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.
Any ecosystem based fisheries management system is necessarily faced with the problem of multiple objectives that trade-off against one another. Typically, objectives such as the maximization of yield, employment or profit or minimizing environmental impacts will be optimized in different parts of the decision space, which is formed of the fishing mortality rates that can be applied to the various species, given the constraints imposed by the mixed species nature of many fishing fleets. Since objectives cannot be simultaneously achieved, managers need to consider how such objectives trade-off against one another in order to choose a balanced strategy. Normally, they also have to consider the views of different groupings of stakeholders, who often favour widely different and conflicting objectives. This is particularly difficult if stakeholders are reluctant to expose their negotiating positions. This article explores two possible approaches to developing a Decision Support Framework for the North Sea. The first is a classic Multi- Criteria Analysis (MCA) approach that was developed in cooperation with North Sea stakeholders. The implementation went smoothly for the definition of suitable scenarios, decision trees and criteria, but failed in facilitating consensus on how to set priorities at the stakeholder level. However, it remains a possible approach for higher level management to adopt. Consequently, to aid effective decision-making a simpler approach was designed to visualise stakeholders concerns both to themselves and to the managers in charge of actual decision-making. Rather than trying to achieve some joint optima of the objectives that stakeholders wish to achieve this approach seeks to avoid the solutions various stakeholder groups resent the most. This ‘N dimensional potato approach’ proposed here treats the decision space as analogous to a partially rotten potato that has to be prepared for the table: each group of stakeholders cut away those parts of the decision space that they consider unacceptable. Ideally, this would leave a decision space where somewhat acceptable compromise solutions exist. But, if no decision space is left after all have made their cuts, this approach will still inform managers about the consequences of different solutions in terms of which group will be disappointed and by how much. Making this approach operational requires both uncovering various stakeholders’ views of the unacceptable areas, and also displaying these areas in a convenient fashion together with areas of stakeholder consent. The article describes the steps taken to address these two tasks by the North Sea case study of the MareFrame research project.
The present paper explores how industrial symbiosis emergence unfolds within port industrial areas through a multiple case study that focuses on actors, platforms for collaboration, and content of stakeholder processes. Drivers for industrial symbiosis emergence are identified, and future lines of research are proposed.
The SEAwise project works to deliver a fully operational tool that will allow fishermen, managers, and policy makers to easily apply Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management (EBFM) in their own fisheries. One of the key uncertainties in fisheries science and management can be linked to (our understanding of) fishermen's behaviour. In this report we describe the project efforts to better understand fisher behavior by assessing literature, interviews and data to advance towards a better representation of fisher behavior in our modelling. A better understanding of fisher behavior is especially needed in the context of change affecting Europe's marine ecosystems. Change is both related to the natural part of the ecosystem (ie climate change) as to the social side of the ecosystem (ie building of wind parks).
To that aim we present nine different case studies in Europe as examples of how fisher behavior has been studied and which factors are (or can be) relevant for a better understanding of fisher behaviour. Each case study ends with a table summarizing the factors influencing behaviour, the categories within that factor and the (potential) application in modeling as well as the implications for management. The table below summarizes the factors found / used in the case studies and the elements (social, cultural, ecological, economic and institutional) to which they relate. A variety of social factors were identified that are promising for use in modelling. A key conclusion is that social data are often context dependent and cannot be copy pasted from one situation to the other and in some cases, additional data needs to be collected. The cases also demonstrate that mixed methods approaches and interdisciplinary approaches are key to get in-depth understanding of fisher behavior in fisheries science.
In 2020, the Danish Ministry of Environment and Food launched a new state-led ecolabelling scheme for fish originating from small-scale, 'low-environmental-impact' fisheries; "Nature-friendly". The label was introduced to a domestic market where the vast majority of the fish landed by Danish vessels was already certified by the global leader in certification of (wild caught) fish products, the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC). MSC's high market penetration created a situation where especially small-scale fishermen felt that MSC certification had developed into a market norm without providing fishermen the benefits of demonstrating extraordinarily sustainable practices and thereby gaining competitive advantages. Rather, MSC's market penetration was perceived as undermining efforts to brand and market fish originating from small-scale fisheries as particularly sustainable. This article explores the processes that led up to the NaturSkånsom labeling scheme by applying a 'power in planning and policy framework' as an analytical lens. Through the NaturSkånsom process, the article investigates what happens when an ecolabel becomes a market norm, how small-scale fisheries actors who feel disadvantaged by such a development and environmental organizations form alliances, mobilize support and multiple resources to strengthen their positions in the political settings. The examination of this case highlights how stakeholders traditionally thought of as less resourceful can gain political influence. The article offers a glimpse into a possible, emerging future where those who perceive themselves as the most sustainable producers may increasingly view large and dominating ecolabels simultaneously as obstacles and forces for positive change.
