The emerging policy landscape for marine spatial planning in Europe

Qiu, Wanfei; Jones, Peter J.S.

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2012.10.010

Cited by 167 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Strategies to meet these goals include incentivebased fisheries management policies (89), spatially ambitious ecosystem-based management plans (83), and emerging efforts to preemptively zone human activities that affect marine wildlife (90,91). There have been mixed responses among marine managers as to whether and how to embrace these tools, but more complete implementation of these strategies will help chart a sustainable future for marine wildlife (43,90,91).…”

Section: Mobility and Managing Defaunationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There have been mixed responses among marine managers as to whether and how to embrace these tools, but more complete implementation of these strategies will help chart a sustainable future for marine wildlife (43,90,91). A second, complementary set of goals is to incorporate climate change into marine protected area schemes to build networks that will provide protection for ocean wildlife into the next century (92).…”

Section: Mobility and Managing Defaunationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Marine defaunation: Animal loss in the global ocean

McCauley

Pinsky

Palumbi

et al. 2015

Science

1,036

711

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Comparing patterns of terrestrial and marine defaunation helps to place human impacts on marine fauna in context and to navigate toward recovery. Defaunation began in earnest tens of thousands of years later in the oceans than it did on land. Although defaunation has been less severe in the oceans than on land, our effects on marine animals are increasing in pace and impact. Humans have caused few complete extinctions in the sea, but we are responsible for many ecological, commercial, and local extinctions. Despite our late start, humans have already powerfully changed virtually all major marine ecosystems.

show abstract

Section: Mobility and Managing Defaunationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Mobility and Managing Defaunationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Marine defaunation: Animal loss in the global ocean

McCauley

Pinsky

Palumbi

et al. 2015

Science

1,036

711

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been argued that while the non-binding IMP is a growth-led MSP policy, its legally-binding cousin, the MSFD is more focused on environmental protection as a central pillar of sustainability (Qiu and Jones, 2013). Although this may have been understood as a signaling a strong commitment to environmental protection at the EU level, maritime economic activities such as offshore wind energy seem to have been the main driver of MSP in several EU countries (e.g.…”

Section: Construction Of the Marine "Problem" And Implications For Sumentioning

confidence: 99%

Taking power to sea: Towards a post-structuralist discourse theoretical critique of marine spatial planning

Tafon

2017

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responding to calls for a more theoretically-driven, post-positivist and radical Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) research that approaches the policy as a political project, this paper develops a political discourse theory approach to critical MSP. Elaborating radical contingency as an ontological condition of social life, which points to the ineradicability of power and conflict in MSP social relations, the paper problematizes MSP as constituting politics, or key practices that attempt to organize human co-existence and thus, conceal this radical contingency. These practices (e.g. ecosystem-based management, participation, planning regulation and the organization of socio-natural spaces), whose outcomes are far from adaptive, consensual or neutral are discussed as sites of "politics" that effectively marginalize particular groups of people and "herd" their participation and ways of knowing toward achieving limited policy outcomes. Drawing on the MSP Directive, the paper further teases out how specific narratives and rhetorical signifiers around "integrating" and "balancing" potentially irreconcilable sustainable development objectives may interpellate particular stakeholders in ways that render them ideologically complicitous in sustaining, rather than challenging, neoliberal logics of managerialism and economic maximization of marine resources. But in tune with the ontological condition of the social as radically contingent, the paper discusses how and why participatory spaces may constitute a potential space of contestation for marginalized voices and thus, reveal the political moment of Introduction and AimsConceptualized as a marine governance expression of sustainable development, Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) in the European Union (EU) has far reaching ambitions of tackling social, environmental and economic conflicts across EU seas by implementing ecosystem-based management (EBM). It is assumed that science-based knowledge and broad stakeholder participation will deliver rational, adaptive, holistic and consensual solutions to these conflicting interests and thus ensure the acceptance and effectiveness of planning decisions. The MSP literature over the years has emphasized the usefulness of EBM and participation for the integrated planning of balanced environmental protection and sustainable use of ocean and coastal resources.In a reformist, rather than critical approach, research has generally accepted the rationality and This argument stems from the unsettling assumption that participation among broad stakeholder groups can lead to equitable and consensual decisions and that the adaptiveness of EBM as a tool can facilitate objective decisions. Consider, still, the following assertions from prominent MSP scholars: 1) Ehler's (2012: 3) emphatic assertion that 'MSP is clearly an idea whose time has come'; 2) Douvere's (2008: 765) rather uncritical and unedifying observation that MSP is crucial because it '[f]ocuses on influencing the behavior of humans and their activities over time'; and 3) the un...

show abstract

“…Because of the collective nature of marine resources and the need for effective maritime infrastructure, cooperation among countries is pivotal in effective governance [11,12]. Ecosystem services as well as various forms of societal pressures and impacts from transportation, pollution, fisheries, agriculture and other sector activities tend to transcend marine national boundaries [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Collective action and agency in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning: Transnational policy coordination in the promotion of regional coherence

Haßler

Gee²,

Gilek

et al. 2018

Marine Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the increasing attention given to marine spatial planning and the widely acknowledged need for transnational policy coordination, regional coherence has not yet improved a great deal in the Baltic Sea region. Therefore, the main objectives in this article are: (a) to map existing governance structures at all levels that influence how domestic marine spatial planning policy strategies are formed, (b) to identify specific challenges to improved regional cooperation and coordination, and (c) to discuss possible remedies. Based on data from indepth case studies carried out in the BONUS BALTSPACE research project, it is shown that, despite the shared goal of sustainability and efficient resource use in relevant EU Directives, action plans and other policy instruments, domestic plans are emerging in diverse ways, mainly reflecting varying domestic administrative structures, sectoral interests, political prioritisations, and handling of potentially conflicting policy objectives. A fruitful distinction can be made between, on the one hand, regulatory institutions and structures above the state level where decision-making mechanisms are typically grounded in consensual regimes and, on the other hand, bilateral, issue-specific collaboration, typically between adjacent countries. It is argued that, to improve overall marine spatial planning governance, these two governance components need to be brought together to improve consistency between regional alignment and to enhance opportunities for countries to collaborate at lower levels. Issue-specific transnational working groups or workshops can be one way to identify and act upon such potential synergies.

show abstract

The emerging policy landscape for marine spatial planning in Europe

Cited by 167 publications

References 24 publications

Marine defaunation: Animal loss in the global ocean

Marine defaunation: Animal loss in the global ocean

Taking power to sea: Towards a post-structuralist discourse theoretical critique of marine spatial planning

Collective action and agency in Baltic Sea marine spatial planning: Transnational policy coordination in the promotion of regional coherence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About