This paper centers local processes for co-creating transitions towards more sustainable, inclusive, and resilient coastal community development. We have conceptualized a path for change processes with phases of transition including 1. Reasons to convene; 2. Governance and participation "rules"; 3. Building knowledge together; 4. Implementation and experimentation; 5. Post-hoc reflections and assessment; 6. Transfer/reproduction of practices. Here, we focus on the first three stepping stones, which form the foundation of the collaborative process, focusing on the challenges and opportunities encountered as a pilot intervention is planned. We use a framework informed by partnership-, co-creation-, transition-, and justice literatures, to analyze data focused on establishing partnerships for ongoing co-creation of knowledge, empowering actors in the local communities, and selecting options for an intervention pilot. Conclusions relate to (a) trust and preexisting relationships, (b) what inclusion means, (c) internal power differentials, (d) preexisting tensions in the community, (e) challenges to co-creation.
Coastal communities have ideas and plans on how to redirect the blue economy to
support thriving societies, but how can EU Member States better support bottom-up
transitions?
This is a policy brief included in D5.3 of EmpowerUs.
The EU Green Deal calls for a rapid and efficient green transition. On-going climate change and an increasing need for secure and sustainable energy means ambitious projects and goals are accelerated. To expand and exchange offshore wind energy across North Sea neighbouring countries, the Danish government presented in 2020 the Danish North Sea Energy Island (NSEI) project. This pilot project illustrates the shift from ‘nationally individualistic’ modes of connecting offshore wind energy projects, to supplying a multi-lateral renewable offshore energy grid. The Energy Island project builds on the Hub-and-Spoke (H&S) approach, which introduces a new level of complexity to governing the next generation of offshore wind energy projects. This paper analyses the political motivations for the Danish project and the planning and implementation of the Energy Islands, integrating a combination of collaborative and transboundary governance perspectives. The qualitative analysis is based on a document analysis and a literature review. Findings show how planning for the Danish Energy Island has faced delays and challenges, causing uncertainties about the Island’s capability to support Green Deal goals, as well as a mismatch between political ambitions and practical implementation. The artificial offshore island is currently under reconsideration due to costs and is, as of March 2024, still in its planning phase. This case study on the Danish NSEI serves as an introduction to the general functionalities and development of the Island and defines a Danish Energy Island. Results indicate that the combination of transboundary and collaborative governance structures are necessary as part of a successful implementation of Energy Islands.
This paper discusses the governance of port classification through the lens of multi-level governance theory, with a particular focus on the Port of Aalborg and the issue of classification of Limfjord waters, in Denmark. The study identifies a conflict in which national governmental decisions regarding the classification of navigable waterways obstruct the port's access to funding opportunities. Despite the port's autonomous operational capacity, national control over waterway classification and port typology shows a nested governance dynamic, thereby highlighting the intricacies of the European Union's subsidiarity principle. This paper argues that the case illustrates how the classification of inland waterways, although ostensibly legal, is intrinsically political and subject to national interests. The Danish government's refusal to designate the Limfjord as a navigable waterway potentially hinders regional development and impedes the EU's policy objectives for intermodality. Methodologically, the research synthesizes desk-based analysis with key-informant interviews to examine the legal, political, and geographical dimensions of this issue. The findings contribute to multi-level governance theory by describing the case as a hybrid model that integrates both nested and polycentric elements, thereby enriching the debate on governance complexities within the European context.
This article explores how adopting a combined ecosystem and justice approach to deep-sea mining (DSM)-particularly in vulnerable regions like the Arctic-would constitute a paradigm shift in ocean environmental law and governance. Such a shift would move ocean governance beyond fragmented, technocratic, and resource-driven frameworks toward an integrated, equitable, and sustainability-centered regime grounded in ecological integrity, social justice, and respect for human rights and local traditions.
