Coastal borderlands are subjected to particular socioeconomic, political and environmental dynamics in Europe and worldwide. The presence of the international boundary in these areas poses challenges in the process of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM). The aim of this paper is to explore the existence, characteristics and the role that local cross-border cooperation plays in transboundary coastal zone management as well as the resulting potentialities of local endogenous development for improving the management and governance of the tourism sector, coastal development, fisheries and marine protected areas in the Albera Marítima (Northwestern Mediterranean). The applied methods included document review, statistical information and semi-structured interviews. The research shows that local agents are not capable of developing a stable cross-border network due to persisting lack of trust, weak joint strategic vision and high competitiveness in sectors like fishery and tourism. Based on particularly interesting initiatives occurred in Albera Marítima and other successful experiences in Mediterranean coastal borderlands, a proposal has been made to implement several measures, including a transboundary integrated coastal plan, the joint observatory of fishery resources and a scientific network platform. For the aforementioned issues, the study contributes to the ICZM literature by providing a new perspective on local transboundary cooperation.
Governance and Legal Frameworks
Reflecting on two decades of the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is particularly timely during the OceanObs'19 meeting. Over the past twenty years since the first OceanObs meeting was convened, U.S. IOOS has advanced from regional proofs of concept to a national, sustained enterprise. U.S. IOOS has grown to include 17 Federal partners and 11 Regional Associations (RAs) that implement regional observing systems covering all U.S. coasts and Great Lakes with activities spanning from head of tide to the U.S. exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), as lead agency, provides guidance and national-level coordination. An interagency body, the Integrated Ocean Observation Committee (IOOC), communicates across federal agencies and ensures IOOS maintains strong connections to the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS). Additionally, a federal advisory committee, non-federal association, and various informal partnerships further inform and advance the IOOS enterprise. This governance structure fosters both national consistency, regional flexibility, and global contributions addressing the diverse needs of U.S. coastal and Great Lakes stakeholders.
What is known today as the Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI) was first proposed in fall 2013 by China’s President Xi Jinping in a keynote speech to the Indonesian parliament in Jakarta and has since drawn immense geopolitical and economic attention. The stated goal of the large-scale initiative is to strengthen maritime connectivity between China, Asia, Africa and Europe by infrastructural development, particularly of ports, oil transshipment terminals and Special Economic Zones. Based on the initial review of policy documents and widely published strategic visions of the Maritime Silk Road, the paper aims to explore, on the one hand, the conceptual foundations and policy mechanisms behind China’s large-scale development projects in coastal areas along the Indian Ocean. On the other, the paper by drawing on an empirical example from Sri Lanka seeks to take an evolutionary governance theory (EGT) perspective towards on-the-ground implementation of these policies. By doing so, the study highlights the impact of interconnected formal and informal institutions and discourses, in transforming Chinese engagement. The contribution therefore seeks to reflect upon particular Chinese patterns of high-modernist developmental governance in coastal places and their local social and political negotiation and materialisation.
Marine social-ecological systems are influenced by the way humans interact with their environment, and external forces, which change and re-shape the environment. In many regions, exploitation of marine resources and climate change are two of the primary drivers shifting the abundance and distribution of marine living resources, with negative effects on marine-dependent communities. Governance systems determine ‘who’ makes decisions, ‘what’ are their powers and responsibilities, and ‘how’ they are exercised. Understanding the connections between the actors comprising governance systems and influences between governance and the environment is therefore critical to support successful transitions to novel forms of governance required to deal with environmental changes. The paper provides an analytical framework with a practical example from Vanuatu, for mapping and assessment of the governance system providing for management of coral reef fish resources. The framework enables a rapid analysis of governance systems to identify factors that can encourage, or hinder, the adaptation of communities to changes in abundance or availability of marine resources.
As the configuration of global environmental governance has become more complex over the past fifty years, numerous scholars have underscored the importance of understanding the transnational networks of public, private and nonprofit organizations that comprise it. Most methodologies for studying governance emphasize social structural elements or institutional design principles and focus less attention on the social interactions that generate diffuse, hybrid regimes. Yet capturing the dynamics of these networks requires a relational methodology that can account for a range of elements that constantly shift and change relative to overlapping institutional boundaries. Collaborative Event Ethnography draws on insights from multi-sited, team, and institutional ethnography to assemble teams of researchers to study major international conferences, which offer important political spaces where public, private, and nonprofit actors align around sanctioned logics and techniques of governance. Drawing on insights generated from these conferences and field sites across the globe, we trace the constitutive forces behind paradigm shifts in biodiversity conservation, specifically the interconnected rise of market-based approaches, global targets, and new conservation enclosures. We show how the iterative refining of the methodology over five events generated an increasingly robust understanding of global conservation governance as processual, dynamic, and contingent, constituted through constantly shifting assemblages of state and nonstate actors, devices and narratives that collectively configure fields of governance. Finally, we reflect on how our team, as an evolving combination of researchers, research interests, and data collection tools—itself an assemblage, —has informed the continual refinement of the methodology and generated novel understandings of global conservation governance.
