Built at sea: Marine management and the construction of marine spatial planning

2010 ◽  
Vol 81 (2) ◽  
pp. 173-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Jay
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Management

scholarly journals ‘Hooks’ and ‘Anchors’ for relational ecosystem-based marine management

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Jane Macpherson ◽  
Stephen C. Urlich ◽  
Hamish G. Rennie ◽  
Adrienne Paul ◽  
Karen Fisher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Marine Management ◽  
Laws And Policies ◽  
High Level ◽  
Interdisciplinary Study ◽  
The Impact

There remains uncertainty about the legal and policy tools, processes and institutions needed to support ecosystem-based marine management (EBM). This article relies on an interdisciplinary study of ecosystem-based language and approaches in the laws and policies of New Zealand, Australia and Chile, which uncovered important lessons for implementing EBM around the need to accept regulatory fragmentation, provide effective resourcing, respect and give effect to Indigenous rights, and avoid conflating EBM with conventional approaches to marine spatial planning. We suggest a new way of thinking about EBM as a ‘relational’ process; requiring laws, policies and institutions to support its dynamic process of dialogue, negotiation and adjustment. We argue that relational EBM can be best supported by a combination of detailed rule and institution-making (hooks) and high- level norm-setting (anchors). With its focus on relationships within and between humans and nature, relational EBM may enable new ways to secure cross-government collaboration and community buy-in, as well as having inbuilt adaptability to the dynamics of the marine environment and the impact of climate change at different scales.

scholarly journals Iberoamerican Contribution for the Achievement of the Objectives of the Roadmap to Accelerate Marine Spatial Planning Processes Worldwide

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (Vol Esp. 2) ◽  
pp. 9-32
Author(s):  
Alejandro Iglesias-Campos ◽  
Michele Quesada-Silva
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Western Mediterranean ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Joint Work ◽  
Member States ◽  
Agenda 2030 ◽  
Marine Management ◽  
National Planning ◽  
Institutional Strategy ◽  
Planning Processes

Since 1997, IOC-UNESCO has been developing and applying the concepts of coastal and marine management and planning, as part of its institutional strategy. The conclusions of the first international conference on marine spatial planning (MSP) in 2006 led to the publication of the first step-by-step guide to support IOC-UNESCO’s Member States in the development of marine spatial plans. IOC-UNESCO and the European Commission committed themselves in 2017 to promote the development of MSP at global level through a roadmap (MSProadmap) open to all countries of the world. Ibero-American countries are active beneficiaries of this roadmap and the MSPglobal Initiative, in its pilot cases in the Western Mediterranean and the Southeast Pacific. The objective is to support the implementation of actions to advance national planning processes considering transboundary aspects in favor of institutional exchange and cooperation at regional level. This article puts into context the present and future joint work of the IOC-UNESCO and its Ibero-American Member States, in line with the commitments and objectives of the Agenda 2030 and the Ocean Decade (2021-2030).

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.

scholarly journals Marine Spatial Planning, Coastal Management, Sustainability and Participation

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (Vol Esp. 2) ◽  
pp. 473-496
Author(s):  
Raquel Dezidério Souto
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Coastal Management ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Theoretical Frameworks ◽  
Marine Management ◽  
Management Processes ◽  
Over Time

This article reviews some of the relevant international and national marks to coastal management and marine spatial planning (MSP), observing the aspect of participation. The (re)reading of these documents showed that: i) the search for the sustainability of the ocean and coasts, initially with a focus on the longevity of stocks of living and non-living resources, is an ideal since the formulation of the first chartes of principles and laws; ii) the participation gained more space in the theoretical frameworks of coastal management and MSP over time; iii) in general, there are still few studies and researches regarding the applicability and limits involved in participation in coastal and marine management processes. Case studies are presented to highlight aspects of participation in the PEM process, pointing out its advantages and limitations. With the publication of the article, it is expected to contribute to the development of a conceptual framework on participation in the management processes of coastal and marine zones. The information presented provides an initial theoretical basis, which can be adopted in the development of new studies, researches; and management, monitoring or evaluation actions.

scholarly journals Ocean data portals: Performing a new infrastructure for ocean governance

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 484-503 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noëlle Boucquey ◽  
Kevin St. Martin ◽  
Luke Fairbanks ◽  
Lisa M Campbell ◽  
Sarah Wise
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
East Coast ◽  
The United States ◽  
Marine Spatial Planning ◽  
Critical Cartography ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
Ocean Governance ◽  
The World ◽  
New Infrastructure

We are currently in what might be termed a “third phase” of ocean enclosures around the world. This phase has involved an unprecedented intensity of map-making that supports an emerging regime of ocean governance where resources are geocoded, multiple and disparate marine uses are weighed against each other, spatial tradeoffs are made, and exclusive rights to spaces and resources are established. The discourse and practice of marine spatial planning inform the contours of this emerging regime. This paper examines the infrastructure of marine spatial planning via two ocean data portals recently created to support marine spatial planning on the East Coast of the United States. Applying theories of ontological politics, critical cartography, and a critical conceptualization of “care,” we examine portal performances in order to link their organization and imaging practices with the ideological and ontological work these infrastructures do, particularly in relation to environmental and human community actors. We further examine how ocean ontologies may be made durable through portal use and repetition, but also how such performances can “slip,” thereby creating openings for enacting marine spatial planning differently. Our analysis reveals how portal infrastructures assemble, edit, and visualize data, and how it matters to the success of particular performances of marine spatial planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document