22 research outputs found

    The role of boundary organizations in co-management: examining the politics of knowledge integration in a marine protected area in Belize

    No full text
    Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an increasingly popular tool for management of the marine commons. Effective governance is essential if MPAs are to achieve their objectives, yet many MPAs face conflicts and governance challenges, including lack of trust and knowledge integration between fishers, scientists, and policy makers. This paper considers the role of a boundary organization in facilitating knowledge integration in a co-managed MPA, the Gladden Spit and Silk Cayes Marine Reserve in Belize. Boundary organizations can play an important role in resource management, by bridging the science-policy divide, facilitating knowledge integration, and enabling communication in conditions of uncertainty. Drawing on ethnographic research conducted in Belize, the paper identifies four challenges for knowledge integration. First, actors have divergent perspectives on whether and how knowledge is being integrated. Second, actors disagree on resource conditions within the MPA and how these should be understood. Third, in order to maintain accountability with multiple actors, including fishers, government, and funders, the boundary organization has promoted the importance of different types of knowledge for different purposes (science and fishers’ knowledge), rather than the integration of these. Finally, a lack of trust and uneven power relations make it difficult to separate knowledge claims from political claims. However, even if knowledge integration proves difficult, boundary organizations may still play an important role by maintaining accountability, providing space for conflicting understandings to co-exist, and ultimately for governance institutions to evolve

    Beyond Baselines: Rethinking Priorities for Ocean Conservation

    No full text
    In 1995, Daniel Pauly identified a "shifting baselines syndrome" (SBS). Pauly was concerned that scientists measure ecosystem change against their personal recollections of the past and, based on this decidedly short-term view, mismanage fish stocks because they tolerate gradual and incremental elimination of species and set inappropriate recovery goals. As a concept, SBS is simple to grasp and its logic is compelling. Much current work in marine historical ecology is rationalized in part as a means of combating SBS, and the term has also resonated outside of the academy with environmental advocacy groups. Although we recognize both conceptual and operational merit in SBS, we believe that the ultimate impact of SBS on ocean management will be limited by some underlying and interrelated problematic assumptions about ecology and human-environment relations, and the prescriptions that these assumptions support. In this paper, we trace both assumptions and prescriptions through key works in the SBS literature and interrogate them via ecological and social science theory and research. We argue that an expanded discussion of SBS is needed, one that engages a broader range of social scientists, ecologists, and resource users, and that explicitly recognizes the value judgments inherent in deciding both what past ecosystems looked like and whether or not and how we might reconstruct them

    Human dimensions of large-scale marine protected areas: advancing research and practice

