Marine spatial planning: risk or opportunity for fisheries in the North Sea?

Abstract

Professional fishing and fisheries quota systems can affect women and men differently, yet gender analysis of quota systems is rare. In this article, we use a feminist framing and a mixed methods approach to examine the long-term gendered effects of the introduction of the 1990 quota system in Norway. Using statistics from the National Fishery Registry and the Directorate of Fisheries, we found that the number of women and men registered as fishers has declined since 1990 (an overall decline of 59%). Over this period, men have consistently outnumbered women among registered fishers (2.7-3.2% women), among boat owners (2.23% women in 2017) and particularly among owners of larger boats (> 11 m), which can have multiple quotas (0.35% women in 2017). However, changes in the age and geographic location among women fishers reflect changes to fisheries overall, as well as highlighting the gender-blind entry barriers that disproportionately impact women. In addition, contextualising statistical data with participant interviews conducted in North Norway, especially in Finnmark, enables us to examine more closely why the gender gap remains. This mixed method approach also identifies changes women and men working in fisheries have undergone, while also addressing women fishers' political efforts to improve gender equity in Norwegian fisheries. Our study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of Norwegian coastal fishing, and particularly women's small but significant presence.

Identifying conflict potential in a coastal and marine environment using participatory mapping

“…Given MSP is a wicked problem, there is never a 'final' solution to the problem, only its 'taming' (Jentoft and Knol, 2014). Solutions, by necessity, are negotiated and re-negotiated between stakeholders over time.…”

“…Until recently, it was largely sectoral-based, limiting its capacity to identify and manage conflict between sectors (Douvere, 2008). In the last decade, MSP has increasingly been adopted in marine policy and management, with applications reported from Dutch, Belgium, German, Norwegian, U.K., Canadian, U.S., and Australian efforts (Douvere, 2008;Douvere and Elher, 2009;Kenchington and Day, 2011;Jay et al, 2012;Jentoft and Knol, 2014;Vince, 2014).…”

“…Characteristics of MSP are its ecosystem-based approach, spatial focus, integration across sectors, and multi-level policy framework (Jentoft and Knol, 2014;Vince, 2014). Allocating use within three-dimensional space, and ecological, economic, and social objectives are other essential elements (Douvere and Ehler, 2009).…”

“…Minimizing conflict can be achieved through an integrated approach to management underpinned by spatial planning (Douvere, 2008;Jentoft and Knol, 2014). MSP offers a potential solution and opportunity to identify priority MPAs across a region, and link MPA planning with other local, regional, and national planning efforts (Agardy et al, 2011).…”

Identifying culturally significant areas for marine spatial planning

“…Although the responsibility for MSP lies at the national level and addresses maritime activities in a nation's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), a transnational, subregional, and even a regional sea perspective is called for when maritime activities and/or their effects cross national borders (Gee et al 2011). This creates considerable challenges for the planning process and stakeholder consultation (e.g., Argardy et al 2011, Maritime Spatial Planning in the North Sea 2012, Halpern et al 2012, Jentoft and Knol 2014. However, it also provides challenges for assessing effects on the marine environment given the requirement under the MSFD to achieve GES at subregional and http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol20/iss1/art64/ regional sea scales (Articles 3[2] and 3 [9]).…”