Current modeling practices for social-ecological systems (SES) are often qualitative and use causal loop diagrams (CLDs), as these models promote an evaluation of the systems loops and variable connectivity. Our literature review demonstrated that quality assurance of these models often lacks a consistent validation procedure. Therefore, a guide to improving the validation of qualitative models is presented. The presumed utility protocol is a multi-dimensional protocol with 26 criteria, organized into four dimensions, designed to assess specific parts of the modeling process and provide recommendations for improvement. This protocol was applied to three demonstration cases, located in the Arctic Northeast Atlantic Ocean, Macaronesia, and the Tuscan archipelago. The “Specific Model Tests” dimension, which focuses on the structure of the model, revealed positive evaluations of its structure, boundaries, and capacity to be scaled up. "Guidelines and Processes", which focuses on the meaning and representativeness of the process, showed positive results regarding purpose, usefulness, presentation, and meaningfulness. "Policy Insights and Spillovers", a dimension focused on the policy recommendations, revealed a high number of "not apply", indicating that several criteria are too advanced for the status of the models tested. The "Administrative, Review, and Overview" dimension, which focused on the managerial overview, showed the models needed improvement in the documentation and replicability, while time and cost constraints were positively evaluated. The presumed utility protocol has shown to be a useful tool providing quantitative and qualitative evaluations for an intermediate evaluation of the model-building process, helping to substantiate confidence, with recommendations for improvements and applications elsewhere.
This book introduces a novel model to explain how the co-design and co-delivery of ocean science knowledge and solutions is influenced by ocean stakeholders with asymmetric power and resources, policy incentives and ocean conflict, ocean narratives, different knowledge systems, security concerns, principles, formal and informal rules, and communication competencies. Using the International Collaboration in Ocean Science model as a basis, the book advances with three lines of inquiry: ontological security of ocean science participants, the Ocean Decade and human well-being, and strategic narratives about international collaboration in ocean science. Through these, Carolijn van Noort shows the enabling and constraining conditions of co-creating ocean knowledge and solutions. Theoretically novel, the book provides a compelling framework for scholars to study ocean science collaboration.
This chapter examines the development of the law of the sea at the time of the League of Nations with specific focus on the entitlement to the oceans and the use of the oceans. This chapter first addresses the entitlement to and jurisdiction over marine spaces by examining the issue of the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, bays and islands. The chapter then examines the issue of the use of the oceans, focusing on the regulation of fishing and navigational rights in straits. Finally, the chapter will conclude that the era of the League of Nations can be thought to be one in which the traditional paradigm of the law of the sea was being formulated. However, the paradigm was qualified by the absence of an agreement with regard to the breadth of the territorial sea and rules regarding the delimitation of the territorial sea. In this sense, the paradigm in that period remained incomplete. Furthermore, the time was not ripe to establish a global legal framework for the conservation of marine living resources. Overall the law of the sea at the time was characterised by the reconciliation of competing interests of individual states.
This study examines how the work of the International Law Commission (ILC) has contributed to the ‘progressive development’ of general international law relevant to regulating rescue and disembarkation of refugees and migrants found at sea. It explores the ILC’s texts on interpretation and implementation of international obligations, state responsibility, fragmentation and harmonization of international law, and the status of certain principles of general international law, including jus cogens general principles of law and the principle of good faith, which present legal parameters for regulation of maritime search and rescue operations. In conducting doctrinal examinations of international law and gathering evidence of the practice of States and other relevant actors, the ILC contributes by analysing, clarifying, and systemising important topics of general international law. However, state implementation frequently falls short of the legal interpretations of the ILC, particularly as they relate to respect for and protection of human rights at sea. Therefore, while the ILC needs new strategies to directly connect with States and international organisations, it remains reliant on the mutual following of national and international courts and tribunals, and its mutual contribution in scholarship.
Maritime security is a major international concern with the Gulf of Guinea recognised as one of the global hotspots of blue crime, such as piracy, kidnap for ransom, trafficking of narcotics, human and arms, and illegal fishing. The complex and complicated challenge of maritime security, a wicked problem, calls for inter-agency coordination, synergy of efforts and scaling up of responses. Given the complexity of maritime security threats, no single organisation has the institutional muscle to single-handedly deal with it. Drawing on evidence from Ghana, where the arrival of maritime security as a concept triggered a shift from single to a multi-agency approach to dealing with maritime issues, the article examines the potential of and challenges associated with inter-agency coordination. In line with recent international developments, African nations like Ghana aim to apply the concept of inter-agency coordination to tackle maritime insecurity in its waters. The paper assesses how inter-agency coordination could be used in an African maritime security governance context, while examining power imbalance, strife for agency autonomy and other obstacles that have to be addressed to ensure that the promises associated with the concept are fulfilled.