This guide provides evidence-based advice on how to use the governance of marine protected areas to promote conservation and share sustainable marine resources. It has been developed using marine protected area (MPA) case studies from around the world. People who can benefit from this guide include planners, decision makers and practitioners engaged in marine protected area development and implementation, or those who have a general interest in protected area governance. It provides a governance framework and highlights key issues to address specific governance situations. It can be used as part of an adaptive management cycle. The case studies (page 12-13) highlight different governance approaches, challenges faced, and solutions implemented to achieve conservation objectives. Some marine protected areas are more effective than others, but they all highlight areas for improvement and indications of what could be implemented to enhance their effectiveness. All MPAs display unique characteristics and face their own complex combination of challenges. There is no "one size fits all" solution. This guidance recognizes this and provides a flexible approach to governance that can be relevant to any MPA and used on an ongoing basis. The case studies cover a variety of MPA types, including notake, multiple-use, small, large, remote, private, governmentled, decentralized and community-led MPAs. The global and varied examples used to support this guidance have demonstrated and highlighted the differences in the various roles that are taken within the governance and management of MPAs, between men and women as well as between different classes and ethnicities. These differences are identified across a variety of regions and cultural contexts, where there is not always equal opportunity to voice concerns and influence decisions and the benefits from protected areas are not equally distributed, frequently resulting in marginalization (Box 1). Global in scope, it recognizes the essential aspects of gender, class and ethnicity-related equality, as fundamental factors to achieving sustainable development goals and delivering effective and equitable governance of MPAs. This should be taken into account for all MPA governance projects to provide equality across all gender class and ethnicityrelated characteristics.
The Indo-Pacific small island states characteristically have relatively small land areas but large maritime zones that include biodiversity hotspots, fragile ecosystems and unique habitats affected by anthropogenic impacts and natural pressures. Whilst there are differences between these nations in terms of geography, history, and politico-legal systems, the majority are developing countries with limited technical and financial resources to implement laws for marine conservation and management. Despite these limitations all the small island states have laws for marine protected areas (MPAs) in one form or another. Because these countries also rely heavily on the coastal zone and marine resources in terms of subsistence and livelihoods for local communities, the extent to which the law accommodates civil society interests, and involvement in decision-making and management, is critical. Although some studies have explored law and policy relevant to MPAs in individual countries, rarely have countries across the Indo-Pacific region been compared. By doing so, different approaches and success stories can be shared, as well as legislative gaps and challenges addressed. This paper outlines the legal frameworks that provide for the establishment and management of MPAs in a selection of small island states across the Indo Pacific. The laws have been comparatively analysed to demonstrate the extent to which they provide for public participation and community-based management. The results are presented together with lessons learnt and recommendations made for future legal developments. The article, therefore, contributes to the growing body of literature on MPA governance, marine management in island States, and how to advance social sustainability.
Coasts are dynamic socio-ecological systems, subject to increasing anthropogenic pressures that present complex challenges for the design of effective coastal and marine governance systems. There are many contributing factors to the unsustainability of the marine environment, including weak governance arrangements. Typically, the management of coastal and marine ecosystems is undertaken in a fragmented way, with responsibilities dispersed across a number of bodies. ‘Integrated management’ is often proposed in normative approaches to marine management as a mechanism for securing more sustainable outcomes. The implementation of integrated management, however, tends to occur within existing governance structures and fails to address deep-rooted issues such as path dependency, institutional inertia, and policy layering. These barriers to transformative marine governance are re-framed in this paper as ‘persistent problems’ which inhibit more holistic approaches to achieve effective integrated management. Using insights from two Irish case studies to show how the implementation of innovative local initiatives for sustainable coastal and marine management are constrained by persistent institutional problems, it is concluded that an alternative management paradigm is required to understand and address the complexities involved in the design and delivery of an integrated management regime.
This article analyses the legal adaptive capacity for increasing sustainable fish aquaculture production in EU-Finland. Currently, fish aquaculture is driven by increasing global demand of fish, declining natural fisheries, food security and blue growth policies. At the same time, environmental policies such as the EU Water Framework Directive and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive set tightening legal-ecological requirements for the industry's nutrient emissions. Against this background, the success of blue growth policies related to aquaculture – and the hope of reconciling competing interests at sea – boil down to measures available for dealing with excess nutrients. In line with the mitigation hierarchy, the article establishes four alternative pathways for the fish aquaculture industry to grow without increasing its environmental nutrient footprint significantly, and evaluates the legal adaptive capacity and the legal risks attached to these pathways.
As 2020 approaches, countries are accelerating their commitments to protect 10% of the ocean by establishing and expanding marine protected areas (MPAs) and other area-based protections. Since it began in 2014, the Our Ocean Conference (OOC) has become a high-profile platform to announce ocean commitments. To evaluate the impact of these promises, this analysis asked: (1) What are the MPA commitments? (2) Who is making them? (3) Have these announcements been followed by action? and (4) Have they contributed significantly to ocean protection? A systematic review of the 143 MPA announcements made at the four OOCs between 2014 and 2017 (and the 202 individual actions they encompassed) concluded that the numbers and sectors of announcers, as well as the types of actions, increased over time. Fifty-two countries and 52 other organizations made OOC commitments, 46% of which have been completed and 56% of which are still incomplete. Thirteen countries and 17 organizations have completed all of their actions. All organizations and 48 out of 52 countries have made some progress on their actions, but no evidence of progress could be found for actions from four countries. OOC announcements have promised to protect 3.4% of the ocean (12,279,931 km2). To date, 43% of that promised area has been implemented, with another 57% yet to be implemented. Based on these findings, a number of actions are recommended to improve the clarity and traceability of OOC announcements, facilitate the monitoring of outcomes, and deliver on the promise of accountability emphasized at the OOCs.