Five rules for pragmatic blue growth

Abstract

The concept of blue growth is the newest of many recent calls for more holistic management of complex marine social-ecological systems. The complexity of ocean systems, combined with limitations on data and capacity, demands an approach to management that is pragmatic-meaning goal-and solution-oriented, realistic, and practical. This article proposes and discusses five rules of thumb upon which to build such an approach. 1) Define objectives, quantify tradeoffs, and strive for efficiency. Understanding stakeholders' objectives, and the nature of tradeoffs between them, keeps management goal-oriented, aware of its full range of options, and maximizes the likelihood of finding win-win solutions. 2) The data you have can do more than you think. Crosssystem similarity, within-system complexity, and general first principles all add informational value to data collected both within and outside the system being managed. 3) Engage stakeholders, but do it right. Comanagement and citizen science can be important tools in the science and management toolbox, especially in data-and capacity-limited regions. 4) Measure your impact and learn as you go. This can increase short-term start-up costs but can prevent larger wastes of resources in the long-term. 5) Design institutions, not behaviors. Management does not directly control fishing efforts, pollution rates or other behaviors, but instead controls institutions under which stakeholders make choices. Each of these rules of thumb is inspired by real-world successes and case studies. Concrete examples are used to illustrate key concepts, with the aim of providing a digestible set of guidelines that any manager can follow.

The blue economy: Identifying geographic concepts and sensitivities

“…The definitions developed by policymakers and their consequential policies often influence the domain within which BE studies are conducted (Kwak, Yoo, & Chang, 2005;Morrissey et al, 2011), thus guiding the focus of scholars even when they attempt to self-define the boundaries of BE (Doloreux, 2017;Doloreux & Shearmur, 2009;Silver et al, 2015;Voyer et al, 2018). Of course, these definitions can be challenged, prompting a two-way relationship among the actors (Burgess et al, 2016;Eikeset et al, 2018).…”

Using systems thinking and open innovation to strengthen aquaculture policy for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

“…Some maritime nations, are starting to show signs of adopting a wider systems approach to aquaculture, embracing the blue growth agenda (Burgess et al , ; Eikeseta et al, ) by considering broader socio‐political, as well as ecological linkages. The PESTLE framework is being applied to prioritise activity, with the aim of achieving SDG 2 (end hunger, achieve food security) and SDG 14 (conserve and sustainable use the oceans, seas and marine resources) by identifying initiatives that can increase economic prosperity through smarter use of marine resources.…”

Institutional Arrangements for the Blue Economy: Marine Spatial Planning a Way Forward

“…Blue Economy has introduced a new dimension in ocean management. It recognizes that diverse ocean uses and marine ecosystem services are interconnected, and additional value can be gained from managing these uses and services jointly rather than managing them separately (Burgess, Clemence, McDermott, Costello, & Gaines, 2018). The Blue Economy conceptualizes oceans as "Development Spaces" where spatial planning integrates conservation, sustainable use, oil and mineral wealth extraction, bioprospecting, sustainable energy production and marine transport (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2014).…”