Successful maritime spatial planning processes require stakeholder engagement and participation, thus requiring tools that support collaboration. Communication-driven spatial decision support systems are designed to facilitate decision making processes of complex spatial problems and are therefore suited for this task, but there are unresolved questions about user access control for these systems. In this study, user access control was designed for a spatial decisions support system for collaborative maritime spatial planning based on observation of two user tests. It was found that there were three distinct groups of users with special access needs to collaborative functionality. The level of access to functionality was organized into three groups: passive participants, actively contributing collaborators and managing moderators.
While European policies have progressed towards an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM), limited attention has been paid to the implications for its advisory system. This paper analyzes the advisory landscape in the European Union (EU) by addressing two questions: to what extent can the needed advice be provided? how prepared is the management system to integrate ecosystem advice? We provide a systematic analysis of the relevant advisory bodies, explore gaps related to the requested and delivered advice, and identify paths for improvement. The findings confirm earlier observations of lack of a formalized process to provide and integrate advice in support of an ecosystem approach into EU fisheries management. Instead of enabling existing capacities to embed ecosystem components (eg investments and initiatives made by stakeholders (and authorities) to move to EAFM -pushing strategies), the system relies heavily on mandatory requests from policy makers (pulling mechanisms). Furthermore, social and economic dimensions are the weakest aspects in the advisory process, which hampers the balancing of objectives that represent one of the hallmarks of EAFM. The policy framework has adopted EAFM for European fisheries, but the advisory processes have not yet been adapted to substantially support EAFM.
This article discusses the development of second ship registers and their interconnections to the policy idea of maritime clusters. Through a narrative of the contemporary history of Danish maritime policy, the article shows how these apparently different policy measures were closely related and together constitute a coherent framework based upon specific values, views of cause–effect relationships, and perceptions of major challenges and their context. Danish maritime policy provides an excellent case for the study of the contemporary history of maritime policy-making. Denmark was among the first of the traditional shipping nations to set up a second register, and the concept of maritime clusters became part of Danish maritime policy before it emerged as a construct in European Union maritime policy. We provide detail on the unfolding of some of the most important recent events in Danish maritime policy and highlight its development as a process of learning that involves the prolonged drafting and fine-tuning of statements and ideas, and the borrowing and adjustment of policy ideas developed elsewhere.
Recent trends in port development show that ports are making increasing efforts to forge mutually beneficial cooperation strategies, particularly ports sharing a common hinterland. In this paper, we analyse the North Adriatic ports (Koper, Rijeka, Trieste and Venice) with a focus on two related themes. First, the complementarity of the North Adriatic (NA) ports in the container market is analysed based on port vessel service patterns and shipping line interviews. We operationalize the analysis of complementarity with an analysis of the effects of multiple port calls on the revenue required to make a call in a specific NA port economically feasible. We conclude that the inclusion of another NA port reduces the minimum required revenue for a call in an additional NA port.
Second, we assess the scope and depth of cooperation between ports. We map current and potential future cooperation using a 'cooperation matrix' with two dimensions: the involvement of stakeholders (limited vs. broad), and the depth of cooperation (pre-competitive vs. commercial). We use in-depth interviews with port authorities, terminal operators, rail operators, major shipping lines and forwarders in the NA region to position the NA ports in the matrix. We conclude by discussing prospects of future NAPA ports cooperation.
This report analyses recent productivity developments in some of the main capture fisheries in Europe. Using data on specific fleet segments, productivity growth has been compared
between demersal fisheries in the UK, Spain, Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands, and pelagic fisheries in the UK, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands.