine criteria weights, however, they ignore the uncertainty of data and criterion weights and the efficacy of results. In this study, a coupled fuzzy Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach was employed to site landfills in Lanzhou, a semi-arid valley basin city in China, to enhance the spatial decision-making process. Primarily, 21 criteria were identified in five groups through the Delphi method at 30 m resolution, then criteria weights were obtained by DEMATEL and ANP, and the optimal fuzzy membership function was determined for each evaluation criterion. Combined with GIS spatial analysis and the clustering algorithm, candidate sites that satisfied the landfill conditions were identified, and the spatial distribution characteristics were analyzed. These sites were subsequently ranked utilizing the MOORA, WASPAS, COPRAS, and TOPSIS methods to verify the reliability of the results by conducting sensitivity analysis. This study is different from the previous research that applied the MCDM approach in that fuzzy MCDM for weighting criteria is more reliable compared to the other common methods.

Understanding stakeholder positionalities and relationships to reimagine asylum at the US–Mexico border: Observations from McAllen, TX

2020 ◽  
pp. 194277862097931
Author(s):  
Halley L. Glier ◽  
Temperance Staples ◽  
Megan Martínez ◽  
Anita Fábos ◽  
S.E.D. Mitchell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Community Action ◽  
Observational Research ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Federal Authority ◽  
Major Stakeholder ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Status ◽  
Mexico Border ◽  
The Government

This paper draws on observational research conducted in McAllen, Texas, during the summer of 2019, of three major stakeholder groups involved in asylum management: Catholic Charities Humanitarian Respite Center (HRC); federal government agencies; and the McAllen community. Each group holds a unique, pluralistic perspective on migration, informing intra-group relations and exposing uneven power dynamics between them. Our analysis is contextualized by a local voice, a former long-term volunteer at the HRC, who speaks of the evolution of the McAllen border in her lifetime, as well as federal authority over McAllen and the HRC to process asylees. We dissect how this power dynamic produces a highly violent, detention-dominant immigration landscape in the Rio Grande Valley (RGV), antithetical to the practiced intersectional culture of voces locales. We reimagine how the US responds to asylum seekers by offering a community action-based framework, where these pluralistic perspectives are equitably valued. Based on interactions and conversations had with each group, we advocate a paradigm shift reflective of La Frontera’s (The Border’s) intersectional identity. This can be achieved by prioritizing voces locales and building capacity for the humanitarian sector, which is already doing critical work at the southern border. We look to contemporary movements like “Defund the Police” as examples, where divesting from the status-quo system of oppression can nurture reparative justice and empowerment to the RGV. In reimagining a more adaptive, asylum justice-oriented paradigm shift, we also recognize the need to abandon the government-controlled deterrence paradigm, which repeatedly causes tremendous harm.

Governance Practices and CEO Hubris

2021 ◽  
pp. 161-182
Author(s):  
Paola Ferretti ◽  
Cristina Gonnella
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Internal Control ◽  
Financial Distress ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Power Dynamics ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Managerial Entrenchment ◽  
Governance Practices

This chapter analyzes the connection between CEO hubris and corporate governance contingencies, including a case study of an Italian bank for which the state of financial distress shall be linkable also to bad governance. The main objective is to verify whether, in presence of hubristic CEO, the internal control mechanisms, set to ensure the board vigilance and limit the overconfidence of the leader, are implemented, and if so, whether such mechanisms, even when formally respected, may be not so appropriate to guarantee a good governance. Particularly, the existence of a CEO hubris could neutralize their positive expected balancing effects on the power dynamics between CEO and board, such as to give prevalence to substance over form. Therefore, it may occur that some governance mechanisms (e.g., independence, non-duality), even if formally implemented, are unable to stem the managerial entrenchment of the CEO, who succeeds in enhancing immoderately his substantial power in the decision-making process.

scholarly journals Marine spatial planning in Barbuda: A social, ecological, geographic, and legal case study

Marine Policy ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 103793 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayana Elizabeth Johnson ◽  
William James McClintock ◽  
Ogden Burton ◽  
Wayde Burton ◽  
Andrew Estep ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Social Ecological ◽  
Legal Case

scholarly journals Navigating a just and inclusive path towards sustainable oceans

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Justice ◽  
Fisheries Management ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Conservation ◽  
Global Ocean ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Ocean Science ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
Blue Economy

The ocean is the next frontier for many conservation and development activities. Growth in marine protected areas, fisheries management, the blue economy, and marine spatial planning initiatives are occurring both within and beyond national jurisdictions. This mounting activity has coincided with increasing concerns about sustainability and international attention to ocean governance. Yet, despite growing concerns about exclusionary decision-making processes and social injustices, there remains inadequate attention to issues of social justice and inclusion in ocean science, management, governance and funding. In a rapidly changing and progressively busier ocean, we need to learn from past mistakes and identify ways to navigate a just and inclusive path towards sustainability. Proactive attention to inclusive decision-making and social justice is needed across key ocean policy realms including marine conservation, fisheries management, marine spatial planning, the blue economy, climate adaptation and global ocean governance for both ethical and instrumental reasons. This discussion paper aims to stimulate greater engagement with these critical topics. It is a call to action for ocean-focused researchers, policy-makers, managers, practitioners, and funders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document