    No full text
    This special issue of Coastal Management focuses on the human dimensions of large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs), those MPAs that are typically larger than 250,000 km2.11. Toonen et al. (2013 Toonen, R. J., T. A. Wilhelm, S. M. Maxwell, D. Wagner, B. W. Bowen, C. R. C. Sheppard, S. M. Taei, T. Teroroko, R. Moffitt, C. F. Gaymer, et al. 2013. One size does not fit all: The emerging frontier in large-scale marine conservation. Marine Pollution Bulletin 77:7–10.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) and the Big Ocean network of LSMPA managers define LSMPAs as those larger than 250,000 km2. Other authors have defined LSMPAs as larger than 30,000 km2 (de Santo 2013 de Santo, E. M. 2013. Missing marine protected area (MPA) targets: How the push for quantity over quality undermines sustainability and social justice. Journal of Environmental Management 124:137–46.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) or 100,000 km2 (Spalding et al. 2013 Spalding, M. D., I. Meliane, A. Milam, C. Fitzgerald, and L. Z. Hale. 2013. Protecting marine spaces: Global targets and changing approaches. Ocean Yearbook 27:213–48.[Crossref], [Google Scholar]; Gruby et al. 2016 Gruby, R. L., N. J. Gray, L. M. Campbell, and L. Acton. 2016. Toward a social science research agenda for large marine protected areas. Conservation Letters 9 (3):153–63.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). View all notes We define ‘human dimensions’ as the cultural, social, economic, political, and institutional factors that affect and are affected by large-scale marine conservation efforts. While human dimensions of marine conservation and coastal management have long been a focus of research, they have not yet received sustained and systematic consideration in relation to LSMPAs specifically. Although there is an emerging body of scholarship focused on the human dimensions of LSMPAs (e.g. de Santo 2013 de Santo, E. M. 2013. Missing marine protected area (MPA) targets: How the push for quantity over quality undermines sustainability and social justice. Journal of Environmental Management 124:137–46.[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Harris 2014 Harris, P. 2014. A Political Trilemma? International Secruity, Environmental Protection and Human Rights in the British Indian Ocean Territory. International Politics 51 (1):87–100.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Wilhelm et al. 2014 Wilhelm, T. A., C. R. C. Sheppard, A. L. S. Sheppard, C. F. Gaymer, J. Parks, D. Wagner, and N. Lewis. 2014. Large marine protected areas – advantages and challenges of going big: Considerations when going big in MPAs. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 24:24–30.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Richmond and Kotowicz 2015 Richmond, L., and D. Kotowicz. 2015. Equity and access in marine protected areas: The history and future of ‘traditional indigenous fishing’ in the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument. Applied Geography 59:117–24.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Gruby et al. 2016 Gruby, R. L., N. J. Gray, L. M. Campbell, and L. Acton. 2016. Toward a social science research agenda for large marine protected areas. Conservation Letters 9 (3):153–63.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Ban et al. 2017 Ban N. C., T. E. Davies, S. E. Aguilera, C. Brooks, M. Cox, G. Epstein, L. S. Evans, S. M. Maxwell, and M. Nenadovic. 2017. Social and ecological effectiveness of large marine protected areas. Global Environmental Change 43:82–91.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Alger and Dauvergne 2017 Alger, J., and P. Dauvergne. 2017. The global norm of large marine protected areas: Explaining variable adoption and implementation. Environmental Policy and Governance 27 (4):298–310. doi:10.1002/eet.1768.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Christie et al. 2017 Christie P., N. J. Bennett, N. J. Gray, T. A. Wilhelm, N. Lewis, J. Parks, N. C. Ban, R. L. Gruby, L. Gordon, J. Day, et al. 2017. Why people matter in ocean governance: Incorporating human dimensions into large scale marine protected areas. Marine Policy 84:273–284.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]), this is the first collection of papers devoted to their analysis. The purpose of this special issue is to showcase the diversity of human dimensions of LSMPAs, illustrating the range of contexts in which LSMPAs function, the variety of social science tools that can be used to analyze LSMPAs, the ways that human dimensions considerations can be integrated into LSMPA management, and the diverse human dimensions outcomes that are associated with LSMPAs. We suggest this special issue is timely and valuable for several reasons

    Stakeholder perspectives on large-scale marine protected areas.

    No full text
    Large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs), MPAs greater than 100,000km2, have proliferated in the past decade. However, the value of LSMPAs as conservation tools is debated, in both global scientific and policy venues as well as in particular sites. To add nuance and more diverse voices to this debate, this research examines the perspectives of stakeholders directly engaged with LSMPAs. We conducted a Q Method study with forty LSMPA stakeholders at five sites, including three established LSMPAs (the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument, United States; the Phoenix Islands Protected Area, Kiribati; the National Marine Sanctuary, Palau) and two sites where LSMPAs had been proposed at the time of research (Bermuda and Rapa Nui (Easter Island), Chile). The analysis reveals five distinct viewpoints of LSMPAs. These include three more optimistic views of LSMPAs we have named Enthusiast, Purist, and Relativist. It also depicts two more cautious views of LSMPAs, which we have named Critic and Skeptic. The findings demonstrate the multi-dimensionality of stakeholder viewpoints on LSMPAs. These shared viewpoints have implications for the global LSMPA debate and LSMPA decision-makers, including highlighting the need to focus on LSMPA consultation processes. Better understanding of these viewpoints, including stakeholder beliefs, perspectives, values and concerns, may help to facilitate more nuanced dialogue amongst LSMPA stakeholders and, in turn, promote better governance of LSMPAs
    corecore