A systematic review of integrated coastal and marine management progress reveals core governance characteristics for successful implementation

Eger, Sondra; Loë, Rob C. de; Pittman, Jeremy; Epstein, Graham; Courtenay, Simon C.

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104688

Cited by 22 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…They are challenged by the need to approach coastal and marine degradation from the perspective of spatial integration, following MSP, and to identify the ways in which pressures from different sources are interconnected (Satumanatpan et al, 2018). The reliance on familiar tools and approaches to deal with problems, and the lack of knowledge and opportunity to reflect on the root causes is a common challenge in coastal governance, not only in the case of Thailand (Eger et al, 2021).…”

Section: First-order Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been argued that continuing evaluative and adaptive processes are imperative, using a system of indicators, but the application of this is not without a challenge due to the multi-faceted nature of coastal ecosystem. Eger et al (2021), for instance, suggest that governance characteristics, including formal governance structure, engagement with diverse actors, and innovative mechanisms for coordination and cooperation among multi-actor groups, are key elements that need to be examined for successful ICM, measured by numerous input, process and output indicators (Ehler, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Thai government has been supportive of ICM and dedicated the responsibility of coastal management to the Department of Coastal and Marine Resources (DMCR) in 2015. Like other coastal regions elsewhere, Thailand faces several governance challenges related to inter-governmental and inter-sectoral coordination, communication and dissemination of information, stakeholder participation, long-term financial support, and consistent monitoring and evaluation, among others (see e.g., Christie et al, 2005;White et al, 2006;Satumanatpan et al, 2017;Eger et al, 2021). Thailand is a signatory to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (NESDC, 2021), supporting the ocean sustainable development agenda, including the most recent Blue Growth and Blue Economy initiatives.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Interactive Governance for the Sustainability of Marine and Coastal Resources in Thailand

Satumantpan

Chuenpagdee

2022

Environ. Nat. Resour. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coastal zones are biodiverse, with complex and dynamic interconnectivity between terrestrial and marine areas, and with multiple interactions between ecological and social systems. Despite on-going efforts to conserve and protect these ecosystems, destructive extraction and unsustainable resource utilization are persistent, posing challenges for governance. Issues and concerns in coastal zones are cross-sectoral and cross-boundary, often with overlapping jurisdictions. They are considered ‘wicked’ governance problems, requiring nuanced approaches to address, rather than technical quick fixes. Interactive governance is one such approach that examines relationships within and between the ecological and social systems, as well as with the governing system. Theoretically, the governability of coastal zones depends on the inherent quality of these systems and their interactions, and improving governability needs to take place in all three orders of governance. At the ‘first order’, a better understanding of the diversity, complexity and dynamics of coastal zones, and related scale issues is required. Improving governability at the ‘second order’ involves evaluating and adjusting the existing legal and institutional frameworks to improve the performance and the correspondence with the systems they aim to govern. Finally, discussion about coastal governance needs to be elevated to ‘meta-order’ where principles are set and values derived so that hard choices can be made, for instance, between conservation and utilization of coastal resources. Guided by the interactive governance framework, the paper presents an overview of coastal governance in Thailand, summarizing key features of the natural, social and governing systems associated with coastal zones, and discussing what can be done to improve coastal governability.

show abstract

Section: First-order Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interactive Governance for the Sustainability of Marine and Coastal Resources in Thailand

Satumantpan

Chuenpagdee

2022

Environ. Nat. Resour. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the myriad (and often competing) interests, uses, values, and activities within coastal and marine areas, researchers emphasise the importance of giving explicit attention to how marine and coastal areas are governed and protected (Alexander and Haward 2019;Eger et al 2021;Wondolleck and Yaffee 2017). Country-, place-based, and comparative research has examined efforts to operationalise EBM via a range of institutional mechanisms over different scales to identify enabling conditions to support EBM (Macpherson et al 2021b;Stephenson et al 2019;Wondolleck and Yaffee 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Broadening environmental governance ontologies to enhance ecosystem-based management in Aotearoa New Zealand

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecosystem-based management (EBM) is a holistic approach to managing marine environments that can potentially reconcile cross-sectoral conflicts, scale mismatches, and fulfil sustainability objectives. In Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa NZ), the operationalisation of EBM has been uneven; however, a set of principles to guide EBM in Aotearoa NZ provides a useful foundation to enable and enhance its uptake and to support governance approaches that attend to the rights, values, interests, and knowledges of Māori, the Indigenous peoples of Aotearoa. In acknowledging the need to give attention to the governance of marine environments, we apply insights from the ‘relational turn’ in social sciences and sustainability science to explore the ontological and epistemological broadening of ‘governance’ to identify opportunities for alternative forms of governance that accommodate Indigenous ways of knowing. We propose four pou (or enabling conditions) that generate alternatives to governance models underpinned by a ‘modernist’ (dualistic, technocratic) ontology: (i) enacting interactive administrative arrangements; (ii) diversifying knowledge production; (iii) prioritising equity, justice, and social difference; and (iv) recognising interconnections and interconnectedness. Our analysis of seven governance examples exposes evidence of radical and progressive transformations occurring within Aotearoa NZ regarding conceptions of the environment and the role of people in it that could support the wider uptake of EBM. Rather than advocating a ‘perfect model’ of governance for EBM, we find potential in EBM as a strategic approach to managing marine environments because of the synergies with Indigenous and relational ontologies, which lie in the emphasis on interconnectedness, inclusivity, diversity, and relationality.

show abstract

“…The occurrence of marine environmental damage behavior is the result of these subjects' rational choices under a specific system [25]. Therefore, establishing a sound management system is the fundamental way to effectively protect the marine environment [26,27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Marine Ecological Environment Management in China: Evolution, Challenges and Prospects

Ren

Chen

2022

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China’s management of marine ecological environments has experienced a development process that has gone from weak to strong. However, whether there are problems such as lack of systems, invalid systems, and system conflicts in the current management of marine ecological environments, and how to conduct collaborative governance among various complex subjects, remain to be answered. This paper first summarizes how China’s marine ecological environment management policy has evolved, which can be divided into five stages: the foundation stage (1949–1980), the initial establishment stage (1981–1995), the steady advancement stage (1996–2005), the deepening adjustment stage (2006–2010), and the strategic development stage (2011–present), and analyzes its characteristics at different stages. Then, this paper further explores the inherent dilemmas in the Chinese marine ecological environment management system. Finally, combined with the practical experience of marine ecological environment management in developed countries, this paper fully considers the division of responsibilities and mutual checks and balances of different subjects, flexibly configures various policy tools, and explores the mechanism of collaborative governance of marine ecological environment from the levels of government, market, the public and social organizations, so as to gradually improve the modern marine ecological environment management system and provide a reference for the government’s governance activities.

show abstract

A systematic review of integrated coastal and marine management progress reveals core governance characteristics for successful implementation

Cited by 22 publications

References 74 publications

Interactive Governance for the Sustainability of Marine and Coastal Resources in Thailand

Interactive Governance for the Sustainability of Marine and Coastal Resources in Thailand

Broadening environmental governance ontologies to enhance ecosystem-based management in Aotearoa New Zealand

Exploring the Marine Ecological Environment Management in China: Evolution, Challenges and Prospects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About