The Effect of a Gratitude Intervention on Subjective Well-Being in a UK Sample: The Role of Self-Esteem.

In the last decade, the discipline of positive psychology has developed a substantial number of interventions that are focused on increasing people’s happiness. There is evidence that interventions based on practising gratitude may enhance subjective well-being. To date, however, there are mixed findings regarding the efficacy of gratitude interventions. This Internet study investigated the effectiveness of a 3-day gratitude intervention programme based on the count-your-blessings approach on a sample of UK adults (N = 60). The outcome measure of the tested intervention was subjective well-being (SWB). Participants were measured at six points in time: before the intervention (Day 1), immediately after the intervention on each day (Day 2, Day 3, Day 4), one day after the 3-day gratitude intervention (Day 5), and at 1-week follow-up (Day 12). The results revealed that the gratitude intervention enhanced satisfaction with life and decreased negative affect in participants, and this positive effect of practising gratitude on SWB persisted over 1-week. In addition, the given intervention also momentarily increased individuals’ positive affect on Day 2. Interestingly, further analyses showed that the participants with low and average levels of self-esteem benefited the most from the gratitude intervention, regarding their satisfaction with life on Day 12 and negative affect on Day 5. Therefore, psychologists should stay sensitive to self-esteem as a moderator in future research. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed

Examining the role of integration in marine spatial planning: towards an analytical framework to understand challenges in diverse settings

Marine spatial planning (MSP) as a means of marine governance has been given more prominence recently in response to the problems of fragmentation of marine regulation, environmental protection from increasing pressures upon the seas and the emergence of new maritime industries (Douvere and Ehler, 2009). Therefore enhancing multiple aspects of the way that marine authorities, sectors and stakeholders interact and engage with each other is integral to MSP's role and function and seen as a key means to address fragmented and isolated decision-making in marine space (Portman, 2016). While the function and processes of enhancing integration should not be seen as ends in themselves, they aim to create institutionalised platforms that support multi-level and multi-sectoral governance interaction to achieve 'sustainable use' of marine space (Gilek et al., 2016; Ritchie and Ellis, 2010; Varjopuro et al., 2015). Here, integration mostly plays an instrumental role in realising multiple and divergent political ends (e.g. blue growth, sustainable use, legitimate decision-making) related to ‘integrated spatialized outcomes' that seek to reflect a balance of competing goals (Flannery et al., 2016; Flannery et al., 2018; Jones et al., 2016; Olsen et al., 2014a). Integration is also seen to be important to foster greater connectivity over borders, beneficial for conservation, shipping and fishing (Jay et al., 2016). While claims of the benefits of more integration are intuitively appealing, whether and how these are actually delivered through integration practices remains under-examined in MSP practice; as are empirical insights on the multiplicity of roles that integration plays in MSP. So, while integration has been universally adopted as a policy principle where it is believed that more integration is seen to be closely related to successful planning in numerous ways, there is confusion about what it means, how to do it and what it implies in different MSP contexts. In response, the key aim of this article is to develop an analytical framework useful for examining integration in MSP across a diversity of contexts and processes. Given the central role of integration in MSP, it is vitally important to better understand the linkages between ideas of integration and their practical application in MSP. To examine the role of integration across multiple MSP contexts, we first describe the approach taken in this study. This is followed by a review of relevant MSP and integration related literature to develop an analytical framework. We draw on this framework to illustrate important expressions of integration challenges and responses in our cases. The experiences from the multiple cases are then discussed to generate insights into the various roles that integration plays in MSP and how problems arise and have been addressed. In closing, we underline key findings and reflect on the usefulness and adaptability of the integration approach developed in this article

Mainstreaming coastally just and equitable marine spatial planning:Planner and stakeholder experiences and perspectives on participation in Latvia

Community participation and influence are vitally important for meeting the multidimensional sustainability aims of marine spatial planning (MSP) and more specifically for procedural and distributive justice. While participation has received substantial research interest, we identify a need to: 1) develop equity-based principles for coastal community participation that can be used to assess and reform MSP practices; 2) generate rich empirical accounts of coastal community participation and representation linked to real-world MSP practices. Here we present the results of a study that synthesizes critical MSP and blue justice scholarship to develop principles and indicators of coastally equitable and just planning. Drawing on interviews with planners and stakeholders and analysis of planning and legal documents, these principles are used to assess participatory processes linked to Latvian MSP practices in the period 2015 to 2019. Our analysis shows that equitable and just MSP needs to be based on participation that is timely, inclusive, supportive & localized, collaborative, methodical and impactful. When applied to the Latvian case these six principles provide a comprehensive and versatile heuristic approach to assess participation in MSP. In the context of Latvian MSP practices, we revealed a fundamental challenge of maintaining inclusive and localized participation throughout the full planning cycle. To counteract the successive narrowing/hardening of participatory space our results indicate a need for continuously promoting diversity of voices and perspectives, opportunities for collaborative sense making, visioning and critique. This will help to bridge diverse MSP divides (e.g., between land and sea, between local, national, and global values and priorities, between science and local knowledge, and between blue growth, conservation, and justice goals). If applied more generally in research and as part of MSP evaluation an equity-based approach can promote the mainstreaming of coastally just and equitable MSP practices. Finally, considering contextual factors (e.g., history, culture, power, legislation) that shape participation and representation is crucial when applying the equity principles to a particular MSP setting to acknowledge and accommodate its particular characteristics and challenges

Environmental Risk Governance of the Baltic Sea : RISKGOV Final report : Deliverable 12

Environmental risk governance in the Baltic Sea area is still unable to fully support implementation of the ecosystem approach to management. Hence, the aims of the international RISKGOV project were: 1) to improve our understanding of environmental risk governance and its challenges in the Baltic Sea; 2) to suggest possible avenues for improvement. These aims were addressed by integrating social and natural science approaches on five strategically selected environmental risks (eutrophication, overfishing, invasive species, chemical pollution and oil discharges). The findings, recommendations and dissemination products of RISKGOV are described in detail in the Final report (http://www.sh.se/riskgov). Researchers from Södertörn University were involved in all case studies and cross-case comparisons. In summary, RISKGOV concludes that it is necessary to improve the robustness and responsiveness of governance practices to achieve sustainable ecosystem management. Specifically, RISKGOV recommends that: (i) Governance structures need to move towards more reflexive governance by improving regulatory coordination, cross sector collaboration, and interaction space for reflexivity. This is, for example, exemplified by increased interactions between HELCOM and the EU aiming at the combination of mandatory regulation and voluntary agreements; (ii) Assessment-management interactions require improvements e.g. relating to the regional and interdisciplinary knowledge-base, stakeholder participation and coping with scientific uncertainty and disagreement; (iii) Stakeholder participation and communication require improvements in terms of a more integrated system of stakeholder input possibly via an expansion of HELCOM’s stakeholder involvement policy and enhanced efforts to communicate environmental issues to the general public. Implications of these general recommendations for specific actors and stakeholders were analysed and developed through thematic roundtable discussions